Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Comments on Real

well what can i say !!! i am really shocked that Real have done this , i have a good mind to deleate all of Real's software from my macs and never mutter there name ever again .
hey that would be kinda good to do, all mac users boycott Real player! that would P!** them off good and proper


Tom
 
I'm curious about how much work Real even had to do. The Hymn Project figured out how to strip FairPlay pretty quickly. The file format is well documented on their web site. I can't imagine it would have been hard for Real's people to either pick it up from there or repeat the work in a "clean room" environment. Instead of stripping the DRM they'd be looking to emulate it but, who knows, that may be even easier.

I don't know how the DMCA applies in this case. I haven't read enough to understand exactly how FairPlay or Harmony work but it does seem to me that Real is looking to get their own files to interoperate with Apple's hardware. That's different from helping iTunes customers to remove DRM from their files. They may not have had to actually crack FairPlay to interoperate with it.

That may be why Apple hasn't yet threatened legal action.
 
Apple is conflicted

They don't want their DRM to be cracked, as this will cause problems with the labels. They don't want to file a suit, even though the DMCA plainly forbids "reverse engineering" to get around copy protection, because hardware/software companies are not that keen about those provisions, because of the stranglehold it gives to Hollywood. So it's a pickle.

:rolleyes:
 
Nice. Not that Real can ever atone for Flash but nice.
But I don't understand why they would want a converter to Playfair and open a huge backdoor into their DRM schemes.
 
3G4N said:
I'm so tired of hearing this. I can go to ANY local music store and buy ANY music that comes on CD, and use it on my iPod. A huge selection, and purdy darn easy too. Jeez, people, are we so narrow minded to think that iTMS is the ONLY place to get music? Go make a straw man to knock down, why don'tcha?
Click to expand...

Jeez... I only buy my music in CD format for a reason ya know. I personally don't like the ITMS... it never has the music I want, it has DRM, and the bitrate is too low, but great idea that could be fantastic.

But my statement was meant that Apple has a closed market on the ONLINE music stores for the iPod... ya know that hot new trend of the future?
 
What's the fuzz....

Sorry, my fellow Mac fans, but Apple can only sue Real if Real is breaking Apple's Intellectual Property (copyright or patents) or the law (DCMA).

Now, Real will introduce software that is able to produce AAC files containing Real's own DRM. From the outside these files will behave exactly the same as the iPod expects from Apple's iTMS AAC/DRM files. The behaviour of files is not the subject of copyright. If Apple was unable to patent the behaviour of their AAC/DRM files, Real is safe there too.

Real discovered what behaviour the iPod expects from a file by reverse engineering the iPod software. This seems legal, also under DCMA, because they didn't reverse engineer the software in order to break the code of iTMS AAC/DRM files or to promote illegal copying, but to be able to produce their own compatible AAC/DRM files. Reverse engineering for compatibility, even of patented software, is legal because we all like a free and fair market. Real doesn't need to copy or mimic the iPod software itself, so there is no chance on infringement on copyrights or patents there.

So as long as the DRM encoding software of Real doesn't copy code or use patented technology in their software or in the files' behaviour they're perfectly safe and legal. One may assume that Real's lawyers investigated this matter thoroughly (although you may never know if Apple comes up with some "surprise" patent).

Further, it will extremely be difficult for Apple to change their DRM such that Real's files will be rejected by the iPod like they announced, without rejecting already sold iTMS files.

If Apple is not providing serious base for their charges soon they may even be sued for illegally obstructing the free market by falsely discouraging Real's customers to buy, and may be held liable for damages by Real.

This case is a bit similar to a case that arose here in Europe last couple of years about the "Senseo" home coffee brewer and its coffee pads (sort of disc shaped tea bags, but filled with coffee). The brewer was patented by a well known coffee producer (Sarah Lee/DE) in cooperation with Philips, but it turned out that the coffee pads that it uses could not be patented because coffee pads as such were already known (although never succesful for lack of a proper brewer). So once that was clear all other coffee producers started to sell (much cheaper) coffee pads for the brewer, which was found legal by the courts (at least in most countries; in some countries it is still not sorted out). Of course the patent owner was pissed of by this, because he expected to have a monopoly, and make a lot of money on the coffee pads, and therefore had sold millions of brewers very cheaply, even given them away in promotional actions. Wrong bet..... :D Apple's strategy is much better, by selling expensive hard drives (iPods) and cheap songs.... :) Heck, they shouldn't care who sells the songs....
 
i say go ahead and let them do it... then every month release a FP update that breaks it. it's on Real to update their 'licensed' Harmony components.

this is why i still think Real is blowing smoke. their online store is gasping for air, and threats are their last resort... before killing that crap store.
 
Never thought I'd agree with Real

I hate Real and all their crappy spyware infested buggy products.
Their audio sounds like it's coming through a kazoo and their video is jumpier than a kangaroo on crank.

But Apple are acting like lamers here - they have no moral right to prevent other music stores from selling iPod compatible songs. Apple are trying to maintain an illegal monopoly which may land them in a heap of trouble with the Justice Department one day. Apple should calm down and let other music stores sell compatible music.

BTW there is nothing wrong with reverse engineering. It breaks monopolies and ensures there are parallel sources for the stuff we want.
 
sockgap said:
I hate Real and all their crappy spyware infested buggy products.
Their audio sounds like it's coming through a kazoo and their video is jumpier than a kangaroo on crank.

But Apple are acting like lamers here - they have no moral right to prevent other music stores from selling iPod compatible songs. Apple are trying to maintain an illegal monopoly which may land them in a heap of trouble with the Justice Department one day. Apple should calm down and let other music stores sell compatible music.

BTW there is nothing wrong with reverse engineering. It breaks monopolies and ensures there are parallel sources for the stuff we want.
Click to expand...

there IS a problem with reverse-engineering something if you are going to turn around and "license" it - which leads me to believe they are going to CHARGE a FEE to companies who license it. i doubt it's free.

i can't reverse-engineer Konfabulator, then turn around and charge ... oh.. wait a second...










(folks that was just a joke - please don't go on about Konfabulator).
 
sockgap said:
I hate Real and all their crappy spyware infested buggy products.
Their audio sounds like it's coming through a kazoo and their video is jumpier than a kangaroo on crank.

But Apple are acting like lamers here - they have no moral right to prevent other music stores from selling iPod compatible songs. Apple are trying to maintain an illegal monopoly which may land them in a heap of trouble with the Justice Department one day. Apple should calm down and let other music stores sell compatible music.

BTW there is nothing wrong with reverse engineering. It breaks monopolies and ensures there are parallel sources for the stuff we want.
Click to expand...

I agree Apple should liscense the AAC format out to other companies, at least that way they make some money. Companies will just keep reverse engineering the code. However Apple won't get in trouble for monopolizing if they keep changing the format so that Real Player falls behind everytime they reverse engineer (which is what they will do), because Apple is essentially creating a new format, not preventing other companies from accessing the existing format. They won't be forced to make the iPod Real Player compatible either since it's an Apple product. No one has forced Microsoft to make Windows in Linux or Unix, nor have they forced the Powerbook to support windows.... It's the same principle of software support on hardware.

Good post by the way sockgap

Real Player blows anyways, it's like a virus, infecting every part of your damn computer. And the software is buggy, system hogging, and sounds like a friggin' kazoo (to quote sockgap). Even if Real Player offered Ipod compatible songs, and I used my PC for my iPod I'd STILL use iTunes because the software and support is so much better. Real Player is a joke!

I just got my new 12" powerbook 10 min. ago. I'm in apple heaven :)
________________________________________________________________
12" Powerbook 1.33Ghz 512Ram, 80GB HD, SuperDrive/ 4Gen iPod/ Blue mini/
 
I don't know, but I am not exactly agreeing with Real's quote about being able to play songs on the ipod. 1st considering many other players/software have iPod syncing capabilities- WinAmp has a plug-in to sync with the ipod, and many others- open source or not. Heck they could even do DRM'ed files (just that it would have to be decoded before sent to the port that the iPod is connected to). So either they want to sell songs that can be used in iTunes (they're not trying to make you use their software?, considering how much real hid the link for their free player?), or else the have less then great ideas for reverse engineering. Considering doing a complete black box type enviorment for reverse engineering, making your software decode your format to it can be sent to the iPod and sent through the port- I think I would find the black box methoud to be more work. :confused:
 
Photorun said:
My, what backwards sight you use, do you drive using your rearview mirrors ROK? Try looking FORWARD now or pull your head out, whichever or both is clouding your vision!
Click to expand...

actually, no, i don't but thanks for asking.

and my vision is not clouded. but if you think for one second that killing off clones was a mistake (part of your post i didn't quote), then you are either delusional and want to return to the days of 1997 when i couldn't even get up-to-date zip drivers and the stock price was in the toilet, or else you worked for powercomputing. so that's why, despite the cute animation, you'll be getting ignored by me from here on out.

anyway, let's see, is apple the only portable player out there? no.
is the FairPlay DRM the only format that plays on the iPod? no.
is anyone forcing anyone else to conform to Apple's iTMS t use said iPod? no.

what EXACTLY is the problem here? you want apple to do what you want so the stock price goes up? (you did say you were a stock holder, right?) well, let's see, the last time steve made a decision you didn't agree with (killing clones or alliance with microsoft for several versions of office), it seemed to increase your stock investment 1000% before it split. ah, but i bet you didn't actually BUY any money when things were tight and apple needed investors, did you? no. you just decided to hop in and make some money.

cute.
 
Some people really need to learn the definition of a monopoly and also when it can be applied. Hint - the ITMS is NOT a monopoly, nor is the iPod.

