Posted by pooter on 09/30/05 16:45

FatKat [robynari@juno.com] said
>
> pooter wrote:
> > FatKat [robynari@juno.com] said
> > >
> > > fred-bloggs wrote:
> > > > Vegas@WhosYourDaddy.com (Vegas) wrote in news:jdY_e.40843$sx2.23902
> > > > @fed1read02:
> > > >
> > > > > R.I.P.
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/09/22/p2p_networks_darken/
> > > >
> > > > just shows you shouldn't *believe* what you read on the internet
> > > >
> > > I read the article, and I'm fascinated that such an informed piece
> > > still missed the big story. As far as the media is concerned, WinMX
> > > was a network run little (if at all) different from Grokster, by guys
> > > who encouraged piracy - and now it too has fallen. I've seen no
> > > mention of WinMX being a network initially promulgated by guys who
> > > don't even encourage you to use their software (let alone for piracy),
> > > and not a word about the fact that rumors of its shutdown are
> > > exagerrated. Has anybody seen a media report aknowledging that WinMX
> > > users are still on-line and sharing?
> >
> > Would it not be better to not have such 'positive' media coverage as
> > heads above the parapet have a tendency to get sliced off?
>
> I never said anything about coverage being positive or negative, or
> even whether WinMX users should even want there to be any coverage at
> all -obviously nobody wants the industry alerted if they can still
> affect the networks. I'm just curious as to whether the media, which
> has noted Frontcode's apparent shutdown, even knows that WinMX itself
> is still being used.
>
>

You're a touchy old sod aren't you. :-)

[Back to original message]