RealNetworks To Sell iPod-Compatible Songs

[macnews]

Wow, a lot of heated discussion. I can see Apple being upset and maybe suing. Then again, it might mean REAL is more open to terms Apple might set up licensing Fairplay.

What I don't understand is Apple not wanting to license the technology at all. This goes counter to the open source idea they have been pushing, plus has shown to not really work in the past. Perhaps people have wanted to bully Apple in to their terms thinking Apple needed them. Clearly, the popularity of the iPod has shown they need Apple.

Either way, I see this as a positive. 1. It might signal other companies they need to work with Apple, not bully them. 2. If it is legal, it could open up the iPod and strengthen sales, holding off windows media player as the defualt standard. Like it or not, some standards will pop up. We just need to decide what they will be. In the past it has always been MS and someother, non-mac company. Why not Apple and MS, or just Apple, being the default?

 

[vienna]

I don't think this will hurt Apple at all. The people who like the iPod appreciate the ease of use and its elegance. Likewise the people who use iTMS. Until Apple's competitors provide similar features Apple is secure in it's position as the number one online music store with the number one digital music player. Real are just spinning their wheels, they still will not get any market traction because they aren't really competing effectively.

 

[BrianKonarsMac]

I don't think this will hurt Apple at all. The people who like the iPod appreciate the ease of use and its elegance. Likewise the people who use iTMS. Until Apple's competitors provide similar features Apple is secure in it's position as the number one online music store with the number one digital music player. Real are just spinning their wheels, they still will not get any market traction because they aren't really competing effectively.

iTMS, ease of use, and elegance, do not belong anywhere near each other. iTMS is the most bungled piece of crap ever, they need to hire an actual designer.

 

[thisbechuck]

Personally I think this is great. Apple said they don't really make money off the Music Store, and the only reason to have it is increase iPod sales. Real's system, since it will be iPod compatable, will be doing the same-- plus it's not like Apple is losing either money or marketshare. I wouldn't mind another option personally.

 

[Trekkie]

iTMS, ease of use, and elegance, do not belong anywhere near each other. iTMS is the most bungled piece of crap ever, they need to hire an actual designer.

If you're going to make some statement like that it'd sure help if you backed it up with some information on why you feel that way. Some how it's worked well enough for 100,000,000 songs to be sold and I personally haven't found it that hard to figure out...

 

[bonk]

iTMS is the most bungled piece of crap ever

uh... why?

 

[kangaroo]

You all are really doing a great job exposing the undercurrent of Mac-user hypocracy. You can convince yourself otherwise, but you all really just want to see Apple dominate this market with a monopoly. There are a lot of reasons for wanting to see this, including the simple fact that Apple hasn't monopolized a market in 20 years, not to mention some sort of vague pride in being the first iPod owners, believing in the iPod early on, telling your friends about it, following the industry, liking the rumors, ect.

But you all still just want to see Apple in a Microsoft like position. It's a fool's game, and what happened today with Real proves it.

It's a fools game? You mean Apple, as a major player in the computer/electronic industry and a publicly traded company, shouldn't try to dominate a business market, make money, and create a legacy?

At this time, Apple has achieved success with the iPod. The success is tenuous and due, in part, to the closed system which Apple has created/maintained. If you want an iPod and you want to <legally> download music you must use iTunes. The reverse is true. They reinforce each other & that's the logic of it. Harmony opens that closed system and makes an iPod optional. Apple is not going to sit back and allow Real to dilute marketshare in what is and will become <increasingly> a hotly fought market.

 

[JediL1]

Well, in the immediate future at least, people will continue to buy iPods. Their iPods will come with iTunes, so the vast majority of people will just use iTunes UNLESS:

1.) Real's new music store and jukebox are VASTLY superior in design/ease of use/features/ compared to iTunes (unlikely considering Real's previous efforts)

2.) Real acquires exclusive artists that will only have their music on their store. (Unlikely seeing how Record labels like money from different services).

3.) iTunes becomes extremely clunky and unusable (Unlikely)

4.) Real does an AMAZING job marketing itself

5.) Person has both an iPod and a windows mp3 player and wants to sync with both using one piece of software (biggest threat, especially if a WMA compatible player becomes extremely popular)

It seems that if a person is getting an iPod as their only mp3 player, there probably won't be a reason to use Real except for maybe an occasional exclusive song that you just use and download and then use iTunes the rest of the time.

However, if WMA mp3 players become popular, it may become pragmatic for people to use the Real jukebox in a household where there are iPods AND WMA players.

So the lesson here seems to be: Keep selling iPods, keep iPod market share high, use the profits to make iTunes and the iTMS better and it won't matter what Real does because they don't have the money to make their service as good as iTunes.

