Talk:LimeWire

Legality

Limewire is illegal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AndrewOne (talk • contribs) 20:12, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

No. Haakon (talk) 20:16, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, yes actually. You can download music for free, and that is considered illegal. But, if you download a song from a place such as LimeWire, you can keep it on your computer for only 24 hours before it is considered illegal. And during those 24 hours, you cannot burn it to CD, save it somewhere else, etc. You can only listen to it. I asked my aunt and uncle this (As the recently graduated from law school) and they confirmed what I said. 66.60.210.32 (talk) 11:10, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

LimeWire itself is not illegal. It is only a tool that can potentially be used to download illegal files. If the software were to be called illegal because it can be used for illegal purposes, Microsoft could be sued because their Internet Explorer can be used to find descriptions on how to build bombs on the Internet (to do a terrorist attack, for example), or because their Outlook is most probably used by terrorists to coordinate their bombings. Also, skype is most certainly illegal under this definition, because it allows to phone someone and to do illegal business with him. BTW, if you go only a bit further, this definition allows you to outlaw the entire internet...

mfg, OldDeath - 15:04, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

In the United States, yes, it is illegal, even if the program can be used illegallylegally. It has been since the ruling against Grokster in 2005. The same doesn't apply in Canada and a few other European countries, however. _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 22:50, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

You certainly meant "[...]even if the program can be used legally."...? Keep in mind this is only the case if the main purpose of the program is an illegal action, which was the case for LimeWire, as it has (for example) iTunes library integration (and automatic sharing?). This is not the case for most other P2P applications, like Shareaza for example.

mfg, OldDeath - 23:23, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Hehe, yeah, that's what I meant. And yeah, I see what you mean (I read the Reuters story wrong; they're saying what you're saying). Limewire was made almost solely to facilitate copyright infringement, and therefore it was forced to shut down. My mistake. _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 23:34, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

The judges ruling is INSANE as aswell as not legal. Where is the restraining order to stop every computer from being able to have illegal software copied to it? or one stopping DVD recorders etc etc, when they are obviously designed to breach the copyright of shows broad casted etc. They where picked out because they dont have the money to fight it like SONY, IBM Etc would.27.33.106.251 (talk) 13:03, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

That's certainly true. Those who develop open source filesharing clients are certainly a good target to sue, as they generally don't have the money and strength to withstand a legal battle...

mfg, OldDeath - 14:53, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

References

The reference template has been at the top of the page for some time. Are there enough references now? There is no indication who put this here. The addition of the citation was here. There were nine references and there are now 16. Also, there are a few individual citation needed tags. I really wish people who put these templates in were compeled to leave text on their reasoning. Bpringlemeir (talk) 22:49, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

go to http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:LimeWire&action=edit&section=1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.243.60.8 (talk) 13:26, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

The Refimprove|date=September 2008 template has been removed. There are many references and the original editor of the template has not responded in approx. 5 months. A specific citation needed would be more appropriate and/or a comment on this talk page. Bpringlemeir (talk) 13:21, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Shut Down

http://torrentfreak.com/limewire-loses-court-battle-with-riaa-shuts-down-101026/ - .:. Jigsy .:. (talk) 21:54, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

As far as I am aware Limewire has been shut down. However, when I was going to edit the first sentence of the article from 'is' to 'was' I saw a comment line telling me explicitly not to. But Limewire is defunct and the article should say so. If no-one comments on this in a week or so I will make that change anyway. SmokeyTheCat 13:55, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

See Windows 95. OS is discontinued, yet the article uses the present tense in the article because the program still exists. The same logic applies to Limewire; you can still download it to this day, regardless of the fact that it has been "shut down" by the courts. WireShare, also known as the "pirate edition" continues to live as a spin-off as well. _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 18:22, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Expansion

I may decide to help expand this article sometime this or next week. Anyone up for the challenge? _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 02:22, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Lol, maybe you should wait some days until the spamming avalanche has stopped...