That being said, many people keeps saying that this move by Real will help to increase the sale of iPods. One question - HOW?

Right now what we know is that Real will have a music store that will offer songs for a price that can play on the iPod. They are providing nothing different than the ITMS already provides. If that is the case, how does this help iPod sales? Are you saying:

1. That there are a whole bunch of loyal Real customers that have sworn not to buy an iPod until they can put their Real music on it?

or

2. That there are a whole bunch of people that have sworn not to buy an iPod until there are at least 2 stores selling music?

Personally I don't think either of those is the case, so I ask again, how does the news by Real suddenly convince people to buy an iPod? And, if we can't count on increased iPod sales, there is absolutely no reason for Apple to help Real out and license Fairplay. In fact it would only hurt them buy reducing purchases from ITMS.
 
FearFactor47 said:
Who do Real think they are? The "Oh, we never got Apple's approval, so we did it anyway!" tactic just won't work in court. Your right, no-one needs RealPlayer. Basically, Apple IS the music industry, and they are not going to let any one get in their way.
Click to expand...

I remember when Apple WAS the home computer industry. But they failed to open up let others play in the Apple pool. Now we get by with our 2-3% of the market. The iPod and iTunes will suffer the same fate if Apple fails to invite others to come and play with them.

Apples lead is only as big as it is due to lack of real competition, but once MS get it's online store and music players in the market, Apple will suffer, unless they get other to use and accept the fairplay(AAC) format.
 
I'm loving it. You guys all decry Microsoft and their attempts to make all their stuff proprietary, and then take the "little guy's" side when someone tries to get around Microsoft, but when Apple does the same thing you switch sides. :rolleyes:

Steve
 
Abstract said:
I don't really care for any corporation, but since Real is so obviously in the wrong, I hope they get their ass handed to them in court.
Click to expand...

I disagree completely. They may be legally wrong considering the DMCA, but I believe the DMCA is a horrible law and in this case, Apple is dead wrong. I love Apple, of course (I just bought my G4 iPod 6 days ago, and I've owned an iMac, and I currently own a PowerBook, which I love). I understand they are doing this to protect their financial interests and because the law is on their side. But I think that the laws prohibiting competition and personal use, such as the DMCA, have gone too far.
 
Oirectine said:
I disagree completely. They may be legally wrong considering the DMCA, but I believe the DMCA is a horrible law and in this case, Apple is dead wrong. I love Apple, of course (I just bought my G4 iPod 6 days ago, and I've owned an iMac, and I currently own a PowerBook, which I love). I understand they are doing this to protect their financial interests and because the law is on their side. But I think that the laws prohibiting competition and personal use, such as the DMCA, have gone too far.
Click to expand...
Problem is, Apple has a legal responsibility for their shareholders to try to get as much profit as they can, and that includes using whatever law that allows as such.

I haven't a final judgment, but I think I'm on Real with this, but we'll have to see.
 
darkwing said:
I'm loving it. You guys all decry Microsoft and their attempts to make all their stuff proprietary, and then take the "little guy's" side when someone tries to get around Microsoft, but when Apple does the same thing you switch sides. :rolleyes:

Steve
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's right. Does anyone think people shouldn't be allowed to mod Xboxes that people have bought with their OWN MONEY? Also, SAMBA, which reverse-engineers Microsoft's own SMB protocols, and which APPLE USES, is also reverse-engineered.
 
greenmonsterman said:
In other news Microsoft announced today that after a year of hard work and "the Longhorn smokescreen" they will be releasing Mac OSX Panther for windows instead. Codenamed Windows OSXP Panther, Microsoft admits to following in the footsteps of RealNetworks who recently made their way onto Apple's iPod using reverse engineering. "We knew Longhorn was sh*t, so we bought a copy of OSX reverse engineered it and recompiled it to run on windows, we think our customers will be very pleased" Microsoft also admits adding system instability, more frequent kernel panics, and a user favorite, the blue screen of death.

Steve Jobs was unavailable for comment since he had just sh@t on himself.
Click to expand...

Very funny lol :D
 
applebum said:
That being said, many people keeps saying that this move by Real will help to increase the sale of iPods. One question - HOW?

Right now what we know is that Real will have a music store that will offer songs for a price that can play on the iPod. They are providing nothing different than the ITMS already provides. If that is the case, how does this help iPod sales? Are you saying:

1. That there are a whole bunch of loyal Real customers that have sworn not to buy an iPod until they can put their Real music on it?

or

2. That there are a whole bunch of people that have sworn not to buy an iPod until there are at least 2 stores selling music?
Click to expand...

More like 3. There are people who won't buy an iPod since it only supports one online music store; who'll buy another music player which allows them to choose.

or 4. There are people (like myself) who are tired of Apple's attempts to limit choice, such as refusing to license Fairplay, or not allowing any other music service to play on the iPod, or (as is alleged) disabling WMA support on the iPod.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back