Talk:Kazaa

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Kazaa Lite is technically illegal, and I wasn't aware that we're in the business of linking to illegal content at Wikipedia. message left by ??

Wikipedia is not censored so it should be on Wikipedia and it is notable in the p2p scene. MrBobla 15:41, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Kazaa, in itself, is not illegal. What people use it for, however; is illegal. Kazaa is P2P, so it makes it easier to share files with other users. Whether or not they are copyrighted files, are another matter.

I can't see how kazaa is legal at all, though. It's a pedophile's heaven; It's all well and good the US is trying to catch them, but I haven't heard of anyone in the UK/any other part of the world trying to prevent child porn from appearing on Kazaa. That's rather offtopic, I just wanted to raise a point. Unconscious 12:13, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Can we be a little more neutral here? Kazaa was not built for child porn, we are looking for factual information not hysterical tabloid reactions. The same could be deemed about the internet in general being "a pedophile's heaven"(sic) or PC's themselves. Neither of these are illegal as a result simply because it's possible for them to be used for this and, like these, this is/was not the primary function of kazaa. You could make the same argument about almost any P2P network. Danno81 (talk) 10:33, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

If you will notice, the he said "Kazaa Lite", with emphasis on the "Lite" part. Paulish (talk) 09:21, 27 April 2008 (UTC)


Kazaa was originally developed by Estonian programmers. Svedes mentioned in the article only brought the product as they saw a potential in it. The guys that developed Kazaa are the same ones that created Skype.

Contents

[edit] NPOV / Vandalism

Watch out for edits by Haham Hanuka, he frequently adds bias / advertising and generally vandalizes the page.

Four users have reprimanded him (he's already been banned from WP:he), and a WP:ViP has been filed.

Update: A WP:RfC has been filed, check out some of his vandalism: [1]

[edit] Kazaa Lite

can we please give kazaa lite a proper page? it seems such a shame to force it to be a variant. it deserves its own page, and/or the variants page needs to have more than just kazaa lite, and at least give diet-k more than just a brief mention! -mysekurity 03:56, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

--

If there were more info that would perhaps be a good idea. Mavol 17:20, 23 September 2005 (UTC)


[edit] K++ is not a memory patcher

http://www.zeropaid.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=5219&page=2&pp=15

Random nut says it himself. "K++ is not a memory patcher. A memory patcher is a program that modifies one or more memory locations which almost exclusively are data locations. kpp.exe adds its own code to Kazaa's address space. That code then does everything kpp.exe is told to do by the user (registry options)."

[edit] Recent reverts

One or more anonymous editors keep insisting that the text regarding KLT is wrong. However, as I'll explain next I think their reasoning is flawed. Hence, I'll keep reverting the edits.

Why do I think the edits are wrong? The reason is two-fold:

First, the edits are made on the basis that KLT is wrongly accused of containing adware and spyware. This is simply not the case, let me quote the text:

the community split up after false accusations about ads and spyware in KLT

Hence, this simply asserts the claim that KLT was wrongly accused. Making the proposed change just unneeded.


Second, from the comments accompanying the edits I infer that the editor(s) wants to say that KLR contains adware and spyware. However, the text already says this:

All these Kazaa Lite version are clean, except for Kazaa Lite Revolutions and Resurrection.

where KLR is spelled in full here and where clean should be interpreted (given earlier text in the article, as not containing either adware or spyware. Unfortunately, the proposed edit changes this in KLR wrongly being accused of containing either adware or spyware. To quote from the edit:

however a forum discussion about adds in klr and allegations of spyware and that klr is falsely making people donate, got out of hand split the community up'

However this just being an allegation is already refuted by the editor(s), by providing a link which shows that KLR really does adware/spyware.