Most probably, there will be a clean version without the shutdown switch until then, which could be named within the article.

mfg, OldDeath - 12:37, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Jisjames007, 27 October 2010

{{Edit semi-protected}}

Lime Wire has been permanently shut down. [1] Jisjames007 (talk) 23:28, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Not done: See Limewire#Injunction. _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 23:45, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Past Tense?

The software is pretty much useless, since access to the servers from Limewire is blocked. Maybe someone should convert the article to past tense? 99.74.73.107 (talk) 12:01, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

First of all, there are no "servers from LimeWire", as LimeWire is an application operating on a distributed network (P2P network). Second, (AFAIK) there are workarounds for the client not working, as the client is open source and everyone can compile the code without the parts that do block the program ATM. mfg, OldDeath - 14:36, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Any proof of this being done yet? besides Frostwire, have you heard of anyone being able to work around whatever Limewire is blocking? 99.74.73.107 (talk) 02:11, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

I've seen someone on IRC yesterday, claiming he had already found and removed the problematic code passages. But... sorry, I can't recall on which channel/server, as I am online on a lot of channels on half a dozen different IRC servers.

mfg, OldDeath - 11:29, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Older versions of LimeWire still fully functional

{{Edit semi-protected}} Reference: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2371462,00.asp

Versions of LimeWire prior to V5.5.10 can still connect to the Gnutella network and users of these versions are still able to download files, even though a message is displayed concerning the injunction during the startup process of the software. LimeWire versions 5.5.10 and newer feature a "toxic" backdoor included by LimeWire Inc. that allowed LimeWire Inc. to disable the newer versions of the LimeWire software. Older versions of LimeWire prior to version 5.5.10 however do not include this "toxic" backdoor and are still fully functional.

Due to the original architecture of LimeWire prior to version 5.5.10, the RIAA nor LimeWire Inc. have the ability to disable older versions of LimeWire, unless a LimeWire user chooses to upgrade to a version of LimeWire that is 5.5.10 or newer.

Hence why my Limewire still functions. Eh, I'm still changing to Frostwire. _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 23:34, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Done Added to article. Thanks, Stickee (talk) 23:40, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Doesn't seem to be working with older versions on my mac. Could it be different for PC's? 99.74.73.107 (talk) 02:13, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Might be that you're running a newer version of LimeWire on your Mac. Try installing an older version of LimeWire and that should do the trick. There have been many posts around the Net and from a large number of reputable news sources regarding older versions of LimeWire still working perfectly (although the annoying message about the injunction appears). I installed an older version of LimeWire myself (V5.4.6) on my PC and yes, the message about the injunction still appears, but I'm still able to search and download without any difficulties. So again, simply try installing an older Mac version of LimeWire and that should fix the problem. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PWilson3210 (talk • contribs) 04:12, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

This is untrue, you should try it for yourself. I have downloaded 8 older versions and none of them have connected. ForNarniaAndForAslan (talk) 23:22, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Your connection problem is unrelated to the remote controls. Go to the FrostWire forums for instructions on getting and installing a fresh gnutella.net host cache to solve that problem. Aaron Walkhouse (talk) 03:47, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

I downloaded 5.5.7, and it is NOT working. I did not have 5.5.11+ on my computer. As to how far back you must go, I am not sure, but I do know that 5.5.7 is deactivated. 12.41.204.3 (talk) 23:23, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, right. I just installed LimeWire PRO 4.12.3 on my computer and it won't even start. So how about the older versions working properly. Could it be that I am using Windows 7? 82.141.72.152 (talk) 13:56, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Add to introduction

{{edit semi-protected}}

The above already appears at the top of the article: On October 26, 2010, Judge Kimba Wood, a US federal court judge, issued an injunction forcing LimeWire to prevent "the searching, downloading, uploading, file trading and/or file distribution functionality, and/or all functionality" of its software.[3][4] A trial investigating the damages necessary to compensate the affected record labels is scheduled to begin in January 2011.[5]

