I had the opportunity to read a paper by several professors at the University of Madrid, Darmstadt University of Technology, and the University of Oregon a few weeks back on the subject of Peer to Peer (P2P) file sharing often referred to in passing as “torrenting”.  I’ve been thinking about the paper, which is named Is Content Publishing in BitTorrent Altruistic or Profit-Driven, off and on for the last few weeks and what I have determined is that the collected data within this paper is simply proof of markets existing inside of markets.  And that what has occurred within the torrent ecosystem is the development of a free market with multiple players, models, end-goals, and desires that one may find in other “real world” markets.

As is tradition whenever I discuss these subjects I like to make it clear that the discussion within is academic in nature.  Neither I nor DS support the illegal distribution of copyrighted materials.  But neither is this an indictment of torrenting, as there are countless examples of legal and successful uses of the technology.

Some quick points to mention from the data within the paper:

• A publisher is the original individual to seed (make available online) a file and upload the .torrent file, a tracker which via a torrent program is able to locate the desired file to be downloaded.
• Via means described within the paper the researchers were able to determine the original publishers IP address in 40% of all cases.
• Top publishers are responsible for 75% of the total downloads and 67% of the content.

Of the 67% of content that is placed on various torrent websites, which are generally databases similar to The Pirate Bay which allow a user to search for content and then download a .torrent tracker file, the scholars who published the paper in question believe that 30% is fake, 30% is profit driven, and only 7% is altruistic.  Now if you are unfamiliar with altruism, it is defined as “the unselfish regard for the welfare of others.”  I must confess that when I typically think of torrenting, I have generally assumed that all of it is an altruistic, “Everyone deserves everything for free,” “Stick it to the man” type of attitude that perpetuates the ecosystem.  This is apparently not true based on the research at hand which shows that only 7% of the content is a part of the free culture movement.

When broken down to this level we start to get a sense of the reality of the players involved in torrenting operations and their motives.  At the macro level are three groups already mentioned:

• Altruists;
• Profiteers; and,
  
• Fakers.

The Make Up of the “Torrent Free Market”

Altruists: These individuals are made up of people that are mad at “the man”, those that are possibly frustrated with available systems or models of content exchange, and those who are true ideologues for the free culture movement.  They of course could be any mixture of the possibilities as well.

Profiteers: This group of people use torrenting as a profit making mechanism.  Several business models for publishers exist in this group, including:

• Content owners releasing demo’s or partial products to draw users to the full payed version of the product;
• Content owners releasing content while feigning ignorance of the released torrent to draw individuals to payed content;
• The illegal distribution of content (typically movies) that requires some type of container in order for the content to work or play.  The content typically includes documentation of a website or websites that offer the key (a program or security code) at a cost that allows the content to work;
• The supposed illegal distribution of content, though the download contains only links to websites who benefit off ad hits, product placement, or are pay sites to illegally distributed content; and,
• Finally, viruses that allow for data collection that can be sold or that take over a computer to use it for fake email delivery, etc for profit outside of the torrent sphere.

Fakers: The group known as the Fakers mainly consist of three sets of users:

• The first set are those that while similar to the group of Profiteers whose torrent files contain viruses, also include viruses, trojans, worms, and irritating software scripts all for the sole purpose of ruthlessness.  These individuals do not have a rhyme or reason other than that they basically find it humorous to damage other individuals computers, and would site that it is the downloaders own fault and punishment for trying to get illegally distributed content for free.  These individuals are not profit driven.
• Another set of Fakers are those that also advertise content, but the downloaded file contains only links to sites that are ad based, or selling a product.  These downloads do not include content, and so do not provide solutions to view content unless the links are aimed at underground websites offering illegal content downloads or viewing at a cost.
• The final set of Fakers are those in the security business.  Security firms, often hired by content owners, are directed to publish fake .torrent trackers to files of popular new content (movies, music, video games).  The result of the downloaded file often results in some sort of anti-piracy message.  These agencies continually place new and more fake .torrent trackers on the most popular public torrent databases in order to “poison the well”.

The results of all these different players with varying motives is that they in combination with those trying (and statistically failing a good bit of the time based on the research at hand) to download legally and illegally distributed content have created a sort of self-sustaining “Torrent Free Market” or the free market of torrenting, if you will.  Based on the research by the scholars of Is Content Publishing in BitTorrent Altruistic or Profit-Driven, these players exist, and if they exist, then it can be deduced that the polar opposite goals of many of the players as well as the goals of simply beating out the other guy is driving competition of causes, profits, motives, and connivers within the torrent ecosystem.  The out come is a free market within a free market within a free market.  Especially if one assumes that the Internet is a free market, and that the majority of torrenting is coming from out of countries with at least self-described free markets.

What are the results of this Torrent Free Market?  I would assume that many an economist could take the information found in the white paper research along with my own analysis and additions and run with it in many other directions.  But I personally take two conclusions away from the information presented:

1. The total percentage of torrents, the actual working, usable, legitimate illegally distributed content is smaller than many would think.  Which ultimately is a good thing for content producers, and ultimately a bad thing for those desiring to use scare tactics toward the free culture movement as a prevention method.
2. This free market competition that has occurred in the torrent ecosystem is a positive thing for content producers, because it appears that the competitive forces have kept altruistic legitimate publishers at a minimum, and the resulting frustration for those desiring to download illegally distributed content will at least arguably cause them to quit trying to download content illegally if they are having little to no success.  In a larger sense, this competition and frustration may hold the legitimate content being illegally distributed to a minimum for the foreseeable future while newer and better business models and models of distribution are put into play that will have a positive affect on reducing the amount of illegally distributed content even further.

[Cross-posted at Digital Society]