Slashdot Mirror
RealNetworks Settles Lawsuit With Streambox
sdo1 pointed out this CNet story: "Out of court settlement, but it looks like Real won and Streambox lost. Real keeps it's broadcast format proprietary, and Streambox can't distribute tools that decode the stream for such fair use puposes as time shifting and personal archiving." This is not good news for anyone hoping for commonsense wisdom from the bench when it comes to the provisions of the DMCA. Instead, it looks like this settlement came about in part because "Judge Marsha Pechman ruled that RealNetworks made a strong case that the Streambox VCR could be in violation of the DMCA."
Real is a company whose immenent demise at the hands of Microsoft I'm not going to spend much time lamenting.
Their software is generally bloated and buggy, their video format is viciously proprietary and mediocre, and they've got a horrible record on privacy and software invasiveness.
In short, they're a nasty, unpleasant little company, and most importantly, they don't sell any products or services which are not available elsewhere at an improved level for free.
I, for one, will dance on their grave when they're gone.
Zeltar, of no account.
You're absolutely right, someone should mirror This
And, even if you are right, apparently they'd have to take it up with a librarian...
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
Actually, I was wrong: it's even easier.
:)
RealPlayer 7 on Linux uses esd, so just use esdmon to dump whatever input esd gets. Then encode it, it should be 44.1kHz, 16-bit audio by default.
I just dumped the sample sound, now I'll have to grab a decent encoder.
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
about Macrovision;
first off, I don't need to worry about that piece of shit - I have an Apex 600a - secret menu! nya nya! Otherwise it would have been impossible for me to set up my system the way it currently runs; my TV has only ONE input, so I had to route my DVD through my VCR. I had to disable Macrovision for my TV to get an uncorrupted signal - even if I wasn't recording with the VCR! This is complete bullshit -
but you know the other solution the video store suggested to me? For $60, I could buy a special filter to "fix" the signal. Isn't this a copy-protection circumvention device? Funny, the damn thing was made by Sony!
On the Skywalker Ranch where the Storm Trooper Posse says:
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
So that means that the Iraqis and Cubans are laughing their asses off right about now?
On the Skywalker Ranch where the Storm Trooper Posse says:
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
That will definately make a difference.
I'd much rather say "Streaming Vorbis" instead...
DNA just wants to be free...
Personally, I don't think your involvement with hackers.com would wash very well in the political arena. Keep the day job for now.
There are, however, some very specific things you can do:
DNA just wants to be free...
No, "piracy" will do about as much for advancing Free media as it has for Free software. Approximately nil.
RMS didn't set about illegally distributing software to achieve his goals; instead, he wrote his own software that he could legally distribute in the fashion he desired.
Freely distributable content, voluntarily made by artists, is the only thing that can "save" us.
DNA just wants to be free...
Well, I don't know of that much being worked on. Some amount of Free music, and of course visual artists will put some stuff up on their sites, but the latter is often still relatively restricted.
What I'd really like to see happen is Free animation, film, and other "multimedia" work in particular, as well as written fiction, as well as a simple, consistent, and usable donation system to help support all this.
Since I'm a coder, visual artist, writer, and musician, I'm starting to experiment with as many of these as I can. I've already started a few personal projects -- in the next year or so we'll see if they get anywhere. Real "multimedia" stuff is down the road, though -- the first few items are manga and serial fiction. I have some ideas for implementing a web-based Street Performer-type system, as well.
Hopefully I'll manage to squeeze enough time around school and work to get stuff done, and ideally eventually I'll be able to replace the work bit. :P (at least the school bit will end soon)
What really needs to happen, though, is for multidisciplinary groups to be doing this kind of thing.
Another thing I'd like to see (and that I plan on doing myself) is people releasing their work into the public domain after 14 years (the original copyright term), to combat/protest the current sick situation where nothing substantial has entered the intellectual/cultural commons since World War I...
And yes, I realize all this is untried. I'm not demanding that anyone else do this. Someone has to experiment with this stuff, though, and so that's why I want to put my own time (and to some extent money) where my mouth is.