Of course, I should be the first to admit that KLT being wrongly accused in the past should be verified. I've been unable to come up with any evidence of this up until now. Hence, I added the verify tag. -- Koffieyahoo 08:31, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

emmn correct me if i'm wrong but when you check the history we see that you are the one that chaned the txt to the community split up after false accusations about ads and spyware in KLT

klt has always been clean, i have never seen it with any ads http://www.klitetools.com/comments.php?id=5004&catid=59&highlight=kazaa , however as another person in the history page added klr however has had ads in it as seen here on this screen shot from fst, you see the admin from fsp admiting to klr having ads. http://img123.imageshack.us/img123/5615/klr1yc.jpg

on top of that i like to say that Wikipedia should be ashamed to have an rcp like you, you changed the txt, you have no basis for changing the txt, its clearly proven by many people (see the history of this page)that klt is has been clean. based on what are accusing klt?

why should we change the txt to your unverified version when we have proof that the community did breakup over the fact that klr had ads in it.

I have to agree with the others, klr not only had banners but I remember shortly after that post about banners, they went from banners to pop ups, while after that they changed to making people donate to use the beta version, lol, which happens to be klite 2.4.3, which happens to be free. I thought that was very low of fsp to charge people for klite 2.4.3 by disguising it as klr beta.

all that stuff is exactly why i switched to klt K++ and i have to say, clean, no ads and much better then that buggy klr. I also like to add that I don't think its right for you to accuse klt k++ without any proof, I have looked at all the edits in the history as suggested above and article is correct except for Koffieyahoo's edits.

Yes, I was the one who wrote the sentence the community split up after false accusations about ads and spyware in KLT, which is just a reformulation of the sentence that was there before (check the history and youy see that all I did was revert and reformulate!). Moreover, the text already said that KLR has adware and spyware, so nothing new there. What needs verification, and not just removal as is now happening, is the following: Has KLT ever been falsly accused of containing adware or spyware. Thus far no evidence has been provided either way.

Besides the above, plainly reverting to an older version that also remove other edits in other paragraphs (which is what happening!) and simply removing verify and disputed tags without arguing is plain vandalism! -- Koffieyahoo 12:14, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Let me add: Your reactions just make it clear that you aren't reading what I'm writing above and that you certainly aren't reading the text in the article. I'm not disputing any of your claims, but you're just making a mess of the text: either do a serious edit or leave the article alone. -- Koffieyahoo 12:18, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the others, if the tags are problem correct the txt, why are you changing a verified txt to an unverified version? you are the one making a mess of the txt, and they are right you are accusing KLT K++ with no proof. KLT has never had any ads, KLR did have ads and does now and then in the start page.

Perhaps you yourself like to do a serious edit or leave the article alone.

Makes no sense Koffieyahoo, why did you change it from however a forum discussion about adds in klr and allegations of spyware and that klr is falsely making people donate, got out of hand split the community up to the community split up after false accusations about ads and spyware in KLT? that not true, the community spit up because kazaa lite should not have any ads, and KLR did have ads in it, another person has posted a screenshot of the post in the said forum (fst)here it is again incase anybody missed it http://img123.imageshack.us/img123/5615/klr1yc.jpg.

Not to mention that the community split up because of ads in KLR, there where no arguments ever about KLT having any ads and no community every split up over KLT being accused of having ads, so your edit is not only false but it also changes the whole dynamic of the subject and makes it sound like the community split up over KLT when in fact it was over ads in KLR

So why don't you tell every body why you changind KLR to KLT for no reason?

Not to mention that he is not just changing the whole story but that there are no allegations of klt having any ads aside from the one that he is making. The real story is that klr had ads and the community split over that. Now some people come from fsp and falsely change KLR to KLT, and then the good people correct it back. So in no shape or form shoult KLT and ads be in the same sentence, specially after all free things they provide the p2p community for all these years and never have they asked for a dime.

