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

RealNetworks To Sell iPod-Compatible Songs

Mudbug said:
from what I understand of it, the DMCA (digital millenium copyright act) says reverse engineering of a digital format is against the law. I would imagine Apple would use this in their litigation if and when that happens.
Click to expand...

Sounds like an open and shut case.

I think there is too much emphasis these days on "open" this and "open" that. What ever happened to just picking the best product? Open vs closed is one factor, but there are those who hold it up as the primary thing, which it shouldn't be.
 
Good

Thats what Apple gets for not letting other people make a little money off the iPod. More music available for the iPod means more iPod sales, since those files are only playable on the iPod. But since they also own the iTMS, I understand why they don't want everyone to have the codec.
The reason so many PC's are sold every year is because so many companies can make money off of the platform so you have thousands of companies wanting you to buy a PC. The same thing could happen with the iPod if other companies are allowed to participate in their success.
I can only hope that Quicktime will someday play real player files, thats one way Apple can get back at them.
 
What if Real just converted the user's purchased music to regular mp3s? Those play on the iPod. I don't see any problem for Apple because it doesn't affect Fairplay or reverse anything. Of course, they would have another more powerful enemy that would go after them for that.
 
BornAgainMac said:
What if Real just converted the user's purchased music to regular mp3s? Those play on the iPod. I don't see any problem for Apple because it doesn't affect Fairplay or reverse anything. Of course, they would have another more powerful enemy that would go after them for that.
Click to expand...

I don't think the studios would like it... MP3 has no DRM.
 
BornAgainMac said:
What if Real just converted the user's purchased music to regular mp3s? Those play on the iPod. I don't see any problem for Apple because it doesn't affect Fairplay or reverse anything. Of course, they would have another more powerful enemy that would go after them for that.
Click to expand...
Because the labels would ditch them in a hot minute. No DRM = no labels = no music = no customers.
 
Although this may potentially lead to a lawsuit, I don't really have any problems with RealNetworks doing this - in the end it will result in the iPod being more attractive to some consumers and will no doubt help to boost iPod sales.
 
are you people for real?

I don't believe the attitude of people on here. I'm sure there will be a lawsuit but I hope Real wins.

Reverse engineering for compatibility is one of the few allowable exceptions to DMCA. Real tried to do this the best way for Apple, licensing the technology. They were refused so they instead are trying to do a clean room compatible reimplementation. This is a perferctly legitimate business tactic and if they have been careful to reimplement it from scratch avoiding any copyrighted specifications or any patents they may well win.

If it wasn't for this sort of action there would be no personal computer industry as it was the reverse engineering of the PC bios by Compaq that allowed PC compatibles to be made and has lead to the huge advantages in performance and cost that have happened across the whole computer industry.

More iPod compatible music can only be a good thing right?

..unless you are an Apple stockholder and want them to have a monopoly.
 
I'm not suprised that Real is going to debut this service, who wouldn't want a piece of the iPod business, and considering how well other download companies have fared, it seems like this is one of the only competitive options out there. I am sort of suprised that they want to license it. This does sound like a lawsuit, and I'm wondering why any attempt to work with Apple was ignored. I'm sure this isn't the last we'll hear about this.
 
It is a violation of the DMCA

http://www.chillingeffects.org/reverse/

"The exception allows reverse engineering of computer programs if the reverse engineer lawfully obtains the program, seeks permission from the copyright owner, only uses the results of their efforts to create an interoperable computer program and does not publish the results."

Guess which part Real Networks didn't comply with. Hint: it's bolded
 
I am confused. Let me get this straight.

Real plans to sell Harmony-encoded AAC files in its music store. As Fairplay stands now, Harmony can mimic Fairplay and thus the iPod could play these files.

At the same time, Real plans to license their technology so that iRiver's and the like can play their brand of protected AAC's. At the same time, all 100+ million songs purchased in iTunes will, since they have Harmony-compatible Fairplay, could be played on these other players, thereby unbinding people from iPods.

If my impression is correct, then I hope Apple sues the motherf***ers into oblivion.
 
Desperate measures for a desperate company

I'm hoping Apple doesn't bring on a lawsuit. Steve Jobs always said music should be free, music should be for the people, so if Apple does decide to bring forth a lawsuit under the stupid DMCA law, they're no better in their hypocrisy than the RIAA.