DNA just wants to be free...
Well, it looks like we're going to be increasingly cut out of legally participating in the current media standards (DVD/CSS, Real, MP3) by software patents and the DMCA.
Worse, this is extending into hardware. We're nearing the point where it will be illegal to write open-source video drivers, because the connection to the monitor is encrypted in a CSS-like fashion [before you call me paranoid, Intel and a group of other corporations are already developing just that and more -- do some research on HDCP, the High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection spec, and its application in e.g. DVI].
The only compelling argument (for most people) against such draconian hardware measures is the existence legitimate Free alternative technologies (and unencumbered content to go with it!). Of all the boats, let's hope we don't miss this one.
All those that can, hit ogg.org and similar projects, and see what you can contribute. Myself, I plan on working on the content side of things.
DNA just wants to be free...
First off, you're splitting hairs. The industry doesn't seem to give a damn about the differences between hardware and software. They consistantly refer to DeCSS as a device.
You've totally missed my point.
Movie Studio A releases DVDs using CSS, a trade-secret, unpatented and uncopyrighted scrambling algorithm.
Player Manufacturer B releases DVD players that can descramble CSS, after signing a contract to obtain those trade secrets.
Next, the trade secret is reverse-engineered, placing it in the public domain. There is NO IP protection for CSS. The MPAA letters do not claim that CSS is a trade secret, or that it is a patent or copyright violation. Their ONLY claim is that DeCSS is an "unlawful circumvention device"
My Company C releases copyrighted DVDs using an unlicensed CSS encoder.
Software Company D releases unlicensed DVD players that can descramble CSS. (livid)
Movie Studio A claims the right to sue Software Company D, based on the fact that D's players can descramble A's discs without the authority of copyright owner A.
Why does My Company C not have the right to do the same thing? My Company C never gave Player Manufacturer B permission to manufacture DVD players that can decode my DVDs.
The MPAA is not claiming that DeCSS is a trade secret violation. They are only claiming that DeCSS is illegal because it is an "unlawful circumvention device" that provides access to movies without the MPAA's permission
An unlicensed encoder does not provide access to any copyrighted works, and is not a circumvention device under the DMCA.
As for the trade secret issue.
I agree with your comments about stealing trade secrets, but no one is claiming that DeCSS was derived from a stolen copy of DVD-CCA documents. In fact, all of the evidence so far indicates that DeCSS was derived legally -- by reverse engineering a legally purchased copy of the XING player in a country where such reverse engineering is fully legal.
This is the proper, legal way to expose trade secrets.
I'm strongly tempted to produce my own copyrighted work in DVD format and then sue the DVDCCA for circumventing my Technological Protection Measure.
This is an extremely interesting theoretical attack on the DMCA.
1) Create a CSS-encrypted DVD. Now that the algorithm is known, this should be trivial.
2) Get a lawyer and prepare to spend a lot of money.
3) Send cease and desist orders to one of the established player manufacturers, citing the DMCA. They are producing hardware that can remove the copy protection on your work, without your permission.
Now, the court can do one of three things:
1) Order the DVD player manufacturer to stop manufacturing DVD players (which would cause an industry stampede to Congress to get the DMCA modified or repealed)
2) Toss your claim, thus creating a precedent that the inventor of a TPM is entitled to a perpetual patent-like monopoly over the use of that TPM, and hopefully raising the eyebrows of the appeals courts and the Supreme Court.
3) Toss the DMCA as unconstitutional.
Anything I missed?
When the DMCA is first used successfully against a large publishing company, such as an RIAA or MPAA member, it will be found unconstitutional or suddenly repealed.
Right now it's being used to crush small, upcoming companies, but it's an incredibly powerful weapon, and if a small company can figure out a way to get their hands on it and successfully use it against a big company, they will be in just as powerful a position as the lawyers who just convinced a judge to allow lawsuits against the LAPD using the RICO statutes.
Someone HAS to have this stuff. WHO'S GOT IT?