I suggest you all look at this revision, which is from way before I ever touched the article and then look at all the more recent edits. -- Koffieyahoo 08:08, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

If you have enough brains to look at the edits before and after that, you will see some fool just like yourself was falsely changin klr to klt which again others had corrected, again it was over resurrection having ads that the community split over. how many people does it take and how much proof before you get it? last time, community split over kazaa lite resurrection having ads in it, klt has never had ads, there has never been allegations of klt having ads, nor has there been any proof, changing klr to klt changes the whole dynamic of the discussion.

another anon editor... this page looks fine to me in terms of content and verifiability - i'll just go clean up some spelling/grammar. 69.116.150.174 17:40, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] pronouncation

Could someone please put how to properly pronouce kazaa? thanks! Jm51 19:58, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

The KLR program DOES NOT contain adware/spyware/malware. The article is incorrect. The KLR homepage contains ads but that can be changed with a simple settings option. The website contains an ad NOT adware, there is a difference.

The pronunciation is /ʃit/ --84.249.252.211 13:30, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] KLR

KLR does not contain spyware/adware/malware. Please stop saying it does and stop editing the page to say it does. You even have links on the page that prove that it doesn't! Unchained 07:37, 22 April 2006 (UTC)


Infact klr keeps putting ads in and taking them out here is proof, Nightstalker, an admin at fsp admitting to klr having ads. http://img123.imageshack.us/img123/5615/klr1yc.jpg, thats a problem with klr, they are not to be trusted

Just because the website has an ad on it does NOT mean the program contains adware. I'm sure you can tell the difference between the two and if not I'll be more than glad to point it out for you. We do admit to havig ads we DO NOT have adware. And if the ad bothers someone all they have to do is change the startup page. Simple as that. So no adware is bundled with the program. The fact that we tell people the startpage has an ad proves that we in fact are to be trusted. Unchained 21:29, 22 April 2006 (UTC)


I'm sorry but you need to look at the image and read the posts, its not the website that has an ads in it, its inside the app, when you ran klr inside of it it has sections, like traffic, search, etc., one of them is "web" when you go there it has ads in it and you can see in the image the user is clearly complaining about ads in klr itself, no version of klite has ever had ads in any section of the app itself and if it does then its not Lite.


I agree klite has never had any ads in the web section of it, If you wanna put ads in it go ahead but you can't call it Lite, or say its adfree, I mean you can't have your cake and eat it too, either its adfree and its Lite or it has ads and its not Lite.

I did look at the image and read the posts. It is clearly an ad on webpage. The program itself DOES NOT CONTAIN ADS. I use the program, and help work on it. I assure you there are no built in ads at all. It is just the ad on the webpage. It is a simple matter of changing the startup homepage. You said yourself that the ads only appear on the web tab. If it was built into the program it would appear on all the tabs not just the one that has the WEBPAGE on it. Please think before making posts that don't make any sense. Even SYLCK recgonizes that KLR does not contain adware, spyware, or malware. K-Lite recgonizes that KLR does not contain adware, spyware, or malware. Only the people at KLT make this false accustion. Unchained 19:44, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Did you fall on your head when you were a kid or you just don't understand what lite mean? kazaa lite 2.4.x has no ads in its web section, kazaa lite tools 2.x.x has no ads in the apps web section, K-Lite 2.7.7 has no ads in the app's web section, you no why? because they are lite version of the app. If klr wants to be called lite then they can remove the ads from the web section of the app.

User here http://img123.imageshack.us/img123/5615/klr1yc.jpg is complainig about ads in klr not me. You can't links a person to ads via an application and then call it lite.

No I am quite clear on the understanding of what light means. It is you who do are not getting the point. Lite means the application does not contain adware, spyware, or malware. KLR does not contain any of that. A webpage contains an ad (NOT adware). NOT THE PROGRAM. Do you get that? I hope you are able to tell the diffrence between a webpage and a program. If not you should google it. And what do you say to Slyck agreeing that KLR is completely free of adware, spyware and malware? Unchained 20:54, 23 April 2006 (UTC)


No actually it means that it has no adware, spyware, malware or any ads, otherwise exeem and blubster and many other apps that only display ads from a remote webpage (what klr does)would be clean, so when ever exeem and blubster is clean we will call klr clean. And don't forget what Lite (clean) means. You don't get to change the meaning of lite. Klr once installed links you to a remote webpage with ads without klr the user would not need to or be on that page so klr is not clean and we have our own minds we don't need you or anybody else to tell us that when we get linked to pages with ads thanks to klr, if that is clean or not, obviously if you connect me to a webpage with ads you are not clean and you are only after money.