This act from Real does give more choice to consumers, and would, in a small way, only increase the dominance of the iPod. Real broke first, better than Apple breaking to support WMA *shudders at the thought*. Anyway, good news for Apple, even if it's in violation of DMCA.
 
Many of you are missing the point. The iTMS is a BUSINESS which makes money. Albeit not a lot of money, it still makes a profit. Apple is and will be competitive with all their products and software including iTMS. Haven't you read the articles about starting a music store in Europe? About licensing music stores to colleges?

Apple has the iPod which if a PC user buys, he'll get itunes for windows. If an apple itunes user wants a portable mmusic player, he'll get an iPod. Does Apple want to make money on an iPod and then never make money from that customer again? Or does Apple want a customer to buy an iPod and then start buying music from it's iTunes store which is compatibile with their music player?
 
Wow, haha, I can't believe someone would vote negative on this story.

"Oh no, another company is making their music service compatible with iPods, which means I have more choice in where to get my songs and will make a potential iPod buyers decision easier as he knows the iPod is compatible with more services."

Let the companies bicker between each other over whether this is legal or not. This can only be good as it sells more iPods (which is the profitable part of Apple's music strategy).
 
snahabed said:
I am confused. Let me get this straight.

Real plans to sell Harmony-encoded AAC files in its music store. As Fairplay stands now, Harmony can mimic Fairplay and thus the iPod could play these files.

At the same time, Real plans to license their technology so that iRiver's and the like can play their brand of protected AAC's. At the same time, all 100+ million songs purchased in iTunes will, since they have Harmony-compatible Fairplay, could be played on these other players, thereby unbinding people from iPods.

If my impression is correct, then I hope Apple sues the motherf***ers into oblivion.
Click to expand...

Why? Are you an Apple stockholder? It's a win-win situation for everyone else. Other mp3 player owners can play itune music store songs on their hardware, ipod owners can buy compatible songs from other vendors. Unless you believe it is right that companies can use the DMCA to maintain artificial monopolies (not what it was intended for) then you should support this.

Apple will still sell plenty of ipods because of style and because they are the market leader but a bit of competition will force them to be honest and keep prices fair.
 
animefan_1 said:
http://www.chillingeffects.org/reverse/

"The exception allows reverse engineering of computer programs if the reverse engineer lawfully obtains the program, seeks permission from the copyright owner, only uses the results of their efforts to create an interoperable computer program and does not publish the results."

Guess which part Real Networks didn't comply with. Hint: it's bolded
Click to expand...

Hmmmmm, my understanding was that Glaser had sought to license the fairplay technology and was ignored. The details of what Glaser would have said to Jobs are anyone's speculation, but as long as the standard is "seeking" rather than "receiving" permission to reverse engineer, they may be ok...
 
Quobobo said:
I for one think it's great that Real is willing to go to these lengths to ensure iPod compatibility.
Click to expand...

Real isn't doing this because they like Apple or the iPod. Real's doing this because the marketshare for their music service is "real" low and by getting iPod owners to purchase iPod compatible songs through Real, they can increase their marketshare (and $$$). Real knows that there's no way for them to survive in the long run unless they can get their service to be compatible with the iPod (the dominant portable music player). Why do you think Jobs rejected a meeting with Glaser? It's because Apple's iTMS and the iPod are #1 and they don't want anyone to steal that away from Apple.
 
snahabed said:
I am confused. Let me get this straight.

Real plans to sell Harmony-encoded AAC files in its music store. As Fairplay stands now, Harmony can mimic Fairplay and thus the iPod could play these files.
Click to expand...

Correct.

snahabed said:
At the same time, Real plans to license their technology so that iRiver's and the like can play their brand of protected AAC's. At the same time, all 100+ million songs purchased in iTunes will, since they have Harmony-compatible Fairplay, could be played on these other players, thereby unbinding people from iPods.
Click to expand...

No. Real is licencing their technology so that other music stores can sell iPod-compatible songs.
 
eskatonia said:
Why? Are you an Apple stockholder? It's a win-win situation for everyone else. Other mp3 player owners can play itune music store songs on their hardware, ipod owners can buy compatible songs from other vendors. Unless you believe it is right that companies can use the DMCA to maintain artificial monopolies (not what it was intended for) then you should support this.

Apple will still sell plenty of ipods because of style and because they are the market leader but a bit of competition will force them to be honest and keep prices fair.
Click to expand...

First of all, you better believe that Apple, if they don't sue Real into bankruptcy, will update Fairplay within a week to make it incompatible with Harmony. Therefore, songs bought in iTMS will not be compatible with other players.

Second, Apple made a decision to not license Fairplay technology. Why should another company be able to hack into Fairplay code, in flagrant violation of federal law, and reap tons of profit from the market position Apple has created for itself? Apple's position seems to be "we are keeping iPod, iTunes and Fairplay CLOSED until we are forced to open it, and if that situation happens, we want the OPTION to license it." Real is taking that insurance policy away, and not compensating Apple for it.

SUE THE BLOODY HELL OUT OF THEM.
 
From the Times article: "Apple has basically locked in their users," Mr. Bernoff said. "We are not used to thinking of Apple as the monopolist, but in this market they are."

It is a monopoly in the classical sense, but antitrust law says a monopoly is OK as long as you come into it with fair means and maintain it with fair means. I'm sure some crack-smoking Microsoft coddler is going to come along and say Apple using iTMS to sell iPods is no different than Microsoft using Windows to push Internet Explorer.

The difference, of course, is that Apple started iTMS as a vehicle to sell iPods. Microsoft used its OS to horn in on the market-leading browser (Netscape Navigator) and push it out of the way.

Apple played by the rules and developed a market-leading product (the iPod), and it should be able to control the way the product is maintained. Imagine if a TiVo competitor came along and said, "hey, we're only five dollars a month and all you have to do is stick this card in the back to rewrite their proprietary software so we can take over the box."

Apple should file suit IMMEDIATELY in federal court to shut these jokers down.
 
eskatonia said:
Why? Are you an Apple stockholder? It's a win-win situation for everyone else. Other mp3 player owners can play itune music store songs on their hardware, ipod owners can buy compatible songs from other vendors.
Click to expand...

Correction. Other mp3 players *cannot* play iTMS songs unless you were to burn them to CD and then rip them to mp3 or something. Only the iPod can play iTMS songs. Real's just trying to increase the appeal of their own music service by offering songs that are compatible with the #1 portable music player out there --- the iPod.
 
If not for competition like this Apple would not have had to make their Macs look and act the way they do now. I think this will make them innovate more. The iTMS and the iPod are not exactly stale right now, but they have not changed a great deal. Now the might be forced to get creative and give the people what they are asking for to get their sales.
If downloading your music instead of going to the store for it is the future, it can only happen if everyone uses the same technology. Until everyone can use fairplay it will not be the standard music format it should be.
 
edgar_is_good said:
Hmmmmm, my understanding was that Glaser had sought to license the fairplay technology and was ignored. The details of what Glaser would have said to Jobs are anyone's speculation, but as long as the standard is "seeking" rather than "receiving" permission to reverse engineer, they may be ok...
Click to expand...

I don't think it is. Glaser originally wanted a license to the DRM, not for permission to reverse-engineer it.

The fact that they reversed engineered Fairplay without seeking permission, may still be an issue.
 
Wow...

Yeah I am a stockholder, and I have another personal interest in the company too... I want to continue to use Apple computers for the rest of my life so I want Apple to be successful. I do think Apple should have been a bit more open with their codec, but that is their decision. I don't blame Real for doing this, the problem is that they are going to sell it to other companies so that Apple's copyrighted codec will run on third-party devices, thus, hurting the iPod. Is it a stretch to see iTunes recognizing an iRiver as a player? Probably... but it is still illegal in my eyes.
Personally, I like the control that Apple has over the product. They make the hardware and the software and that is why it works. Same thing with OS X. They know that this 'creative control' is what makes the Mac expierience what it is.
I do get tired of the Steve Jobs pissing contests. I wonder if I don't have a 60GB iPod because of it...

Just some thoughts. Whether they are well thought out or not. I'm tired.


________________________________________________________
"A Mac user voting for Bush is like... well it is just really @#$! up!"
 
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