Depends how you define "success". Commercial success, perhaps so (Hulu has definitely show it can be done very successfully).
But In IETF, we do "running codes". A solution that requires using a proprietary technology that does not allow it to be widely adopted, regardless of its commercial success, is not successful by IETF standard. ps: I am not against "protecting copyrighted content" but that can deal with in other venue, not embedded into internet protocols. -James Seng On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 6:25 PM, DePriest, Greg (NBC Universal) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Wouldn't a standard meeting the legitimate needs of all parties stand a much > greater chance of success? > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fabio Hecht > Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 5:14 AM > To: Richard Bennett > Cc: alto > Subject: Re: [alto] Paper on "Pushing BitTorrent Locality to the Limit" > > > I understand, but I believe that will lead to most users not using ALTO. > > Regards Fabio > > > On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 01:39 -0800, Richard Bennett wrote: >> That's not an unusual situation for globally-deployed network systems. >> Wi-Fi uses unlicensed radio channels in several regulatory domains that >> don't exactly line up with each other in terms of the frequencies and >> power levels that are permitted. The relevant standards body, IEEE >> 802.11, didn't define channels and power levels as "out of scope", they >> embraced the problem and permitted the appropriate regulations to be >> plugged-in to standards-conformant systems at run time. >> >> It's not impossible, or even especially difficult, to create standards >> that include the application of local variations. There are all sorts of >> legal restrictions on content and privacy around the world, and I'd >> rather take the adult approach and make the ALTO protocol capable of >> conforming to law and regulation by design rather than through some >> external workaround. >> >> Take that for what it's worth, I'm still coming up to speed on this effort. >> >> RB >> >> Fabio Hecht wrote: >> > Don't forget to take into account that what is illegal where you live >> > may be perfectly legal somewhere else, and vice versa. I think it is >> > clearly declared out of scope of the charter for a very good reason. >> > >> > Regards Fabio >> > >> > >> > On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 08:15 +0800, James Seng wrote: >> > >> >> Good point. >> >> >> >> My view is that one can be reasonably solved technically without human >> >> intervention and one is not. >> >> >> >> I love to see a working scalable technical solution that can identify >> >> copyright content in an encrypted stream. >> >> >> >> -James Seng >> >> >> >> On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 6:02 AM, DePriest, Greg (NBC Universal) >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> >>> That seems like a constructive suggestion. Thank you. >> >>> >> >>> I do have one question regarding policies. >> >>> >> >>> Why is protecting privacy a requirement and protecting copyrighted >> >>> content a policy? >> >>> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >> >>> From: Richard Bennett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >>> Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 4:43 PM >> >>> To: Nicholas Weaver >> >>> Cc: DePriest, Greg (NBC Universal); [email protected]; Arnaud Legout; Paul >> >>> Jessop; Craig Seidel; Le Blond, Stevens >> >>> Subject: Re: [alto] Paper on "Pushing BitTorrent Locality to the Limit" >> >>> >> >>> It strikes me that the discovery of illegal content is a local policy >> >>> decision. There are jurisdictions that require it and those that forbid >> >>> it. Perhaps ALTO needs to support a policy option that allows content >> >>> descriptors to be queried, blocked, or redirected in the interest of >> >>> local laws and regulations. >> >>> >> >>> I don't want to spoil anybody's fun, of course. >> >>> >> >>> RB >> >>> >> >>> Nicholas Weaver wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> On Dec 3, 2008, at 1:15 PM, DePriest, Greg (NBC Universal) wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>> You note that "A localization service doesn't have to discriminate >> >>>>> [between legit and illegit P2P]..." >> >>>>> >> >>>>> I don't understand why it wouldn't. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> What's the point of facilitating the illegal distribution of >> >>>>> >> >>> copyrighted >> >>> >> >>>>> content? >> >>>>> >> >>>>> And how would one justify that? >> >>>>> >> >>>> Under the same justification that you allow BitTorrent at all: You >> >>>> DON'T know that it is copyrighted, it could be Linux ISOs, with enough >> >>>> >> >>>> probability that you can't just block the protocol and you can't sue >> >>>> BitTorrent Inc into submission under the Napster and related methods. >> >>>> >> >>>> Or that you allow HTTP traffic, after all, that could be copyrighted >> >>>> material, kiddie porn, or other bad content. >> >>>> >> >>>> It is not the responsibility of the network to police content, and a >> >>>> localization service doesn't actually have to know what it is >> >>>> localizing, so it is not in a position to police content one way or >> >>>> the other. >> >>>> >> >>>> EG, ask localization service "Who else is accessing 512b-random-ID >> >>>> SHA-512 file descriptor", and the localization service has no notion >> >>>> what the resource is, just a list of who's accessing it. Its in many >> >>>> ways easier to make a localization service which is agnostic. >> >>>> >> >>>> _______________________________________________ >> >>>> alto mailing list >> >>>> [email protected] >> >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto >> >>>> >> >>> -- >> >>> Richard Bennett >> >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> alto mailing list >> >>> [email protected] >> >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto >> >>> >> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> alto mailing list >> >> [email protected] >> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto >> >> >> >> >> > -- > Fabio Hecht > > University of Zurich - Department of Informatics (IfI) > Binzmühlestrasse 14 CH-8050 Zürich, Switzerland > Ph.: +41 44 6357129 / 6350892 Fax: +41 44 6356809 > VoIP sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _______________________________________________ > alto mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto > _______________________________________________ > alto mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto > _______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
