Slashdot Mirror
Gracenote v. Roxio CDDB Suit Settled
An anonymous reader writes with this update: "As reported via the usual sources, Roxio announced today that the lawsuit (read all about it on slashdot) with gracenote has been settled.
To fresh up your memory: Gracenote ('cddb') sued Roxio because they switched from cddb to freedb for identification of audio CDs. Discussion on slashdot was active, especially questioning if gracenote really owned the titles. David Hyman, Gracenote CEO, added, 'We look forward to a long and mutually successful relationship between our companies through this new license for intellectual property and current and advanced music recognition services.' End of quote. Do I need say more than 'corporate lawyers'?"
Let's give Gracenote a couple of dimes to shut them up, it's cheaper than litigating this thing for years.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
So we have a "sealed agreement", under which Gracenote backs down from their utterly contemptible and indefensible suit. This should not be the end of the matter, folks.
If we users allow corporate parasites like Gracenote to operate this kind of hit-and-run prospecting on OUR data, we will all lose in the end. With deep enough pockets, one of them is bound to succeed eventually.
The financial pressure against this kind of opportunistic horseshit must not end with a quiet "sealed agreement", and the lawyers all shaking hands and walking away. Don't use Gracenote's products, via Roxio products, sub-licensed technology on Windows, or any other vendor. Vote with your wallet. Use and help build free alternatives like freedb. The business case for Gracenote to try it again will be much tougher to build, next time they're tempted.
Well, a settlement usually means that one side has a clear advantage at the courts.
Now, using that basis, and the fact that the whole deal is a hidden arrangement, one could guess that one of the two sides obviously didn't want the public to know about this.
Okay, fine.. who has the most to lose by a public disclosure? Gracenote, I think. Follow this logic:
If Roxio was about to lose the case, Gracenote would rather have it public so that nobody else attempts to go without their service.
If Gracenote was about to lose the case, they could approach Roxio behind closed doors to offer them better incentives-- perhaps even PAY Roxio to use the service-- if they'll settle and keep their mouth shut about the conditions. Why would they do this? Because if it were well known that Gracenote couldn't control the 'industry' on CDDB, then nobody would bother to pay for their services in the face of a cheaper alternative.
Unless I'm completely missing something here, that's pretty much the best guess I can come up with.
If this kind of enterprise ever becomes profitable the RIAA is going to step in and say "All your titles are belong to us", and Gracenote will end up paying the RIAA a license fee just to stay in business.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade