Slashdot Mirror
Open Source, Real Media Mega-player?
chill writes "CNN is reporting "RealNetworks on Monday will unveil a new open source version of its streaming media software that supports multiple file formats for audio and video, including those that use Microsoft's Windows Media technology." and "RealNetworks did not formally license the ability to offer Windows Media software, but instead re-created the technology based on data streams sent between the server and player software, The New York Times reported. A Microsoft representative told the newspaper that the company would need to determine whether RealNetworks licensed the software before taking action. " I can't wait to see the actual license." Update: 07/22 19:10 GMT by T : The software can be downloaded from the Helix site, if you're interested.
when something I hate does something I like.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Ok, so they supposedly reverse engineered the MS protocol, then? It surely sounds like they did. The article says they are offering the client source immediately, and then the server source in a few months. Maybe they're waiting to deal with MS first.
Moderation: Put your hand inside the puppet head!
A new suit due to the fact that this'll make it even easier for more people to pirate even MORE content.
Don't park drunk, accidents cause people.
what licence what licence what licence is it under !? If they've put it out under and unfree 'open source' licence, I'll ... not be happy :)
Thats reverse enginering of a copyrighted ( or patented ) protocol.. thought that was no longer legal in this country thanks to the far-sighted *cough* leaders we have.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
License, smishence. We need the code. Give us the code. If it's going open source, it's going to get rewritten.
--
# Canmephians for a better Linux Kernel
$Stalag99{"URL"}="http://stalag99.net";
About the RealNetworks Release
Bruce Perens
Free Software Evangelist
22-July-2002
RealNetworks is announcing today that some of their software will be
released as Open Source or Free Software. While RealNetworks is making a
significant contribution to Open Source, today's release does not include
the "crown jewels" -- their "codecs", the encoding and decoding software
for their proprietary RealAudio and RealVideo formats. I will go into more
detail regarding what they are proposing to release, and when, in this
message.
I'd also like to say what my role is in this. It is not to endorse, but
to explain what's going on from an Open Source perspective. Some of the
pieces announced today will be Open Source, but many will not be. Thus,
I can't fully approve of what is going on. I will continue to lobby
RealNetworks to follow today's step by going fully open, and I urge you to
continue to use fully open codecs in preference to the RealNetworks ones.
It was entertaining to see the first sentence of the invitation that
RealNetworks sent to some of the press:
> On Monday at 10am in SF, Eric Raymond, Bruce Perrins, Brian Bellendorf
> etc. will all be attending a press conference with Real Networks and 30
> other top industry companies for a significant industry announcement.
I am flattered by their enthusiasm, especially since I'd told them
repeatedly that I'd not be making an endorsement. This shows that
RealNetworks may actually be able to deal with the Open Source community
on the community's own terms. That will be essential if a real partnership
is to come of today's announcement.
So, what is RealNetworks proposing? They plan to release code in 90
days. Some of the details of that code, including what parts are included
in the release and how they are licensed, may change before then.
RealNetworks "client engine", the thing that lives in the desktop or the
web browser and drives the client half of their codec, will be available
under a license that is derived from the Apple Public Source License, but
with goals much closer to the GNU General Public License. The license text
includes a patent grant. Like the APSL and the NPL licenses, it grants
RealNetworks a right to relicense your code under any license of their choice.
So it is unlike the GPL in that it gives one party more rights than all
others. This license has yet to be approved by the Open Source Initiative
board, or accepted by the Free Software Foundation, or even fully reviewed by
yours truly. It may have to be modified before it is worthy of acceptance by
the community.
The Open Source client engine will probably include:
> - RTSP/RTP/RTCP/SDP network playback
> - UDP support
> - Local file playback
> - Single source A/V
> - A/V data type interface
> - file format interface
> - some A/V codec support (TBD; standards-based, probably MP3 and 3GPP
> codecs)
I have an even longer list of other features that the Open Source client
_may_ include, which I can't show you until they decide. On the list of
functions that most likely won't be included, besides the codecs, there's
a lot of utility and user-interface code.