 

[Trekkie]

Personally I think this is great. Apple said they don't really make money off the Music Store, and the only reason to have it is increase iPod sales. Real's system, since it will be iPod compatable, will be doing the same-- plus it's not like Apple is losing either money or marketshare. I wouldn't mind another option personally.

I was really surprised when they said 'no' to Real. Maybe Real wasn't going to pay them anything per song or something like that and Apple wanted more money. I'm not sure why they would say no to Real unless they have something else secrative on the back burner that would partner them with soemthing different.

With all the rumor mongering about Microsoft and Best Buy getting together to push DRM'd WMA and Windows products this fall you'd think that Apple would be trying and laying the groundwork for a cross-platform cross-company head on fight with MS.

you have to wonder though if we're going to see something like the original Apple IIe/IIc being the kick ass product only to loose it to others

 

[cl0r0x70]

Apple on wrong side of this one

If Apple did sue, they would be squarely on the wrong side of this one.

Points to consider:
1) Real is not reverse engineering Apples protocols in order to "crack" or "render useless" the copyrights of the record labels in question. Quite the opposite, they are actually STRENGTHENING the copyrights of the labels by providing another source of legal downloads. It is an important legal distinction.
2) The law is far more ambivalent about #1 as evidenced by #3
3) Many of the programs that make Apple great really on the ability to reverse engineer their equivalent Windoze counterparts. They are entirely legal: Fire, Proteus, Trillian "reverse engineer" MSN, Yahoo, Aim, etc. Open Office "reverse engineers" MS Word, Excel, etc. Gnumeric "reverse engineers" Excel. The list goes on.
4) If legislation ever came into place that truly made reverse engineering illegal WHEN NOT attempting to circumvent copyright, then much of the Open Source community and Apple would be in serious, serious trouble.
5) Apple has nothing to gain by suing Real. Contrarily, Real has to play catch-up every time Apple shifts gears, which guarantees Real will always be a little behind the game compared to iTunes.

No worries on Apples part, I would assume.

 

[jwhitnah]

By the end of the week, Rob Glasser will be spitting bloody teeth into a gutter and wiping his mouth on the tattered sleeve of a grungy brown jacket picked up from goodwill after glorious STEVE came in on a white horse and obliterated his company, murdered his wife and children, and reduced him to picking up cans and roaming the streets for scraps of food.
Rob Glasser and his entire extended family for generations to come will continue to feel the sting of what he's done here and now, and I hope that the word "regret" will never fully describe his nightmarish agony.

I'm sensing some hostility here.

 

[jwhitnah]

Harm Money

At best, this will not take off. Even if the songs are cheaper or they somehow get better variety than iTMS, I would not bother to use it. Part of the whole experience is ease of use. Moving files to iTunes from Harmony or vice versa would be a pain. iTMS is hot because it is well organized, inexpensive and easy to use.

 

[e-coli]

Whoa I smell a BIG FAT lawsuit brewing.

I bet Steve is scalding hot.

Bye bye Real.

Rule #1 of business: never get on Steve's REALLY bad side

 

[soniquev8]

I'm torn, I really hate copy protection to begin with, but I love Apple and the iTMS. I usually cheer for companies or organizations who reverse-engineer copy protection systems (DeCSS anyone?), but Real sucks.

However, I also think Apple should have been a little more open when Real came to them for licensing. But I can also see Apple's uncertainty... which would make them more money: the licensing of the DRM technology or keeping it to themselves? One idea that my have worked would be to license Fairplay to Real in exchange for Quicktime being able to play Real content. It would work for Real, but also for Apple because then people would have little reason to download RealPlayer anymore.

But then I think about the DMCA aspect of it. Is it really that serious? I mean, there are about a dozen pieces of software that can remove the DRM from iTMS AAC files... maybe Real just took one of them and (in concept) reversed it... adding the DRM instead of removing it.

As I said, I'm torn... but I think in the end the software will be the battleground. Which is easier to use? Which is faster? Which has more music? and overall, Which is cheaper? I'm betting on iTunes. Real has been in a slow, downward spiral for a couple of years now and this seems like a last-ditch effort on their part.

 

[Freg3000]

I think I missed most of it, but here is an interview with Rob Glaser on CNBC....he is answering the question about fearing a law suit from Apple, since this "by no means" was a partnership or collaboration.

http://homepage.mac.com/freg3000/Glaser.mp4

 

[dontmatter]

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.

wait wait wait. This doesn't break fairplay, it just mimics it so real songs can be played on an ipod. Can itms now be played elsewhere? No way. THAT would be breaking the law.