No exeem and blubster download adware programs onto your computer. KLR does not. Like I said it is very easy to change the start page. Also you are avoiding answering the question about Slyck. Slyck considers us a clean program. You obviously do not understand the concept that the start page can be changed to anything the user wants. And again, I must point out that there is a difference between an ad and adware.Unchained 23:13, 23 April 2006 (UTC)


Blubster and exeem used to do the same thing as klr then they went to actually installing adaware,, reguardless lite means no adware, spyware, malware or any ads, I understand that the start page can be changed but you are forgetting that with the klr install links the user to webpage with ads in it and the fact that fsp money hungrey people changed it from what it was in klite to a webpage with ads says alot about fsp, klt, k-lite, klite2.4.x none of them have any ads or link you to any ads with the app only fsp and klr does this.

Again, slyck gives us a clean slate so it doesn't really matter what you say. Everyone says we are a clean program. And they are not money hungry, it just helps pay the server costs.Unchained 01:57, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

→Only 3 Lite versions of Kazaa are recognized by the masses (file sharing community). This is Kazaa lite K++, Kazaa Lite Resurrection and K-Lite. Neutral source ZeroPaid.com: http://www.zeropaid.com/programs/?scatid=66. Hence I think the topic about the Lite variations should only contain these three.

→Due to poor programming, the older versions of Kazaa can easily be edited by anyone (no programming knowledge is required), let us not clutter the Wiki with all (insignificant) variations ever made. Just to pick up on the forum image posted multiple times before, that member is not part of the admin team at FSP or KLR developer team. Any statements made by that person are irrelevant.

→Now for the malware in KLR: On launch of KLR for the first time, the user’s KLR webpage shows the FSP site. On the FSP site there are ads, the user will see the same ads as if he/she surfed to the site with his/her favorite browser (or not at all if he/she is using an ad-blocker). The user may change the webpage startpage immediately (two simple clicks) after launch if he/she wishes to. This live webpage startpage format is exactly the same as the one present in the never released Kazaa Lite K++ 2.44 version.

→Mavol 15:49, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Protected

Please work out your differences here instead of reverting. Also, remember to sign your talk page comments by typing four tildes in a row (~~~~). And PLEASE stop inserting horizontal rules -- they make the server work harder than it needs to. Use nesting instead, which you can do by typing a colon in front of your comments. To indent again for the next comment, use two colons, and so on. Like this:

Okay? · Katefan0(scribble)/poll 02:12, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Ok. Thank you. Unchained 13:17, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
What appears to be the problem with the page that it was protected? Kilo-Lima|(talk) 16:47, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Edit wars. False accusations.Unchained 18:51, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
I don't believe them to be false. And doesn't your working on KLR mean that your contributions here are either biased or self-research? 69.116.150.174 22:04, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] References

Can somebody please make this section smaller? <font size="80%"> ... </font> doesn't seem to work.69.116.150.174 22:15, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Done. You had to use <div style="font-size: 90%"> instead. Kilo-Lima|(talk) 18:26, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I hope by writing this, I am not violating any Wikipedia rule. I am looking for a list of file-sharing programs that do not contain adware, spyware or underware (you know, a garment worn under clothing).

I am fairly intelligent, but got lost in this article after its description of Kaaza lite. How many programs are there like Kazaa-lite that do not have adware, that do allow peer-to-peer sharing without first needing a program like Kaaza that contains malware.

