Slashdot Mirror
Gracenote Reponds Regarding Roxio Lawsuit
jark writes: "Gracenote has responded to the community with an 'open letter' regarding their lawsuit against Roxio and their switch to FreeDB. Seems that they wanted to completely dodge all the bullets that were shot their way rather than address the real issues at hand (such as why they think they can claim OUR inputs are THEIR intellectual propery, among others)."
Did I miss something or did he completely skip the question of _why_ they want to sue Roxio?
Honestly, I think gracenote doesn't have much of a leg to stand on in this case. The real people they need to sue are the freedb.org folks and not Roxio... and honestly I don't think suing the freedb.org folks would do much good either.
I think the community at large would do better without these bozos peddling their wares.
--
Most of this piece is conciliatory fluff, but the real point is here somewhere in the middle:
Although the raw data is user submitted, the storage, retrieval, categorization, and organization of the database, the access interface, and the matching and filtering methods are absolutely proprietary, and we will do what is necessary to defend this intellectual property
Current cddb licensees turning to freedb is the most immediate threat to their revenue, so first thing to do is scare their customers. Depending on any patents they have they might then force the freedb to develop a different protocol to do the same thing or even try to get exclusive rights to the concepts of matching CD signatures with an online database. We don't want to go there. Community driven alternatives must prevail.
The fact that the PTO only searches its own database was confirmed by the PTO's chief.
--
You know, you gotta get up real early if you want to get outta bed... (Groucho Marx)
"But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
-- Joe
I must be missing something here. As I see it, Adaptec used to subscribe to Gracenote's services. Then, Adaptec decided to switch providers, and not pay Gracenote any more. How is this against the law? If Netscape includes a site in their default bookmarks, and then later decides to remove the bookmark, does the site have the right to sue Netscape?
As far as I see it, Adaptec is merely using a common business practice. Intel does it, Microsoft does it, Apple does it. It's called capitalism. If there's a cheaper alternative, or in this case a cheaper provider, USE THE CHEAPER ONE.
This letter gives me no answers to my questions. If they explained that Adaptec is required by law to use Gracenote, then I'd understand. They made no mention of it, however, and so I still remain here, confused. If anyone knows if such a contract or deal was made that prohibits Adaptec from using freedb, then please enlighten me.
Oh, and one other thing. They say, "Gracenote only charges licensing fees to developers of commercial applications, NOT end-users." But who do the developers pass these fees to? End users. They're presenting a logical falsely.
We should develop a non-commercial program using Gracenote's technology that compares the entries in both DB's then submits anything that FreeDB is lacking.
Gracenote does claim to allow non-commercial access to it's DB's for personal use...
by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
Actually I was thinking about it a little more. And Gracenote is actually breaking the law where as FreeDB is not. This is why:
Gracenote:
Believes that they "own" the content of the database, they call this "IP" (per the buzzword that everyone is using these days). However they allow the end user to use the database limitlessly as long as the client has been "approved" by Gracenote. (if free or not free etc.)
FreeDB:
Knows damn well that it doesn't own the content of the data. FreeDB believes that the data in the database is a community resource - getting to it may be slightly different as they own the equipment that the data runs on. This is entirely dependant upon the community at large.
The reason why Gracenote is probably screwing up is simple. 1) The record company, 2) artist, or 3) individual owns the IP. Not Gracenote. If 1) the record company has trademarks regarding the name of the song - they own that for a number of years. Sorry. If there is no record company, and the artist is independant then 2) the Artist owns it. Depending on both 1 and 2 it comes back to 3) the individual consumer. Simply put unless the consumer is given a liscense to sell or give away the intellectual properity they have no right to give it away to Gracenote for sale. If they DO then Gracenote *MUST* notify the consumer that this is their intent - and as such the consumer has the option not to allow this.
None of this happens with Gracenote, simply put they take and sell. This is a sad thing indeed because Gracenote doesn't have any idea of how these companies look at the IP that THEY protect. Gracenote should take precautions as not to be sued themselves.
At any rate, thought this was interesting
Essentially gracenote is suing because they are using a competing service. Regardless of if it is the same protocol or not. This won't stand up in court simply for the fact that businesses can (and do) support community services instead of a corporation. Gracenote must have learned that they have no value to add to the service, and as such they must protect it. Sadly this is not going to fly with Freedb out there. If Roxio / Adeptec wants to use a differing service - who cares? Unless Gracenote / Adeptec had some other agreement above and beyond .... there just isn't much to stand on here.
