Slashdot Mirror
CDDB Shutting Down Media Jukebox
shaun writes: "According to this thread on the Media Jukebox Talkback site, CDDB is refusing connections from Media Jukebox until the Media Jukebox guys sign an "exclusive agreement" to use CDDB's database.
Taking a shared public resource private has destroyed their karma, but what can be done?" Are grip and xmcd next? How do you enforce exclusivity for an open source program? Everyone should use FreeDB instead anyway: It's everything that was once good about cddb, including that little free part that made cddb itself the defacto standard before it got too big for its britches.
What we need is a local proxy for CD requests that users can install (and use with all the same software the cddb does). This proxy could then randomise the agent string (if required) and firstly search FreeDB and then CDDB if FreeDB aint got it.
In the instance that FreeDB doesn't have the album in question then the proxy will automatically fill it in using the cddb info. Nothing wrong with that since they cant copyright the data - only protect the service.
www.cdindex.org is what you're looking for. It's flexible, open, and nice. Unfortunately, it's not terribly complete, and also (mostly because of that) doesn't have a very large database yet.
Also it's supported by a major online music provider e-Music.com so I think it actually has a chance of sticking arount.
subsolar
Ok then. Make a CDDB "ripping" util that dumps everything into a comma-delimited file, which is then porked into a "totally separate" util that reads the glorious file and shoves the data back into FreeDB. Stupid laws only need stupid workarounds.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
Hi, I would like to submit the following tweak for DiscPlay 4, formerly owned by Obvion Systems now owned by iCast, under Windows 95/98.
In the registry go to
HKEY_USERS\xxxx\Software\Obvion Systems\DiscPlay\CurrentVersion\CDDB
where "xxxx" must be replaced with the username logged in
Change the entries at Server List and Server to:
freedb.freedb.org
for both values.
Notice: I use *both* W98 and S.u.S.E. 6.4 and each have their own "Good Things"(TM) And I Payed Nothing For Either One.
---
Free ?! Does that mean I can't get a Discount ?!
This message was
Also... Microsoft's ows CDPLAYER.EXE uses the same algorithm to store CD/Track info in CDPLAYER.INI. CDDB (Escient) didn't invent that algorithm.
---
Minor brain fart - these are track offsets, not track lengths.
I suspect you got a nice "gift" of junk mail...
-----
If I enter 1 CD or 1000, it makes no difference: the fact that cddb accepts info from their users means it should made freely available. If they want to take the time to enter the data in themselves and then charge for it, fine. But don't you dare take the data I freely gave and slap your "license" on it. Your arguement rests on the thinking that 1 or 2 contributions are inconsequential. Thats pure BS. Lets assume for a second that I only enter in 2 CDs....but then 3000 people do the same thing. Thats 6000 CDs they didn't have to do!!
My biggest gripe is that when cddb first started going, I thought it was a "no-strings attached" database...now I reget ever adding my CDs to them. To cddb: STOP being so greedy.
--------
-------
"Every artist is a cannibal, every poet is a thief."
xmcd the orginal cddb-client has AFAIK always been GPL and it still is. xmcd certainly includes the disc-id algorithm. Originally, the cddb server software was also GPL, but newer versions is not. The software FreeDB is running is based on the original GPLed software
Well, it's not quite that simple. They (Escient, Inc.) didn't start it. It was started by a couple of guys working indpendently. Along came Escient, from the highly elite and well capitalized enclave of Carmel, Indiana, and bought these guys out. To quote Calvin of Calvin & Hobbes fame, "I don't know which is worse: that everyone has his price, or that the price is always so low. "
When the data was added by the users, it was added under the guise that the service was and would remain free (of cost, of encumbrances like ads in one's CD software).
I say let the market decide. The market is what will favor free software in the end anyway. I use FreeDB. Why shouldn't we all? It provides the exact same service and has fewer costs. I don't end up having to pay in one way or another for Escient's giant multi-story office complex that I pass on highway 65 now and then. Now, if they want to give me a little office in the corner somewhere with a fat pipe, a reasonable salary and I can read Slashdot all day, the market may sway me somewhat differently...
This isn't sarcasm, I just want to thank you for this sentiment. You are right, there are greater injustices that need to be solved, but you don't fix the world in one fell swoop.
I think you are absolutely right that this is a perfect project to test the mettle of this community. Let's see how big of an impact we can make. Then we can realistically scale our efforts towards other 'good causes'.
This is not the way to build a lasting empire.
Hi, please, don't use the web-based search. It's a "proof of concept". Nothing more.
I've been doing that for months as well. The only complaint I have is that often the CDDB entries are rather shoddy in quality, so it's good to check them for typos before sending them on.
