Real Music Store is now iPod compatible

Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV edited January 2014
http://news.com.com/2100-1027_3-5282063.html



Time will tell if this gives Real's music store any steam, but in the meantime doesn't this make the iPod the only portable player compatible with Real's Music Store? (not Real Rhapsody)



They're just passing through the raw AAC stream into an iPod/FairPlay compatible container.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 46
    voxappsvoxapps Posts: 236member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Eugene

    doesn't this make the iPod the only portable player compatible with Real's Music Store?



    According to the N.Y. Times, Real's new "Harmony" software will also be compatible with "...Creative, Rio, Samsung and others."
  • Reply 2 of 46
    ipodandimacipodandimac Posts: 3,273member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Eugene

    http://news.com.com/2100-1027_3-5282063.html



    Time will tell if this gives Real's music store any steam, but in the meantime doesn't this make the iPod the only portable player compatible with Real's Music Store? (not Real Rhapsody)



    They're just passing through the raw AAC stream into an iPod/FairPlay compatible container.




    Lawsuit?
  • Reply 3 of 46
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ipodandimac

    Lawsuit?





    Can we all say "cease and desist"



    Dear Real Guys:





    It has come to my attention that you have made an unauthorized use of my copyrighted work entitled [name of work] (the "Work") in the preparation of a work derived therefrom. I have reserved all rights in the Work, first published in [date], [and have registered copyright therein]. Your work entitled [name of infringing work] is essentially identical to the Work and clearly used the Work as its basis. [Give a few examples that illustrate direct copying.]





    As you neither asked for nor received permission to use the Work as the basis for [name of infringing work] nor to make or distribute copies, including electronic copies, of same, I believe you have willfully infringed my rights under 17 U.S.C. Section 101 et seq. and could be liable for statutory damages as high as $150,000 as set forth in Section 504(c)(2) therein.





    I demand that you immediately cease the use and distribution of all infringing works derived from the Work, and all copies, including electronic copies, of same, that you deliver to me, if applicable, all unused, undistributed copies of same, or destroy such copies immediately and that you desist from this or any other infringement of my rights in the future. If I have not received an affirmative response from you by [date give them about 2 weeks] indicating that you have fully complied with these requirements, I shall take further action against you.





    Very truly yours,





    Steve J.





    (sample form from: http://www.utsystem.edu/ogc/intellec...ract/cease.htm)
  • Reply 4 of 46
    crazychestercrazychester Posts: 1,339member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by TednDi

    Can we all say "cease and desist"



    Dear Real Guys:





    It has come to my attention that you have made an unauthorized use of my copyrighted work entitled [name of work] (the "Work") in the preparation of a work derived therefrom. I have reserved all rights in the Work, first published in [date], [and have registered copyright therein]. Your work entitled [name of infringing work] is essentially identical to the Work and clearly used the Work as its basis. [Give a few examples that illustrate direct copying.]







    This isn't about copyright is it? I assume Real already has the right to distribute the material (otherwise it would be the labels suing wouldn't it, not Apple).



    It's about licensing isn't it? Please somebody tell me they haven't blown it again. Is this the same dude who was saying a few weeks back that they'd approached Apple to license Fairplay but Steve wasn't returning their calls?



    Still the music wasn't making much money anyway. At least this will still sell iPods.
  • Reply 5 of 46
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    sorry, you are right.



    Insert "apple proprietary technology and patented material" in lieu of copyright.
  • Reply 6 of 46
    buonrottobuonrotto Posts: 6,368member
    The issue is the license agreement with the iPod and with iTunes. Real reverse-engineered a solution but, technically speaking, users of the iPod and iTunes are not entitled to use that solution as per the agreement they made when they first used either product. Real might get a free pass because they're not the user per se. I'm not totally up on my legaleze so I might be wrong.



    Apple has to tread carefully here. If they try to pull a FairPlay/iTunes/iPod update that breaks Real's access to the iPod, then they could be abusing their (near?) monopoly of the online music service and player markets. Apple has to have set up a good IP case beforehand, or else I don't see how a reverse engineered solution can be stopped.
  • Reply 7 of 46
    chris cuillachris cuilla Posts: 4,825member
    Reading the article on this, I'm not sure what Apple would have to sue over. And I am also not sure how this will affect Apple long term.



    In the short term it actually looks good. But it could have some dire consequences longer term.



    Bottom line is that they don't appear to be violating anything. All they are doing is finding a way to put their DRM protected stuff on an iPod.



    The only thing this can do is make the Real music store more appealing to consumers...simply because they have figured out a clever way to make their music play on the most popular music player (as well as other music players). But the economic issue still remains the same. There is not money to be made selling the music (execept for the music companies of course). So Real is working hard to try and get more customers for a money losing business.



    Color me puzzled.
  • Reply 8 of 46
    jmoneyjmoney Posts: 133member
    I think Apple should have sold the technology to Real instead of having them reverse engineer.. If they did that type of stuff more often, we might be more than 4% of the market share!!
  • Reply 9 of 46
    banchobancho Posts: 1,517member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by JMoney

    I think Apple should have sold the technology to Real instead of having them reverse engineer.. If they did that type of stuff more often, we might be more than 4% of the market share!!



    Apple's share of the online music market is a good deal more than 4%.
  • Reply 10 of 46
    chris cuillachris cuilla Posts: 4,825member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by JMoney

    I think Apple should have sold the technology to Real instead of having them reverse engineer.. If they did that type of stuff more often, we might be more than 4% of the market share!!



    I'm not sure that Real DID reverse engineer things. What they appear to have done is found a way to deploy THEIR DRM protected music files to an iPod...without FairPlay.