I believe the following is also very relevant to point out at the very beginning of the article rather than in the middle of the article, either before the above paragraph or just after the above paragraph: As of October 26, 2010, versions of LimeWire including V5.5.10 and newer have been disabled by LimeWire Inc using a backdoor installed by the company into newer versions of the software. However, all versions of LimeWire prior to V5.5.10 are still fully functional and cannot be disabled unless a user upgrades to one of the newer versions. References: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2371670,00.asp and http://www.gnutellaforums.com/windows/97241-lw-still-works-fine-version-5-5-10-but-do-not-attempt-use-later-version.html

Done Thanks. I tweaked your sentence a little and switched your forum source (as they are not WP:RS) with another PC Mag source. I also made a few changes to the article itself. _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 01:35, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Change "stable release" version to V5.5.8, newer versions no longer working/stable

{{edit semi-protected}}

Versions of LimeWire including V5.5.10 and later are no longer "stable releases" since these versions have now been disabled by a backdoor built into the newer versions of the software and newer versions no longer work. Therefore, since these versions are no longer working and as such are not "stable releases", shouldn't the article be changed to reflect V5.5.8 as the latest "stable release"?

Please note that the "stable release" version should be changed both at the top of the article where the "stable release" version is listed, AND also under the "versions" section of the article. In the "versions" section, "The most recent stable version of LimeWire is 5.5.16." should be changed to, "The most recent stable version of LimeWire is 5.5.8 and any versions of LimeWire past V5.5.8 have been disabled by LimeWire Inc and are no longer working." —Preceding unsigned comment added by PWilson3210 (talk • contribs) 02:36, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Not done: We are not the ones to decide whether a software version is stable or not, regardless of its status. _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 02:47, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Limewire version

On the wiki it says version 5.5.10 and newer cannot download, however I have version 5.5.6 and i cannot download. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.222.66.111 (talk) 08:13, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Try an earlier version (my 4.9 worked fine). We're just relaying what sources say. _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 15:41, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

My version 5.5.8 has not been able to connect for the last couple of days. Has it been disabled? SmokeyTheCat 07:16, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Unsure (I've moved on to Frostwire). If a reliable source says so, then it may be. _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 04:33, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

As I stated above, LimeWire PRO 4.12.3 won't even start on Windows 7. 82.141.72.152 (talk) 13:58, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Hey everyone, whoever has access needs to write that limewire got shut down.

It made the news, its official, theyre gone —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.185.95.173 (talk) 22:17, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

"LimeWire 5.5.11 and newer have been disabled" =/= "LimeWire has been disabled". _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 00:53, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Beancrisps posts

As Beancrisps posts are reverted without notice (I mean without useful comment on the reason), I thought I might post it here (under a new topic) for further discussion. :)

• I challenge anyone to name one law that Limewire broke. Beancrisp (talk) 23:06, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

My reply: If it hadn't broken a law, it wouldn't have been banned. However, I don't think the law it broke is right to exist, as this structure of laws has been created especially for those who oppose P2P/file sharing most: the media content industry...

mfg, OldDeath - 12:30, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles are limited to reporting material from reliable published sources. I am not a legal expert, and even if I were, it would still be up to the courts to make rulings on the legality of Limewire.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 12:39, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

I do not recognize the decisions of rogue judges.Beancrisp (talk) 15:08, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Beancrisp's post were reverted by Ian for WP:NOTAFORUM, and this reflects the edit summary. Bean continued to re-post these, hence why they were reverted again by him and by me. I didn't notice the difference in his final comment, though, which I suppose was an acceptable query. _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 16:27, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

The situation currently facing LimeWire is very similar to the one faced by Mininova in 2009 and AllOfMP3 in 2008. Unlike Louis L. Stanton's ruling in Viacom International Inc. v. YouTube, Inc., Judge Kimba Wood decided that LimeWire had a model based on copyright infringement. Since it is not the job of Wikipedia to decide what is legal, the article can only report on what the sources say.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:26, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from ForNarniaAndForAslan, 7 November 2010

{{edit semi-protected}}

If you download previous versions of LimeWire you will not be able to bypass the court ordered injunction.