I haven't really understood what Gracenote has sued Roxio for, and this letter did not make it any clearer.
As a user of the CDDB service through CD Wizard (For windows 95 at the time) I inputed nearly 200+ CDs that were not already in the database, and recently I have been writing a Windows based application and they want to charge me for access to what boils down to my own work? This is the most baseless lawsuit ever. Moreover, the reson they have brough on this lawsuit is because the storage, retrieval, categorization, and organization of the database, the access interface, and the matching and filtering methods are absolutely proprietary so what have Roxio done wrong against this?
UG!
-eric
They're absolutely right. It's not about data, it's about intellectual property. IANAL, but at least I can spot a red herring when I see one.
-jhp
/. -- the Free Republic of technology.
Although the raw data is user submitted, the storage, retrieval, categorization, and organization of the database, the access interface, and the matching and filtering methods are absolutely proprietary, and we will do what is necessary to defend this intellectual property.
Including suing someone who want to switch to a free alternative? Not mentioned.
Most of our developer partners understand our need to defray our costs, and don't demand that we provide our service for free. They also know that even if they had free access at one point in time it doesn't mean that they are guaranteed free access in perpetuity, at our expense.
But of course, if they want access to a free service without paying our expenses, then hell, we'd better get after them.
See how it works kids? Your average suit who needs to worry about business and that kind of stuff will read this excellent piece of spin-doctoring and wonder what all the hullabaloo is about. I reckon this letter cost them a fortune to draw up.
--- Hot Shot City is particularly good.
Did you know the cddb protocol supports/requires the client to send your user name and host name to the server with the request?
/~cddb/cddb.cgi?cmd=cddb+query+5c096c06+6+150+1270 2+50127+72362+81675+102570+2414&hello=private+free .the.cddb+Grip+2.95&proto=3
... interesting!
I grabbed this from xmcd 2.6pl0
hello=oolon+sunset.ankh.org+xmcd+v2.6PL0
User-Agent: Mozilla/4.7 (compatible; xmcd 2.6PL0)
Accept: text/plain
Having found this in xmcd I thought I would check another client, and this is what grip sent before they banned it.
GET
HTTP/1.1
Host: freedb.freedb.org
User-Agent: Grip/2.95
Accept: text/plain
I guess gracenotes didn't like an email address of private+free.the.cddb and of course there is grip's submission system which was how do i say
As a show of support, I've modified my copy of Winamp to query freedb instead of CDDB. (I'm not sure if the Linux players query CDDB or not... haven't ventured that far into Linux yet.)
Here's how:
Open the Winamp Preferences window and look under input plug-ins for "Nullsoft CD/LineIn plug-in." Select that item and click Configure. A window will pop up entitled "CD playback settings." Change the value in the CDDB server field to read as follows:
freedb.freedb.org:8880
And of course make sure the "Use CDDB" option is checkmarked.
I encourage all Winamp users who support freedb to do this.
Consider this hypothetical situation. You go to one of the numerous electronics or computer retailers across the fruited plain and you buy a computer off the shelf. (Please...you can stop laughing now at the absurdity of this possibility.) The thing's preloaded with the latest bluescreen inducer. (We're also assuming that, for whatever reason, thinking different isn't an option.) You'd rather replace the preloaded software with something that's a little more reliable. You borrow a copy of $LINUX_DISTRO|$FREEBSD_DISTRO from a friend and blow away Win$YEAR when Billy sends some attack lawyers down from Redmond and slaps you with a lawsuit for depriving him of any future revenue when Win`expr $YEAR + 1` comes along.
How is the above hypothetical any different than what Gracenote is trying to pull off here? They seem to be under the impression that once you use their service in your software, you're stuck with them forever.
(Does anybody have a tool and/or a project (probably of a distributed nature) going to brute-force CDDB for all possible data and pass the info along to one of the free (as in speech) alternatives?)
20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
Windows Media Player will obtain CD artist and track title information, just as most other similar software will do. Reading over the feature list for WMP7, the use of CDDB is not mentioned at all. Even ZDNet noted this in a review of WMP7. Seems that Microsoft didnt want to pay Gracenote either and has chosen to use AMG, though I am sure that Microsoft did pay a license fee of some sort. Regardless, it sure is interesting how Gracenote seems to have let Microsoft slide and chosen not to even attempt to tackle a lawsuit against them for not using their service yet they are pissed at Roxio. Nice of them to be convenient with their choices of who is infringing and who is not.