To within half a percent, pi seconds is a nanocentury. -- Tom Duff
I think the element of this that really sticks in people's craw is the fact a good portion of the labor that went into cddb was volunteer with the idea that contributing that labor guaranteed free access to all the information. The correct way for cddb to handle this would have been to have clearly stated their business model, giving those who contributed the option to contribute knowing that they would eventually be paying for their own labor or to contribute to a different project.
I also believe there are other ways for cddb to make money off of that information (which I don't mind them doing, I just mind them earning money off of the free labor from the very people who performed that labor).
This is not the way to build a lasting empire.
Thanks for the plug, chow!
We have been trying to enter a contract with CDDB for quite some time now, but disagree with some of the language in the contract. A deadline came and went Friday and, unfortunately, our CEO and the folks from Gracenote were unable to reach each other to discuss a continuance and the service was shutdown. We hope to have the issue resolved soon.
Rick Fritz
Software Developer
J River, Inc.
That should be "TOO big for its britches..."
nk
All annoyanced with CDDB aside, I question the ethics of taking information submitted by people around the globe and making it closed/proprietary.
Did Network Solutions buy them when I wasn't looking? This sounds like something they would do...
while their first achievement was cool, ultimately, the work that was being done was repetitive and of no use to anyone. cracking CSS keys, now that would be interesting... :)
I disagree. This kind of service CAN be sustained without any kind of commercial venture. After all, providing CD and track titles is a lot less bandwidth intensive than providing the whole music track, but Napster and Gnutella manage to do that pretty well.
In fact, a distributed database / index should be built into Freenet, Gnutella, Napster, and other similar services. It's an obvious thing, so I think eventually it will be.
That way, you don't put the whole load on one person's home DSL, you spread it out over thousands of people with DSL.
Torrey Hoffman (Azog)
Torrey Hoffman (Azog)
"HTML needs a rant tag" - Alan Cox
is that the source code and the database contents are available for FTP. This means I can setup a server on my local net to avoid slow disc IDs at work (due to overloaded links) and to avoid having to go online at home. (of course i guess this is only a problem for us poor schmucks who still only have dialup access ... :)
dv
"There's no secret. You just press the accelerator to the floor and keep turning left." -- Bill Vukovich
I have no problem at all with CDDB charging for their service, just as soon as they obtain all that track information using their own resources.
What they've done is no different (in principle--obviously, cataloging CD's is trivial in comparison) than an organization like the American Red Cross one day becoming a for-profit corporation and providing services for a fee, but keeping all the donated money and resources.
BTW, the argument that people with the "linux-mentality" won't pay for anything is lame and tired. You can do better.
I like CDDB as much as the next geek, but I think it's a little too limited, for example when it comes to samplers. Are there any other, free alternatives to CDDB that offer more flexibility, like a different artist for each track ? Maybe even something using XML, so it's buzzword-compliant *g*
I now have something to respond with whenever someone says "People are starving in Africa, and you're worried about software?" or something of the sort.
--
No more e-mail address game - see my user info. Time for revenge.
Win dain a lotica, en vai tu ri silota
Chris
Techies hiring techies. Recruiting done right.
Techies hiring techies. Recruiting done right!
I guess anytime anyone does anything that could involve IP in any way whatsoever, Slashdot readers have been conditioned to start crying, shouting "this is evil!" and threaten to start 5 sourceforge projects copying whatever product they are currently angry at, so don't feel bad, it's not your fault for getting this wrong.
sig:
sig:
See the "..for smart people" banners Wired runs here? Look elsewhere guys.
Just to clarify, CDDB doesn't claim to own the song titles (the record companies do?), they claim to own the encoding that turns the length of all the tracks on a disc (the "uniqueness") into a code number to be looked up in the database. You are free to take the song titles from their database. What they'll try to stop is any use of that algorithm.
I just thought I'd clarify because it makes a difference to how to circumvent their theft of everyone's hard work. The distributed.net idea would not suffer from this problem, BTW, not to mention it would be fun. SETI@CDDB! :) I'm sure d.net would never go for it, though, they'd rather bore us all to tears with a yet longer attempt to crack some obscure n-bit variant of a public key system. (d.net: we know that things can be cracked by brute [yawn] force. do something more interesting!]
The safeguard, as I understand it, is the ability for anyone to FTP themselves a copy of the FreeDB database and software, and to set up shop on their own.
An "open source" (for want of a better word) replacement would need to have a verification step. Any data submitted, before being added, should be checked by someone. Maybe have a crew of volunteers (hell, I'd volunteer) who spend a few minutes a day verifiying entries. Maybe have the volunteers list their musical preferences so they would get music they know. With enough volunteers there would be a good chance that 95% of CD's would be already known. Failing that, a simple verification system to check spelling before admission would be good. (Okay, so some songs are spelt wrong deliberately...)
I hope someone with the resources decides to run with this "open source" idea.