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
I am so glad that I will continue to be in the wonderfull position of having to re-download realmedia content everytime that I want to see/hear it. That makes much more sense then downloading once and archiving it!
Can anyone say "Streaming MP3?"
Brought to you by Frobozz Magic Penguin Fodder.
AFAIK, it's hard to get blank DVD disks that don't have the key sector preburned with zeros. This may make it difficult to create a CSS-protected disk.
Vectro, jms, anyone else who wants to try this: if you actually manage to create a CSS-protected work and get to step 2 (the one involving spending money on lawyers) let me know and I'll pitch in.
---
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
"We are pleased to be working with RealNetworks to put this behind us and to bring the creative energies of our software developers together with the leading company in digital media distribution," Bob Hildeman, CEO of Streambox, said in a statement.
Am I the only one reminded of middle school and how the bigger kids would put you in a headlock and not let you out until you said that your mom was a whore or something like that?
Man this brings back memories.
It's good to see that the tradition lives on in the grownup world.
--Shoeboy
This is bad in that it is almost an admission of guilt, giving up the fight.
---
-
ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only
To hell with congress, those fuckers only work for the highest bidder, which is not us. Get out your debuggers and packet sniffers, reverse engineer the Real protocols, and set it loose on the net à la DeCSS. Not even the government and its guns can stuff a genie back in its bottle.
While I certainly see broadcast and cable TV being considered in time shifting arguments, I can't see the same when it comes to streamed content via the Internet
I'm not a fan of "one time use" entertainment (i.e. Divx)
Ah, but with DivX you actually sign a _contract_ saying that you enter into a PayPerView arrangement. Thus, the sale/rental is covered by contract law, not copyright law.
A Realmedia video available to anyone is for all practical purposes equal to a TV broadcast. Why shouldn't the content be covered by normal copyright law?
I can't see the same when it comes to streamed content via the Internet, especially when that streaming is via proprietary format at the originating company's expense.
What has the expense got to do with it? TV broadcasts also cost. Publishing a webzine costs.
They publish it. Ergo, the content should be covered by copyright law.
The way I see it, you play by Real's rules (watch it when it's streamed real-time) or don't watch it at all. No one is forcing you to use the technology, God knows Real has huge competition in this area anyway and if their business model is so evil, you can rest assured it will fail due to consumer backlash in the end.
Sorry, but I find that bullshit.
Why should companies be allowed to modify copyright law to suit their business model?
If J.K.R wrote Windows: Puteulanus fenestra mortalis!
Ah, but with DivX you actually sign a _contract_ saying that you enter into a PayPerView arrangement. Thus, the sale/rental is covered by contract law, not copyright law.
... does that mean DVD manufacturers are "modifying copyright" simply because you can't copy a DVD without special equipment that is on the fringe of legality? Hell no. If this whole DeCSS thing works out for the "people" (it won't, don't get your hopes up) then this may change, but until then ... it's a fact of life.
... if the data owner decides to add even more conditions, it's their right .. just as it's your right to decline to accept those terms and not utilize the data.
.. they can determine exactly how it can be used, and you as an end user only have two options ... agree, or don't. You have no fair use rights in this case.
And you don't have to "agree" to Real's terms and conditions when you install the software? I'm certain you do, just as you must agree to almost any software vendor's terms for using their product. Last I hear, click-wrap agreements were not unconstitutional or even on shaky ground.
A Realmedia video available to anyone is for all practical purposes equal to a TV broadcast. Why shouldn't the content be covered by normal copyright law?
No, Realmedia video is available to a select group of people. Those who a) have an internet connection, b) have agreed to Real's terms for using their RealVideo software, and c) that choose to login to a certain site and request the stream.
Real's content is not floating around in the air like network TV. Once the FCC regulates Real content, then I'll agree with fair use/time shifting arguments but until then, it is a proprietary data feed bound to Real's terms and conditions.
Why should companies be allowed to modify copyright law to suit their business model?,
They are not modifying copyright laws at all, they are determining how they want THEIR proprietary data utilized.
