Apple heated over Real's Harmony

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 96
    GO STEVE!!
  • Reply 42 of 96
    rolandgrolandg Posts: 632member
    I sure hope that Apple finds another solution to the REAL issue than suing or revising the iPod software so it becomes incompatible!



    This would be exactly what Microsoft (and its unalledged affiliates like SCO) would do.



    Isn't Apple the company the always empasizes the importance of open standards?



    On the other hand I do understand that Apple is not too pleased that after revoking a partnership with Real or the licensing of their format they go ahead and reverse-engineer it. This rather leads to the question whether carrying you nose above your head (I can recall that Apple stated that they would not open up because of their market position) and thus refusing to license FairPlay was that great a decision.



    It really is a tough call, giving in to the bullying and finally licensing FairPlay before Real does or being stubborn and taking the issue to court.



    I think they should swallow their pride and open the iPod platform. It will still ship with iTunes which is - in addition to the iTMS's fair licensing scheme - their chance to differentiate themselves form the competition. Because, after all, digital music files are too generic in nature to really constitute a closed market in the long-term without creating artificial boundaries (e.g. propriatory DRM-systems).



    The should desist from adopting "the tactics and ethics of a" monopolist to force customers into a certain direction. It would be better open the platform, keep pushing open standards and have a very good public image because of it.



    Think a minute about SAMBA that enables your Mac to share files with the Windows world via the SMB protocol. This was achieved by reverse engineering, too, because MS did not open the protocol. Some features are still unsupported. The EU wants to even force MS to open it up to the competition.



    Just imagine, MS establishes a new (or slightly revised) SMB-like protocol breaking Mac/Win-sharing. Would you be very pleased? I think not! Do you now want Apple to adopt the same tactics? I don't!



    P.S.: The guys stating that you "own" your hardware seem to forget that most hardware is basically just hardwired software...
  • Reply 43 of 96
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    ok, my $.36



    The issue here is ownership vs. licensing. To own you exert domination and control over the product. Ie. a car.



    This is the hardware.



    Licensing is how one aquires the ability to use software. You don't own the software you license it from the manufacturer. With your money come the right to use the software within the guidelines of the manufacturers instructions. Read some of these kookie licenses that you just click "ok" with. They are really rather draconian.



    You don't own the right to drive the car willy nilly without first obtaining a drivers license. And in many places driving that car off road is illegal except upon your own property.



    Now with the ipod. yes you bought it. yes you can break it if you want. Yes you can modifiy it.



    No you can't mess with the software or try your own software on the apple road without permission. Real here has done just that taken the apple drivers license and said ok fine you can now drive anywher you want with your ipod. and its AAC files.



    I don't think that is gonna fly. Especially if they use the words ipod or itunes or apple in their advertising.



    I think the "senior smackdown" will happen REAL soon!
  • Reply 44 of 96
    andersanders Posts: 6,523member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by TednDi

    ok, my $.36



    The issue here is ownership vs. licensing. To own you exert domination and control over the product. Ie. a car.



    This is the hardware.



    Licensing is how one aquires the ability to use software. You don't own the software you license it from the manufacturer. With your money come the right to use the software within the guidelines of the manufacturers instructions. Read some of these kookie licenses that you just click "ok" with. They are really rather draconian.



    You don't own the right to drive the car willy nilly without first obtaining a drivers license. And in many places driving that car off road is illegal except upon your own property.



    Now with the ipod. yes you bought it. yes you can break it if you want. Yes you can modifiy it.



    No you can't mess with the software or try your own software on the apple road without permission. Real here has done just that taken the apple drivers license and said ok fine you can now drive anywher you want with your ipod. and its AAC files.



    I don't think that is gonna fly. Especially if they use the words ipod or itunes or apple in their advertising.



    I think the "senior smackdown" will happen REAL soon!




    Real doesn´t tamper with Apple software.
  • Reply 45 of 96
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    Tell that to the judge.



    And describe how by overriding apples software on the ipod you can cram your stuff onto it.



    Oh and mind you on the box for the ipod (hardware) is a little printed phrase:



    "Use is subject to acceptance of included software license"



    The software license begins with:



    Please read this software license agreement carefully before using the software. By using the software, you are to be bound by the terms of this license. If you don not agree to the terms of this license, do not use the applicable software and (if applicable) return the apple product to the place where you obtained it for a refund.





    To continue:



    Apple goes on in the license to say:



    You may not copy, decompile, reverse engineer, disassemble, attempt to derive the source code of, modify, or create derivitive works of the Apple Software or any part thereof. Any attempt to do so is a violation of the rights of Apple and its licensors of the Apple software. If you breach this restriction you may be subject to prosecution and damages.