Guess they figure that Microsoft has too much money to invest in lawyers, as compared to Roxio, and therefore they would probably risk too much in litigating against the big boys in Redmond.
Steve Scherf and Ti Kan created CDDB in 1995 and wrote every line of code. Steve Scherf is, and has always been, the chief architect and a founder of CDDB Inc, now doing business as Gracenote.
So let me get this straight: it wasn't a nameless "them" that turned CDDB into the cash-greedy proprietary corporation it has now become, but rather it was one of the two co-founders of CDDB?!
Thanks, Steve. (I wonder what Mr. Kan has to say about this whole brouhaha?)
--
There is a worldwide trend of granting intellectual property protections to databases and compilations of information. This is especially prevelant in European nations, given the EU Database Directive.
For instance, check out the Terms of Use adhesion contract used by the Irish affiliate of Monster.com.
" The contents of the TMP Sites, such as text, graphics, images, logos, button icons, software and other material (collectively, "Material"), are protected under European Union, Irish and international copyright, database right, sui generis right, trademark and other intellectual property laws. Except as provided in the Agreement, all Material is the property of TMP or its content suppliers or clients. The compilation (meaning the collection, arrangement and assembly) of all content on each TMP Site (other than on Private Label pages of Monster.ie) is the exclusive property of TMP, subject to any and all intellectual property rights that Customer may have in the materials prepared and posted by Customer on a TMP Site and all other prior intellectual property rights that Customer may have, and may be protected by European Union, Irish and international copyright laws. "
Why would this be of signifcance to residents outside the EU? Well, consider the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction. The purpose of the Convention is to make foreign civil and commercial judgements recognizable and enforceable in other nations. One of the most controversial aspects of the Convention regards Intellectual Property, as different nations have different IP regimes -- like Database Protections and Sui Generis rights.
Now, if you're an American, you shouldn't have to be worried about European style Database Protections, other than considering them faraway, European oddities. Under the Hague Convention, a judgement regarding Database Protections against you held in an European court under European law can be enforced against you in America.
Hope that sheds a little light on your question.
Sincerely,
Vergil
Vergil Bushnell
Insects and Grafitti Photos
Oh, what the hell, here's mine. I took a different approach and asked him why they sued to begin with. -1, Redundant away.
Dear Mr. Hyman,
I just finished reading your open letter to the community regarding your lawsuit against Roxio/Adaptec (http://www.gracenote.com/open_letter.html).
What your letter fails to mention, and what I - along with numerous others - still don't understand, is why you're suing Roxio/Adaptec in the first place. From what I gather, Roxio/Adaptec has chosen not to use your CDDB service, instead opting to use a free competitor. In capitalist societies, the right to choose from whom you receive a particular product or service is a given, and in many cases, the lowest bidder gets the job.
Nowhere in your letter do you say that Roxio/Adaptec has any contract with Gracenote mandating that they use your database and your database only. Is there such a contract? If so, then Roxio/Adaptec is clearly in breach, and you've got every right to exercise your legal options. But if you don't have a prior arrangement, why exactly are you suing?
I look at your lawsuit, and I see McDonald's suing me because I decided to eat at Burger King today. That's how I'll continue to see it until Gracenote explains why the lawsuit was filed to begin with.
Regards,
Shaun
Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
Gracenote is claiming that the data is not the intelectual property, the DB engine, and infastructure around it is. First, I'm not sure how infastructure can be considered Intelectual Property. Second, Roxio was provided with Data under license, not the infastructure to store and deliver that data. How then can they claim that Roxio stole their Intelectual property? (Did Roxio employees walk into their data center and steal a server?).
IN all seriousness, perhaps a developer who has licensed the CDDB data can explain this to me. DO they provide as part of the license, some proprietary client or indexing algorythem to be used and embedded into the media application? If this is the case, did Roxio remove such a client, libraries, algorythem or whatever from their application when they switched vendors? Is this what they're sueing for?
Then why didn't they say that in the letter?
--CTH
--
--Got Lists? | Top 95 Star Wars Line
Uh, actually it's the other way around. Rather than address why they think Roxio has violated their intellectual property by using a Gracenote competitor, they address why they think "our" contributions to CDDB somehow became "their" I.P.:
Next time, please read the damn article before posting. Oh, this is /. Nevermind!
If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
...What possible legal objection could they have to the FreeDB project? FreeDB used a *GPL* version of the CDDB system (released by Mr. Scherf under the GPL as described in the readme which accompanied the release), started their system with data that was freely distributed with the GPL CDDB code, and supplemented it with data freely contributed by individual users. Maybe I'm just blind, but I cannot see anything that could even remotely be considered infringement of patent, copyright, or any other Gracenote IP. They can patent all they want to, but that does not retroactively invalidate the prior GPL releases of their system.
FreeDB is not copying Gracenote's current code. They are not stealing Gracenote's current data. They are not using Gracenote's network infrastructure. Therefore, they are doing nothing wrong...and thus, Roxio cannot be guilty of any sort of "contributory infringement" because there is no infringement occuring in the first place.
The only possible legal basis I can see for this lawsuit would be some sort of clause in Roxio's contract that forbids them from going to a compteting system. If that is the case, however, it's really their own fault for not reading the contract thoroughly before signing it. Yeah, it's a sleazy clause, but Roxio's legal team should have been more on the ball...
DennyK
I saw "Intellectual Property" in their letter, and immediately decided they were the bad guys. I've obviously been reading Slashdot too long.
-----------------
www.lucernesys.comHorizon: Calendar-based personal finance
Please read before modding as troll... I can actually see why Gracenote charges for the service. According to the letter, the charge is $0.06 per user, which I find quite reasonable, considering that they surely use quite a bit of bandwidth, and have quite a few servers to maintain. As for the issue of user submissions, I think the argument can be made that there really is no issue, as A: the users themselves pay nothing, and get quite a useful service. Another important note is that Gracenote gives FREE licenses to non-commercial 'vendors'. This way, those who use the technology in their commerical products pay a small per user fee to maintain the network, pay the editors salarys, etc, and free developers can still use it.
That said, I think the lawsuit is totally ludicrious, unless there WAS a clause in the contract, in which case, Roxio is obviously screwed...
TODO: Something witty here...
"It's not just data, it's a service
Gracenote provides fast, accurate and secure data delivery to end-users that is available around the world 24 hours a day, 7 days a week to more than 25 million unique users a month. We operate redundant systems in multiple locations to provide what we feel is the best-possible user experience, and that takes bandwidth, servers, database licenses, terabytes of storage, and an expert staff to keep it all running. Additionally, we provide multiple levels of support to our developers to help them offer the best possible applications. Thousands of developers understand and appreciate the value and quality of our service, and are willing to pay our modest licensing fees to support it."
How is Roxio causing a problem here? They aren't hijacking Gracenote's servers, they are just using data from elsewhere -- and, as Gracenote says it's not about the data. And all they are saying after that is that they give great service for their licensing fees. So? Just because they do a great job, everyone should be forced to use their service?
-----------------------
-----------------------
Stay in school, kids! Peace out, Dubya
To: dhyman@gracenote.com
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 7:37 PM
Subject: About Suing Roxio
Dear Mr. Hyman -
I read your open letter regarding the lawsuit against Roxio, and I would like you to know that I am sad to see how you are digging in your heels over this.
The fact is, regardless of however much code Gracenote has developed, that the data was provided to CDDB by end-users who, for the most part, were contributing to other end-users. If CDDB had said, "help us build our database so we can get big enough to stop anyone else from doing it," you would have never ended up where you are now.
I do not dispute that you have every right to ask that developers who build connectivity to your servers be asked to pay a fee. What I do dispute is your right to try to force, by abuse of the law, anyone who would dare choose to not use your service to have no choice. And you may not realize this, but in the end, your war is against the users, those whom you are trying to deprive any choice in cd-databases.
Your behavior on this matter is wrong. Why is it that you do not respect the right of others to compete with you? Just because they are offering a free service does not mean that they have done something wrong. In your letter, you state that you provide quality service. I do not doubt that. If you are that much better than freedb, then you have nothing to fear.
I will switch my CD-ripping software to connect to freedb, and encourage everyone I know to do the same. Please discontinue this lawsuit. Give users a choice.
Thank you
-----------------------
-----------------------
Stay in school, kids! Peace out, Dubya
what a coincidence -- suck has some commentary on gracenote and other similar companies in their daily essay. Mmmm....suck...filler archives....