toggle

AAPL Stock: 562.29 ( -3.03 )

MacNN News

Apple investigating DMCA violations by Real's Harmony

updated 08:45 am EDT, Thu July 29, 2004

Apple on Real\'s Harmony

Apple today released an official statement on , which allows users to play its song files on the iPod. In a brief statement, Apple said that it was investigating possible criminal violations under the DMCA and other laws as well as threatening compatibility by updating the iPod firmware. "We are stunned that RealNetworks has adopted the tactics and ethics of a hacker to break into the iPod, and we are investigating the implications of their actions under the DMCA and other laws. We strongly caution Real and their customers that when we update our iPod software from time to time it is highly likely that Real's Harmony technology will cease to work with current and future iPods."

by MacNN Staff

(72)

TAGS :

Apple

Share the Article

Facebook Twitter Delious Slash Dot Digg

toggle

Comments

denim
Mac Elite

Joined: Jun 2000

0

07/29, 08:51am | report spam | close Reply |
HAHAHAHAHAHA

Like people will break their expensive iPods so they can play low quality Real files! Right. If they do, there's no need to sue Real. Just make sure the iPods won't ever update again, and add mucho cool features later.

johnhood
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Apr 2003

0

07/29, 08:52am | report spam | close Reply |
Funeral date set?

Real R.I.P

macimmortal
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

07/29, 08:55am | report spam | close Reply |
Link please?

How about a link to the official statement?

boomer0127
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jan 2004

0

07/29, 09:04am | report spam | close Reply |
Not a Real supporter...

...but isn't it funny to hear FUD coming from Apple? Or is it sad? Or is it a sign of Apple's dominance/monopoly in digital music?

Jonas Maebe
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jan 2002

0

07/29, 09:05am | report spam | close Reply |
Sad

Although I don't like Real as a company at all, I find it lame of Apple to act as if there is something inherently/morally wrong with what Real did. They reverse-engineered the format/security protocol uses for the sole purpose of creating an interoperable product. So what?

It's as if Apple is somehow scared of competition! Duke it out in the market place, not in the court room! Real is not plagiarising, not "stealing" anything or whatever.

It's sad that laws like the DMCA may indeed make stuff like this illegal.

PS: before you bash me as an Apple-hater: I own a G4/400, an iBook G3 and a RevB G5/1.8.

paulc
Junior Member

Joined: Aug 2000

0

07/29, 09:09am | report spam | close Reply |
still don't get it

I have yet to read/hear one real downside to this situation. IF Real proceeds and apple doesn't fight them, will they sell LESS Pods? Or maybe they'll sell MORE? And I seriously doubt they'd sell LESS songs on the ITMS; besides, they have said all along they don't make their money there, but on sales of Pods.

And these wouldn't be REAL format, they'd be AAC, same as what apple sells.

I also do NOT get why Mac faithful cheers so loudly while apple acts almost worse than m$. It's like they are PROUD that jubs can be just like gatez. Don't make me proud.

ronjamin
Baninated

Joined: May 2002

0

07/29, 09:20am | report spam | close Reply |
Back to the Good Ole Days

I remember when Apple had the prick mentality. When Apple's customer service wouldn't help you or even tell you how to turn the computer on (remember they used to tell you to see your local sales rep!).

Arrogance is Apple's biggest failing. Now that they sit on the top of the mole hill with 1 product, an mp3 player, they are playing hardball. Yea, they got stung by not protecting their "windows" interface, so now they are being extra careful.

So, instead of keeping all of the toys for themselfs, why not license the technology, like Microsoft did with windows. Then they will truely know monopoly.

Yea, right......Like Steve would do that.

Ahh, well, they "rebranded an iPod with HP". Why not rebrand the file format with Real?

deTaNg
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Apr 2003

0

07/29, 09:21am | report spam | close Reply |
Situation-

It's not about the concern of putting more songs from elsewhere on the ipod. It's about the control, licensing and distribution of what Apple has created and made mainstream. If you made a web site and someone hacked it, made it compatible, so that someone could browse it from another website without directly going to yours, all the meanwhile you were planning to sell your website, would you be PiSsED?!!!

Seqiro
Junior Member

Joined: Nov 2003

0

07/29, 09:30am | report spam | close Reply |
Think of it this way...

If Real has figured this much out, it might not be long before Real figures out a way to make iTunes purchases playable on other devices, something that Apple doesn't want since the point of iTunes is to sell iPods.

dwishbone
Grizzled Veteran

Joined: May 2002

0

07/29, 09:38am | report spam | close Reply |
should have licensed

apple brought this on themselves. REAL came to them and wanted to use Fairplay. Apple refused them. what else could REAL do? drop off the face of the earth? (wouldnt that be nice) its not that surprising this has happened. iPod is tops. they want their music on it. so do all the others. if Apple would just off their high horse and license Fairplay everything would be fine.

JeffHarris
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Oct 1999

0

07/29, 09:58am | report spam | close Reply |
Different Thinking?

Apple and Steve Jobs should just get over themselves and license AAC. This could be used as another way of pushing QuickTime technology as well. If you want to play Real/AAC files on your computer, you gotta install QuickTime. A nice tie-in.

The bunker mentality never served Apple well in the past. History has a strange way of repeating itself, unless one LEARNS from mistakes of the past. Arrogance serves nothing but one's own ego.

Maybe Apple should pull a Microsoft. Just spend some of that 4.8 billion they've got squirrelled away and BUY Real. Then it'll be a two-way slug-fest between iTunes/QuickTime and Windows Media Player.

hayesk
Professional Poster

Joined: Sep 1999

0

07/29, 10:04am | report spam | close Reply |
Think about it

for a second. Suppose iPod customers buy lots of music from Real. And suppose six months from now Apple updates the iPod and the Real music stops working. Guess who the customers are going to blame? That's right Apple. Why? Because the Real music "worked before the update" - now all of a sudden Apple has to support Real's format and test for it when they do updates. Do you think Real is going to fund that testing? I doubt it.

As for Apple licencing Fairplay to Real? Maybe, but wouldn't that be a money-losing proposition for Apple? The profits on music are so miniscule, do you think Real could pay a license large enough so Apple doesn't lose money on the deal, and still be able to charge a fair price for the music?

fiesta cat
Forum Regular

Joined: Nov 2003

0

07/29, 10:05am | report spam | close Reply |
Apple must protect Apple

If REAL puts out software/firmware/whatever to make the iPod play it's music and it messes up somebody's iPod, because of the agreement that the person going through that process agrees to (you know, the one where everybody sees a screen pop up with a bunch of legal mumbo-jumbo and then they quickly click on "Okay" or "I agree"), REAL is not responsible.

Then that person, if they want to get their iPod fixed, has no choice, but to goto Apple. Apple says "we did not authorize this, you voided your warranty, it'll cost you for us to fix or replace it". Said person gets angry, goes out and rants and raves and trashes Apple over their own, personal, mistake. After a bunch of people do this, Apple looks like the bad guy, and must either ride it out, or break down and fix whatever (thereby costing Apple money out of its pocket and potentially causing prices to rise for the rest of us).

jrome
Junior Member

Joined: May 1999

0

07/29, 10:07am | report spam | close Reply |
Easy workaround

All Real has to do is get permission from the record labels to transfer the songs to the iPod in unprotected AAC format. After all, there's already an easy way to strip the DRM (by burning a CD and re-ripping it), and this would be essentially equivalent. It would be just enough of a PITA to un-DRM the songs that I doubt anyone would bother.

fiesta cat
Forum Regular

Joined: Nov 2003

0

07/29, 10:07am | report spam | close Reply |
It's like a car maker.