    So, you own the hardware as long as you agree to the restrictive terms (not uncommon in property law (called covenants)) which transfer with the ownership. The right you give up is when you buy the product is that you are bound to the software license. If you want that right then you will have to buy the software in it's entirety from apple this gives you ALL rights to the product. Apple will then charge much more than the 400 bux for the ipod they will charge you millions.



    You may not then reverse engineer or modify the software.



    Here is the rub. Apple will change the software to prohibit REAL's hack. and sue REAL for good measure!



    A judge will probably hear the first motion before the Paris expo. The first motion will be by Apple enjoining Real from using and or distributing their harmony system untill the merits of the case can be heard (probably 3-4 years) Story over. Apple eats real in court and drains REAL's coffers with the lawsuit.
  • Reply 46 of 96
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    Ok that was harsh, sorry.



    The legal battle is just getting started. Apple has pretty solid positioning. It will disable harmony and eat real for lunch in the courtroom.



    Either way the outcome is the same. Apple will protect its market and marketshare.
  • Reply 47 of 96
    kim kap solkim kap sol Posts: 2,987member
    Amorph...thanks for the explanation. Some of it makes sense...some of it is still confusing though. I don't understand why there are different laws for software, licenses to software, music, and video though. Seems like they all have their own set of copyrights or laws.



    Fairplay is a licensed piece of software...why is circumventing it legal? You don't actually own the software as you said. If I circumvent Microsoft OS or Office licenses, I can use Windows or Office on any computer I want? Since when does not wanting to pay for a license and circumventing it legal? If it's been legal forever, then maybe the Justice system should get an overhaul.



    I'm still not sure anyone is entitled to hacking or cracking an app they own...can you explain to me again why this is allowed and not condemnable?



    Doesn't that also mean that ROMs used in emulation are legal? If so, why are sites pressured into removing ROMs? I heard that owning a ROM doesn't entitle you to make a copy or own a copy of the ROM on your computer. If this is wrong then what makes downloading ROMs that you own illegal? Is it the act of not backing up the ROM onto your computer yourself that's illegal? If I own, say, Lord of the Rings on DVD, but I don't have software to rip it to the computer and I download a rip of Lord of the Rings from the internet, is that illegal? The distribution is illegal?
  • Reply 48 of 96
    macsrgood4umacsrgood4u Posts: 3,007member
    Gene Steinberg points out this morning in The Mac Night Owl that Harmony is only compatible with PC's. It doesn't work with Macs. Here's article:



    http://macnightowl.com/index.htm





    Interesting that nobody in the media or here has picked this up as far as I can see!
  • Reply 49 of 96
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    Oh, and the jurisdiction and choice of law is for the cause(s) of action is California.
  • Reply 50 of 96
    kim kap solkim kap sol Posts: 2,987member
    How does Harmony work? If you've decided to download a Fairplay song from Real's Rhapsody, do you have to authorize your computer to play it through Apple? If it doesn't then I'm afraid this is basis enough for a lawsuit because it wouldn't really be Fairplay anymore.
  • Reply 51 of 96
    cowerdcowerd Posts: 579member
    This is from one of Real codec engineers (from hydrogenaudio's forums):

    Quote:

    When transferring your purchased songs to the iPod, the AAC itself is not touched, but the Helix DRM is transmuxed to a DRM that is compatible with the iPod, i.e. fully protected and without trans-coding. If you then transfer the file back to your PC (for instance with Anapod), you get an M4P file, that is a protected MPEG-4 AAC file.



    Real already sells songs in AAC format. They would not have to use Apple's servers to "authorize" the song as that is done on the computer. Think about it--the iPod doesn't have or need any auth capability.



    The only issue Apple has is if Harmony DRM'ed doesn't work as transparently as Fairplay DRM'ed songs on the iPod. After all the iTunes, ITMS and iPod are well thought and usually a good user experience. Why Apple didn't just license Fairplay to Real just as they did with Moto is another debate.



    Quote:

    And describe how by overriding apples software on the ipod you can cram your stuff onto it.



    Quote:

    Fairplay is a licensed piece of software...why is circumventing it legal?





    It doesn't look like Real is overriding or circumventing Fairplay. From my extreme lack of technical understanding, it just looks like Real hacked a closed file format. If that is illegal then watch out....



    PS there's also a good chance that Real didn't reverse-engineer Fairplay, but just went and had a look at HYMN and VideoLan.
  • Reply 52 of 96
    banchobancho Posts: 1,517member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by cowerd

    This is from one of Real codec engineers (from hydrogenaudio's forums):



    Real already sells songs in AAC format. They would not have to use Apple's servers to "authorize" the song as that is done on the computer. Think about it--the iPod doesn't have or need any auth capability.