It's too bad that a boycott wouldn't do anything. The only people with a clue as to what these corporate types are doing make up a real small percentage of the user base. *sigh*
Mark my words. Google will be next.
---
From the FreeDB site: Looks safe to me.
--
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Unless Media Jukebox is CDDB2-enabled, it would be a simple matter to fool the server -- just substitute a different user-agent. No problem. The only way CDDB can know that the client is lying is to 1) reverse engineer (ie. use an http spy) the software in question, or 2) force everyone to use CDDB2. Eventually, the original CDDB is supposed to be turned off in favor of CDDB2.
My ripper (win32 only...), can be configured to use any CDDB out there, but I'm hesitant to disable the "official" *.cddb.com servers, since it should be the user's decision what to use.
---
---
"Go Metallica. Die RIAA." -- Linus Torvalds
"man, those poor programmers, they make more money than anyone and get huge job perks, but apparently the government is right on the cusp of outlawing them! it must be true, i read it oni slashdot.org!". Simmer down buddy, the government doesn't care about you.
sig:
sig:
See the "..for smart people" banners Wired runs here? Look elsewhere guys.
How to setup Winamp to use FreeDB instead of CDDB:
.ini file.
(I did this on Windows NT)
1. Browse to your Winamp directory
2. Open winamp.ini with your favorite editor
3. Go down to the section that says [CDDA/Line Input Driver]
Change the following values to this:
rt=888
use_cddb=1
rver=freedb.freedb.org
Unfortunately, these values will get overwritten anytime you use Winamp to change the CDDB server. In this case, just go back and edit the
"Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
I seem to remember downloading the SDK for CDDB way back, and I think you'll find the this "license agreement" thing is on the part of the developer, not the user. So in fact it would the responsibility of the coder of the KDE CD player to ensure that if you CDDB, you dont use anything else.
--- I hate my sig
Sadly, this isn't because the CDDB folks "saw the light," it's because the folks who make Media Jukebox signed a contract.
Still, I think freeDB is a better alternative.
Once they nailed you to CDDB as the only provider (That's one of the requirements to get the license!), they'll start charging the user. Just give it time.
How much time do you think it will take, exactly? Since this requirement has been around for well over a year now. (I know this because I was working on a piece of software that used CDDB at one point.)
First law of the open market - if you CAN charge for something, you WILL
Exactly. But do you honestly think CDDB could charge the users directly for the service? Hell no. If anything, it will be an indirect fee -- they charge the developers that write programs using CDDB (which is, after all, a value added incentive in their program). In return, they might choose to raise the price of the software to cover it.
Regardless, I think it is a service well-worth paying for. If someone can maintain it for free, that's fine, too. But I don't try to pretend that everything should be free.
-thomas
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
"And like that
cddb took our data and told us if would be free for other people to use.
Uhhh, first of all, where did they say this? And second of all, even if they did actually say this, they *HAVE NOT* charged any users for CDDB access. It is still free to use.
Why should developers, who add CDDB access as a value-added service, get to do so with no stipulations? It costs money to run CDDB, you know?
Then they switched it on us and forced these rules on its users.
Uhhh, no, they did nothing to the users. They added stipulations for DEVELOPERS adding CDDB to their programs.
Thats fraud in my book.
Then your book is not very well written. Consult a lawyer.
You and your comments amount to nothing more than a sorry sack of crap.
The truth hurts, don't it?
-thomas
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
"And like that
I'm sick of the internet gimme, gimme, gimme attitude. It's frustrating for me personally, because I know people that have to battle this attitude in order to make a well-earned living.
-thomas
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
"And like that
sig:
sig:
See the "..for smart people" banners Wired runs here? Look elsewhere guys.
I have no problem at all with CDDB charging for their service, just as soon as they obtain all that track information using their own resources
They *DID*. Don't you see? Their resource is YOU. Your payment from CDDB is free access to the entire database of CD's, most of which YOU did not contribute in the first place. They are an information exchange.
What they've done is no different (in principle--obviously, cataloging CD's is trivial in comparison) than an organization like the American Red Cross one day becoming a for-profit corporation and providing services for a fee, but keeping all the donated money and resources.
That is probably the worst analogy I've ever heard.
BTW, the argument that people with the "linux-mentality" won't pay for anything is lame and tired. You can do better.
No, it fits perfectly. The people doing the complaining are mostly linux users. How do I know? Because the programs they are complaining about are primary used on Linux. Linux is free. Much of what surrounds linux in the way of services is free. Therefore, it makes sense that the people least willing to pay for "information services" are Linux "information-wants-to-be-free" and open source zealots.
-thomas
P.S. If you can do better to explain this "why should I pay for a useful service that used to be free" mentality, please do.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
"And like that
So you'd see it as okay if someone borrows you lawnmower and starts renting it out to people
1. I paid for the lawnmower. It's mine. You did not pay for the listing of CD track names. It is not yours.
2. You lend your lawnmower to someone with the specific intention that you will get it back. Please look up the word "borrow" in your dictionary if this point confuses you. CDDB never said to you, "please let us BORROW your list of track names."
