p2p

Ipoque Study of Internet Traffic

Ipoque Internet Study, 2008-2009
Yet another indicator that filesharing is not going away, even if video-streaming is growing more rapidly.

Some of the key findings of the study are:

  • P2P generates most traffic in all regions
  • The proportion of P2P traffic has decreased BitTorrent is still number one of all protocols, HTTP second
  • The proportion of eDonkey is much lower than last year
  • File hosting has considerably grown in popularity
  • Streaming is taking over P2P users for video content
  • Usenet, a file sharing alternative for P2P, appears in the statistics for the first time

An Empirical Analysis of Filesharing

Olson’s Paradox Revisited : An Empirical Analysis of Filesharing
Thierry Pénard, Sylvain Dejean, Raphaël Suire (June, 2009)

Abstract:

This article aims to examine the impact of group size on the provision of collective good provided by P2P file-sharing communities. Olson (1965) argued that small communities are more able to provide collective actions. Using an original database on Bittorrent file-sharing communities, our article finds a positive relation between the size of a community and the amount of collective good provided. However, the individual propensity to cooperate decreases with group size. These two features seem to indicate that P2P file-sharing communities provide a pure (non rival) public good. We also show that specialized communities are more efficient than general communities to encourage cooperative behavior. Finally, the rules designed by the managers of a community play an active role to stimulate voluntary contributions and improve the self-sustainability of file-sharing.

Source and full paper
See also Janko Roettgers article in this

hexagon.cc: file-sharing goes semi-private

Perhaps the days of the general file sharing nodes, like piratebay, isohunt, or even mininova are over. But certainly not the days of unregulated file-sharing. As far as one can tell, private-trackers are thriving and now the founder of isohunt is creating a new system called hexagon.cc which centers around the ability of users to create groups of people with whom they want to share.

torrentfreak.org wirtes: “The main difference that sets Hexagon.cc apart from other social file sharing and BitTorrent sites, is everything is centered around groups. Be it file sharing networks or flash video sites, a key piece we found missing is social context,” isoHunt’s founder Gary Fung said.

With Hexagon Fung hopes to bridge this gap by allowing people to
start groups where they can share content within a certain niche. These groups help to organize content and allow people to share with others who are interested in the same material, privately or in public.

Update: See also this article by Janko Roettgers (Sept.05.)

Tanda Foundation: community funding for culture

Tanda Foundation is an experimental and informal not for profit held and run by its users. We aim to found new ways and means to support creative production, create a community interested in build a public fund via micro-donations and decide our own cultural agenda. The Foundation aims to be an accountable platform of funding for its users, where the process of application, reviewing, voting, and collection of funds is accesible to all its Patrons and Candidates.

The Foundation relies on 2.0 infrastucture to exist with minimal costs and labor. Think in an automatic not-for-profit.

For more information about our Grant 2.0 system, please visit our F.A.Q. section. Also visit the Desk dedicated to the administration, view the Works section and browse the documentation about the mechanisms used to collect funds.

Mininova Helps Artists to Monetize Torrents

A new article over at TorrentFreak indicates, once again, that free downloads and 'for-sale' distribution model might well co-exist, even if it's much too early to tell if this model is doing to be stable. They write:

Mininova, one of the largest BitTorrent sites on the Internet, will launch a new feature today that will help artists, labels and other content producers to generate revenue. The Dutch record label ‘Beep! Beep!’ is one of the first to try the new feature, which allows content producers to add ’shopping links’ to their free torrents.

Ups and downs Economic and cultural effects of file sharing on music, film and games

On Februry 18, a report commissioned by the ministry of Economic Affairs, the Justice Department and the ministry of Education Culture and Science called "Ups and downs Economic and cultural effects of file sharing on music, film and games" was released. A few days ago, the official English translation was released as well.

The research shows that the economic implications of file sharing for welfare in the Netherlands are strongly positive in the short and long terms. File sharing provides consumers with access to a broad range of cultural products, which typically raises welfare. Conversely, the practice is believed to result in a decline in sales of CDs, DVDs and games.

