MemeStreams | MemeStreams Discussion

Create an Account

This page contains all of the posts and discussion on MemeStreams referencing the following web page: [IP] Businessweek Article on Darknets. You can find discussions on MemeStreams as you surf the web, even if you aren't a MemeStreams member, using the Threads Bookmarklet.

[IP] Businessweek Article on Darknets
by Decius at 11:30 am EDT, Sep 8, 2003

] The entertainment industry says these digital versions
] of Prohibition-style speakeasies are of little concern. Since
] darknets typically include no more than 50 or 100 people
] because of technology limitations or security concerns, music
] and movie companies think they can't do much damage. "If
] they are using private networks, there is very little
] risk of being caught, but there is very little risk of
] them really doing much harm to the entertainment
] companies," says Randy Saaf, president of MediaDefender
] Inc., a copyright-protection security company.

This article is kind of annoying because it invents this term, "darknet," and then applies it to a bunch of different things without defining it. This allows them to say that Glaxo's VPN and FreeNet are the same type of thing. There are important similarities, but there are also important differences. Use of private networks by companies is not under some new growth spurt, and has no relationship to the development of private file trading networks.

Having said that, this article is public acknowledgement that we have now moved to the next phase. People are moving over to anonymous networks. Also, the spin from the recording industry has changed. Their first statements where "we can crack this technology." That was good spin. They can spread FUD for a long time that way and they never have to prove it. Here they instead say that private networks are not going to cause large financial problems for them. Thats quite an interesting take. If they think these networks will be less effective they are confused. Maybe they think they will be less visible (I.E. Shareholders will be less concerned about them)...

RE: [IP] Businessweek Article on Darknets
by Jeremy at 9:50 pm EDT, Sep 8, 2003

Decius wrote:
] This article is kind of annoying because it invents this term,
] "darknet," and then applies it to a bunch of different things
] without defining it.

Tom,

The author of this BusinessWeek article did not invent the term "darknet", although they may have used it without providing the definition.

The term was coined by Microsoft employees Peter Biddle, Paul England, Marcus Peinado, and Bryan Willman in a paper published at Stanford's DRM conference in 2002. Google for 'darknet' and follow the first link or click I'm Feeling Lucky. You'll be given a copy of the paper as a Word document.

Here is the abstract for that paper, which is entitled "The Darknet and the Future of Content Distribution." I will log the URL separately.

We investigate the darknet -- a collection of networks and technologies used to share digital content. The darknet is not a separate physical network but an application and protocol layer riding on existing networks. Examples of darknets are peer-to-peer file sharing, CD and DVD copying, and key or password sharing on email and newsgroups. The last few years have seen vast increases in the darknet's aggregate bandwidth, reliability, usability, size of shared library, and availability of search engines. In this paper we categorize and analyze existing and future darknets, from both the technical and legal perspectives. We speculate that there will be short-term impediments to the effectiveness of the darknet as a distribution mechanism, but ultimately the darknet-genie will not be put back into the bottle. In view of this hypothesis, we examine the relevance of content protection and content distribution architectures.