If Braveheart comes on TNT, you can tape it
What most people don't seem to understand is that copyright is a bare minimum
Real's feeds are NOT like the government subsidized airwaves that have been deemed a minimal communication's mechanism that should be afforded to all Americans. It is a proprietary data feed, Real owns it
and Streambox can't distribute tools that decode the stream for such fair use puposes as time shifting and personal archiving. This is not good news for anyone hoping for commonsense wisdom from the bench when it comes to the provisions of the DMCA.
While I certainly see broadcast and cable TV being considered in time shifting arguments, I can't see the same when it comes to streamed content via the Internet, especially when that streaming is via proprietary format at the originating company's expense.
I'm not a fan of "one time use" entertainment (i.e. Divx) but I'm not about to support a company that circumvents the safeguards put in place by the company selling the product either. I'll simply not use their product, in this case, RealPlayer. Their business model may not be right for you, that doesn't mean someone circumventing their protections is justified nor does it mean YOU have any rights to time shift the content just because you can under other fair use situations like broadcast TV.
The way I see it, you play by Real's rules (watch it when it's streamed real-time) or don't watch it at all. No one is forcing you to use the technology, God knows Real has huge competition in this area anyway and if their business model is so evil, you can rest assured it will fail due to consumer backlash in the end.
AFAIK, it specifically outlaws any device that circumvents anti-piracy protections. DVD players do so, but have copyright protections of their own.
Does the latter matter, after all the deCSS software also has copyright protection.
There were better laws that had been doing just fine for decades before the DMCA was purchased. Those would the standard copyright laws with exemptions for fair use and none of this "anti-circumvention" crap.
Except for the other problem of copyright lenght getting longer and longer.
Shoot them straight in the fucking head
Don't you have to do a few other things first to comply with the second ammendment. i.e. form a militia and declare them enemies of the state.
Rader
If someone wrote realplayer in opensource that didn't save anything to disk, that might seem okay at first (it doesn't allow copyright infringement). But since it's open source, it might be next to trivial for someone else to modify the program to save to disk rather than display to screen.
So, at the very least, when dealing with programs that allow viewing of copyrighted material that would otherwise be locked, it seems like DMCA would require opensource programs to obfuscate the interface between the decoder and the displayer/player.
But then their copy protection mechanism would be downgraded to how well the OSS coder obfuscated the interface, and might make it illegal to untangle the interface.
But in the end, it doesn't seem like DMCA is very compatible with OSS.
--
Older versions of Windows Media Player used to play contemporary versions of the RealMedia format. Quicktime, too.
The government fixed that.
MSK
Even on that front, of course, the theorey fails. Streambox didn't violate anyone's copyright. They did, however violate the DMCA. But as we all know, the DMCA takes away fair use.
I'm strongly tempted to produce my own copyrighted work in DVD format and then sue the DVDCCA for circumventing my Technological Protection Measure.
The DMCA does not need to be fixed or amended. It needs to be eliminated.
How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
I have a copy of Streambox VCR 1.0 at home. It's a Beta version, and it's been cracked, so that should tell you something about it's stablity. The reason for using this instead of just recording from the audio output is the way the data is delivered to my system. All it takes is a little line noise or server snafu and you will wind up with a recording that has a bunch of blank spaces. Not very fun. Streambox VCR saves the stream to a file, and can also resume it if their is a connection problem. Not very useful for live stuff, but nice for other things like radio show arcives that are deleted every few months. It also tells you some stats and info, etc. It's a really usefull tool for people who have flaky connections. Works with audio and video, but you sometimes have to muck around to find exactly where the audio/video stream is coming from, as it is sometimes bundled up in some java filler.
You can still get it from some warez sites, if you are into that kinda thing.
This case didn't really mean a whole lot. Many of the issues that make the DMCA a bad law either weren't present or weren't raised.
Streambox allowed access to work that was never purchased. This makes a big difference in the fair use analysis.
Streambox lost under 1201(b)(1) which concerns circumvention for copyright infringement purposes. They did also lose an (a)(2) claim, but they have no way to claim their access is authorized by first sale, since there was no first sale.