    The only issue Apple has is if Harmony DRM'ed doesn't work as transparently as Fairplay DRM'ed songs on the iPod. After all the iTunes, ITMS and iPod are well thought and usually a good user experience. Why Apple didn't just license Fairplay to Real just as they did with Moto is another debate.







    It doesn't look like Real is overriding or circumventing Fairplay. From my extreme lack of technical understanding, it just looks like Real hacked a closed file format. If that is illegal then watch out....




    A lot of people are missing or confusing a very important point.



    Apple did not license Fairplay to Motorola. Apple created a version of iTunes that runs on Motorola's phones. That means that the whole experience is still Apple controlled and it still drives business to the iTunes music store. What Real is trying to do is sneak their files in by simulating Fairplay on their files.



    Whether or not it is legally actionable it makes me wonder of the license implications of the files you buy from Real vs. the ones you buy from iTunes music store.



    Apple has already updated Fairplay once and it seems it will *need* to evolve in order to keep their agreements with the record companies. When they updated it and broke Playfair it may have seemed like a mean gesture but it showed the record companies they are making an effort toward keeping the files secure (even if people found ways around it the next day). So now if Apple updates Fairplay again for a similar reason *even if it is not just to screw Real* and Real's files no longer play then who will take the heat? I'm sure people will scream at Apple, but what makes anyone think Apple needs to babysit (and update DRM on) files you purchased from another Music store?



    On another note, at least this is s way to pass time until the iMacs come out...
  • Reply 53 of 96
    cowerdcowerd Posts: 579member
    Quote:

    Apple did not license Fairplay to Motorola. Apple created a version of iTunes that runs on Motorola's phones. That means that the whole experience is still Apple controlled and it still drives business to the iTunes music store. What Real is trying to do is sneak their files in by simulating Fairplay on their files.



    There seem to be two pieces to the flack of Apple/Moto:

    Quote:

    Motorola, Inc. (NYSE:MOT) and Apple® (NASDAQ: AAPL) today announced they are partnering to enable millions of music lovers to transfer their favorite songs from the iTunes® jukebox on their PC or Mac® , including songs from the iTunes Music Store, to Motorola?s next-generation 'always with you' mobile handsets, via a USB or Bluetooth connection. Apple will create a new iTunes mobile music player, which Motorola will make the standard music application on all their mass-market music phones, expected to be available in the first half of next year.







    If a Moto cellphone plays DRM'ed AAC files from ITMS then Apple has licensed Fairplay to Moto. Doesn't matter if iTunes exists for the little phone or not. Fairplay is what allows ITMS DRM'ed files to work.



    Whats "sneaky" about allowing more file formats to work on a portable jukebox. It seems that if Apple claims to derive their only profit from the ITMS-iPod-iTunes troika from the sale of iPods that more software availability would increase hardware sales. After all if Apple thinks that ITMS is driving iPod sales then they are seriously deluded.



    Sorry but this smells like Mac/Wintel all over again.
  • Reply 54 of 96
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    This from the itunes terms of use:

    http://www.apple.com/legal/terms/itunes/service.html



    quote:



    You agree that you will not attempt to, or encourage or assist any other person to, circumvent or modify any security technology or software that is part of the Service or used to administer the Usage Rules.



    Now by using Real's service does a user violate this term of use or Does REal for allowing it's creation to circumvent the users obligation under the terms of use



    From itunes terms of use:



    quote:

    THIS IS A LEGAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN YOU AND APPLE COMPUTER, INC. (?APPLE?) STATING THE TERMS THAT GOVERN YOUR USE OF THE ITUNES MUSIC STORE SERVICE. THIS AGREEMENT?TOGETHER WITH ALL UPDATES, ADDITIONAL TERMS, SOFTWARE LICENSES, AND ALL OF APPLE?S RULES AND POLICIES?COLLECTIVELY CONSTITUTE THE ?AGREEMENT? BETWEEN YOU AND APPLE. TO AGREE TO THESE TERMS, CLICK ?AGREE.? IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THESE TERMS, DO NOT CLICK ?AGREE,? AND DO NOT USE THE SERVICE. YOU MUST ACCEPT AND ABIDE BY THESE TERMS AS PRESENTED TO YOU: CHANGES, ADDITIONS, OR DELETIONS ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE, AND APPLE MAY REFUSE ACCESS TO THE ITUNES MUSIC STORE FOR NONCOMPLIANCE WITH ANY PART OF THIS AGREEMENT.



    so, If apple wanted a press fiasco it could just bar users who placed tracks on the ipod without apple's authorization. Apple could just disable the device till a firmware update or bar them fromm it's stores.