Kaaza-lite may be illegal, but those who created it sound a lot more moral than those own Kaaza.

Where did the name "Kaaza" come from anyway?

[edit] Major NPOV violation

The final paragraph of the "History" section currently reads, verbatim:

Unfortunately, in 2006, "Kazaa en masse" may be now subject to United States court action for massive complaints by consumers for disappearing, disconnected and/or derilict customer support as well as poor quality software. Consumers report their new offerings for movie downloads is completely defunct. Kazaa Gold is the worst of the lot racking up complaints labeling it as "pure scam". None of Sharman Networks or Kazaa websites respond to inquiries and several 8oo numbers now report no affiliation or knowledge of Kazaa. The worst problem is in the morphing of Kazaa name. Each entity feigns ignorance of the other but as of this date Sharman has not officially complained of its name being used illegally .

This is in utter disarray, not only because it violates NPOV but also because it is confusing. However, I'm leaving this paragraph intact for now because I believe it does contain some salvageable information not mentioned elsewhere (such as the impostor services). Maybe information about scam sites such as Kazaa Gold could be re-written and lumped into a new section. Just throwing it out there. Czj 05:05, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removed Incorrect statements

This text:

"Kazaa doesn't scan downloaded music or video files for malware and spyware, and users can get spyware by playing downloaded music or video files. It claims to scan for viruses."

is not correct because music and video files do not contain executable data, so I removed it. It was also completely in the wrong place. Minipie8 16:59, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Name origin

Kazaa means nigger in swedish

Source? Unconscious 13:07, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Kazaa means goat in Russian.--169.232.119.69 (talk) 01:40, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Kazaa means "you've just been ripped off, your computer is now infected with varios spywares, and tech support is from some dot-head who is on the other side of the world who laughs at you when you tell him you want a refund for them violating their end of the agreement and failing to provide what they have promised." I bet you didnt know one little word could mean so much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.93.168.18 (talk) 16:45, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dutch Supreme Court and "copywritten"

Added reference to Dutch Supreme Court verdict of December 2003 to make legal overview more complete. Also changed some occurrences of "copywritten" to "copyrighted".

What are the child porn statistics doing here? They are sourced but completely irrelevant. But I haven't edited here before so I'd like to check what's going on. 80.56.190.110 20:21, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

The child porn debate is one of the main debates around Kazaa's legality. It's rather relevant. Unconscious 12:14, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

According to your sophismatical way of thinking, then, video cameras and the TCP/IP itself are of doubtful legality too, because(exactly like any other type of thing, BTW) they may be used for illegal practices. Besides, you "forgot" to stress that the so-called pedophilia is illegal only because it has been defined so by stupid and ignorant legislators who work for the anachronous monotheist/bourgeois/hypocrite moralism, period. And yes, your wikipediac codename is indeed quite appropriate ^_~
Most sincerely, KSM-2501ZX, IP address:= 200.143.28.19 23:58, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Does anyone that even questions pedophilia not being illegal have any business discussing here?

But of course. Let's drop this silly discussion on Kazaa and start thinking out ways to legalize child porn. Or maybe not. --Safe-Keeper 03:43, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spyware

This article makes numerous assertions that the company's product is infested with malware. These claims are highly defamatory, and while they might be true, need to be supported by WP:RS. If there are no sources, they should not spend a second in the article. As such I removed the largest section filled with uncited claims about malware. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nssdfdsfds (talk • contribs) 23:47, 4 April 2007 (UTC).

(copied from my talk page) The content is clearly defamatory of Kazaa. It's clear in the talk page that the claim that Kazaa has malware in it is disputed, and comments from April 2006 from Unchained (1 year ago!) show that this has been disputed. Given the very serious nature of the accusations, a proper job should be done on sourcing. No effort has been made to properly cite the claims in 1 year. So the sensible approach is t remove them. Regarding references, the ones under 'References' make no mention of any spyware at all. THere appear to be some claims about spyware in 'External Links', which maybe reliable sources, however AFAICT, the content dates from 2002, 2003 and 2004. We are talking about Kazaa NOW. If Kazaa has malware NOW, current version, provide a reliable source for it, and cite it properly, because currently the article asserts that it does, with no relevant sources that I an see. Otherwise these clearly highly objectionable claims have no place in the article. Nssdfdsfds 23:59, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

The last source added (at the bottom), is from 2002, and states quite clearly "The information for this story was valid on the day of publication. However, elements of the software may have changed over time. " In other words, they are basically saying that Kazaa now is not the same program it was in 2002. Nssdfdsfds 00:08, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Irregardless of the fact that I have now added a current sorce, these reports were valid. Can you find a valid, reliable source since then saying they have removed them? -Mask? 00:37, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kazaa, illegal?

Now, Kazaa aint illegal, dont ever say that, i use kazaa to download stuff like a parted homework from my friends and such on.

And to you who said that you have never heard of any other country than the Usa that tried to censor the porn and stuff like that on the network, i guess thats because you dont live in another country, there have been a lot censoring (or at least the government have tried) in Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Norway and holland.. Now, i have never heard of anybody in the states that tried to censor porn (probably because i dont live there) so please, dont be so narrow minded.. ofcorse youve never heard of any other place thatve tried that, as of for example you dont watch the Danish news..

Kazaa was sued and lost and had to pay 100 million dollars. Users of Kazaa were sued and had to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars. Users who supplied child porn were also investigated and arrested. Kazaa was very illegal but the US courts ruled that they could only be prosecuted in civil court for infringement because their network was not centralized (but instead connected directly from computer to computer and they were not responsible for content shared). But never the less, Kazaa was shut down because of legality and copyright issues because of what was being shared and downloaded between members. Australian courts seized all their assets, raided their headquarters, and ended up shutting them down. I would say that turned into a very legal issue for them!


[edit] Criticism section

The section labeled "Criticism" currently contains nothing but a text about child pornography in p2p networks. I don't think this is relevant to the kazaa article, so I propose a deletion of this section. I'll leave it over there for now, to see the opinions about it. Miguel1626 23:17, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removed info

I removed two sections from the article, one giving translations of the name in several languages and another listing mentions in pop culture. Regarding the translations, I'm not sure things like kazaa meaning "goat" have any relevance unless one or more meanings influenced the naming of the software (which, if so, wasn't mentioned). As for the mentions, none of them were significant allusions or incidents, just mentions of the service on television. Luatha 19:23, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] removed 2.0

"Altnet is the legal music licensing entity and owns the hash file patent behind peer to peer sharing technology. Sharman Networks and Altnet share the same development teams and technical administration. If you use Kazaa and attempt to download protected DRM files you will often be redirected to the Altnet store site. To dispel the rumors it was actually Sharman that approached Sony BMG with what they determined as a great product and requested a licensing arrangement. The level of technology frightened the legal side of the music and movie industry that was just recovering from napster. Today piracy of digital IP can only be controlled by understanding the technology better. The second issue has to do with the duplication of media through out the web. The solution will eventually be to use hashing to force licensing and minimize duplication which was the original point of Kazaa.

"Altnet is very focused on the infringement of the TrueNames patent and we believe that many of today's active peer-to-peer applications may be in direct violation," Altnet CEO Kevin Bermeister said in a statement in 2003. http://www.slyck.com/story1264.html

A year after launching its sometimes-controversial alliance with Kazaa, Brilliant Digital Entertainment subsidiary Altnet is kicking off a new, ambitious stage of its peer-to-peer marketing campaign. http://news.com.com/2100-1025_3-1011827.html

"

This section is to me a mix of POV, unsourced and likely untrue (no one uses their crappy hash system) and/or weird statements, and general bad writing and style("To dispel the rumors"). Also it seemed misplaced there in the article. Please rewrite. --Echosmoke 21:04, 28 September 2007 (UTC)