If you buy a Ford, replace the tires, replace the exhaust, fiddle around with the engine, maybe rechip the computer, and then have problems, Ford is going to say "Hear that sound? That's the sound of Ford Motor Co. telling you that you voided your warranty. Would you like a list of independent auto mechanics in your area? It may cost you a lot to fix, but I'm sure you thought of that when you started modifying your car".

gudin
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2000

0

07/29, 10:10am | report spam | close Reply |
um, you people are wacky.

Real DIDN'T license the technology. They created a method to break contracts with Apple. Apple is INVESTIGATING possible criminal acts. If they are criminal they are criminal. If not, they are not.

It's hardly surprising that Apple would react harshly to something created to break something Apple created. This has nothing whatsoever to do with whether apple SHOULD license it or not. They DIDN'T.

Apple did make a deal with HP, they could make a deal with anyone. They DIDN'T make a deal with real. Get it?

Perhaps these are criminal acts, perhaps not. If so, they are hardly out to lunch in seeking to enforce their rights. It's PERFECTLY REASONABLE.

Sheesh. Yesterday this forum was filled with people saying how awful it is that Real did this, and encouraging Apple to act. Now they do, and this is the response.

ciphun
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2000

0

07/29, 10:23am | report spam | close Reply |
re: should have licensed

Apple should NOT have licensed. Don't blame Apple for protecting their product and deciding what is best for the iPod. Further, re-read the paragraph that was posted. Apple is claiming that Real has hacked the firmware, which means that Real didn't just find a way to play their music on the iPod, they are making a change to the firmware that is operating the iPod. This changes things dramatically. Real could literally cause a problem with all iPods whose owners decide to install this firmware hack and then when their iPods s**** up, who is going to be blamed? You guessed it, Apple. People are gonna be crying, moaning and *itching to Apple about why their iPods broke. What Real is doing (assuming that they did, in fact, hacked the firmware) is wrong and shame on Real and anyone else that supports this. Real should at the very least, make a competing hardware player, all on their own, like Apple did and offer a compelling reason for people to buy and use their player, since they can not compete on Apple's current level.

darkpill
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jun 2004

0

07/29, 10:46am | report spam | close Reply |
Morons

You guys are complete morons. Real is the one performing illegal acts. Real asked Apple to license fairplay, Apple said no. End of story. That doesn't mean you can go ahead regardless with no consequences. Real f*cked up, and I hope they pay the price. Apple IS licensing fairplay - like they did with Motorola.

dws
Forum Regular

Joined: Apr 2001

0

07/29, 10:48am | report spam | close Reply |
Apple is right!

RealNetworks might be a nobody, but Apple has to fight back now; or other (more important) players in the music field will step in and do what Real did. Apple surely has long-range plans for the iPod, that include successive changes to both QuickTime and the iPod firmware. If they don't stop this kind of hacking now, all their future plans will be in jeopardy.

poulh
Mac Enthusiast

Joined: Jun 2000

0

07/29, 11:06am | report spam | close Reply |
apple shouldn't help rea

Real is in trouble... they make 1 of 3 media players and that is about it. They don't make a lot of money and could go out of business in a few years. iTunes/iPod is a trojan horse to get quicktime/aac/rendesvous on pc's. So why would Apple want to help a competitor?

If Apple helps real they stay around and compete. If Apple gives them the cold shoulder they will go out of business and then its just Msft and Apple.

Apple not liscensing to a competitor is common sense.

Now, liscensing to a non-direct competitor like a car-stereo company makes sense and should be considered.

DannyMac
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

07/29, 11:39am | report spam | close Reply |
Finishing quote...

"We strongly caution Real and their customers that when we update our iPod software from time to time it is highly likely that Real's Harmony technology will cease to work with current and future iPods and that's not a warning... that's a fact."

Eriamjh
Addicted to MacNN

Joined: Oct 2001

0

07/29, 11:44am | report spam | close Reply |
This is Sad

Apple should just say "whatever" to Real and let it happen. Push them away and they will embrace microsoft!

hayesk
Professional Poster

Joined: Sep 1999

0

07/29, 11:47am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: This is Sad

" Apple should just say "whatever" to Real and let it happen. Push them away and they will embrace microsoft!"

Yeah, and when they update the iPod and the Real files stop working, who are the customers going to blame? Hint: it isn't Real.

srrojo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2004

0

07/29, 11:47am | report spam | close Reply |
Go, Apple!

Real, a company that blew off Apple and makes the all intrusive Real Player Gold, the cruddiest piece of software on ANY platform now wants to behave like a cracker and bypass Apple's DRM?

I hope Apple sues the pants off Real. This will set a legal precedent that software companies that behave no better than crackers can expect a hefty lawsuit .. if not, then it will just show that the DMCA is meant to persecute the little people and not high-and-mighty, ethically-challenged companies like Real.

Real ceased to be relevant the minute Steve rebuffed their Fairplay bid, and they know it.

testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

07/29, 12:22pm | report spam | close Reply |
Have to sue

Although I don't like Real as a company at all, I find it lame of Apple to act as if there is something inherently/morally wrong with what Real did. They reverse-engineered the format/security protocol uses for the sole purpose of creating an interoperable product. So what?

They have to sue, otherwise, when Billy-the-haXor comes out with his next fairplay hack, his lawyers can say Apple condoned such actions because they didn't sue Real...

testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

07/29, 12:26pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: should have licensed

apple brought this on themselves. REAL came to them and wanted to use Fairplay. Apple refused them. what else could REAL do? drop off the face of the earth?

Except they didn't just come to them. They came saying "License us Fairplay, or we'll go talk with MS!" Threatening a potential partner isn't exactly the best way to do business, and if you ran a company, I doubt you would've made the deal (if you did, then everyone else knows you'll bow to threats).

Buran
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2000

0

07/29, 12:33pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: comparison to Ford

Sorry, no. I know some locals who have done mild customizations to their cars. This misconception comes up quite a lot, but it's incorrect.

It is illegal to void the warranty on something just because its owner made a modification to it. You can only refuse to repair, under warranty, any problems that are related to the modification that the customer installed. So if you chip your car to have more turbo boost and the turbo fails (because it wasn't designed to take that boost) then you MAY (not definitely) be refused warranty coverage on that failure. The carmaker may not refuse to cover other failures (suppose the car's radio fails, which is not part of the turbo) that are not related to the modification. See the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act.

I am not sure what to think of Real's move in general, but let me remind you that the personal computer revolution was helped along immensely by the reverse engineering of IBM's BIOS by non-IBM engineers. Once that happened, IBM lost its monopoly on compatible systems and components -- and it was all clean-room reverse engineering, which IBM found out to its chagrin when it tried to stop the cloning. So, like Information Society said, "Where would I be without IBM?" It was the spread of the IBM PC Clone that is partly responsible for making computers inexpensive and small enough for everyone (the Apple II and Commodore and a few others were important too, of course. So was Project Apollo, which drove the development of light, small, and powerful computers that could be flown on spacecraft.)