GNU take software you've contributed to thinking it was Free, and start selling it
If I contribute software to GNU, it would be distributed under the GNU license. They are, as allowed by the license, permitted to charge for software that includes my code, as specified by the GPL (as long as source is provided).
Your analogies are very poor.
Without the users CDDB would be nothing
EXACTLY! Without other users, you would not be able to pop in most any CD and instantly get all track names on your PC. And how is this made possible? By the hardware, network, and programming services of the people at CDDB. Work done by them that you apparantly feel is worthless.
and by attacking open-source development, CDDB are attacking their users.
Uhhh... again, flawed thinking. First of all, they aren't attacking open source development. Their stipulation is that you use only CDDB in your software, or not at all. Likewise, you display a small CDDB logo while downloading the information for the user. Both of these can be performed in open-source software.
That is payment for services rendered, as far as I am concerned.
-thomas
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
"And like that
They could just shut off their servers and go home.
Bandwidth costs money. The number of applications which support the CDDB concept has increased tremendously since it's initiation. Consider for instance Microsoft's media player which ships with Win98/Win2000 now includes CDDB access.
We're talking millions of users out there. Do you seriously think someone's home DSL can handle this?
There is no way that the service could ever be sustained without some sort of commercial venture.
Although it's certainly a service which the RIAA could take up as a free value-add to the music community. Not sure why they don't do it on their own since they already have access to this information without having to deal with people hand entering it and getting it wrong.
MS Judge 2000
Fully RIAA and MPAA compliant
134340: I am not a number. I am a free planet!
Is anyone working to get :CueCat coding cross-referencing with FreeDB? I want a MyCDCollection.com account so that I can scan in my UPCs and get the song listings and other info that's currently in CDDB/FreeDB (savable and searchable).
(Slashdot story combining...Off-topic or insightful?)
-----
do you have a link to 'cddb2-enabled' that doesn't get us non-developer folks a username/password prompt?
----------------------------
[Server burden] A distributed approach, a la
;)-- off the
Freenet, where everyone shares a little of the
server load, seems like a wonderful solution. I
would gladly give up a portion of my bandwidth
(5%?) for the benefit of everyone.
Considering that downloads aren't constant, and
that I'm not the only source, I guess 5% would be
an overestimate.
[Stability] The distributed nature of such a
system would also be resistent to unjust
regulation.* (BS database regulation...)
*Oversimplified: While I'm hesitent about
duplicated a database that required ingenuity and
monetary investment of private parties. However,
one leeched, --how's that for bias
backs of the netizen's honest labor thought to be
for the unrestricted benefit of all is
disheartening. --I had put my fair share of time
inputting CD data.
There was a slashdotter whose mentioned: [Law is
not morality...] Paraphrased
[CDDB's actions] I resent what appears to be abuse
of the public's good will. Similar to all the
companies that try to layer software patents while
utilizing software ideas/principles (in all the
computer systems running their business) that
were given freely for the greater good of society.
--Perhapse an anti-software-patent patent-pool or
coalition? *Chuckle* Don't get me started about
the commercializtion of academia.
[Qualifying my post]: I have not researched this
topic with the rigor I usually prefer. But, it's
piqued my interest as many Slashdot articles have.
"'Try' or 'Try Not'; there is no Yoda."
"'Try' or 'Try Not' there is no Yoda."
Does anybody have, or know where I can obtain, a crack for winamp that would allow me to use freedb.org?
Ugh, that was my first post.
I checked the posting guidlines and
found that other people had mentioned
similar things. Sorry =(
"'Try' or 'Try Not' there is no Yoda."
Perhaps the CDIndex (soon to be musicbrainz.org) people can answer this: would it be possible to merge the efforts of FreeDB and Musicbrainz? It seems very wasteful to duplicate the effort for a free CDDB replacement, not just for the project developers but for the end users typing in track info for both. I'm specifically wondering whether
The second question strikes me as particularly important - CDIndex is moving to a completely track-based design that should be media independent and make up for the limitations of the CDDB formula. The problem with this is that temporary backward compatibility with the CDDB would be a real asset in allowing people to use CDDB-enabled clients of various kinds and simply point them at a different server. It also better allows for the quiet updating people have been doing with clients like grip, where the CDDB info is re-uploaded from the client machine to FreeDB, slowly mirroring the database. To my knowledge, CDIndex has never been compatible with the CDDB format (even before switching to the track-based musicbrainz format).
-- Life is short. Forgive quickly. Kiss slowly. ~ Robert Doisneau
So? Just don't accept the license agreement. Since when you do need a license to query a publicly-available server on The Internet? It doesn't even ask for a login id, for Yog's sake.