"However, version 5.5.10 and all prior versions of LimeWire remain fully functional and cannot be disabled unless a user upgrades to one of the newer versions.[6][7]"

This statement is proven false easily by downloading 5.5.10 client and/or any previous earlier versions, and the references provided don't pertain to the statement. ForNarniaAndForAslan (talk) 23:20, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Not done:. The sources do reflect the statements. "On Tuesday, a federal judge ordered that Lime Wire LLC shut off the LimeWire client from Gnutella, a decentralized peer-to-peer network. Lime Wire blocked access by covertly installing a centralized "kill switch" into recent versions of the LimeWire client. Other alternatives to LimeWire remain, however, including older versions that lack the kill switch." [2] "With versions 5.5.10, released in June, Lime Wire added automatic updates, with a key stipulation; if an update is available and the user chooses to ignore it, the LimeWire client cannot be opened, the source said." [3]

We would need a source to verify your claim as well. _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 00:05, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Limewire Pirate Edition is released

According to Slashdot.org, the Limewire development team has released an updated Limewire client to the open source community. It is based on the 5.6 Beta.

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/11/09/042242/LimeWire-Lives-Again

14:07, 9 November 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfdavis668 (talk • contribs)

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/11/horde-of-piratical-monkeys-resurrects-limewire-pirate-edition.ars 110.175.254.120 (talk) 03:15, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Created Limewire pirate edition --DrDan21 (talk) 02:43, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

RIAA wants revived LimeWire dead and buried This is on CNET today.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 16:26, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

This makes the pirate edition very notable for inclusion. If we get more information, I'll probably write a short section. _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 03:01, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

LimeWire is copyrighted now due to hackers

http://download.limewire.com/injunction/Injunction.pdf proof --Strangeowl1948 (talk) 10:37, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

No, it's not. Injunctions can only apply to specific parties, not the general public. That October 2010 injunction has nothing to do with "hackers" or their new versions and only applies to people involved with Lime Wire LLC, Lime Group, Greg Bildson and Mark Gorton to stop them from making or distributing P2P software. This one was negotiated, stipulated and ordered before "LimeWire Pirate Edition" made it's first appearance so is no proof of copyright preventing future actions by unidentified people. It would be impossible to use against anybody unless they were first found and then identified as those two people or working for those companies and then only if proven they did anything forbidden by the injunction.

The software itself is licensed under the open source "copyleft" (GNU General Public License Version 2) which still applies and cannot be revoked retroactively by anyone. GPLv2's main purpose is to keep software free and open so it will be legally impossible to outlaw future versions that other people may create and also impossible for anyone to turn it into a closed-source product or switch to a different or more restricted form of copyright.

The name of LimeWire, on the other hand, is a trademark that third parties cannot use without permission. This is why the "LimeWire Pirate Edition" site was quickly abandoned and WireShare appeared after Lime Group shut that site down, not because those other people had the source code or that it was illegal to have it. Aaron Walkhouse (talk) 20:34, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Merge LimeWire Pirate Edition into this article

The article LimeWire Pirate Edition is too short, so its better if you merge it here. TheChampionMan1234 (talk) 02:17, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

March 2013

I would like to edit this page: There are current laws that have resulted, although may not be directly but indirectly related to the issues concerning LimeWire. I want to add information about the new law that internet providers now partake in, called the “Six strikes Law”. I propose this law as an important issue in relation to this page because it is one of the results of having illegal downloading sites. This law then also concerns matters of individual privacy as everything is being monitored and therefore, it creates restriction on the use of internet which is obviously not appreciated by everyone in this generation where the supply of “free” anything and everything is welcomed. Thus, I would like to include the criticism that this new law is probably facing and how the public and the internet providers are dealing with them. Also, I found a term, AVG, used but as a reader I had to look up what it was because it was not directly defined. I think Wikipedia pages are made to break down the simplest of things and therefore, as a reader who is new to this technical diction, I believe it is necessary to explain the simplest of abbreviations. I want to edit this page and answer the question, “What is AVG?” Overall, I will edit the subsection “Version History” to define “What is AVG?” and then I will create a new subsection about the “Six strikes Law” and the criticism that follows the new law.Pringles012 (talk) 05:20, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