They didn't press any of the Constitutional claims that were raised to Kaplan. They keep their source code proprietary which indicates that they are not trying to communicate coding ideas.
They can't qualify for the reverse engineering exception because it requires the interoperability not result in copyright infringement.
Shoutcast makes a streaming audio server in some ways similar to what real is doing. Is this something they could bitchslap me for if they had the desire?
I have no idea how shoutcast feels about my program and I doubt anybody there even knows about it. Makes you nervous to develop software these days.
The inevitable consequence of the DMCA restrictions on fair use will be to drive media services like Napster and MP3.com offshore, like many of the gambling sites, beyond the effective reach of the DMCA. This will be good for globalization and drive the tendency of the Internet to obsolete national governments. The market always finds a way.
This was not a legal ruling by the judge and sets no legal precedent whatsoever. Since Streambox agreed to an OUT-OF-COURT settlement. Think for a second about what that means. Obviously Streambox realized they didn't have a leg to stand on and decided to settle rather than fight. This gives no weight to anything since the decision will never be on the books for precedent.
--------- Beware the dragon, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.
Does someone know any more on this subject? If this is correct, you're pretty much screwed if you're in any UN country.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
This will have the extremely convienent (From the MPAA and RIAA's point of view) side effect of preventing anyone from creating any content without their permission and sanction, allowing them to lock the market up even more than they already have.
Guys over at Suck and Petreley may smirk now and call us idealistic and greedy. They'll be singing another tune altogether when they have to ask Time Warner for permission to publish their articles in SecureXML(tm) which is the only thing anyone has a browser to anymore.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
I have always wanted a solution to the RealMedia crisis. I hate the player, but some clips that get sent around are only in RM formats. On a rare occasion, I'll want to watch a RM stream, but if I do I want it to be the highest-quality stream. That wouldn't be a problem if the player would just buffer the entire clip (even in an encrypted form) somewhere before they play it.
= -=-=-=-=-=-=-
No...they have to try to play it live, and so it ends up skipping and looking awful.
Well, what about this solution:
I saw a driver a long time ago that emulated a sound card, but really just dumped the content to the hard drive. Can't the same approach be applied to video?
Imagine a Windows 98 driver that emulates a standard VGA screen (640x480x8bit). All this driver does it take in the information from the OS, compose it into a bitmap of the screen and then save it to disk. Maybe throw in MPEG compression and output a stream.
The real trick is how to work this since it wouldn't be viewable. That's where 98 comes in, with it's multiple monitor support. You add this driver as a second monitor and put it to the right of your current workspace. On your primary (actual) monitor, load up the RM content. Then drag the window off the screen to the right onto the "virtual" monitor. Then hit the hotkey that plays the content and let it all be captured to disk. From there, just use a video editor to crop every frame to remove the desktop and Real player window.
What about it? Could this be done? It doesn't have to be a Windows solution, but that's all I know so I'm sure someone else could figure out a *nix solution.
This solution would also work for Windows Media and QuickTime...it would get them all in one fell swoop! "If I can view it, I can record it..."
- JoeShmoe
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-- I wonder which will go down in history as the bigger failure: the War on Drugs or the War on Filesharing
Man, I was taking a nap...
.sig and look in the appropriate directory.... NOTE THAT I HAVE NOT TESTED THE FILES YET FOR WORKING STATUS/VIRUSES/WHATEVER. I got them from some FTP site in .ru....
I wake up (or did I?), head over to slashdot, and see THIS, and I think.... damn this is a bad dream! But then I realize that I actually AM awake. Well folks, this is REALLY ****** ironic because (within past 2 days) I _JUST_ finished finding a copy of Streambox VCR.... glad I did it now! And just so all of you can have it, click the link in my
Anyways, download and mirror, y'all know the drill.
-----
And I had them both before all this DMCA business.
http://crummysocks.com
- that the supplied Windows 2000 driver works with Windows 2000,
- that the supplied Windows 9x driver works with both Windows 98 and Windows Me and is 32-bit (not a VxD), and
- that whenever Digital Rights Management is turned on, the sound card driver disables all digital output (either from a connector on the card or to a disk file).
