“Code-crackers risk fines and prison time when they defeat copy-protection technology, but such draconian rules likely don’t apply in the case of RealNetworks and its iPod ‘hack,’ legal experts said,” John Borland reports for CNET News. “Some attorneys have said Apple might have a better case under traditional contract or copyright law. The iPod comes with a license agreement that bars reverse engineering, and if Apple can argue that RealNetworks violated that agreement, the company might have a stronger case.”
Full article here.
first post!!!!!!!!
yehaaaaaawww!!!!!!
Apple should hire Sandy Cohen from The OC!
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
—
http://homepage.mac.com/johnhood
Always nice when someone contributes intelligently to the discussion. Now, go away. Great article and I’m sure Apple is covering all the bases with their attorneys. Should be interesting to follow in the weeks to come.
What no one seems to be considering is what the labels themselves think of Harmony.
Hello, world!
If the labels allow Harmony to stand, they are essentially saying that their agreement with Apple to sell music online is specifically moot and unenforceable.
If the labels don’t shut down Real, they are saying that it’s okay for Sharmon systems to released a Harmony-enabled Kazaa P2P software that interfaces directly with the iPod.
Right now, users have to use P2P software to download music, then manually important them into iTunes in order to get their songs onto the iPod. I’m sure the labels don’t like that behavior, but they really can’t do anything about it without crippling the iPod (and all music players in general).
But letting Real get away with Harmony means that any P2P company has the legal right to release iTunes-like P2P software that completely knocks iTunes out of the whole iPod equation.
Someone, I think Real forgot to consider it doesn’t own the music.
Of course RealNetwork’s may have some legal standing, or Apple would already have dragged them into court. However, their stance that they are giving customers “choice” is simply laughable. Real Networks is about choice the same as Microsoft is about free and open standards.
Look, if you want to buy an iPod and open up the case and take it appart and combine it with your toaster oven, be my guest, but don’t expect Apple’s help when you want to put it back together. Similarly, if you load up your iPod with songs from a store that uses a non sanctioned hack to allow you to copy songs onto your iPod, don’t expect Apple to help you if something goes wrong. Personally, I think you might be violating the terms of your warranty, either way, it’s not worth the risk in my humble opinion, and don’t expect it to still work if you ever plan to install firmware updates on your iPod.
Lastly, there was NO indication when you purchased your iPod that you’d be able to buy downloadable songs anywhere but iTunes Music Store, so if you don’t want to buy from there you made the mistake of buying the wrong player in the first place. Don’t blame Apple.
Even though they may have the standing to sue, it may not be wise to do so. Apple needs to weigh the cost of the appearance of bullying against any real dollar settlement.
A simple “security and quality” upgrade of iPod firmware may be enough to disable any Real Harmony hacks. Then the Real’s users will be pissed off at themselves for using second rate software, especially since a much more superior program exists for free.
It is far beyond my imagination why anyone would go to Real (or any other) software/download site for use on an iPod. If, by some rarity, that a song I want is not at iTMS, it would be a much better choice to just wander down to my local Borders store and buy it, rather than going through the endless hassles of running and configuring an ill-designed second-rate program… and possibly risking losing all of the songs I already have in my iTunes and Pod. Is it really worth it? Wait… um… I forgot… we are talking about MS Windows users.. this is their normal way of life. Real just may be able to convince these mindless drones.
Paul as it exactly right! Even though Real may have had an agreement with the industry to sell music, FairPlay is based upon APPLE’S AGREEMENT. By changing the files DRM, Real changes the terms under which a song is played.
For example, if Apple strikes a new deal with the music industry so iTunes/FairPlay users can burn 20 copies of the same playlist, Real’s Harmony hack would take a song bought under one set of restrictions and turn it into a FairPlay audio file which would have the limitations of Apple’s most recent agreement.
The music industry should take Real to court and sue them for changing the conditions by which the songs they sell are being played, thereby being a flagrant breach of contract.
LAST POST!!! Hahahha!!! No one can post after me now! Whoever does is ignoring the spirit of last posting and will show the world that they suck!
P.S. I am cooler than anyone else here. Just an FYI. I am ESPECIALLY cooler than Pkradd. Pkradd is only maybe about ten percent as cool as me. Paul is the second coolest… about 55% as cool as me.
Make QuickTime play Real Audio files
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
“Personally, I think you might be violating the terms of your warranty, either way, it’s not worth the risk in my humble opinion, and don’t expect it to still work if you ever plan to install firmware updates on your iPod.”
IANAL. But it could also depend on what you mean by “goes wrong.”
To draw a comparison, car companies attempted to void people’s warranties if you did something to your car that they didn’t like. A law was passed and car companies now have to show the modified part was the culprit of a problem which you are trying to have fixed under the warranty.
For example, my car has a turbocharger. I purchased an after-market chip which changes the way the turbocharger works (BOOOOST!). Now, if I blow my engine, Audi may have reason to void my warranty by showing that the engine was not able to handle the increased air-pressure. Conversely, Audi cannot void my warranty if, say, my CV Boot breaks unless they can somehow prove that the modification to the car led to the problem.
Now this easily applies to mechanical devices, such as cars. It’s less clear-cut when it comes to digital devices, such as iPods. Obviously, if I copy a song from Real onto my hard drive, which promptly crashes (hardware problem), Apple cannot void my warranty without showing how a song from Real could cause my hard-drive to crash.