 

[Jawbreaker]

Though I anticipate Apple suing in response to this development, I can envision a scenario in which they don't. Essentially, having more stores selling iPod-compatible music only serves to further the iPod's advantages in the marketplace. One of the problems with licensing, though, would be the question of how such a move would be spun in the media. If Apple had gone out earlier in search of partners and licensees for FairPlay DRM, headlines would have read something along the lines of "Apple enlists allies in effort to maintain market dominance." What we have instead with Real trying to gain access to iPod owners as a music market is a situation where one of Apple's competitors has gone to considerable effort and expense to work with Apple's solution. The story here is that iTMS's competitors are quite desperate to sell to iPod owners, and given that iPod is what makes Apple its money in music, this actually makes iPod's dominance even more evident. I'm not fully convinced that Apple is entirely upset that Real is providing a way for other music stores to simply break even while further driving iPod sales.

 

[leftbanke7]

This is what Apple should do. Licence FairPlay to everybody BUT Real. That would get ol' Robby Boy's panties in a bunch.

 

[jocknerd]

All I can say is...

Is Fairplay used on the iPod? I thought that Fairplay was on the computer itself and that the iPod has no idea what Fairplay is. If thats the case, Real should have no problem with Harmony. Hell, their software could just convert their DRM'd AAC file to an non-DRM'd AAC file that gets uploaded to the iPod. Apple would have no argument at all. It would be just like uploading any AAC or MP3 file.

Now if Harmony is compatible with Fairplay and in a way that Fairplay can't be updated to break the compatibility without breaking existing compatibility with current Fairplay, then I just have to say that Steve f###ed up again. Got too greedy and didn't license his technology.

On the other hand, I think all DRM sucks. I no longer buy from iTMS and I won't buy CD's that have copy protection. I am not a criminal and I don't care to be treated as one.

 

[a_iver]

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).

Well, you have to think of it this way. The people here (or a good chunk of them anyways) like Apple a lot because of the products they produce. In my opinion Apple does a good job of making things user friendly, while still looking good. How would all these mac users feel if Apple went out of business some day. So we support Apple because they have a good history of making products. Other companies may create a better product every once in a while, which gives us the option. The option of of being selfish for our benefit (which is not a bad thing, don't get me wrong), or to support Apple because they have always been good to us in the past. It's like the old grandpas who go into department stores and always buy the same type of cleaner because it always seemed to work great in the past, regardless of whether or not there's a newer better product. Loyalty.

Sorry I drew out the message so long I just wanted to make sure everyone got it. It seems like a common topic here.

 

[Savage Henry]

Apple will not licence up Fairplay to the morons at Real: period.

Real are jokers if they think this is going to do them any credibility in the long run. Soon every other planet in the galaxy will be cracking wise about their mamas!

[Apologies to ep14 season 3 Futurama]

 

[iMeowbot]

Is Fairplay used on the iPod?

Yes, absolutely.

I thought that Fairplay was on the computer itself and that the iPod has no idea what Fairplay is.

Both use it. The iPod doesn't know how to manage keys, but it does know how to check a song against the keys that have been placed on it.

If the iPod didn't understand Fair Play, then the DRM would be kind of pointless, preventing playback on the host PC but not the iPod.

 

[d-fi]

I'm not opposed to another source but....

I'm not opposed to having another source to buy music from i think thats a good thing personally, keeps apple on their toes. But Real would be about the last company i'd turn too knowing how well Real software works on both PC and Mac. I'm don't think i've ever heard of a person who likes any of Real's software.

I Suspect that you may be able to download Real music to your iPod but you'll have to use Real software to do it, and i know that if i can't play the music in iTunes. I'm not going to start Real player to listen to a few "special" tracks. I want my music in one place in my computer and my iPod there is no point in buy from them if i have to use 2 different players when i'm at home.

 

[cr2sh]

One can hate Real and yet defend their right to use legal means to compete with ITMS.

From what I've read, this new software does little to actually compete with ITMS. Indeed it translates ITMS files to work on other mp3 players... but all that does is give people another reason to buy from ITMS.

Also, I can buy songs from REAL now and convert to play on my iPod... more of a reason to buy an iPod.

They way I see it, Apple has the top mp3 player and the top music store... in my mind its a perfect solution for the user, but not open enough. This software certainly creates more flexibility for music buyers (which will increase sales) but most of us want to see Apple KO the entire industry and this certainly doesn't aid that.

I'm not about to "give Real a try"... I've got WMP and QT... if its not offered in either of those formats I'm guessing its not worth viewing.

 

[iMeowbot]

From what I've read, this new software does little to actually compete with ITMS. Indeed it translates ITMS files to work on other mp3 players... but all that does is give people another reason to buy from ITMS.

That's exactly what Harmony does not do. It allows files encoded by Real to be played on both WMA and Fair Play devices. It doesn't allow music purchased from iTMS, Napster or elsewhere to be converted to play on other devices. Any tracks you purchase from Apple will still be locked out from non-
Apple players.