99 % of BT transferred files are copyright infringement.

[Vation]

I asked myself quection can peer to peer be legal. there are several sites like:
legaltorrents, Frostclick, Mininova they are just tiny exception, there are also legal files transferred, free books, trailers, pictures, but the rest...

(...)It has never been a secret that the majority of files being shared over BitTorrent are movies and music that are likely being shared illegally. (Sorry, Linux distro nerds.) Princeton senior Sauhard Sahi confirmed this recently after setting out to survey the content available on BitTorrent and, although there are caveats to his findings, they highlight the relationship DRM has with illegal file sharing. As in: the more DRM there is on the legit versions of the content, the more popular it is on P2P.

Sahi chose a random sample of 1,021 files from the trackerless Mainline DHT and classified them by file type, language, and apparent copyright status. He found that nearly half (46 percent) of files were nonpornographic movies and TV shows—the largest single category of content. 14 percent of the files were porn, tied with the 14 percent dedicated to games and software. Just 10 percent of the files were classified as music, and one percent were books and guides.(...)

read more at Ars Technica:
BitTorrent census: about 99% of files copyright infringing

[SBfreak]

Not quite 99%.Let's not forget game companies like relic and blizzard.Also these days software developers also offer bittorrent links as an alternative download.

[slikrapid]

the title is wrong, its not 99, but about 99 or likely 99, basically its a guess made by taking a small sample and analyzing it, something like a simple student task, nothing very relevant/serious or selectable to be published online (must be the 'princeton' effect)

however it may roughly give some insight on the subject, interestingly the blog owner (also the students mentor) didn't bother to reply a few questions that wanted access to the raw data of this 'study', maybe thats copyrighted too

here a more interesting comment from the original blog:

Of course we download copyrighted material... it would be shocking if a significant portion was *not* infringing since the automatic copyright rule means pretty much everything out there is infringing.

You should pay attention to the fact that "we can't say anything about the characteristics of BitTorrent downloads, or even of files that are downloaded via BitTorrent, only about files that are available on BitTorrent." So what does data about files that are *available* on BitTorrent tell us? It tells us what proportion of our culture (i.e. things that people think are worth sharing on BitTorrent) is "owned". It tells us that, as yet, open culture doesn't seem to have had much impact on pop culture, since the majority of files *available* come from copyrighted sources. Of course, given that copyright has been a part of our history since long before the existence of the internet, it shouldn't surprise us that the number of cultural artifacts under copyright vastly outnumber the number outside of it.

I don't need a study that says noninfringing content is common in Bittorrent to justify my downloading habits as you imply. Even if that study existed and was true, I don't see why it would be relevant to the copyrighted content that I download. I am perfectly aware that I break the law when I download copyrighted material. I'm ok with that. I'm not ok with the fact that the act of sharing culture via BitTorrent (or any form of online sharing) is illegal. I'm not ok with the fact that 99% of the culture that people want to share is somehow "owned" by someone. That's not how culture works, and trying to force it to work that way simply ends up destroying that culture. Culture is fundamentally a shared experience. Take away our ability to share it freely and what you have is at best commerce, not culture.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not anti-copyright, and I make my living in the film industry. But we shouldn't be using copyright to control culture (it won't work). We should be using it to regulate commerce, where it is well suited to solving very valid business conflicts. But, once those business conflicts have been resolved, copyright needs to recognize that people are interested in *sharing* copyrighted works because those works are culturally interesting, and copyright should not be standing in the way of doing so. After all, the reason many (most?) copyrighted works are created is in hope that the creation might, in some way, be culturally interesting. Copyright only serves as an incentive for creation when it *improves* the chances of a creation having cultural worth; if it outlaws allowing a creation to be used culturally, I (and many other creators) have no use for copyright.

http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/felten/census-files-available-bittorrent#comment-109783