RealNetworks suck. I hope Apple puts them out of business.
One thing that’s been overlooked here – and may well be the basis of Apple’s legal action is that the iTMS/iPod package is ‘secure’ BECAUSE the record industry insisted that it must be BEFORE it allowed any of its music to be sold by Apple.
Apple would therefore have a strong case in aguing that a necessary part of it’s effort to make secure the record industry’s ‘property’, as well as make secure it’s own aparatus for safely storing, protecting and delivering that property, is to deny entry to ANY unauthorised files. And ANY unauthorised files means files which have NOT been JOINTLY agreed upon by Apple and the Record Industry for the iPod system.
Music without DRM which is already owned by a customer is the only LEGAL exception.
Apple can then argue, in fact, that it is PROTECTING the Recording Industry by barring ALL files which attempt to interfer with, bypass, wrap, or otherwise manipulate its DRM in a way which alters (and lessens the effectiveness of) its intended function… INCLUDING Real files.
In doing this, Apple can claim, it is in no way attempting to prevent any other company from implementing and marketing a similar independent system.
In response to Twenty Benson: You’re absolutely RIGHT! That’s what I’ve been (similarily) saying all along (in other posts). Apple needs to buyout Real as a company, and take control of all their products. MUhahahahahhahah. Well that might be harsh but it would be really cool.
REAL’s licensing agreement allows the end user to do different things than what Apple allows you to do.
If changing the Helix DRM to Fairplay changes what you can do with the song, the RIAA should be upset. That would violate REAL’s agreement with the labels.
If this is true, Apple should point out that the terms of REAL’s agreement with the music labels has been violated.
Let REAL deal with the RIAA.
“If Apple strikes a new deal with the music industry so iTunes/FairPlay users can burn 20 copies of the same playlist, Real’s Harmony hack would take a song bought under one set of restrictions and turn it into a FairPlay audio file which would have the limitations of Apple’s most recent agreement.”
Mmmm…maybe.
That could be an interesting way for Apple to fight this. I can’t find any info on DRM restrictions on Real’s site. I also don’t know anything about how FairPlay works, but I have written some DRM code for images so I have a few ideas.
That said, imagine this scenario:
I purchase a song from Real’s store which does not allow me to burn it to a CD but will allow me transfer it to a portable player. So I transfer it to my iPod and take it over to my friend’s house, plug it into his computer and start iTunes. I know that iTunes won’t let me upload the song to his computer, but will iTunes let me burn a CD of music from the iPod? If so, Real has allowed me to circumvent their licensing and may be liable to the RIAA.
Of course, I also assume that Real’s lawyers looked this over, too. So I assume–perhaps rashly–that this was taken into account and the more restrictive rights translate. Or it may be that you can only download songs to an iPod which meet Apple’s requirements (so, for example, you couldn’t download songs to an iPod that don’t allow CD burning).
hehe.. out of court settlement + rejig iPod Update to kick out party crashers…
lmfao
I say stuff the lawyers and just block the hack with a sw update. Dont give Real any more PR than they already have. Once the street realises that Harmony is dead it will be forgotten along with real.
Keep Music Free!!!!!…Artist’s make money from shows not CD’s…the record companies screw them by giving them a predetermined amount for their albums based on projected sales…Screw FairPlay..Screw the RIAA..Hello Aquisition!!!!
I dont mind the 99 cent song..Just the BS that comes along with it…
I like pudding.
I like liver.
Should Apple reverse engineer Real software for use it QT?
Can customers install Linux on ‘their’ XBlob, without ‘reminders’ from M$ regarding warranties?
Is M$ the ONLY ‘tech’ company allowed to control their products?
If people really want choice, then why is WinXP on 89% of PCs?
Will Real cover iPod warranties if their software or files are proven to have damaged any iPods?
Why did it take Real 8yrs to produce a ‘stable’ media player for the Mac, yet only 3 mos. to crack FairPlay?
>Should Apple reverse engineer Real software for use it QT?
Check the Real Website. It already plays QT.
>Is M$ the ONLY ‘tech’ company allowed to control their products?
Control?! They have an open architecture strategy which is exactly why WIndows is so sloppy, and clunky. Apple is the one who refused to let anyone in on the Mac OS.
>If people really want choice, then why is WinXP on 89% of PCs?
Ahem. XP adoption is nowhere near 89%.. many people are using 98.. though, as new PC’s break down and replaced XP adoption will come along. But most people see little incentive to upgrade this time around. (Set off all your dormant viruses.. YAY!)
>Will Real cover iPod warranties if their software or files are proven to have damaged any iPods?
This is where it starts to get FUN.
>Why did it take Real 8yrs to produce a ‘stable’ media player for the Mac, yet only 3 mos. to crack FairPlay?
Good point, … unless you look at the Mac market share… and then look at the iPod marketshare..
HINT: They don’t care about the Mac. Check out MSN Messenger for the Mac 4.0..
Doo doo doo…
I smell a troll. —–>Mike
By the way the OSX is open source. Remember Darwin. There is nothing open source about Windows, which by the way only runs on one chip architecture.
/spank mike
fxcking troll