Probably far behind in terms of computer technology, and out a lot more money. I don't think it's right, legally and otherwise, to just condemn these people outright without some consideration as to why this kind of thing is important overall. Especially legally. If it's clean-room, it's fine. If trade secrets were actually stolen, it's not.

jcroft
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 1999

0

07/29, 12:38pm | report spam | close Reply |
Who said anything about..

..customizations to the iPod?

You guys are not understanding this properly. All Real did was figure out how to put a DRM onto AAC files and still have the play on the iPod. They aren't planning to release firmware updates for the iPod. They aren't planning on making ANY customizations to the iPod. All they did was create a AAC/FairPlay compatible file format. This won't harm your iPod in any way.

That said, I'm not necessarily on Real's side here. All I'm saying is that those of you suggesting Real is going to somehow break people's iPods are being foolish.

Jonas Maebe
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jan 2002

0

07/29, 01:15pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Morons

You guys are complete morons. Real is the one performing illegal acts. Real asked Apple to license fairplay, Apple said no. End of story.

No, this simply means Real cannot use Apple's implementation of FairPlay (since they would need a license for that). There is nothing illegal about creating your own implementation (except if you infringe on some software patent by that, or if it's a circumvention device in the eyes of the DMCA, or a terrorist supporting action under the Patriot Act, or ...).

However, the fact that Apple did not give a license, has nothing to do with this.

shatten22
Mac Enthusiast

Joined: Apr 2001

0

07/29, 01:47pm | report spam | close Reply |
Lighten up -

Apple. You said yourself that you're making money selling iPods not music. It's the music that sells the iPods. SO open your baby up and allow REAL to help you sell more friggin' iPods. Ignore these Apple fascists (pretty close to M$ fascists) and remember, open compatability is the future. A closed system dies eventually.

You've finally got your name back to the glory it used to hold, so don't s**** it up by acting monopolistic. You need all the help you can get against M$ and the WMV format.

peace.

MichaelNH
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2002

0

07/29, 02:33pm | report spam | close Reply |
The law is the law

obviously it must be important enough for there to be a law about not doing... bypassing security to make a profit, is illegal, plain and simple... Real did whatever it took to bypass Apple's security on the iPod to benefit themselves off Apple's success... Apple has the right to make a complaint. Stop being damn hippies and acting like doing anything at anytime is okay. Geezus

porieux
Baninated

Joined: Mar 2001

0

07/29, 02:43pm | report spam | close Reply |
AAC

Anyone can use AAC. That is not the issue here.

z10n
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Oct 2003

0

07/29, 02:43pm | report spam | close Reply |
Unfortunate

but not unexpected, is this statement from Apple.

Real has not broken anything. If Real sold their songs in MP3 format, Harmony wouldn't even be necessary. Apple makes it sound like all the iPod plays is DRMed AAC files from iTMS, which isn't true. I'll wager even right now, you could download songs from Real's store, burn them to CD, re-rip them to AAC, and put the on an iPod. All Real's technlogy does is make this process automated, and retain the DRM information of the original files. That's it. So instead of corrupting your Real files by taking some extreme measures to get them on an iPod, you can have the files exactly as intended.

Instead, apple thinks they have a right to kill competion. For far too long, they've tried to make themselves be some kind of special market where the rules of competition do not apply. OS X is tied to mac hardware so that apple can make people pay more for it. If I want a DVD burner I have to buy the midrange iMac, even if I don't want the rest of that model's features. If I don't like my iMac's monitor I have to buy a whole new computer. And so on.

I don't believe apple should adopt microsofian measures to maintain their music marketshare. It worked for microsoft, they made a lot of money for it, but though winning the war, I believe it cost microsoft their soul. Apple is supposed to be a different kind of company. If not, then I might as well buy a windows machine, because can no longer call themselves "different". Apple used to be the kind of company that had principles and did things right by the customer, but for the last several years, I've seen that erode away more and more. Apple is becoming just like every other greedy company. And that's really a shame.

Maybe we all need to grow up to the fact that apple isn't out for their customers any more. They are out for themselves.

VR6
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 2001

0

07/29, 02:52pm | report spam | close Reply |
right metaphor

Is Apple behaving with the ethics of a hacker when they write software that will allow their proprietary format to be played on Microsoft's operating system?

This is just Apple's hate-on for Real showing itself.

testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

07/29, 03:00pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: right metaphon

Is Apple behaving with the ethics of a hacker when they write software that will allow their proprietary format to be played on Microsoft's operating system?

Umm, since its their format, they can write the software. They'd be hacking if they did some manipulations because Windows didn't support the file, or, for that matter, to get the files to work on WMA devices.

testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

07/29, 03:12pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: unfortunate

Real has not broken anything. If Real sold their songs in MP3 format, Harmony wouldn't even be necessary. Apple makes it sound like all the iPod plays is DRMed AAC files from iTMS, which isn't true. I'll wager even right now, you could download songs from Real's store, burn them to CD, re-rip them to AAC, and put the on an iPod. All Real's technlogy does is make this process automated, and retain the DRM information of the original files. That's it. So instead of corrupting your Real files by taking some extreme measures to get them on an iPod, you can have the files exactly as intended.

Except that's not what they're doing. The retaining the DRM and getting it on the iPod isn't the same as ripping to/from a CD. In order to get the DRM, they'd have to hack Apple's code somewhere along the line.

I don't believe apple should adopt microsofian measures to maintain their music marketshare

Well, someone here is going to act like MS. Its either Apple ("Don't you think about breaking our DRM") or Real ("I'll do what I want, because its what I think should be done"). By just breaking the DRM (or cracking it or duplicating it or whatever you want to call it), Real is doing what MS used to do. Take someone's product, reverse engineer it, and use that against them.

Both Apple and Real are acting like brutish children who need to be sat into a corner for 10 minutes. But Apple has the legal upperhand and they can do with the iPod whatever they like (its their product, after all). If you, and other people don't like it, then you'll start buying other products, and we can all watch Apple's share plummet to 3% (like the computers). But its their perogative.

(BTW, keep in mind that Fairplay is tied into iTunes which is tied to the Apple store, where they verify you are a user who's allowed to use the music. As such, any licensing to third parties, like Real for Harmony, would have to also hook into this same authentication scheme, as I'm sure you'd be pissed if you downloaded music from Real, and you couldn't bring it over to iTunes because it doesn't recognize you as the owner).

marzetta7
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Dec 2003

0

07/29, 03:51pm | report spam | close Reply |
Get REAL!

"Compatibility, choice and quality are critically important to consumers and Harmony provides all of these to users of the iPod and over 70 other music devices including those from Creative, Rio, iRiver, and others. RealPlayer Music Store provides the highest sound quality of any download music service. That's why so many consumers have welcomed news of Harmony. Consumers, and not Apple, should be the ones choosing what music goes on their iPod."

"...Harmony creates a way to lock content from Real's music store in a way that is compatible with the iPod, Windows Media DRM devices, and Helix DRM devices. Harmony technology does not remove or disable any digital rights management system."

These are some comments from Real in response to Apple's statement. From what I've gathered from their statement is this:

1) It's vague as h*** as to how they are trying to make this work.
2) They're telling me that they're not removing or disabling any DRMs which tells me they're using Apple's DRM without their permission and making it compatible with other devices. One word, "illegal." Not to mention this would lead to customers buying other portable players which is why Apple has a BIG problem with that, and rightfully so.
3) When the h*** did REAL become the company to decide for Apple what format should and shouldn't play on their iPods? I'm sure when the majority of customers are up in arms because they want other formats to be played, Apple will change. They'll have to either that or they'll begin to license the format a bit more liberally. But for now, since Apple has 70% marketshare, I think the resounding answer from customers is that they're perfectly happy with Apple's format and iPod.

bobdapoet
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2004

0

07/29, 03:51pm | report spam | close Reply |
Yeah, look at the example

Real took legal action against Streambox when they tried to market a ripper for converting RM files to WAV files- look where it got REAL....

But- since the iPod plays more formats that AAC, why is that an issue for "the consumer"? The consumer gets the choice of mutiple formats, just not in a way that Real can profit.

msconvert
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2002

0

07/29, 03:58pm | report spam | close Reply |
Look

Apple sold the Record companies on a CLOSED system. One Store, 3 computers, unlimited one way copies to iPods. The system is contained and the music industry likes it. I like it.

Apple has cut out the middle man, all of them, record stores, dealers, radios, All of it and I thank them. I don't care how music from the artist gets to my ears, as long as it is inexpensive and sounds good (this is debatable, but somewhere else). I also don't care how my money gets back to the artist as long as they continue to make music, I will buy it.

Right now apple has the only 'product' that does all of it with ease and style. People are deciding that the 'product' is the music service not the player, not the distribution media, it is getting the music I want into my head.

People like Real and Roxio and others are still stuck on the old music system. Sony has the right idea, but really poor execution, but they get it. Real is trying to insert themselves into the music distribution industry and are finding out that it is dead. They need a complete system and they are trying to edge in on what apple has built. Apple needs to protect their product so we can have the best service possible.

The one stop no think portable music system with class is here to stay and Real just doesn't get it.

ender
Junior Member

Joined: Mar 1999

0

07/29, 04:15pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re:

Re: It's like a car maker.
"If you buy a Ford, replace the tires...you voided your warranty."

Nothing Real is doing in anyway changes your iPod, so your example is irrelevant.

Re: um, you people are wacky.
"They created a method to break contracts with Apple...something created to break something Apple created"

I don't think there is any "contract" dispute involved here. As far as breaking something Apple created, we'll have to wait and see if the interoperability sections of the DMCA apply here. Since Real is only modifying something THEY are selling, you can not claim that thay are removing copyright protections which is prohibited by the DMCA.

How different is this from copying a CD to cassette for personal use? You are changing the format to be playable (ie, interoperable) with a different playback device. What next? Will Apple upgrade the iPod to only playback music purchased from the iTMS? Will they restrict ripping a store-bought CD because I didn't get the music from them? The ONLY issue is the METHOD Real used to create their system. If that turns out to be allowed by the DMCA for interoperability, then the process itself should be legal.

As for arguments that people might blame Apple if their music stops working after a firmware upgrade, that would depend. If Apple did something to INTENTIONALLY cripple playback, then they are no better than Microsoft and should be treated accordingly by the legal system.

ender
Junior Member

Joined: Mar 1999

0

07/29, 04:28pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re:

"In order to get the DRM, they'd have to hack Apple's code somewhere along the line."

That is an assumption and while likely true, not necessarily so. And we won't know until we learn more about HOW Real created their process. And even if it is true, that does not necessarily make it illegal if in fact the DCMA allows reverse engineering for interoperability reasons.

srrojo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2004

0

07/29, 04:35pm | report spam | close Reply |
It's Apple's hardware..

..and Real can cry if they want to. They tried that sloppy 'we'll go to MS' ploy and found out how irrelevant they are. There are only three standards left: Flash, WMV, and Quicktime. Everything thing else is just a layoff waiting to happen.

Real is out of ideas. RealONE is a dud, they were rebuffed by the littlest guy on earth (Apple), and MS doesn't care. MS has Windows Media, Apple has Quicktime -- these are the predominant media on the web. So Real is irrelevant there.

Maybe they should make their own hardware or cut a deal with Arkaos?

Nope, too late. They shouldn't have been so snotty about things a few months ago. Tick Tick Tick.

Apple wants to move iPods. Real, in its bid to gasp for financial solvency, intends to muddy the waters, so guess what? Maybe the next lawsuit will break it. Good riddance to a company that harvests user information, employs adware, and generally promotes a crappy media standard that is a PITA to author.

As to Apple 'intentionally crippling' things, it's been done before, from G3 firmware blocks to DVD-R drives that only operate at half their rated (OEM) speed due to contract. And where is the user uprising? Nowhere, because the PC makers do it too. Standard business practice.

Oh, and -how- has the US Legal system handled Microsoft? Exactly?

z10n
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Oct 2003

0

07/29, 04:47pm | report spam | close Reply |
What?

"Apple sold the Record companies on a CLOSED system."

Please. How do you know that? Do you have a copy of apple's deal with the record companies? No? Then stop it with the FUD. The music lables have gone on RECORD saying that they would prefer it if apple and other tech companies would get together with a standard and stop exculuding users from using any player they want. It's apple trying to lock users out, not Real, and certainly not the music labels.

"Right now apple has the only 'product' that does all of it with ease and style."

I get it now. You're an apple apologist. Why didn't you just come out and say so?

Why is everything apple does so full of "ease and style" and everyone else who makes things easy somehow "doesn't get it"? How hard is it to download a song from Real's store and double-click to put it on an iPod with Harmony? It takes all of 3 minutes. Not rocket science. But because some peice of the process is not handled by apple, suddenly it becomes too difficult for anyone to do? Give me a break.

Instead of making music easier by supporting other music stores, apple actual makes it harder, because any time I want to put a song NOT from iTMS on my iPod I have to go through 10 hoops to do it. It's easy to use, but only if I play the game by apple's rules. All because apple can't stand any competion. Well guess what? I'm a user. I want things to WORK. If it doesn't work, then I get pissed off. Currently, APPLE is the reason it doesn't work, not Real. Real wants it to work. The labels want it to work. USERS want it to work. It's only apple that's being a stubborn jackass about it.

Stephen.S.
Junior Member

Joined: Mar 2004

0

07/29, 04:54pm | report spam | close Reply |
RE: Re: This is sad

"Yeah, and when they update the iPod and the Real files stop working, who are the customers going to blame? Hint: it isn't Real. "
Apple has already made it clear that future updates could cause problems. It is up to Real, not Apple to keep their customers informed. If Real does not make a statement to the affect that future upgrades to the iPod by Apple may lead to issues, then Real is to blame, not Apple.

ltong
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2003

0

07/29, 05:30pm | report spam | close Reply |
Open Harmony

If Real is actually just looking out for us little guys (consumers) they'll make Harmony open source.

endrmtc
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2002

0

07/29, 05:41pm | report spam | close Reply |
no.

