BitTorrent "Bundles" Create Cash Registers Inside Artwork 97
cagraham writes "BitTorrent has released a new file format called Bundle into closed alpha-testing today, according to VentureBeat. The format allows artists to embed a paywall inside of their work, and then distribute the art for free over BitTorrent. When users open the work they can listen or view part it for free, and are then prompted to either pay a fee, turn over their email address, or perhaps share the work over social media, in order to see the rest. The new format may ease artists concerns about releasing work for free and having to hope for compensation in the future. Artists who have already signed on include Madonna, The Pixies, and author Tim Feriss."
Re: (Score:1)
10minutemail.com
Let me translate that into English: (Score:5, Insightful)
They've reinvented demoware.
Re:Let me translate that into English: (Score:5, Funny)
They've reinvented demoware.
You're forgetting the magic words that summon Venture Capitalists:
"It's Demoware... IN THE CLOUD"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Bah, these are the risk takers that think beyond your puny limitations. The ones who will get in on the next trillion dollar idea because they dared to dream.
The ones who live on daddy's dime and if in any lower economic class would be sitting in a 3rd rate casino somewhere plunking nickles in a slot machine all day...
Re: (Score:2)
"It's Demoware... IN THE CLOUD"
Nope. Pretty sure that's already been done.
It's Demoware...In the cloud....ON BITTORRENT!"
Re: (Score:2)
> "It's Demoware... IN THE CLOUD"
I thought the magic words were "dot com". Am I behind or something?
Re:Let me translate that into English: (Score:4, Informative)
What stops people from redistribution? (Score:5, Insightful)
Unless there is yet another crappy DRM scheme buried inside these "bundles", what stops people from simply redistributing a paywall-free version?
Seeding CRM protected files has newer been difficult. It just so happens nobody wants to download them ...
- Jesper
Re:What stops people from redistribution? (Score:4, Interesting)
The honour system. Bittorrent users would never pirate music from independent artists, they only go after labels' output where the economics don't favour the artist or the consumer.
Stop laughing.
Re: (Score:1)
The honour system. Bittorrent users would never pirate music from independent artists, they only go after labels' output where the economics don't favour the artist or the consumer.
Stop laughing.
You laugh, but to be fair, when things are readily available digitally, piracy does drop off quite a bit.
Yes, there's always going to be cuntrags that bitch -- the whining blubbering mass of entitled manchildren that cry every time Viz shuts down another Naruto / One Piece / Bleach piracy site being the example that immediately comes to mind -- but for the most part, people pirate not because they don't want to pay, it's because they want convenience.
Relevant Oatmeal link. [theoatmeal.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Until shows are released a. free of cost, b. free of DRM, and c. almost immediately available via a simple link, piracy will always be a significant issue. With applications like SickBeard, CouchPotato, and HeadPhones that automatically scour and download content, it's hard to compete against that for convenience.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Haha. Not really.
Oh, (a) can play a part, but cheap is good enough. (b) is dumb. No one (statistically speaking) gives a fuck. (c) is the biggest point. Don't believe me? Guess how much my bit torrent use has fallen off since I got a roku and netflix account? I think that Gravity Falls and Game of Thrones are about the only things I bothered hitting torrent up for. So yeah, point c is valid, but the other two are plain wrong.
Re:What stops people from redistribution? (Score:5, Insightful)
You have mistaken giving a fuck out of principle for giving a fuck out of annoyance.
I have quite a few gamer friends. Most of them couldn't give the least damn about the ethics or long term implications of DRM in games. Every single one of them understands what it means when they can't play (for example) a single-player game offline on their laptop in a waiting room or on a plane. And the majority (sometimes with a bit of help, admittedly) of them have "fixed" those problems by grabbing a crack off the internet.
So no, most people have no idea they should oppose DRM. Despite that, most people do hate everything about it without even knowing the target of their ire.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:What stops people from redistribution? (Score:4, Interesting)
I pirate a lot of stuff -- movies, TV shows, video games...
But in the past couple years I've completely stopped pirating music. Why? Well, if I can get a guaranteed high-quality, DRM-free copy of the album in ten seconds for $5, why would I bother spending more time to pirate a copy of unknown quality? Particularly considering how hard to find much of the music I listen to is -- you can find it on Amazon, but it's not on TPB, not on GNUtella, not on slsk, often not even on iTunes...
I'd use Netflix if I could use it the way I wanted -- i.e., integrate it into my custom home theater system. But until Netflix will run on a Raspberry Pi, I'm going to be pirating my movies and TV shows. Of course, the ones that offer a paid download option (or even a donations appreciated download option) get my money. As for video games -- those I usually pirate just because I can't find them anymore. Pirated a bunch of N64 games because I don't have an N64, you can't find the game cartridges anywhere, and they don't offer those games for sale on the Wii store (the ones they do offer I've already purchased)...so I hacked the Wii and pirated the roms. Trying to do the same for Gamecube games now, for the same reason -- I just can't find the game discs even if I wanted to buy them. Give me a $5/game download option and I'd GLADLY skip the freakin' *weeks* I've spent trying to get the damn pirated copies to work...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't want Netflix as it currently exists, that's my point. I don't use XBMC (which is the single slowest media player I've ever seen,) I use omxplayer and some custom PHP and Bash code on a model B Pi. Works great. Plays all my media just fine, kicks on the news as I walk in the door from work, turns the projector and stereo on/off as I start or finish watching something, handles YouTube subscriptions, torrents...Next project is integrating it with my room lighting and gaming systems. It does more than t
Re: (Score:1)
Only very rarely is media released in DRM-free downloadable formats. Baen Ebooks, Tor/Forge, and Louis CK's shows are the most popular examples I know of, but it is very rare. I can think of no broadcasted or cable television show that allows it.
Re: (Score:3)
Does Viz release these shows in DRM-free downloadable formats? I'd imagine not. So even that one falls under the convenience category.
Only very rarely is media released in DRM-free downloadable formats. Baen Ebooks, Tor/Forge, and Louis CK's shows are the most popular examples I know of, but it is very rare. I can think of no broadcasted or cable television show that allows it.
I was actually speaking of the comics, not the cartoons. The great unforgivable sin was that Viz wanted something like $0.25 a chapter and had a 2 week delay (which has since been lowered to same day) release lag. The "pro-piracy" arguments were hilarious, and stupid. [mangafox.me]
Or as I said before -- blubbering, entitled Manchildren. Especially when you consider the company they're defending, NOEZ, has made a fortune ripping off Japanese and US IP for years now. [batoto.net]
Anyway, DRM is no excuse. If a company wishes to sell
Re: (Score:1)
A company has a right to make an offer. But I have no obligation to accept. Nor do I have an obligation to care about corporate wishes. Why on Earth should I?
And no, just because they paid good money to get laws passed does not oblige me to do anything besides laugh as they fail to have any effect.
We're talking about copyright law, not property la
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
In my experience most people don't WANT TO PAY! And that's why 99% of the torrents are breaking copyright rules.
Because an album costs between 15$ and $40 in countries where average salary is $250 and where is $2500 (and gives $1 to the artist). Would you pay like 10% of your montly income for an album?
I'm very sure the way of distributing music will change [theoatmeal.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not (yet) laughing, but a certain independent artist named Madonna is reported to be among the first to sign on.
capcha: unionize
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Nobody is laughing. The moment some publishers like Tor started distributing e-books without DRM, there was an increase in e-book sales from these publishers. The Amazon Gateway sort of distorts this a bit, but outside the kindle world (i.e. in the open epub world) it is easier to notice such things.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
I don't know, there are definitely better ways than other to do this than others. Spiderweb software actually does this well I think. After something like 20 hours of gameplay you get to a point where you can't go past. You know this ahead of time though. If it's a timed event, that does stink, it's jarring and degrades the product. The key is to make you want to give them the money. Make it an emotional buy and it bypasses the logic filter.
Is this the same honor system that keeps artists (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So, sounds like bullshit to me either way.
Re: (Score:2)
I would imagine that they hold the decryption key on the servers for the pay content, and only send it to you when you fulfill the terms of the bundle. That's not DRM, that's encryption, and it works.
Or they could be stupid. Either way.
Re: (Score:2)
I would imagine that they hold the decryption key on the servers for the pay content, and only send it to you when you fulfill the terms of the bundle. That's not DRM, that's encryption, and it works.
Or they could be stupid. Either way.
Unless that encryption is built into the media players (ie "DRM"), it can obviously only protect the content as far as the first decryption. After that, the content is free from decryption and it can easily be redistributed.
- Jesper
Re: (Score:2)
Sure. Pirates are gonna pirate, after all.
Re: (Score:2)
True, but is that really a problem? DRM has, as far as I know, never been successful in preventing pirate versions from being posted. The goal should be that artists get paid, not to have zero piracy. Having an additional way to distribute content which includes payments to the artist will help, if it is convenient enough.
Re: (Score:2)
Question is: is it convenient enough?
When speaking of torrents, why download the "paywalled" version if the free one is right next to it?
I know I would opt for a paid version; albeit from a different channel. But I just don't see the current bunch of torrent users picking the paywalled version over a pirated. They're often (with exceptions naturally) people who don't care about the ethics and morality concerning intellectual property...
In fact, some of them will go to great lengths defending their position
Re: What stops people from redistribution? (Score:2)
I tend to agree with the basic premise of your argument.
It remains to be seen if they will find enough people downloading and seeding it though. Without people actually downloading these files and seeding them the whole plan is dead in the water.
Re: (Score:2)
Question is: is it convenient enough?
There is not enough information out there yet to say. I think a lot will depend on how well the client is written and how easy the payment procedure is.
Another question is whether they will insist on people using their client or open up the format for inclusion in third party media players etc.
When speaking of torrents, why download the "paywalled" version if the free one is right next to it?
I know I would opt for a paid version; albeit from a different channel. But I just don't see the current bunch of torrent users picking the paywalled version over a pirated. They're often (with exceptions naturally) people who don't care about the ethics and morality concerning intellectual property...
I don't think these bundles would be very popular on The Pirate Bay, but they could be distributed via the artist's own site or via a store/portal/search engine that only contains these bundles etc. Studies have shown
Re: What stops people from redistribution? (Score:3)
Perhaps.
But buying a key means everybody gets the same key (since they have the same file) or that the decryption is a mix of home brew stuff - and such things are eventually cracked. Especially on the PC.
The only argument I can find against cracking the key system or distributing the key, is the fact thatost likely someone will distribute the decrypted content anyway, so perhaps nobody will take the time to crack the system.
It's not a very compelling argument though ...
Re: (Score:2)
The key distribution system can be secured, since it resides on the server side and the server is in the hands of someone trusted by the rights owner. The key itself cannot be secured, since it is needed on the end user's machine to unlock the content. It could be hidden within the client, but that could be cracked. This comes down to the fundamental problem of DRM: you cannot both let the end user have the content for the purpose of playing it and not have the content for the purpose of copying it.
But look
Re: (Score:2)
In that case, why have DRM at all? Simply ask for donations. Since DRM is not effective, people are not going to pay anyway unless they feel like it, so why annoy them and lower your chances? Instead, focus on making as many payment methods available as possible, from credit cards to Paypall to Bitcoin.
Re: (Score:2)
Meant DRM ... obviously ... :-)
Re: (Score:2)
You really don't know what the fuck you're babbling about.
Spent 5 minutes looking for details... (Score:2)
Anyone know how this works? Is the content encrypted in such a way that there are millions of secret keys that can unlock the secure payload?
Re: (Score:3)
Well, the details are sparse. Being that it's bettorrent what we know is that there will be two versions of the content, the secure payload, and the superior ripped version without DRM which is freely available from ThePirateBay.
Nope (Score:1)
I hope it helps the artists though, i know musicians everywhere get fucked severely by the "record companies".
Re: (Score:2)
This is a step back. This will be exploited/cracked/patched to hell and back, especially if the bulk is kept client-side. This is DRM. Every lock is built around the key, nothing is perfectly secure. I hope it helps the artists though, i know musicians everywhere get fucked severely by the "record companies".
Theoretically (especially for 'release promotion' type stuff, where longevity is not a concern and awful 'analytics' people are probably salivating over the numbers) the plan might call for a server-side component(which would allow both tracking of interested users and allow the bittorrent-distributed component to be incomplete and thus not crackable on its own). That wouldn't stop the trivial redistribution of de-crippled copies once one person takes one for the team and complies with the demands of the pa
Re: (Score:2)
If it's partly server side, the file you download after paying can be digitally marked with your identifying information and when thousands of copies of that turn up in the hands of third parties or on a torrent, they can go after the person who paid for it for illegal file sharing.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, that fingerprint crap is easy to strip out. Amazon mp3 files have it and you can easily download several tools to scrub the watermarking information out.
Re: (Score:2)
If it's partly server side, the file you download after paying can be digitally marked with your identifying information and when thousands of copies of that turn up in the hands of third parties or on a torrent, they can go after the person who paid for it for illegal file sharing.
True enough, which creates the embarrassing perverse incentive for the hypothetical release group to pay with the credentials of the most hapless, sympathetic, ma_and_pa_clueless@AOL.com people they can find, just to see if the rightsholder will take the bait and sue the ostensible leakers...
Re: (Score:2)
Which has the side effect of potentially drawing down a world of shit on innocent third parties. Classy.
Prediction (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Fork what? BitTorrent the client? There are already tons of BitTorrent clients. BitTorrent the peer-to-peer sharing protocol? It's already a protocol built mostly out of optional extensions and client-specific additions. BitTorrent the conceptual network in which the protocol operates? The "networks" of different torrents are completely independent except for DHT. There is zero benefit to splitting it up whatsoever.
Ya Good luck with that (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
However it doesn't necessarily matter if its cracked, if the distribution method is easy enough and the content cheap enough (this cuts out a lot of palms) then its likely enough people will just pay for it to make a decent profit. After that, who cares about the deadbeats who share it for free? Its all gravy after that anyway.
I think one thing many don't realize, and some like the RIAA base their entire job on not realizing, is what LL Bean seems to have realized with their return policy: trying to stamp o
Re: (Score:2)
but if achieving that drives away customers and gives you a reputation as a pain in the ass that nobody wants to deal with, its not really good business practice is it?
It is if phase two of your plan is to either eliminate or buy out the majority of your competition.
Re:Ya Good luck with that (Score:4, Insightful)
Alternately (and more likely), people simply won't bother with these bundles.
In other words, expect to see something like this for all these "bundles" on your favorite torrent site:
HOT TORRENTZ* FOR MADONNA'S NEWEST SONG!!!!
Comment 1: Hey, this is just a demo and it asks for money after 1 minute. Anyone know where I can download the full song?
Comment 2: yeah, go to http://www.piratestuff.com/torrent1234.html** [piratestuff.com]
File size: 12MB Total downloads: 1 Seeds: 37*** Leechers: 0
Meanwhile, the usual torrent of the MP3 or AVI files without the bundled DRM will have thousands of downloads. Why should people waste their time downloading these bundles and then looking for a crack when it's available elsewhere without the hassle?
* purposeful use of "z" to make it seem cool and illegal, just like a real pirated song!
** not a real link so don't even bother
*** seeders are all the copyright owners wondering why nobody is downloading
Re: (Score:2)
Sharing as a true "free-advertising" model (Score:4, Insightful)
Describing the mechanism as a pay-wall probably does the feature a disservice - of course, one way of unlocking is pay, but it is stil possible to view free, and a more useful corollary as demonstrated in the article is that the artist can more effectively drive the user to a retailer of their merchandise (and a preferred one at that), or to their own store.
As usual, persons who specifically do not wish to pay money will not have to, but ensuring a store link for that particular content accompanies the piece in an otherwise free-distribution format
This could work really well, so long as sharing gratis and libere is still possible, and if artists using this can provide direct access to the specific item in an international store.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd modify you insightful if I hadn't already posted here, that's terribly astute. Ensuring that there's as little barrier as possible between the arrival of a copy of the song, and actually paying for it, is all this needs to do to be a success.
artists, get over it! (Score:2)
Artists who fear copying need to get over it. They fear the loss of what they shouldn't have at all. The ability to monetize a work by charging for copies was entirely dependent on the primitiveness of our copying methods. When good quality copying was an operation took lots of expensive equipment, material, space, and time, it was possible to regulate it. Now copying takes very little of any of that. There's no turning back the clock.
This DRM idea is ridiculous. It's Blu-Ray with unskippable commer
Re: (Score:2)
I consort with artists. I talk with them often. Small fry, who want so desperately to make a living from doing what they love. They fear for their work being lost on the net with no trace back home, and therefore no commissions, and therefore no pay.
I talk to them about Creative Commons. All you need is to submit to advertising and get page views. How many, when anyone can be an artist? Just get a part time job to tide you over. A job to afford making art, that takes so much time away from making art?. It's
Re: (Score:2)
We are in a slow transition; but still in the old capitalist model so I'll address it from that perspective:
1) You can't always do what you want. A highly visible and vocal minority says otherwise (plus there is a lot of money to be made from all the attempts people make to join that minority.)
2) Hobby. When did hobbies die? Far fewer people have hobbies today. It is either a career path or nothing - when your hobby becomes an attempt at a career it is no longer a hobby. Many so-called hobbies today are j
Re: (Score:1)
.... a fair retort. May I respond:
1) Indeed you can't just do "what you want" - but when what you do is lauded and desireable, is it really that much to ask to be able to make a living from it? From a zen buddhist perspective, we could also simply do what we do and let people benefit from that without thought of reward, be that making art, tables, or farming the land. It works when everyone is as altruistic and zen-buddhisty - but it doesn't pay bills that are at a baser, more real level than idealism and p
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
There is a wide range of opinion and only the top few ever get attention anymore. I'm not heavily invested in this topic. I'm not happy with the 1 sided nature of the debate and how over the years the industry is turning Ideas into property; like some big land grab... after the wealthy claimed most everything else they are now taking away ideas... something intangible and more valuable to humanity than money. I'd make a ridiculous claim about religious ideas becoming private property someday...except Sci
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, and no "Dark side of the moon", and no Beatles.
The world envisioned by parasites sucks.
Re: (Score:2)
You make the same mistakes they do. I didn't say they shouldn't make a living from art. I said, they shouldn't try to make a living from monetizing copying. It doesn't work. It asks too much of us, that we should honor-- honor, since force does not work-- a system based on artificial scarcity, to the detriment of us all.
Freely. Wihtout agenda. Isn't that the type of art we want to see? ... Is that not worth paying artists a living for?
Of course it is. Are they and you totally unable to think of any other way to compensate artists for their efforts? You know, patronage? National Endowment for the Arts? Kickstarter?
Re: (Score:2)
I believe artists should be able to monetize the dozens of hours and materials they spend to create a work we can share at the push of a button.
I agree completely. They just need to do it before they distribute the work. Once it's been distributed, short of an (impractical) NDA, it's out of their hands.
I would suggest a Kickstarter campaign. Set a target for public release under an open license, e.g. CC-BY-SA. Offer some bonuses, like signed prints—or whatever is appropriate for your medium—for serious backers. Post some watermarked thumbnail images so people know what they're getting. When and if the target is reached, distribute full-
Re: (Score:2)
Some of the best art in the world where funded by outside sources, so I"m not sure what you think you are driving towards.
I am going to be blunt: that vast majority of 'art' isn't any good, and the vast majority of artists aren't any good.
If you want to make money doing art, then you have to do what people will pay for, or getting funding elsewhere.
" Wihtout agenda."
Of course they have an agenda
You can't stop redistribution; STOP ASKING (Score:3)
All of you who are asking how they will stop redistribution of the unlocked content are missing the point entirely. [Many] unauthorized copiers have long been saying that they use bittorrent not because they won't pay, but because it's better. This is an attempt to find out if that is true. The content will wind up on bittorrent networks regardless of how it is distributed, so there is really no drawback. There's no reason why this should fail spectacularly because while this doesn't make it any harder to distribute illicit copies via torrent, it also doesn't actually make it any easier.
Whats the "bundle" format? (Score:3)
Does this bundle format need their client? Is there an embedded scripting engine? (what about security issues?) Is the content encrypted or just blocked? Does it phone-home to unlock? (on every use?) Do you know the price and terms before downloading it, or only after downloading and trying to use it?
I can't find anything on the technology at bittorrent.com or bittorrent.org, either with Google or browsing. I guess this is just another closed-source extension pretending to be "bit-torrent" so they can claim 170 million users.
Re: (Score:2)
I was wondering the same thing. If it's some kind of DRM it's going to require its own proprietary player and will fail. If it's just a gentle reminder that, should you feel so inclined, you can buy this piece of music over there it would seem that this could have been solved with a simple ID3 tag.
Jailbroken within a week (Score:2)
been there, had it done to me (Score:2)
Really -- who here hasn't torrented something which turned out to be in an encrypted zip file or some such, with a little note that said "Just go to www.imasucker.com" and answer the brief survey to get the password to unlock this file" ?