BitTorrent Founder interview

He noted that many companies are using BT distribution to distribute legitimate content, and at Declan's prodding, takes issue with the earlier claim that most P2P traffic is pirated.

For the company itself, it's still small. 55 employees, no Washington lobbyists. They want to sell their technology to companies who want to make P2P a higher margin part of their business.

Navin believes that P2P will be adopted by people who need to save money on distributing video, and they're still "working through" the cloud of illegality from Grokster, and that companies like Yahoo can use BT to distribute content.

What does Navin see the role of Congress being? He answers that if Ed Markey called him to ask help in writing a bill, he'd be the wrong guy. He goes back to the fact that they're about the technology. He's not going to hire lobbyists, but will allow Google, etc to work the Government Relations front.

When I asked him if it was irresponsible to allow others to "carry his water" by not hiring lobbyists and letting other companies do the heavy lifting if needed, Navin was actually rather honest in his self-assessment, saying that yes, it could be irresponsible or naive, but the gist of his argument was that he's going to let the product speak for itself, and that it's "breaking down barriers." For instance, kids in China knew who he was when he visited recently. I'm not sure how that fits in, but if he's brave enough to let the software do the talking and not take a proactive approach like say, loopt, (see my interview with Brian Knapp posted earlier) especially in spite of P2P's history, well, more power to him. 

Other questions were more technical in nature dealing with the recently settled Comcast issue, and one questioner pointed out the MPAA's idiotic statement that the Comcast settlement was a "step in combatting online piracy," and asked Navin how the agreement would fight privacy. He had no idea. 

Navin added that BT plans to work with ISPs, content providers, IETF, and pretty much everyone in the "spirit of openness." He envisions the network as being less asymmetric, and I think that's a pretty optimistic prediction. Other suggestions included hardware-based solutions for bandwidth issues and copyright problems like Akamai's software. 

When asked if ISPs could sit on BT streams and identify pirated content, Navin alluded to the fact that if an ISP and a copyright holder had a deal, it is technically feasible for an ISP to watch BT packets. 

Jonathan Taplin asked if he's exaggerated the ease that Cable companies could have a symmetrical network. Navin had no idea about the cost and ease (he cites Brian Roberts of Comcast saying it would be done) but emphasizes the importance of open dialogue with ISPs.

Navin did say that identifying infringing torrent content would be quite costly in response to a question from McCullough. What he sees, though, is that rights-holders will embrace content-recognition and P2P technology that will enable new business models, not just takedown notices. In Navin's future, piracy will disappear because the free flow of video we have now will be monetized to the point that it will become a non-issue.

Next, Declan brought up the idea of blanket licenses, and Navin was not adverse to a "Rhapsody-style" license that would not "criminalize the vast majority of people in the United States..."

Good job by both.