    I don't really know how this affects Apple right now. I think it could help short term but hurt long term. Not sure yet. Haven't thought it through completely. But it doesn't appear to be anything illegal that Real is doing...or anything Apple can sue over.
  • Reply 11 of 46
    jmoneyjmoney Posts: 133member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Bancho

    Apple's share of the online music market is a good deal more than 4%.



    Right, I wasn't referring to the music market.. Apple's got way more than that.. I was referring to the computer market. I think if Apple licensed out (call it selling out if you may) then there would be quite a few more mac users out there..
  • Reply 12 of 46
    banchobancho Posts: 1,517member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by JMoney

    Right, I wasn't referring to the music market.. Apple's got way more than that.. I was referring to the computer market. I think if Apple licensed out (call it selling out if you may) then there would be quite a few more mac users out there..



    What could they license to help marketshare? The OS? That's (part of) what had put them in such bad shape in the first place. Market share is tricky anyhow. Apple's marketshare can grow *but* if PC marketshare grows faster then it appears Apple's is shrinking even if they are gaining users and making money.
  • Reply 13 of 46
    What he means is that it can't hurt if Apple spends more time licencing their technologies (and making money off that) instead of taking companies to court (and losing money and time).
  • Reply 14 of 46
    chris cuillachris cuilla Posts: 4,825member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by monkeyastronaut

    What he means is that it can't hurt if Apple spends more time licencing their technologies (and making money off that) instead of taking companies to court (and losing money and time).



    That's understood...but it is also an assumption that might not be valid.



    I, for one, hope (and think) that Apple will eventually license FairPlay...but perhaps the conditions are not yet right for them to do so.



    But what do I know.
  • Reply 15 of 46
    dave k.dave k. Posts: 1,306member
    Questions...



    How does REAL plan to sync its music store with the iPod? Couldn't Apple invoke the DMCA based on how REAL will copy the files over to the iPod?



    How is any kind of reverse engineering not illegal? Apple went after PlayFair over DMCA, how is this different?



    Microsoft encrypts everything on its XBOX hard drive so that way if a group tried to install Linux on the hard drive they would be breaking DMCA by circumventing Microsoft's encryption scheme. Couldn't Apple do the same thing (if not done already)?



    Thanks



    Dave
  • Reply 16 of 46
    banchobancho Posts: 1,517member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by monkeyastronaut

    What he means is that it can't hurt if Apple spends more time licencing their technologies (and making money off that) instead of taking companies to court (and losing money and time).



    I understood quite clearly and asked for an example.
  • Reply 17 of 46
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Dave K.

    Questions...



    How does REAL plan to sync its music store with the iPod? Couldn't Apple invoke the DMCA based on how REAL will copy the files over to the iPod?



    How is any kind of reverse engineering not illegal? Apple went after PlayFair over DMCA, how is this different?




    How can Apple invoke the DMCA on Real for its method of copying files over to the iPod? RealPlayer + a plugin copies files to my iPod just fine. It's a freakin' HDD...



    The difference with PlayFair is that it deals with the iTMS. It is a utility that fetches your iTMS keys and strips them from the files you bought per the agreement. With the Real technology, I assume they get around all of this since they claim not to have used any code that belongs to Apple (which I assume includes copying a user's existing keys.)
  • Reply 18 of 46
    rolandgrolandg Posts: 632member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Eugene

    How can Apple invoke the DMCA on Real for its method of copying files over to the iPod? RealPlayer + a plugin copies files to my iPod just fine. It's a freakin' HDD...



    Except for the fact that in order to be "playable" on the iPod, the files must be put into the hidden directory structures.



    I don't know much about what these structures are like (hanven't played with the right toolz yet) and how playlists, autosync and this sort of stuff is handeled but Real must have taken that into account. There, Apple IP might potentially be involved.



    Quote:

    Originally posted by Eugene

    The difference with PlayFair is that it deals with the iTMS. It is a utility that fetches your iTMS keys and strips them from the files you bought per the agreement. With the Real technology, I assume they get around all of this since they claim not to have used any code that belongs to Apple (which I assume includes copying a user's existing keys.)



    That is true, but I don't think that Real would allow their music to be transcoded to non DRM'ed MP3 or ACC-files. DRM'ed files would have to be in a FairPlay-container thus requiering some sort authentication key. It's like the opposite of PlayFair: The latter got rid of the DRM-container, the former one presumably tries to put the tracks into one.



    On the other hand, why not? The music that is once on your iPod is not supposed to be transfered off of it ever again. But this would leave open the questions for the software they use for transfering the files and compatility with iTunes's autosync.
  • Reply 19 of 46
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member




    What's notable:

    RealMS files are encoded at 192 kbps.

    Harmony mimics FairPlay v1.

    Purchased By: RN_ProtectediPodUser



    Getting RealPlayer 10.5 to talk with my iPod was fairly painless. RealPlayer 10.0 was actually already capable of that. All I had to do was download the new beta, add the device, purchase a song and add it to the iPod. The raw AAC is taken from the .rax and inserted into an .m4p file.



    I was able to play the music fine on a 3G iPod but I had no luck with my 2G. When it tried to play the file, it would bring up the "Now Playing" window and then immediately jump to the next song.
  • Reply 20 of 46
    dfilerdfiler Posts: 3,420member
    Why would apple sue? This just makes the iPod more appealing to consumers. Apple makes their money off the iPod not the iTMS.



    Also, there wasn't any reverse engineering going on here. What real has done is figure out how to make the iPod play an additional format of music. They haven't duplicated functionality, they've added functionality. Nearly every closed platform market on the planet has third party accessories... Everything from cars to game console systems.
Sign In or Register to comment.