"It's Apple's hardware.."

No, it's not. It's MY hardware when I buy it, Apple can't dictate what other software companies write for the iPod. They can restrict who uses FairPlay, but if you reverse engineer it for compatability purposes, that is _expressly permitted_ under the DMCA. Not only is it legal, it's actually spelled out very specifically as acceptable use.

Apple is in the wrong on this one, sorry fanboys. If Real should be shut down for making software that puts its songs in the iPod, then so should ANY 3rd party application (anapod, etc.) that does the same thing. The fact that Real fakes the iPod into thinking it's a Fairplay DRM'd AAC file is irrelevant.

ltong
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2003

0

07/29, 06:12pm | report spam | close Reply |
Your iPod, Apple's SW

It's your hardware, but the software that makes it work is only guaranteed by the Acceptable Use Policy you almost undoubtably agreed to without reading. Your binded by the terms of that agreement, so if Apple wants to block certain software from running on your iPod, they have the right to do so.

endrmtc
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2002

0

07/29, 06:48pm | report spam | close Reply |
Apple's SW isn't involv

Where in the acceptable use policy does it say that I can't run (or write) my own software on my computer to interact with the iPod? Apple does not have the right to dictate what I do with my iPod, or what software I run on it.

There is no software "running on my iPod" in this case, Real is not editing the iPods software at all, they are simply uploading a file to it.

baederboy
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2004

0

07/29, 07:03pm | report spam | close Reply |
Quality of Real ACC file?

So, if Real does a really bad job of encoding the ACC files and then someone ends up transferring them to the iPod and they don't sound so good, who to do you think the customer is going to want to blame when they hear the resulting lousy encoded ACC file with Fairplay DRM on their iPod? Will they remember where they purchased the song from? Will they be mad at Apple? Will they call up Apple? If this happens even once for every hundred or thousand songs will Apple still come out ahead for fielding complaints based on Real's problems?
I thought that one feature of the ITMS songs was their superior encoding using the original masters in many cases and using just the exact right settings for a particular song. Thus, the ITMS song is usually much better than one you would rip off of your CD, especially using the encoder and defaults contained in iTunes. Isn't that why some people use Quicktime Pro to tweek the settings on the encoding?
Or do you think that ACC files encoded at a certain bit rate are exactly of the same quality no matter what the source material is and what the encoder quality and settings are???
Now, based on the Real video files that one sees on websites and the quicktime videos of the same content, who do you think would have spent the time and energy getting the best source material and the best encoding of the ACC files? Apple or Real? Enough said.

Captain Obvious
Professional Poster

Joined: Jul 2001

0

07/29, 07:05pm | report spam | close Reply |
Umm no

"No, it's not. It's MY hardware when I buy it, Apple can't dictate what other software companies write for the iPod."

Ha ha ha, you dumbass. Go take a class on patent law. Apple sure as h*** can dictate what software is allowed to interact with thier products.

Whatever, Apple should just take them to court of a few months to drain coffers then allow them to settle. Apple takes a huge chunk of the proffits until Real goes under in a couple years and the problem is solved.

ahmshaegar
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2003

0

07/29, 07:17pm | report spam | close Reply |
what about apple and PDF?

What about Apple and PDF? I'm sure as most of you know, you can create PDF files directly from Mac OS X. Apple made their own algorithms for creating PDF files, right? Isn't that something like what Real did? Implementing a FairPlay compatible AAC into their music download service? In any case, it'll be interesting to see how this turns out. It's sad these days, how a lot of money is made by lawyers and "intellectual property firms."

endrmtc
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2002

0

07/29, 07:20pm | report spam | close Reply |
who's the dumbass?

Apple can only tell me how I can use their hardware if my use is infringing on their patents or copywrite. They can't just say "we don't like that, you can't use it." What part of patent law allows the maker of a product to tell me what legal products I can and can't use with their device? Did Apple patent all software designed to upload songs to the iPod? What patent would I specifically be infringing upon?

It's quite clear that Real's efforts do not infringe on Apple's patents or copyrights. And it's also clear that it is legal under the DMCA, since reverse engineering for compatability is permitted (expressly)

When I buy a DVD player, the maker can not restrict me from playing DVDs from another company. If the DVDs were created illegally it would make them illegal to sell, but in this case Real has not broken the law.

Please explain what laws Real has broken by reverse engineering Apple's DRM for compatability purposes.

bfalchuk
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2003

0

07/29, 07:56pm | report spam | close Reply |
Real claims to have...

If you read Real's statement when it responded to pundets yesterday, they said that they HAVE NO REVERSE ENGINEERED ANYTHING. That's very odd of them to say as that would have been a very simple defense that is guarded by the law.

What they really did was create a workaround. It's not that they made a knock-off of FairPlay.

Whatever you think of Apple and whether they should open the iPod to other stores, you cannot argue with the business ethics lacking from Real's move. I would never buy from them anyway, but now I won't use their sh!tty media player ever. Too bad because all of my Simpsons episodes are Real Media Files (no, I didn't create them, or they'd be in QuickTime format).

Doug Brown
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2000

0

07/29, 08:18pm | report spam | close Reply |
PDF in Mac OS X

Adobe publishes the PDF specification for anyone who wants to make a program that creates or reads PDFs. That's a totally different ballgame than FairPlay.

http://partners.adobe.com/asn/tech/pdf/specifications.jsp

LouZer
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 2000

0

07/29, 09:44pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: who's the dumbass

When I buy a DVD player, the maker can not restrict me from playing DVDs from another company

Yet they can restrict you from playing DVDs from another country. How come one is OK and one isn't?

As for Real, you can't claim one way or the other that they are or aren't breaking the DCMA as you all have no idea what they've done or how they've done it. And Apple can't prevent you from doing anything with your iPod, but if you plan on using the iPod OS on it, then you technically are limited by the software license for that (just like your mac).

As for PDF, its an open specification. When Apple announced they were dumping the slow and congealed Display Postscript for PDF, many whined (figuring the DPS would give them perfect screen to output), but Apple wasn't going to be forking over the money to Adobe for the DPS licensing (like Next had to). And then when people finally realized that PDF was much better for transferring files (and, how great is it not having to buy Adobe Acrobat just to produce simple PDFs), it became a smart move. But that's neither here nor there.

macimmortal
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

07/29, 09:50pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: What?

"Why is everything apple does so full of "ease and style" and everyone else who makes things easy somehow "doesn't get it"?"

Because it is so. Get your head out of your PC software user manual and enjoy the Mac ease of use.

"How hard is it to download a song from Real's store and double-click to put it on an iPod with Harmony?"

Probably harder than single clicking on "BUY SONG" and connecting my iPod to my Mac...end of story.

"It's only apple that's being a stubborn jackass about it."

Why don't you take over the company for them. I'm sure you could do a better job of running it.

ender
Junior Member

Joined: Mar 1999

0

07/29, 10:07pm | report spam | close Reply |
Remember Connectix VGS?

Anyone remember several years ago when Connectix released Virtual Game Station, a PlayStation emulator for the Mac? Sony filed a lawsuit, but lost an opening round attempt at an injunction because they did not have a strong enough case. In the end Sony ended up just buying out Connectix's interest in the product because it was cheaper than persuing further legal action (that they may well have lost!).