---
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
I've got to disagree with this. d.net is now working on the Optimal Golomb Ruler (OGR) project. This is a project which has actual uses beyond just proving that it can be done. I'll leave the site above and it's links to explain it further.
Too bad that violates the CDDB license agreement, which says that if your program accesses CDDB then it cannot access any other databases.
MyopicProwls
MyopicProwls
My homepage
I have come to the conclusion, that the worst thing that can happen to CDDB is that the database is littered with erroneous entries.
If we all decided to fill in data that wasn't correct, the base would render to be totally useless.
Just an idea.
:-) = I am happy
:^) = I am happy with my big nose
C:\> = I am happy with my OS
Fine, have it dump the contents into a file on your hard drive, then use another program to upload the values (maybe DeCDDB?), and delete the file on your hard drive. No database, no liscensing problems, and you can let CDDB burn in it's own greed.
The middle mind speaks!
Molog
So Linus, what are we doing tonight?
So Linus, what are we going to do tonight?
The same thing we do every night Tux. Try to take over the world!
Tough luck. Grip will let you set any database you like; when ripping a CD, use CDDB for the first retrieval of CD/track titles, etc., switch the settings over to FreeDB, and submit them. I do it all the time.
I don't recall agreeing to or signing any license agreement when I installed Linux, fired up the KDE CD player, and added freedb.org to the setup info. I don't see how a license which the user never sees can be enforced; if CDDB doesn't want to send me CD track info, they have the power to have their server bounce me. As long as they make the info available publicly, the public will make use of it, license be damned.
This copying from CDDB to FreeDB sounds cool - I would do that but apparently all of my CD's are already in FreeDB. I haven't had a failed lookup in months.
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
Secondly, you're right, they took over cddb after a useful amount of seed work had been done for free. Quite ingenious, and quite evil of them. And like most evil things, it's been quite profitable for them too.
The reason for the exclusvity clause in their contract is so it's hard to compete. I think the open source community should take the time to use freedb, or help on cdindex, so escient doesn't end up being the only purveyor of this information in the world, in which case I think we can all be sure that it won't be free anymore.
----------------------------
How many support queries to both CDDB and FreeDB, and sending an updated entry to FreeDB if it doesn't have it?
A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
Well, at least most Internet companies don't have a business model that involves charging your users for info they freely submitted to you. Even Napster had a better plan than that!
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
On the FreeDB site they say that the CDDB server was GPL'ed originally. Is this the case? Is that source code still available or have they attempted to change the license?
Other than that, it is my firm belief that a company will reap what it sows and once enough people get sick of them then things like FreeDB will take off.
Closed and proprietary are different things. When you submit a patch for GCC you have to assign copyright to the Free Software Foundation; it becomes proprietary. Then it is up to the FSF to decide whether or not it will be open or closed.
All annoyanced with CDDB aside, I question the ethics of taking information submitted by people around the globe and making it closed/proprietary.
I question the ethics of relying on CDDB to put up the resources to house the entire known database of CD's and to allow anyone to search this database of knowledge FOR FREE.
In exchange, I estimate less than one percent (probably WAY LESS than one percent) of the people that use this resource have actually contributed to it by submitting the tracks on their current CD. Why is this number so low? Because the number of CD's is far outweighed by the number of people using CDDB's service.
So, what exactly is the problem with CDDB trying to make money off of this venture? Just because you may have submitted the track list of one or two CD's -- not an original work by you, I might add -- you expect to get this service at no cost.
Well that's fine -- but someone must pay for it. If it's not going to be you, it's going to be the maker of your music software. And last I heard, the only "payment" CDDB required was that you use them exclusively in your software, and you show the CDDB logo for a few seconds while the information is downloaded.
Stop being so selfish.
-thomas
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
"And like that
Why should I accept that a company who offered a service in exchange for my labor is now changing the terms of that service after they have acquired my contribution?
First of all, their "terms of service" were never explicitly granted to you.
Second of all, the "terms of service" that you thought were IMPLIED are STILL in effect. In exchange for some work (which you may or may not have ever done -- most CD's are already in the database, after all)... in exchange for this work, you get access to the information on other CD's for free.
How has this changed for you? Are you no longer able to access CDDB? No. Has a program you previously used been denied access? Possibly. But that is a separate matter. The person writing the program is adding VALUE to their application by including CDDB. Nowhere did CDDB guarantee developers free access to CDDB for their programs, for all times.
All you "Napter is theft" assholes have no leg to stand on here when you say that cddb is doing anything worse.
Hmmm, Napster is not theft. Napster simply allows theft to occur. I don't really see how this applies to CDDB. Nor do I see how it applies to our debate.