Determining the impact of unlicensed downloading on the purchase of paid content is a tricky exercise. In the music industry, one track downloaded does not imply one less track sold. Many music sharers would not buy as many CDs at today’s prices if downloading were no longer possible, either because they cannot afford it or because they have other budgetary priorities: they lack purchasing power. At the same time, we see that many people download tracks to get to know new music (sampling) and eventually buy the CD if they like it. To the extent that file sharing does result in a decline in sales (substitution), it usually entails a transfer of welfare from producers to consumers. With estimated welfare gains accruing to consumers totalling around €200 million a year in the Netherlands, music producers and publishers suffer turnover losses of at most €100 million a year. These calculations are necessarily based on several assumptions and contain uncertainties as many of the underlying data are not precisely known. Whereas comparable figures cannot be provided for the film and games industries, they follow a similar logic.

Economy Profits From File-Sharing, Report Concludes

Source Torrentfreak:

Commissioned by the Dutch government, a recently published report concludes that file-sharing has a positive effect on the economy, both on the long and short term. A massive 30% of the Dutch population uses file-sharing software to download music, games, movies and other forms of entertainment, which is now considered to be a ‘good thing’.
....
File-sharing gives people access to a wide range of cultural goods and is often used to sample content that is bought later, the report concluded. Most file-sharers would have never bought the content they downloaded, but having access to such a large media library increases the welfare of Dutch citizens, the researchers note.

Frankly, the findings of this study do not surprise me and they point to the power of the long tail for cultural economy. Wider range of access to cultural product is a good thing, in and off itself. People will be able to find what they really care for (rather than stick to what is just not objectionable enough to switch off -- the basic mode of operation of TV and other broadcast media) and form that engagement, many things can flow.

Ars Technica writes:

Things get really interesting on page 116 as the report starts to dissect the societal effects of file sharing. The study concludes that the effects are strongly positive because consumers get to enjoy desirable content and also get to keep their cash to buy other things. Because the consumers save much more money than the producers lose, the net economic effects are positive. The report also reinforces the truth that unpaid downloads do not translate into lost sales in anything close to a one-to-one ratio.

Shift from p2p to Video Streaming?

Ars Technica reports on changing traffic patterns, with streaming video rising while p2p traffic, overall, stagnating, now accounting for only one quarter of the overall traffic. They conclude:

The shift, as it take hold around the world, benefits everyone. For content owners, the gain is obvious: the vast majority of high-traffic streaming content is legal and licensed (Dr. Who, Battlestar Galactica, Colbert Report, etc.). This stands in contrast with P2P, of course, and even though user-generated content sites like YouTube still have copyright issues, those issues are "above water" and easy to deal with.

For users, legitimate on-demand access to huge troves of high-quality video removes the risk of lawsuits, but it also has other beneficial effects. For one thing, the P2P blocking/delaying/filtering schemes being trotted out around the world don't affect most of these services. ISPs have gotten away with such blocks using the argument that most P2P is illegal anyway; without that support, it will politically be much harder to block or limit access to legal streaming in the same way.

In a way, this seems to follow suit with a more general trend related to web2.0 of centralizing infrastructure, thus the ability of big organisations, media companies, to reassert control. Very troubling.

80% want legal P2P - survey

The Register has an interesting survey concerning the use of p2p file sharing (the sample, though, is quite small, 773 people, no word on how they were selected.)

A fascinating survey of music consumption conducted for British Music Rights has good and bad news for the beleaguered music business.

The bad news: online file sharing is more prevalent than other surveys suggest. The good news: a lot of people are willing to pay for a service that offers legal, licensed P2P file sharing. Half the people surveyed think distributors such as large telecomms companies should pay creators from the proceeds of such a license. And a surprisingly large number of people still value physical music goods, with two thirds of potential subscribers to legal P2P saying that they would continue to buy CDs.

The numbers are quite high:

63 per cent acknowledge they "illegally" download unlicensed music - with the average monthly download being 53 tracks a month.

Also interesting is this fact:

Altruism plays a large part, the survey discovered. More than two thirds said they were giving something back to the community. The reason that most frequently appears on website comments - that music is "too expensive" - was only cited by around 10 per cent of respondents.

"This suggests that respondents recognise the value in the ‘share-ability’ of music and are motivated by a sense of fairness and the principle of reciprocity – something for something illegally," BMR concludes.