The situation is very similar. Sony makes little if any money on the hardware sales (like iTMS music sales) as a lead into making money from game sales (the iPod). Connectix (Real) made something to take the place of the loss leader hardware (songs) and Sony (Apple) had a fit, but in the end could not build a stong enough legal case to stop Connectix (Real). And now Real has the added advantage of the DMCA which appears to expressly allow reverse engineering for the purpose of interoperability.

I'm a big Apple fan, but even still, they can't always have their cake and eat it, too.

CarpetFluff
Mac Enthusiast

Joined: Dec 2001

0

07/30, 03:23am | report spam | close Reply |
Sad

I think the main thing here is that everyone is seeing Apple and the iPod as an ongoing monopoly. Sure right now they have a 70% market share but other manufacturers were simply caught with their pants down.

While it's not a good thing for manufacturers to dictate what a customer can or can't do with their purchase. I hardly think that customers feel oppressed and restricted by the choices available to them with the iPod at the moment as online music stores are in their infancy. Once the other big players muscle their way into the market then things will get a lot tougher for Apple and they know this.

My feelings are that Real has nothing to offer in exchange for trying to crowbar their music onto iPods, they are not doing it to champion the consumer, they are simply trying to make money and stay relevant.

BasketofPuppies
Professional Poster

Joined: Jan 2003

0

07/30, 05:36am | report spam | close Reply |
Apple's Real Problem

Ignoring potential legal issues, Apple's main beef with the Real Music Store and Harmony is that they break its (Apple's) business model.

The iTunes Music Store is not only a loss leader to sell iPods and AirPort Express Base Stations, it also locks consumers into buying all future portable music players and music streaming-capable wireless networking products from Apple. (RealNetworks' music store is a loss leader to get consumers to subscribe to RealRhapsody, its on-demand streaming music service.)

RealNetworks' Harmony breaks Apple's business model. Suddenly, without any major effort on the parts of consumers, it's possible to buy digital music that plays on the iPod, AirPort Express and competing portable music players and wireless networking music streaming hardware.

Meaning iPod and AirPort Express owners aren't forced into replacing old Apple hardware with new Apple hardware when they upgrade.

brkn
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jun 2003

0

07/30, 09:07am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: who's the dumbass 1

When I buy a DVD player, the maker can not restrict me from playing DVDs from another company

Yet they can restrict you from playing DVDs from another country. How come one is OK and one isn't?

No, they can't - that's a technical measure, not a legal measure. Down here in Australia, the salespeople unlock the region coding in the store for you, and if I remember correctly, in New Zealand, region coding is illegal (anti-competitive).

Back on topic, from what I gather, Real is just encoding their songs in a way that the iPod can understand. Unless they are doing so with Apple trade secrets, or by infringing on Apple patents, this is perfectly legal, and IMO perfectly ethical too. Real is basically uploading a file to the iPod's disk, the same way programs like XPlay for the PC do, or in a wider scope, the same way I do when the iPod's recognised as a Firewire drive on my Mac. If the iPod software wants to interpret that file in a certain way (i.e. by recognising it as a song, and displaying and playing it in the iPod user interface), then that's up to the iPod software. However Apple can in no way dictate what sort of files I can copy to my own iPod.

z10n
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Oct 2003

0

07/30, 09:30am | report spam | close Reply |
Acceptable Use

"It's your hardware, but the software that makes it work is only guaranteed by the Acceptable Use Policy you almost undoubtably agreed to without reading. Your binded by the terms of that agreement..."

(A) Acceptable Use Policies (AUP) and End User Licence Agreements (EULA) are not legally binding contracts- they are typically loads of c*** created solely to protect the company from lawsuits. For example, AUPs only perscribe what actions a service provider might take as a result of you using their service in an unsupported way. The only thing a provider can do if they don't like what you are doing with their service is terminate your access to the service. That's it. What are you suggesting apple do? Terminate my access to iTMS because I loaded songs onto my iPod from somewhere other then iTMS? For one, that would piss people off. For two, that would give Real a huge advantage because then I could only buy songs from Real. How stupid would that be of apple to do?

(B) Last I checked, using iTMS was not a requirement of buying an iPod. You don't even need iTunes to use an iPod, though obviously it's recommended. Before iTunes came out for windows, there were like three programs that worked with the iPod. The point is, apple might conceptually tie iTunes to the iPod, but there is no reason in the world a person can't choose a different piece of software. Apple might void my warrenty, they can terminate relations with me, etc. But they can not legally stop me from doing anything I want with my iPod.

(C) The reason people are confused about about what consitutes a contract and what doesn't is becuase of the introduction of DRM, which is being used primarily not to stop piracy but to technologically enforce what the company deams acceptable. The DMCA was pushed through by companies because it gives them sweeping rights over control of a product after it's been purchased, controls which never existed for physical (real world) products. This is why the DMCA is such a bad law. If a company had total control over their products, then for one, people wouldn't own anything they actual bought. For two, they could easily lock people into schemes where they have to pay over and over again for the right to use something. And finally, it kills competition because then no 3rd party can offer services which work with the product. How great has it been now that cars have been upgraded with computers such that a 3rd party dealer can't fix a car? Less competition means more monopolies, means higher prices, and generally means bad things for a consumer.

z10n
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Oct 2003

0

07/30, 09:44am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Apple's Real Prob

"Meaning iPod and AirPort Express owners aren't forced into replacing old Apple hardware with new Apple hardware when they upgrade."

This is a Good Thing (TM). Why? Because then, (gasp) apple has to actually innovate to compete! What a novel concept! Instead of locking users down to gain marketshare, they actually have to improve their products. This is the whole essence of the way a free market economy should work.

Apple has always produced innovative, cutting edge products. Isn't it better that apple stay innovative and compete with other companies then close everything off and limit their own potential? Is apple actually afraid that they won't be able to stay competitive? I find that hard to believe.

ciphun
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2000

0

07/30, 09:50am | report spam | close Reply |
baederboy

have you noticed that everyone has been typing the file format correctly as AAC and that no one has an idea what you mean by ACC?

z10n
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Oct 2003

0

07/30, 10:02am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: What

Why is everything apple does so full of "ease and style" and everyone else who makes things easy somehow "doesn't get it"?"

Because it is so. Get your head out of your PC software user manual and enjoy the Mac ease of use.

I've own several macs, including my current G4 running Panther. Repeatedly saying that apple always makes things easier then everyone else does not make it so. Is it easy for me to get my Palm to sync with iCal when iCal repeatedly duplicates appointments? Is it easy for me to use dotMac when dotMac cripples me into not being able to use even the most simple cgi script? Are you even aware that OS X is a version of unix? That unix has a command prompt?

This is 2004. Windows is easy to use. It might have viruses, popups, spyware, and poor security, but the GUI itself is easy to use. Apple no longer has ease of use as a major deciding factor as why the apple way is better. Apple needs to start working on new reasons why people should choose their software other then ease of use, because obviously if that were enough, then macs would be in much more use by people then they currently are.

How hard is it to download a song from Real's store and double-click to put it on an iPod with Harmony?

Probably harder than single clicking on "BUY SONG" and connecting my iPod to my Mac...end of story.

You don't even know, do you? Once again, you assume the apple way is better without even looking to see how the other ways work. Irrational. "End of story" simply tells me you're biggoted and not willing to look at anything other then your own opinion. In that case, I'll part company. It's not interesting to discuss something with someone who cannot see things from another point of view.

It's only apple that's being a stubborn jackass about it.

Why don't you take over the company for them. I'm sure you could do a better job of running it.

Just because I have a problem with what apple is doing does not mean I'm a better CEO or have any interest in running apple. But neither does that make my criticism invalid. You are just like the people that repeatedly use the phrase "switch to windows if you don't like the mac". Switching to windows simply isn't an opinion for most people, and those who make that argument know it. Why can't people just admit that apple, like any other company, makes mistakes?

koolkid1976
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2003

0

07/30, 10:03am | report spam | close Reply |
Has Anyone Tried it?

How does it work?

msconvert
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2002

0

07/30, 11:18am | report spam | close Reply |
Re:Re: What

Ok since I am the original poster you quoted I'll fill in the gaps.

You say the Windows GUI is easy to use as OSX. I will agree if you mean opening and closing windows and navigating through folders, yes they are basically the same. But, and this is a BIG BUT, the Software that is written for windows sucks. All you have to do is look at iTunes and all the other windows music database software to see my point. Ease of use is designed into the layout of the app window and the most used features are prominent and unincumbered. Searching for music is nearly instant and flexible. Playing, sorting making playlists is just one click away.

Once again, it is the whole package deal that you somehow don't get. Just about every mac program that I use is at this level of design - and I don't mean look or style, I me thought out intentional design. Something that is lacking in most windows programs - except maybe powerpoint and even that is very clumsy.

You say "Why is everything apple does so full of "ease and style" and everyone else who makes things easy somehow "doesn't get it"?"

Who are the others that are making things easy? Sony? Real? Napster? WHO?!! Nobody has a single click system that buys, stores and syncs with a music player! It really is that simple. It seems apparent to me that you have not even used iTMS to buy music and stick on your iPod. If you had, then you would see how easy simple it is and how stupid and cumbersome every other option is.

Just because apple has made their system the "easiest" doesn't imply that apple had anything to do with making it difficult for everyone else. Everyone else has made it difficult for themselves by not thinking the music delivery system through. Real only delivers content - that business model is dead. They didn't see the big picture. Apple has.

Music stores are dying. In 7-10 years everything will be downloaded. I may even suggest that it will be fully lossless and may even be at DVD audio quality. But the point is Apple has a complete system NOW that replaces the antiquated, I-heard-it-on-the-radio-so-I-am-going-to-a-music-store-to-buy-an-album method that has dominated since the 1950's. The sooner others see that, the better we all will be.

Sony and their Connect/Walkman/ATRAC system is the closest competitor to the Apple product. the only advantage has right now is that Sony actually owns the content it sells and Apple has to negotiate new contracts with ALL of the record companies every few years.

You say the record companies don't want DRM and apple didn't negotiate a closed system? What are you smoking?

Apple's original iPod had NO DRM! Apple and more importantly Jobs early on said DRM will hinder downloaded music sales. The record companies are clearly the source of DRM and that is why apple had to go buy/license Fai

koolkid1976
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2003

0

07/30, 12:58pm | report spam | close Reply |
reply to z10n

"Apple no longer has ease of use as a major deciding factor as why the apple way is better"

Are we talking about the OS here or Apple products in general? If we are talking about Apple products, go read the reviews for iPhoto, iTunes, iPod, Airport Express, and see what the deciding factor is as to why the apple way is better. Look at the iPod. Is it cheaper, has more storage, has more features, has more batter life than the other players out there? The answer is "no." What then is the deciding factor? Ease of use.

If you are talking about the OS. Ease of use was touted by the Mac all the time because that's basically all it had over windows. Windows is easy to use now, but it still getting outpaced by OS X in terms of security and technology.

marzetta7
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Dec 2003

0

07/30, 02:51pm | report spam | close Reply |
Another RE: to z10n

I've own several macs, including my current G4 running Panther. Repeatedly saying that apple always makes things easier then everyone else does not make it so. Is it easy for me to get my Palm to sync with iCal when iCal repeatedly duplicates appointments? Is it easy for me to use dotMac when dotMac cripples me into not being able to use even the most simple cgi script? Are you even aware that OS X is a version of unix? That unix has a command prompt?

I think your directing this question to the wrong crowd. I believe there was a study that found that most persons owning a macintosh have higer educational levels and more extensive careers than their windows counterparts. I think you ought to be directing this question to the millions of clueless windows users because I know for a fact that the majority of them have no idea about the macintosh being a Unix based system. And I guarantee you that mac users have a more in depth knowledge of the Microsoft OS than their window counterparts have of the Mac OS. h***, as a mac user, how can one not help but run into a Microsoft OS, their shotty software is everywhere in the business world, costing companies millions of dollars in upkeep from malware, viruses, etc. You talk of mac users of not knowing the other side of the equation, give me a break dude, and stop smoking crack. I work with Windows-based systems as an occupation, and I'll take Mac OSX over any Mirosoft OS anyday simply for security, EASE OF USE, and innovation.

I think you and a lot of people posting here miss the point of all this. Apple does innovate. Always have, always will. You join the countless ranks of those who hope to have others profit on account of Apple's innovation. Case in point, the iPod and Apple's iTunes. h*** this whole system hasn't even been out very long and already you have greedy companies like REAL and people like you who support them, trying to steal their piece of the pie. That's right, there's the key word, steal. Because that's all REAL is trying to do here. They give you fancy words like "reverse-engineered" to justify their feeble attempt at essentially what is a hack. And it's good to see that you and your counterpart endmtcr or whatever the heck his/her name is are experts in the subject of DMCA, EULA's, and AUP's. Or are you just talking out of your one good eye? Your red-eye that is.

And I'm not saying Apple is infallible, they do make mistakes. Many mistakes, as history has shown. But the question I pose is this, why are people attacking Apple here when all they're doing is protecting their own innovation? Newsflash folks, every business does this, it's just plain good business practice! I guarantee if Microsoft, Sony, or any other company for that matter had this done to them, they'd be on REAL's case just as fast. Kudos to Apple, I hope they drive a stake through REAL's black heart and I hope to have REAL never awaken again with their crappy

endrmtc
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2002

0

07/30, 05:12pm | report spam | close Reply |
blah blah blah

Sigh... Please explain what Real is stealing from Apple. iTunes used to work with other MP3 players before the iPod came out, was Apple "stealing" something from them? No, they are simply trying to interoperate. Also, explain how Real working with the iPod is attacking Apple's innovation. Is Apple inovating by locking the iPod down and not allowing other software to interact with it? You do understand that the only thing Real's software is doing is uploading a file on to the iPod, right? There is nothing that says I have to use my iPod with iTunes, or the store, and Apple doesn't have the right to tell me (or Real) what software I use to upload songs to it. That's the core of this arguement: my right to use whatever software I want to upload a song to my iPod. I don't see anything in the EULA that requires that I use iTunes.