The "six strikes" law would have WP:TOPIC issues in this article, which is primarily about LimeWire as a piece of software. There is a separate article Copyright Alert System which looks at this scheme.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:27, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree. This article is about LimeWire, not the Copyright Alert System. Information about that system belongs in it's own article, not this one. --Geniac (talk) 23:06, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

"Is" or "was" again

In 2010, Judge Kimba Wood effectively ended the glory days of LimeWire. This does not mean that the software no longer exists. There are still old versions of LimeWire which are functional, and LimeWire Pirate Edition. This is why changing "is" to "was" is inaccurate.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 05:37, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Anyway, even though you can download it from the links you mentioned, it's still non-functional and instead of showing "connected" status, it says that LimeWire was unable to connect, and the pirated edition stays on "connecting" status forever and eventually it doesn't connect. So I think changing "is" to "was" still makes sense. Megahmad (talk) 23:48, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Put simply, LimeWire became defunct after the court ruling in October 2010, and attempts to revive it have not been successful. WireShare redirects to LimeWire Pirate Edition. LWPE was renamed to WireShare for legal reasons; the program has not been updated since October 2012.[4].--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:07, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

The SF page states it as a fork. There is no reliable third-party reference that LPE was renamed and nothing linking LPE's creator/dev team with WireShare. Not a single referenced news article here mentions WireShare, it all LPE. Anyone can download the source and replace a couple strings. -- ZinnKid (talk | contribs) 14:15, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

The open source nature of Gnutella means that any piece of software based on it is copyright free. It is unclear what relationship LimeWire Pirate Edition has with WireShare, but it is clear that neither of them has had any great success.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 16:08, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on LimeWire. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150823123232/http://b.imagehost.org/0927/lime_wire_start.png to http://b.imagehost.org/0927/lime_wire_start.png
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20111116173345/http://wiki.limewire.org:80/index.php?title=Changelog to http://wiki.limewire.org/index.php?title=Changelog
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110812152113/http://blog.limewire.org/?p=361 to http://blog.limewire.org/?p=361

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:57, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Reboot/comeback

Since the reader may not be an expert on all of this, the key question is whether the 2022 reboot/comeback is in any way endorsed by the original developers of the software. Or is it just different people who are using the name LimeWire? Can someone clarify this?--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 16:48, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

LiveWire-Piracy? Also, general filesharing-piracy associated illegal download tool as it simultaneously shares the downloads with others!

Its an illegal piracy-related tool. 5G increases this tools's piracy-ability. All other P2P-tools are either also illegal piracy-encouragers or are simply insecure for any further use. Microsoft and other Messenger-offerers should be advised NOT to use P2P anymore for this due to its general insecurities. Else, they are perfectly legal to use. But due to its P2P-protocol-use, they are hopelessly insecure! Please do no longer advise for downloads also due to German IT Security law civil disobedience by this protocol in question. NOT SAFE TO USE TECHNOLOGY. --2001:16B8:5756:8C00:2C78:35C3:4DF9:E900 (talk) 12:20, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

This is in WP:NOTAFORUM territory but also Wikipedia is not censored. Wikipedia does mention things if they are discussed in reliable sources. I agree that any form of P2P file sharing software should be approached with caution as it can cause your IP address to leak, and it shares content on your computer with other people, but it is beyond the scope of the article to give warnings or disclaimers. Also, Wikipedia is read in countries other than Germany, where the copyright laws are very strict. See also WP:IANAL.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 12:59, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Limewire does not function properly on older versions

according to this talk page, the text saying non disabled versions are still perfectly functional are wrong Pwnz0rServer2009 (talk) 20:17, 18 June 2024 (UTC)