On Fri, 20 Dec 2002, Anonymous wrote: > And I wonder...with international companies now cracking down on > "Power-Users" of networks like Gnutella, one would think that > building-in some crypto capabilities (say into Kazaa) could be > something "regular" people might be willing to pay for. (Or, at the > very least, if the Kazaa crypto add-on itself became a shared file, > why it would spread like wildfire!)
You're misunderstanding things here. If I'm a member of a file sharing network I can quite easily prove violations by pulling up copyrighted content from a given user's IP. The user can more or less plausibly deny responsibility by claiming she's been h4x0red, or that he's running an adaptive swarm delivery p2p client which uses encryption that no one but the end user who knows the document's cryptohash is commiting the (c) violation by assembling scattered content slivers on his system. The technical issues are clear enough -- so it's how your local legislation (and the individual reptile-tailed judge) are seeing it. Clearly you can make it illegal, so users will rely on more hardened prestige-based designs, and packaging delivey infrastructure into semistealthy worms. I hear China is getting plenty of DSL now.
