“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.
Mike, you are combining hardware and software in your comment. You are right in the statement that they have adopted an open architecture (hardware) strategy and that is why it’s so sloppy. But their software (OS) is anything but open. That is why many of the supposed cross platform technologies (can anyone say java) don’t work corectly on their OS. Remember they refused to support java as a standard and created their own bastardization of it.
“[…] OSX is open source. Remember Darwin.”
Uh, OS X is not open source. Darwin is the BSD-based kernel, the lowest-level of the Operating System. Everything above that (ie, windows, graphics, etc.) is Apple-owned.
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.
I doubt if the RIAA gives a crap about this, as they will already have their cut from songs that are sold, regardless of what players they end up on. I can see a lot of music trading moving to emails now that limits for single emails are moving from 1 or 2MB to 10MB. The RIAA’s gotta be crapping their pants about that, but there’s nothing they can do about it (I hope).
[Check the Real Website. It already plays QT.]
That wasn’t the question.
[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.]
Open hardware, and YOU know that!
[Ahem. XP adoption is nowhere near 89%.. ]
WinDroids always love to bring out the 89% Windows number, and YOU know that aswell.
[This is where it starts to get FUN.]
???
[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..]
Yes, they don’t care about the Mac. This ‘might be’ obvious.
Where are all the clueless Mac zealots that earlier claimed that the DMCA applies to this case?
The only reason we’re even having this discussion is due to the absence of Hegemony from you know who. They are so far behind the eight-ball they are not even on the horizon. Those billions of dollars of R&D are going around trying to find an angle that’ll extend their monopoly. Problem is, Apple keeps moving the pool table.
So where is the steroid version of AppleWorks?
This site is worthless bit of mac fanboys…
Apple allows you to take any mp3 and play it on the iPod, no problem.
Apple allows you to take WMA (non protected) and convert it to AAC and play it on the iPod, no problem.
This issue has nothing to do with iTMS, nothing to do with audio format, nothing to do with ipod and nothing to do with iTunes/iTMS.
This is strickly about DRM and what access rights the RIAA want to allow the users.
Apple should stay clear of this and let the music industry get its story straight first. They are letting Apple fight their battle for them and Apple can only lose and the music industry can only win. All of this means losing for the consumer until downloaded music is the same as ripped from CD. Any format, any player, any time, any place the consumer wants. Until this happens, fights like this will continue (and there will be more) and illegal downloading will continue.
1. How do you know that Real reverse engineered the fairplay system? Do you have proof?
2. I don’t know the specifics of the fairplay security system, but is it built in to the security that you can only play the files on 3 computers and a couple of iPods, or is it just some parameter that Apple sets when they upload the songs to your computer when you buy it? If the latter is so, then Real could simply match the terms of Apple’s fairplay system.
3. People who buy iPods are already voicing their choice –> APPLE.
4. Why is it that there are at least 10 mac users complaining per every non mac user? Does anybody else see a problem with this picture? Also the number of sites on my google searches on the subject have mac in their URL. This seems like a very biased set of discussions to me. And pointless. The point is, you either choose to buy an iPod and use ITMS or something else and use any other music store.
A T & amp ; T