The evolution of P2P networks for file exchange: the interaction between social controversy and technical change

Since the irruption of Napster in 1999, Peer-to-Peer computer networks for file exchange have been at the heart of a heated debate that has eventually evolved into a wide social controversy across the world, involving legal, economical, and even political issues. This essay analyzes the effects of this controversy on the technical innovations that have shaped the evolution of those systems. It argues that the usual image of a single two-sided conflict does not account for most of the technical changes involved. P2P entrepreneurs and creators show a wide range of motivations and business strategies -if any- and users are not a monolithic group with a common set of goals and values. As a result, the actual historical evolution of those networks does not follow a simple linear path but a more complex and multidirectional development

Can filesharers be triggered by economic incentives? Results of an experiment

Illegal filesharing on the internet leads to considerable financial losses for artists and copyright owners as well as producers and sellers of music. Thus far, measures to contain this phenomenon have been rather restrictive. However, there are still a considerable number of illegal systems, and users are able to decide quite freely between legal and illegal downloads because the latter are still difficult to sanction. Recent economic approaches account for the improved bargaining position of users. They are based on the idea of revenue-splitting between professional sellers and peers. In order to test such an innovative business model, the study reported in this article carried out an experiment with 100 undergraduate students, forming five small peer-to-peer networks.The networks were confronted with different economic conditions.The results indicate that even experienced filesharers hold favourable attitudes towards revenue-splitting.They seem to be willing to adjust their behaviour to different economic conditions

The economics of copyright law: a stocktake of the literature

This article is a survey of publications by economists writing on copyright law. It begins with a general overview of how economists analyse these questions; the distinction is made between the economics of copying and the economic aspects of copyright law as analysed in law and economics. It then continues with sections on research on the effects of copying and downloading and the effects of unauthorised use (‘piracy’) and ends with an overall evaluation of the economics of copyright in the light of recent technological changes. Economists have always been, and still are, somewhat sceptical about copyright and question what alternatives there are to it. On balance, most accept the role of copyright law in the creative industries while urging caution about its becoming too strong. And although European authors’ rights are different in legal terms from the Anglo-American copyright, the economic analysis of these laws is essentially the same

Unfinished Business: Are Today’s P2P Networks Liable for Copyright Infringement?

In June 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court issued the decision in Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios v. Grokster Ltd., a case that asked whether peer-to-peer networks may be held liable for facilitating the illegal distribution of music over the internet. The music industry petitioned the Supreme Court to settle the disagreement between the circuit courts over the standard of liability for aiding in copyright infringement. The case was based on a clash between the protection of technological innovation and the protection of artistic works. This iBrief examines the circuit split and the Grokster opinion and discusses the questions of liability left unresolved by the Supreme Court. It argues that further clarification of the Sony rule is still needed in order to encourage the proliferation of legitimate peer-to-peer networks by protecting their services while discouraging illegitimate file-sharing activities

The Economics of Limited Liability: An Empirical Study of New York Law Firms

Since the rapid rise in organizational forms for business associations, academics and practitioners have sought to explain the choice of form rationale. Each form contains its own set of default rules that inevitably get factored into this decision, including the extent to which each individual firm owner will be held personally liable for the collective debts and obligations of the firm. The significance of the differences in these default rules continues to be debated. Many commentators have advanced theories, most notably those based on unlimited liability, profit-sharing, and illiquidity, asserting that the partnership form provides efficiency benefits that outweigh any costs. In this article, the authors test these theories empirically by examining the choice of organizational form by New York law firms. Although the evidence indicates a strong shift from the general partnership form to the limited liability partnership form, a significant number of New York law firms remain general partnerships. The authors conclude that the prevailing theories based on unlimited liability, profit-sharing, and illiquidity are insufficient and posit that, in contrast to the beliefs of many commentators, the choice of form decision is quite complex. It depends on a variety of factors, including the behavior of other similarly situated firms that the decision makers consider competitors for prestige and clients. Nonetheless, it is apparent that unlimited liability is generally considered burdensome, and it is the authors’ prediction that, at some point in time, nearly all the firms in their sample will choose to file as limited liability partnerships. The general partnership form, with its unlimited liability, will operate only as a penalty default that punishes parties who fail to sufficiently define their organization, forcing firm members to reveal relevant information to courts and interested third parties

Artists, Musicians and the Internet

Presents findings from a national survey of self-described artists and an online survey of 2,755 musicians that assess how artists and musicians use the Internet, what they think about copyright issues, and how they feel about online file sharing

Media Downloading, Uploading, and Sharing Among College Students

On many occasions over recent years the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has made national headlines with its large-scale effort to launch civil suits against individuals alleged to be involved in illegal downloading of copyrighted material over the Internet including many college students. By reputation, college students are among the most active users of digital media obtained through peer-to-peer downloading and similar techniques. We conducted a three-phase study to understand student beliefs and behavior in the areas of media downloading, copyright, intellectual property ownership, and computing security. The research included a small cohort of personal interviews, an anonymous paper and pencil survey of 164 students, and a Web-based survey with 402 respondents