You equating reverse engineering with stealing and callng it a "fancy word" just shows how completely ignorant you are. Reverse engineering is permitted by law, expressly. But I guess to you it's just a big fancy word used by "hackers" to "steal" things. Apple engages in reverse engineering for dozens of things, but of course you don't have a problem with that.

People are attacking Apple for the same reason that they attack AOL and MSN when they try to lock out other chat clients. Except in this case it's even worse because the iPod is a piece of hardware that its owners (people who buy them, you and me) have every right to money with as they see fit.

Keep drinking the kool-aid. Apple is wrong here, legally and ethically. The only reason people are defending them is because it's Apple, not Microsoft, Sony, AOL, or anyone else. Microsoft and Sony do this same thing all the time, and are vilified for it almost universally.

msconvert
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2002

0

07/31, 02:47am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Blah Blah Blah

What they are stealing is the resources and the talent that it took to make the first sucessful music purchasing/listening system work. They are biggy backing their c*** software on to the system that Apple has made to be seamless. They have forced users to use an external interface that make the process of buying music orgainizing it in iTunes and putting it on the iPod. They are actually making the process that Apple developed more complicated and difficult to use and much more like napster/rio windows BS.

This is the reason that I don't think that the Real/Harmony deal is really that big of a deal after all. It is not going to be worth even $.30 or $.50 more (if Apple decided to raise the prices) to use Reals POS software and the extra hasle of buying/converting it/adding it to iTunes (adding all of the ID3 tags)/putting it on the iPod. Granted Real may have the song that you want (and it might be worth buying one or two tracks from them) but Apple will get the contract soon enough for the track and I can wait.

Anybodies system that is an afterthought to Apples system will be so much more cumbersome that iPod users will prefer to use iTMS for their download purchases. Once the music catalogs become equivalent, this Harmony technology is all going to be a useless.

BTW, reverse engineering is not legal in some situations so we will have to see what the courts decide. It depends on how it was done and what information they had to extract from the iPod OS (and quicktime) and what was really found in 'public domain'. You don't know any more than the "apple appologist" so hold your legal definitions to yourself.

Also, if you do read any of Apples ULAs, you will see that they don't have to support you or your hardware if you modify or use it in a way that is not agreed upon. Try getting warrenty work done on a Mac with yellowdog linux installed on it. It won't happen. Same thing here. If you don't stick to their policies they don't have to warrenty anything because you broke the agreement.

z10n
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Oct 2003

0

08/02, 06:05pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Blah

What they are stealing is the resources and the talent that it took to make the first sucessful music purchasing/listening system work.

For the last time, Real is not stealing/hacking anything. Real is simply providing an alternative to iTMS which works with your iPod. You might hate Real for all they are worth, their software might be the worst c*** you've ever used, but regardless, Real has a right to compete with apple for music downloads. The only way they were going to be able to compete is to find a way to get their songs on the iPod, which is what they have done.

Nobody is forced to use Real's store. Nobody has to give up iTunes or iTMS. If you hate Real, you can go on hating Real. Real is simply providing a choice, that's all.

They are piggy backing their c*** software on to the system that Apple has made to be seamless.

Then apple should have not problem with their actions, should they not? If Real sucks so much, nobody will bother with them anyway. People will continue to use iTMS because iTMS rules and they enjoy the seamlessness and ease of use. What exactly does apple have to fear from Real's actions? Nothing. iTMS kicks the c*** out of Real's store. So why are people getting so upset? The majority of users will still use iTMS, and those who want an alternative will go with Real. Apple will be forced to innovate to keep iTMS better then Real's store. iTunes gets better, and users have more choice. Everyone wins.

bigpoppa206
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jun 2003

0

08/28, 12:06am | report spam | close Reply |
Actually blah, you are

full of it. Read what Thomas Mucha writes:

"Real is waging a grassroots battle where there is no grass. Apple is not Microsoft (MSFT). There is no sense of outrage among consumers. While it's tempting to cast Steve Jobs as a scheming, egomaniacal villain, the fact is that most people love Apple and its hip products. And shameless price cutting, even if it's just a short-term sales promotion, feels like the last refuge of a failed marketing strategy. It does nothing to enhance the company's prickly brand image, something that Real needs to improve as digital music gradually moves into the mainstream. "At the end of the day, starting a price war is going to bite RealNetworks on the a**," Peacock predicts. "Why would you want to Wal-Mart (WMT) your brand?""

Show More Comments

Login Here

toggle

Network Headlines

05/26	Apple updates iOS 5.1.1 release for...
05/25	Sotheby to auction Jobs Atari memo,...
05/25	Apple hiring new chip engineers for...
05/25	Third-gen iPad coming to Philippines...
05/25	Apple to integrate Baidu search into...

Show All

05/27	Manufacturing problems delay blue Samsung...
05/25	Sotheby to auction Jobs Atari memo,...
05/25	Apple to integrate Baidu search into...
05/25	Google picks up webOS Enyo team, Open...
05/24	Apple submits surprise optical stylus...

Show All

05/25	Sotheby to auction Jobs Atari memo,...
05/23	Google launches redesigned Search app...
05/22	Leaked next-gen iPod touch part hints...
05/22	Hulu Plus updates with iPad Retina...
05/22	TiVo Stream to push TV to iPhones,...

Show All

03/02	Save $330 on refurb. 15.4-inch, 2.4GHz...
03/01	Pre-owned 8GB iPod touch 2G, drops...
02/29	$150 off Nikon Coolpix S80 Compact...
02/28	Plantronics BackBeat 903 Bluetooth...
02/27	Refurb. Seagate 1.5TB GoFlex Portable...

Show All

toggle

Apple investigating DMCA violations by Real's Harmony

updated 08:45 am EDT, Thu July 29, 2004

Apple on Real\'s Harmony

Related Articles

Recent Articles

HAHAHAHAHAHA

Funeral date set?

Link please?

Not a Real supporter...

Sad

still don't get it

Back to the Good Ole Days

Situation-

Think of it this way...

should have licensed

Different Thinking?

Think about it

Apple must protect Apple

Easy workaround

It's like a car maker.

um, you people are wacky.

re: should have licensed

Morons

Apple is right!

apple shouldn't help rea

Finishing quote...

This is Sad

Re: This is Sad

Go, Apple!

Have to sue

Re: should have licensed

Re: comparison to Ford

Who said anything about..

Re: Morons

Lighten up -

The law is the law

AAC

Unfortunate

right metaphor

Re: right metaphon

Re: unfortunate

Get REAL!

Yeah, look at the example

Look

Re:

Re:

It's Apple's hardware..

What?

RE: Re: This is sad

Open Harmony

no.

Your iPod, Apple's SW

Apple's SW isn't involv

Quality of Real ACC file?

Umm no

what about apple and PDF?

who's the dumbass?

Real claims to have...

PDF in Mac OS X

Re: who's the dumbass

Re: What?

Remember Connectix VGS?

Sad

Apple's Real Problem

Re: who's the dumbass 1

Acceptable Use

Re: Apple's Real Prob

baederboy

Re: What

Has Anyone Tried it?

Re:Re: What

reply to z10n

Another RE: to z10n

blah blah blah

Re: Blah Blah Blah

Re: Blah

Actually blah, you are

Login Here

Register for our weekly email newsletter:

Connect tools: