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 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 wars. False accusations.Unchained 18:51, 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] 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)
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
Felt like I had to put that there, I don't have that much time on my hands so... anyone feel free to edit whatever needs to be done to expand that part. Or if it's not that important, you can move it somewhere else in the article of erase it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.146.236.11 (talk) 02:16, 27 January 2007 (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)
