Does Interdiction Work?

Frank’s been taking great notes at iLaw.  This section from Professor Fisher’s and Nesson’s presentation stood out:



“Another stick: a ‘first in line auto-competition’ system
The objective is to protect new releases that have immediate commercial value. Preservation incentive for novelty.


At T0, the file exists only at the artist’s. Someone gets a copy, and puts it into the P2P net. As soon as that happens, it is now visible – until then, it’s invisible. So, we set up a system that searches the net, and finds the first release of the file on the network, and then – here’s the big deal – (1) the program starts hogging access to that single file excluding others and (2) notifying the poster that s/he’s been identified as the source of the infringing copy.


This technology has been developed and is being tried out. Stats for three weeks of protecting a file on KaZaA and Gnutella. 20 seeds (initial drops into the net); total sharers: 500 – others. What we see is that, on a day by day basis, there’s a big bounce when radio plays start up. And the program seems to be effective at getting people to take the file down. Only a few evaders.


So, this is a proof of concept – it is possible to inject something into the technology so that you can get ahead of the rate of “seeding” the network; downloads may behave exponentially, but uploading does not - so it can be attacked. Stopping the seeder seems to have meaningful effects – so the trick is to monitor all networks (and thus, a problem, IMHO)”


Very interesting.  Again, this is a key component of the speed bumps argument.  What I hadn’t seen before is any actual stats on interdiction – I’d love to see more.  Putting aside methodological problems, getting such stats is difficult because no one really admits on record that they’re using interdiction.

No comments yet. Be the first.

Leave a reply

Protected by AkismetBlog with WordPress