    As I said a public relations fiasco. or Sue Real for Tortious interference with the apple end user agreement. Making the user break the agreement by using REAL tracks on an unauthorized apple product.



    Better.
  • Reply 55 of 96
    vinney57vinney57 Posts: 1,162member
    I thnk people (and naturally the press) are reading WAY too much into this. This has nothing to do with moral rights or 'fighting for the little guy' or any of that crap. This is a political spoiling play by Glasser who's company is in a very vulnerable place. The 'consumer choice' soundbite is as empty and meaningless as it always was. The iPod is a music player that will play the lingua franca formats of MP3, Aiff and Wav very happily. Apple provides an excellent way of ripping your own CD's into those formats if you wish. If CD's are 'protected' by the music companies that is hardly Apple's problem. iTunes only exists because the major record companies insist on copy protection for downloaded files. Apple uses that situation (not of its making) to create a viable business by making a store and player combo that provides the best user experience. Apple has no moral obligation, and no business imperitive, to open this system to anyone. Apple is not preventing you from putting any music you like on your iPod.



    I doubt very much that there will be any legal battle. Apple's statement was an obvious and natural little FUD play. The Real Harmony software will likely suck in the extreme and if Apple are smart they will make no further statement on the matter. You can absolutely gurantee that 'Harmony' music files will simply not work on future iPods. Apple will make this quietly clear to all those companies that may be considering licensing Harmony.



    In a few months this will all be a forgotten joke.
  • Reply 56 of 96
    banchobancho Posts: 1,517member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by cowerd

    There seem to be two pieces to the flack of Apple/Moto:





    If a Moto cellphone plays DRM'ed AAC files from ITMS then Apple has licensed Fairplay to Moto. Doesn't matter if iTunes exists for the little phone or not. Fairplay is what allows ITMS DRM'ed files to work.



    Whats "sneaky" about allowing more file formats to work on a portable jukebox. It seems that if Apple claims to derive their only profit from the ITMS-iPod-iTunes troika from the sale of iPods that more software availability would increase hardware sales. After all if Apple thinks that ITMS is driving iPod sales then they are seriously deluded.



    Sorry but this smells like Mac/Wintel all over again.




    Their hardware sales of iPods seem quite good *and* the ITMS is making money. They both work well together and provide an experience that's hard to beat.



    Seen that way, what motivation would ever convince Apple to license Fairplay to Real or any other competing music store? If the deal with Motorola included a license to use Fairplay then it still is fine with Apple because Motorola is just trying to sell a phone and *not* compete with ITMS. Apple does not see Phones as a threat to the iPod because of the limited number of songs a phone can hold compared to an iPod.



    What if Apple did license Fairplay and some company with a lot of money decided to sell songs at a price could never match due to contracts with record companies (what if they sold songs for $0.50)? That could be suicidal for Apple so it is quite in their interest to just say *no* to other companies.



    On the same note if they *did* then is it Apple's responsibility to help maintain DRM on songs *not* purchased from ITMS?
  • Reply 57 of 96
    vinney57vinney57 Posts: 1,162member
    I am amazed that people still think that the failure to license the the Apple OS was a mistake. I was not. It was the best possible outcome.
  • Reply 58 of 96
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    REAL responds:



    http://www.vnunet.com/news/1156985



    kind of a "oh yea and what are you gonna do about it big guy?"



    In wrestling voice



    "Let's get ready to RUMBLEEEE!!"



    in this corner Weiging in at 5 billion dollars and wearing the Ive designed boxer shorts The undisputed heavyweight of the online music biz Stone Cold Steve Jobs!!!! "



    The crowd roars





    Can we all say "STEVE !!"





    In this corner an upstart punk. Wearing a pair of tattered old stinky gym shorts and a pair of borrowed sneakers. REAL Harmony!!"



    crickets chirping....



    The spanking can begin now in ernest!



    "STEVE STEVE STEVE STEVE"
  • Reply 59 of 96
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    I've got an iPod full of songs, not one of which came from the Apple iTMS. But then again, I AM CANADIAN!
  • Reply 60 of 96
    cowerdcowerd Posts: 579member
    Quote:

    You agree that you will not attempt to, or encourage or assist any other person to, circumvent or modify any security technology or software that is part of the Service or used to administer the Usage Rules.



    Please explain how Harmony circumvents security technology (DCMA violation) or modifies Apple software?
Sign In or Register to comment.