-thomas
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
"And like that
Too bad that violates the CDDB license agreement, which says that if your program accesses CDDB then it cannot access any other databases.
Unless CDDB becomes owned by a big organisation there is little they can do about it.
And second of all, even if they did actually say this, they *HAVE NOT* charged any users for CDDB access. It is still free to use.
Free speach rather than free beer. The problem is that the people involved have not obtained explicit permission from the contributers that they be able to apply these specific distribution restrictions.
As far as I know, I'm not using a proxy. My computer is directly connected to the cable modem, though I'm running WinProxy so my girlfriend can connect with her laptop.
SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
I don't know how many people around here use it, since it's a Winblows program, but MediaJukebox is just about the coolest freaking MP3 player/organizer I've used since Digital DJ and Grip. They kept the product free until CDDB and Thompson started beating them up on licensing fees, and even though they charge now, you only have to pay if you want the services depending on the licensing fees (MP3 encoder and CDDB). Admittedly it's still Beta, but these guys really interact with their user community and are super commited to fixing any bugs. I'm not used to Windows software where I can regularly chat with the engineers and have them fix my problems within days and auto-update the software for me. If you do need to use a dreaded Redmond product, I highly recommend them, and I hope they switch to FreeDB.
Don't bet on it. I seem to remember a ruling a while ago where a database can be copyrighted even if the information it contains is in the public domain.
The gist of the ruling was that the creation of the database in and of itself resulta in a copyrightable work, thus making it a breach of copyright to copy the database without the owner's permission.
its what I've been doing for yrs now.
I point, primarily, at freedb. if that doesn't resolve, I point at cddb. if there's a match there a dialog pops up and says "should I submit entry to freedb?". I always say 'yes' unless the data is so wrong its just not worth it.
the neat part of opensource is that I can change the 'id string' to say whatever I want. there is NO way to block my queries.
they collect the work of The People yet try to band some for ridiculous reasons. I don't agree with this logic so I ignore their 'rules'. and I suggest others do too.
(if I was going to write or publish my cddb lookup app, I would never hardcode in the db servernames. I'd hint/suggest to the user that they can set whatever env vars they want and that will be the search order. the app, then, would not be making policy and can't be sued or harassed; only the end user could. that would be my solution to this whole madness)
--
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
I like the "modest fee" bit. How many people make that much money from banner ads anyway? They're living in a dreamland...
---
--
From the grip README:
CDDB notes
==========
I have declined to sign a license agreement with Escient, the company who owns "www.cddb.com" and runs the CDDB server "us.cddb.com". Their license would (among other things) have required me to place advertisements in Grip and restrict you, the user, to use only their databases. I am against this commercial use of the track information submitted by users such as yourself. For this reason, I encourage you to use free servers, such as "freedb.freedb.org".
-- Information is not knowledge, knowledge is not wisdom.
CDDB is a perfect example of the disingenuous (but all too common) practice of taking work done (typing in track names) by many in a cooperative effort
You act as if CDDB ripped you off. Look at the flipside -- did you ever offer to pay CDDB for the service they provided? Why not? It's useful isn't it? It costs them money to run that service. Why should you get it for free?
the work was given with the understanding that it would continue to be available free without condition
Work? Well, I suppose typing in 10-15 track names by way less than 1% of the people that use CDDB constitutes work. Anyway, why did the people doing this "work" think CDDB would continue to be free without condition? Was there a clause that I am not aware of that said it would be so?
Again, why should it be? They provide a useful service.
BTW, where's the RIAA? Surprised their panties aren't in a knot about lists of album names, titles, and track times being available for download. Or has Gracenote paid them off?
Another stupid comment. Ever heard of "fair use." A list of track names is not a copyright infringement if the work being sold is the MUSIC described by the track names, and not the track names themselves.
Why am I not surprised by the attitude on slashdot? The linux-mentality is that any service should be free, just because there are some people in the world that COULD or WOULD set it up for free.
Try arguing on the merits here and face facts. You want CDDB to continue to provide and pay for an absolutely free service for you and your friends.
Why should they?
-thomas
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
"And like that
i entered in over two dozen of my cd's into cddb back in it's early days. i did it with the intention of sharing that info with everyone
And you have, thanks to CDDB.
i'm not sure that there was a notice at the time saying that the data could be taken into a closed form, but maybe there was.
Ummm... you submitted track names to a company, whose sole service is to respond to search requests and send your info to those people. You don't even own the right to those track names. If anyone, the artist does.
You submitted that data in exchange for the service that CDDB provides. It's that simple.
-thomas
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
"And like that
Furthermore, many people submitted the information without charging anybody and they thought their help would remain free, because the initital licence was GPL
Was CDDB GPL'ed when it started or at some point during its life? If so, does that version contain this "encoding" in it?
Just wondering if most of the info on FreeDB is actually correct. I've put in CDs and had them lookup CDDB and come back with people's handles and URLs as Album names. Or something even more annoying is people labeling track names with the track number in them (ex: 01.song 1, 02.song 2). Talk about annoying... This is the main problem when you let anybody submit data. The data is only as accurate as the people submitting it...
Why not just start a mass backup of the CDDB into FreeDB and pick up where it left us off ? Just query every single possible disc-id and keep it somewhere warm. IANAL, but since this is information that was publicly submitted in the first place, I don't think they can sue anybody for copying what they copied in the first place. Although not every judge has a functional logic module in his/her brain.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
Well, last I looked, grip already uses FreeDB by default (or maybe that's just the default Helix config), and I hadnt even noticed. So, if cddb goes the way of self-annihilation through irrelevance, no big loss.
This seems to be the way internet companies do business. First offer the product free until you have a large enough customer base, and then start charging them, and lose your whole customer base. If they were going to charge for their service they should have started from the begining, because now people will just flock to an alternitive, and they will lose whatever little revenue they would have gotten by going down a diffrent route for revenue (ie. advertisements)
You submitted that data in exchange for the service that CDDB provides. It's that simple.
Except that CDDB changed the service they provided without the permission of their contributers.
I'm sorry. I'm practical :
...
17: Element / Red Meat & Beauty Queens E.P.
Just went to FreeDB and entered 'Queen' as request. Here's what I got
1: Deacon Blue / Queen of The New Year (Single)
2: Queensrÿche / Greatest Hits
3: Queens of the Stone Age / Rated R
4: Queens of the Stone Age / Rated R
5: Queensryche / Rage For Order
23: Freddie Mercury / Queen
25: The Royal Philarmonic Orchestra / Queen's Rhapsody
This means that they have bad db format. Or wrong query format. Why didn't they just copy CDDB's format ?
Why not just start a mass backup of the CDDB into FreeDB and pick up where it left us off?
Right on. This looks like an absolutely clear example of good versus evil. Though there are far greater injustices out there that need to be corrected, this is a good place to start. Lets test our power.
--
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
I use grip with freedb as primary. If freedb doesn't have it and cddb.com does, grip will prompt to update your primary server with the data off the secondary. That way freedb will become as good a hit rate as the proprietry one. Scrag.
Computers are like air conditioners; they stop working if you open windows
CDDB is a perfect example of the disingenuous (but all too common) practice of taking work done (typing in track names) by many in a cooperative effort without permission (the work was given with the understanding that it would continue to be available free without condition), then closing it off for commercial gain. See also Deja (Usenet posts--older archive removed).
:>)
Are there safeguards to prevent FreeDB from doing the same thing some day? Had CDDB been required to pay authors some sum ($1?) for each CD cataloged, they likely would never have dared to choke this stuff off.
(As an aside, if I had written MediaJukebox, I'd randomize the client identifier or masquerade various "authorized" clients (just like changing the user agent field to avoid sites that discriminate based on browser (or block wget)) Then if cddb (now <puke>Gracenote</puke>) blocked MediaJukebox they'd have the people who paid (or tagreed to conditions or kowtowed in some way) them upset. Then they could sue, causing more publicity for FreeDB
BTW, where's the RIAA? Surprised their panties aren't in a knot about lists of album names, titles, and track times being available for download. Or has Gracenote paid them off?
I'm tempted to write a perl program to begin querying cddb with random ID's and populating FreeDB.
IIRC, cddb used to be freely available.
I used to submit enties and I once or twice downloaded the whole cddb file to use as sample data for database projects. (Maybe it was IMDB...)
How exactly do things like this become private?(CDDB, IMDB, whois...)
People contribute their time and effort to building a public database and some ########s turn it into some private business. Then they limit who can see it.
(Probably it boils down to who owns the hardware.)
I guess there is no more good will good faith efforts when the pointy-haired set get involved.
I don't get it. These things THRIVED before there were restrictions - why do these petty little dotcoms think they can change the rules and expect to remain viable?
I expect that I'm not the only one who no longer types in song titles and submits them to cddb - Let them do their own typing from now on...
Tell me more about FreeDB - I'm listening.
Jim in Tokyo
-- My Weblog.
Not that it would happen, but if they wanted to, could a directory like Dmoz (which apparently cannot respond to emails from prospective editors) shut out their site from those who would use it freely? What do we have to ensure that something like this won't happen? What about a site that doesn't distribute its content all over, like SourceForge?
icqqm [ICQ:11952102]
they referenced the cddb logo and said something like 'use our software to label your discs'.
so if cddb has got kenwood's attention, you know it went mainstream.
--
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
distributed.net did get very boring for a long while and I stopped paying attention. OGRs are hard to find and there's no substitute, so it's good to see all the effort being put to something useful. It is a little bit boring still, but that shouldn't be a measure of the hard work of science.