Then Microsoft signs the driver digitally, asserting that "if your box crashes, it's not this driver's fault, and this driver is allowed to play copyrighted streams."<O
( \
XGNOME vs. KDE: the game!
Will I retire or break 10K?
Windows Millennium Edition supports driver signing: companies submit their drivers to M$ and they get a logo license and a digital signature. Its audio pipeline will not play copyrighted data over an unsigned (i.e. untrusted) driver.
<O
( \
XGNOME vs. KDE: the game!
Will I retire or break 10K?
Have a look at ASFRecorder, it allows you to save streaming ASF files and its written by some anonymous group.
l ight=asfrecorder
http://freshmeat.net/projects/asfrecorder/?high
Full source and win32 gui included.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
So the "For crist's sake its just a video recorder" argument didn't work then.
But laws aren't permanent. They can be overturned on costitutional grounds, although I don't see an obvious way to apply that attack in this case. Better yet, laws like this can be undone by Congress.
The Geek Vote doesn't hold much sway in Congress, so we need to get John Q. Public interested in this. If enough people complain (and threaten to vote according to their complaints), then politicians will do the right thing.
My mom is not a Karma whore!
----
Instead of continuing to post various accounts of where the DMCA was used to prevent a company from reverse engineering a protocol to foster interoperability, host a petition on the /. site and allow visitors to sign it. There is nothing that anybody can post to this story that has not already been said about DeCSS, CueCat, etc.
/.ers would be willing to help as well. Slashdot's YRO section needs to evolve beyond simply news to include an ACLU-like action center.
Not only would you finally be able to produce something tangible that represents the opinions of the community, you would get TONS of page-views as people include a link to the petition on their sites. I would be willing to work with you to draft the petition and I'm sure other
ByteMyCode.com: A Web 2.0 code sharing community.
Yeah, I know that reasoning didn't help Jon Johanssen much, but I'd like to believe all the world is NOT territory of the USA. BTW, what is Jon's current status? Is he clear regarding Norwegian law or what?
The critical thing about online activism is to make it simple to participate. IW goes part of the way but doesn't itself mobilize opponents... maybe a "Fight DMCA" slashbox would be a good way to start.
sulli
sulli
RTFJ.
Under the DMCA, would it be legal to, say, reverse engineer the PCAnywhere network protocol to create a 3rd party software program that works just like pcAnywhere?
Would it be legal under the DMCA to reverse engineer the java applet that Symantec has created in order to do the same?
What exactly are we allowed to reverse engineer, and when?
-thomas
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
"And like that
I think that in the present litigious environment the only way we're going to get some of these handy items (like a 'VCR' for realaudio and windows streaming media. I tried out a cracked version of Streambox VCR and it's really great) is to quietly develop them out of public view and then release them into the world. Sort of the way Gnutella happened, except that the source would be released as well. Anyone know of an effort to develop a Streambox VCR-like tool?
"If I have seen further than other men, it is by stepping on their glasses." - Michael Swaine
I wish this had turned out otherwise...it would be nice if someone else could use Real's format. I don't know about anyone else, but RealPlayer bogs my computer down like I'm running moslow at like 2% or something. I'm also pretty sick of streaming media that's in a 1.5" square section of my screen at about 8 fps...I mean, I have a cable modem, not two tin cans and a string here.
OK, ranting complete now. I would DEFINITELY like to see either someone else be licensed to use the format, or see another streaming format take over the market. I can't take RealPlayer any more.
For people who haven't had enough of the DMCA, here is an ISP info sheet put out by the University of Texas (UT)....
I wonder if these types of notices will eventually be federally mandated to post somewhere (think: company lunchroom).
Once the DMCA is turned against a large entity instead of "cannon fodder", I think the public will mysteriously begin to dislike it. Who knew?
;-)
--
Spindletop Blackbird, the GNU/Linux Cube.