The CDDB guys hate blind people? There's a headline for you...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
They are abusing our trust - so what can we do?
Start submitting 'corrections' to entries...
If they are relying upon public input for their bread and butter, start putting flies in the butter.
I would guess that a fair percentage of slashdot's readership *built* their database and have the ability to render it unusable.
What legal obligation do we have to keep paying their salaries by populating their databases? Let's say I stick in a CD by the backstreet boys (supposing I owned one,) What if I decided that the the first song was called 'Some crappy song by backstreet boys' and the next was called 'Another crappy song by backstreet boys'.
Who's to say that there is anything wrong with that?
In another way, it's been happening - If you pop in a CD of J-Pop, half the time, the song titles come back as 'Japanese' since the title is written in Kanji. Is one more subjective than the other?
CDDB - I know you are reading this. Don't alienate this group. You'll regret it.
Jim in Tokyo
(PS - If you're right about google being next, I will sell my computer...)
-- My Weblog.
Well they might not be able to but send your email to support@cddb.com telling something like.
I have submitted some query's to your database because I thought it to be GPL'd or running under similar licence. I am not happy with your change of licence and want my submissions out of the database.
Please remove all my submissions
Sincerely yours.
I agree with others who have said that all this whining about CDDB is pointless, since FreeDB exists, and has a huge amount of data in it already.
However, FreeDB very much needs help. There are a number of bugs and horrible misfeatures in it, and the main developer seems to have close to zero time to work on it. Pretty much any time I've found a problem, his response has been, ``yeah, too bad I don't have any time.''
Not that there's anything wrong with that: he's doing a big service to all of us by keeping it running at all. But, if any of you do have the time and ability, it seems to me that FreeDB desperately needs a co-developer.
i entered in over two dozen of my cd's into cddb back in it's early days. i did it with the intention of sharing that info with everyone. i'm not sure that there was a notice at the time saying that the data could be taken into a closed form, but maybe there was.
it certainly solidifies my resolve to publish my code under the gpl and not any other license. this kind of crap pisses me off and the leeches out there don't even get the moral equivilant of heartburn when they close off access to the very people that built their system. yet another reason to hate suits.
US Citizen living abroad? Register to vote!
In the same way, cddb is full of information which is not only public domain but which was largely submitted by users of the system anyway! I know I've submitted CD track information to cddb before.
How have lobbyists been /so/ successful in convincing lawmakers that everything needs to be protected by copyright?
MyopicProwls
MyopicProwls
My homepage
This should be open source code, open database, and we should be able to be mirror at any time.
Although I did check out their faq that they claim that they recieve about 200 new entries / corrections to their database from "dedicated users". Since so much of their IP is from 3rd parties, maybe a class action lawsuit should occure from the unpayed workers asking for a piece of the pie...
III.IIVIVIXIIVIVIIIVVIIIIXVIIIXIIIIIIIIVIIIIVVIII
From: Freecddb's Why page
"(Funny sidenote: One programmer told me, that his cd-player will be banned if he is refusing to display the CDDB-logo. His software is a console-based program (it does not produce any graphical output) for blind people...)."
Its designed to completely supercede CDDB by providing a free and open database for information without the cumbersome album model and cumbersome license agreements. Its being sponsored by Emusic.com and Relatable.com.
The project leader is Robert Kaye. He's currently at Burning Man so he's not here to defend himself.
Jacob Everist
jeverist@fairtunes.com
------
wildmage
Memoirs of a Mad Scientist
> Simmer down buddy, the government doesn't care about you.
Are you sure?
M.G.
Excessive forking causes un-wanted children.
my dictionary says that means "exclusively owned". No one other than the FSF owns the copyrights on the code for GCC. That is why they are allowed to redistribute the code under non-GPL licenses like they did for Motorola.
If the FSF releases the code into the public domain it would cease to be proprietary and become public. But the FSF hasn't done that.
Proprietary and closed are orthogonal.
I know exactly what the problem is...
People are selfish.
-thomas
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
"And like that
It's too bad that these databases don't include the Universal Product Code. It would allow for some mildly interesting barcoding apps when combined with the CueCat barcoding hack.
The reality of FBI background checks isn't as far off as you may think.
In Vermont, school teachers are being required to have FBI background checks before being hired.
You can read about it in one of the local Vermont newspapers.
i guess soon we will not be able to log onto microsoft and friends' site using netscape hehehe... sorry stupid joke (not even funny)
Hi- sorry for an offtopic post...
when I try to hit slashdot from home, I get an Apache screen saying "You don't have permission to view / on this server" or somesuch, whether I'm in Netscape or IE. From work it's fine, from my old academic account via lynx it's fine. My home connection is a cable modem via RCN. Any idea if I'm being blocked at the slashdot server level for some reason?
SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death