So, we're getting some network protocols that go on top of IP and UDP,
and do their best to provide continuous playback despite the fact that
the Internet doesn't guarantee throughput or latency. On top of that are
file formats and data objects, and other pieces necessary to make an Open
Source player for some already-open file formats. It is likely that many
of the client pieces will be applicable to servers and encoders as well,
although RealNetworks is not placing their server and "encoder engine"
in Open Source. Combining the Open Source player with RealNetworks
proprietary codecs will produce a player for the RealAudio and RealVideo
formats on new platforms where no player existed before.
Perhaps the greatest beneficiary of RealNetworks contribution could
be the Ogg Vorbis audio format. Ogg is a fully Open Source codec,
unencumbered by patents or royalty payment requirements, which
offers audio quality comparable to, or better then, its proprietary
competition. The Ogg encoder and servers, not just the client, are
available as Open Source. The addition of RealNetworks network protocols
and other utilities might make Ogg even better, and might facilitate the
inclusion of Ogg as an option in RealNetworks proprietary products.
RealNetworks server and "encoder engine", without the actual codecs,
will be under a "community source" license. This means that source code
will be disclosed to people who sign an agreement, and those people will
get a lot less than the full set of rights that come with Open Source
licensing. Since other streaming servers and encoders are already fully
Open Source, we can't expect the Open Source community to have much to
do with this part of RealNetworks code. However, community source does
make life easier for RealNetworks partners, whose business depends on
this code and who might not have had source code until now.
The RealAudio and RealVideo codecs will be available in compiled form, as
proprietary software that can be linked into a larger product. Again, no joy
in the Free Software camp. However, these codecs will be available for use
along with various Open Source pieces that Real is releasing, and thus it will
be easier to for third parties to produce a half-proprietary Real-format player
under Linux and on other operating systems where one is not supported today.
Why is Real doing this? Obviously, they are under pressure from
Microsoft's Media Player, and would like to prevent that product
from achieving market domination. Increasing open-ness is a weapon in
that battle, because a perception of open-ness will make more people
consider RealNetworks products as standards rather than just products.
But RealNetworks may not be able to afford to be open enough - their
revenue today depends on licensing fees for the use of their software, and
unless they can change their business model somewhat, it will be difficult
for them to achieve a real partnership with the Open Source community.
That community has little to gain by replacing Microsoft's proprietary
audio format with RealNetworks still-proprietary audio format. The Free
Software folks will continue to develop Ogg Vorbis and other solutions,
although perhaps in a way that is more compatible with RealNetworks
proprietary software. Thus, I consider todays announcement to be only a
first step for RealNetworks, with additional steps necessary if they are
to succeed. On behalf of the Open Source and Free Software developers, I
hope to be able to help RealNetworks take those additional steps.
Respectfully Submitted
Bruce Perens
Bruce Perens.
DVDs though? :)
RealNetworks will begin offering Helix's client source code within 90 days
It doesn't mention linux/etc though.. so is this an OpenSource Windows app? And what will the license be like? Will we beable to port it?
Questions questions questions!
The problem with slashdot is that most of its users were bullied and stuffed into lockers as kids!
the news is posted on "netscape.com.com", is "Special to ZDNet News", and was first reported by "New York Times". Where does CNN report it?
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
My computer runs AOL. Will this media player work on AOL?
but instead re-created the technology based on data streams sent between the server and player software,
Dare I say it, however isn't this exactly what BnetD did with Battle.Net? Why can Real media get away with it but not BnetD? This makes no sense at all.
Maybe we will soon wittness an updated version of The Player War (I still hope for a new Browser War...). If M$ can find a hair in RN's soop, they will almost certainly pick it up and make a big deal out of it, either as patent infringement or as proof that they indeed do *not* have a monopoly. Either way, it's going to be ugly...
Good news is if the thing is waterproof and 100% Open Source... Maybe time to rejoice after all...
Excellence: Moderate (mostly affected by comments on your karma)
This is great news. I don't know of any OSS that will play .rm files. It's just too bad that Real makes crappy software. There is a lot of work ahead for the OSS if they want to make it any good.
Welcome to the land of the free...pay toll ahead...no photography...please open your bag...
If it is truly OSS I'll be extreamly happy. I really want to believe it's open, but other big companies with 'open' software don't actually conform to the open source communities ideals.
The article was light on details, but it sounds like RealNetworks was sniffing the data stream and reverse-engineering the Media Player protocol. I'm really hoping they did it the correct way, or Microsoft could literally sue them into oblivion.
AFAIK, you can reverse engineer the protocol correctly. What you need to do is have a programmer or team of programmers reverse engineer the stream and create a working replica. Once they've successfully created a Windows Media streaming program, they sit in a conference room with a team of "virgin" programmers who haven't seen the source or any data from the stream. The virgin coders then talk with the team that reverse engineered the stream, but don't actually see the source or the technical information. The virgin coding team then takes that data and creates a new software component.
I just really hope they took that vital step, otherwise RealNetworks is violating Microsoft's IP and will get sued off the face of the earth.
There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
:wq
http://developer.apple.com/darwin/projects/streami ng/
Welcome to the party REAL
If it goes open source, won't that make it
easy to hack around the RealOne Superpass
that keeps me from all those juicy videos
on CNN, etc.?
Do we now get all kinds of players on all kinds of platorms, thereby releaving M$ of any advantage they have (had) by controlling Windows Media?
Don't get me wrong!
Here.
Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
The article compares Microsoft's battle with Real to their past battle with Netscape. It is an intersting comparison since both battles I believe were a combination of Microsoft's maneuvering and the other companies failure to put out an adequate product. Real has consistently put out bloated, resource-hogging, spywaring, bug-ridden software.
RealOne is a huge improvement over previous products but you still have to be careful with it re-associating itself with certain file types. I think what has helped Real, though, is the fact the Windows Media Player really peaked at 6.4 and has itself become bloated.
MS is going to crap bricks if they aren't getting a piece of this pie.
-- Scientist: You aren't going to leave me here, are you? Boagh! Thump...
Now I am just waiting for Dreamcast, PS2 & Xbox ports based on the open source code..... all my anime was leeched or converted by me to .rm format and hopefully I will be able to watch them on TV with my PS2.
- HeXa
Step 1: Make a name for yourself in the market
;^)
Step 2: Microsoft steps in and begins to eat up your market with their desktop integration
Step 3: Struggle. Squirm.
Step 4: Release source to your application.
Granted, this might not be all of Real's assets in the way that Netscape released their browser source, but it could be the leg up that free software needs to get into the streaming and streaming client market. Also, it bears noting that Netscape (i.e. AOL/TW) invested tons of money to make the product work after they released the source. The Mozilla project certainly wouldn't be where it is today without that investment.
Now, how would it proceed?
Step 5: Company is marginalized, possibly dies.
Step 6: Free software product lives on.
We've already seen Nautilus from Eazel do this on the GNOME desktop (although some people seem to dislike the bloated desktop). It certainly is a possibility with Netscape, given the recent troubles at AOL/Time Warner. And I can't remember the time I read a positive article about Real, but then again, I might just be missing out.
Now, I guess I should read the CNN article...
Curmudgeon Gamer: Not happy
RealNetworks did not formally license the ability to offer Windows Media software, but instead re-created the technology based on data streams sent between the server and player software
I'm not American, so my details on this would be hazy. But this is reverse engineering. And you're in trouble of the DMCA kind when you perform such an operation, I've observed.
Am I correct?
Blearf. Blearf, I say.
Reg required, etc, but this NYT article, besides getting the scoop, is longer and better with details than CNN. Shocking, I know.
We'll see...
Trying to understand the conference which is streaming now... but it's hard to listen trough the market-speak...
Overall, I'm feeling excited, not sure why.. but it's something new... refreshing
So RN reverse engineering some of Microsoft's video formats? I hope they made sure to catch the part that allows an asf file to open IE, because that's important to me. The best thing that could come of this is a rash of video converters so that everyone can convert their files out of asf/wma/rm/etc into something better.
similar article posted at NY Times: http://nytimes.com/2002/07/22/technology/22REAL.ht ml
Comic Book Guy: "There is no Groening in my store."
and vested interests?
Since the DCMA has provisions disallowing reverse engineering, might MS sue Real under the DCMA? Could we have a DCMA showdown between the two companies? Might prove interesting.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
that the DMCA is somehow going to come into play (mostly likely it will be because of M$).
forget it.
Does anybody know if they are any patents that might interfere with this (like that damn patent on mp3 encoding)? :(
All it would take is one good patent for MS to shut this down.
I guess we'll just have to wait for the legal battle to begin. sigh. I wish I lived in a country that allowed intellectual freedom.
On the brighter side of things, at least I don't live in a country that allowed someone to patent the wheel. Although, we did let IBM get a patent on measuring bra cup size via direct measurement.
I wonder which is worse.
Life is too short to proofread.
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
they release Microsoft's codec and don't release their own codec. We should not become a tool in the wars between these behemoths. That is a road to mediocrity.
Didn't Real put Streambox out of market because Streambox had reveng'ed the protocol to allow downloads of streaming media?!
Maybe I'm remembering this wrong, but that would really smell of hypocrisy.
Belief is the currency of delusion.
regardless, most of us here still aren't going to buy a goldpass when we can view windows media in the mswmp. besides, if they are allowed to do this, microsoft will just do it to them and suddenly i'll be able to watch cnn realmedia again ;-)
Shawn D. Pullum
So far, what Real has shown is marketing hype. There is no open source software until they give us the source. And as Bruce and others have pointed out, they're only open-sourcing Microsoft's codecs, not their own; this is not the spirit nor the letter of open-source!
In April, RealMedia reached 17 million at-home viewers, compared with Windows Media at 15.1 million and Apple Computer's QuickTime at 7.3 million, according to Nielsen/NetRatings. At work, Windows Media drew about 12.2 million unique viewers, compared with RealMedia's 11.6 million and QuickTime's 5 million.
In 2001 Quicktime was downloaded about 80 million times. My personal website experience also contradicts Quicktime usage numbers as well. Huh? Are they counting porn in those numbers?
"I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish." -NOFX
Sorta like DVD players. Apex probably broke their contract, but mplayer/xine/etc didn't break anything.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
thought [reverse-engineering a proprietary protocol] was no longer legal in [the United States]
1. Only if the protocol "effectively controls access to a work protected under this title". If you test the app using Charlie Chaplin movies or other pre-1923 content, you're not triggering the DMCA's circumvention ban (17 USC 1201).
2. The circumvention ban contains an exemption in 1201(f) for reverse engineering necessary to achieve interoperability. It's not my fault Judge Kaplan ignored this subsection; I consider it an incompetent error.
Will I retire or break 10K?
I often wonder why format creators don't always do this (i.e. release specs for format into public domain, while maintaining control over servers/encoders).
If I create/sell tools for a format, and give the players away for free anyway, I want as many people to use the format as possible. If the format becomes standard, I'm in a great position since I control the content creation side (i.e. where the $$$ is).
So people creating open source players/viewers doesn't hurt me, it helps me enormously, since I don't have to expend resources maintaining all possible platforms.
Doug
Venn ist das nurnstuck git und Slotermeyer? Ya! Beigerhund das oder die Flipperwaldt gersput!
SnapStream (makes TV recording software) also does Windows Media streaming... They have a built-in streaming server that supports Windows Media Video files. But their application isn't open-sourced and it's embedded as a part of their consumer TV recording app (rather than being sold as a streaming server). Does anyone know if SnapStream licenses Windows Media Server from Microsoft or did they develop it independent of Microsoft?
Microsoft did precisely the same thing to Novell's IPX/SPX protocol, developing a "clean room" implementation called NWLink. This protocol allowed for critical interoperability with Netware, and played a large role in companies' gradual migration to NT.
In other words, Microsoft wouldn't be where it is today without reverse engineering.
The sword cuts both ways, Billy.
"Saddam Hussein cavorts with terrorists."
As far as I can see, the DMCA is unlikely to apply here since plain (non-DRM'd) ASF streams do not contain any form of copy protection.
If I remember correctly, though, Microsoft has a patent on the ASF format scheme itself. The granting of this patent in the first place was ridiculous - (thought sadly commonplace these days) - ASF is a very simple format for multiplexing video/audio/whatever over a single stream. There's nothing innovative about it.
Of course plenty of patents are issued these days for very unimaginative, uninnovative things - what makes MS's patent so unusual is that it's tantamount to patenting a file format - something that could effectively prevent otherwise legal reverse-engineering.
The author of Virtual Dub was forced to remove ASF compatibility after pressure from Microsoft regarding the patent.
Microsoft - boldly leading us back into the dark ages of incompatibility!
If MS turns to legal action to fight off REAL's using Window Media, then MS looks evil, and REAL can draw more attention to their OPEN SOURCE efforts. Thus the open source thing is just a tool for REAL to take the moral high ground in their fight against MS :-)
SUV's support terrorism !
but you're right. the business mentality is just hitting the internet, just as it hit every other industry in the last couple centuries. think wal mart, mega-steel, railroads, general closures of small businesses...
REALNETWORKS ANNOUNCES HELIX -- THE FIRST COMPREHENSIVE, OPEN STANDARD FOR DIGITAL MEDIA DELIVERY
RealNetworks forms the Helix Community with support from HP, Intel, Nokia, Oracle, PalmSource, Sony Corporation, Sun Microsystems and more than 20 Other Companies and Organizations
read the complete announce
You can watch the live presentation HERE(scroll down, and click on a player link). They aren't really talking much about an open source version though right now.
from the to-little-to-late dept.
Kind of like your education, Taco.
*sigh*
I sure as hell don't. And I've not run their crappy player for several years. And I suspect their "open source" release will be done in the same spirit as their spyware and nagware.
Rest in peace RealNetworks and take your foul "standards" with you.
... who believes that stealing codecs, even from Microsoft, is wrong?
Now I can hack it, and instead of DELETING the media file after it's been played, it will store it in my hard disk!
I've been waiting for years! At last, "streaming" is actually storing.
Thanks real networks!
They aren't releasing any codecs. Streaming servers don't parse the underlying video data, they just (well, that's a misuse of the word "just" - it's hard to do right) turn the file into packets, and try to make sure that as many arrive to the client on time as possible.
For example, today's RealServer can stream QuickTime files, and they certainly don't have source to the Sorenson codecs.
My video compression blog
One of the major reasons streaming media is used today is not for live productions, but rather, as a misguided and ill-conceived form of copy-protection and content-control. If Real goes open, and that creates a perception that Real is easier to copy, will the media cartel (RIAA, MPAA, etc.) drop Real entirely, in favor of Windows Media or some other more suitably evil technology?
In other words, could this make the Open Source streaming media situation worse, at least in the short-term?
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
Sounds like a DMCA infraction to me.
I am challenging the mod who thinks this is a troll. Respond to this thread NOW, LOGGED IN,
and tell the world why this is a troll. You want a troll? I think the parent comment was moderated by a mentally unstable degenerate that has had his/her eyelids glued shut from being taco-snotted. Seriously, if the mod has guts, oh wait, if they had guts they wouldn't moderate this chicken shit forum.
The smartest thing that M$ could do is just let Real do it. Then all M$ has to do is to create a version of Media Player that includes ALL of Real's protocols (after all they have made it clear through their actions that they believe it is perfectly acceptable to reverse-engineer a protocol based on a data stream) give this new version a nice interface with less advertizing clutter and make it available as minor free update available as part of a service patch. Not that we have never seen this done before, right? Do these companies ever learn?
The actual Helix press release
and, for developers, the Helix Commmunity site, where the source code release dates are posted.
No sig to see here. Move along.
Well, I suppose we'll have to see the license they use. Hopefully it will mean someone can strip out all the real networks garbage that spawns all over my machine when I install (or even use real player). Theoretically, Microsoft could even take their code and use it to support RM in media player. I have no idea why Real thinks people would want to watch WM stuff in real player, or anything at all in real player.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
And if CmdrTaco goes back and fixes the "to"'s in the dept, it'll also be too little too late.
Seriously, you're one of those mush heads that thinks that RM and QT are good technology. I like my movies with a frame rate of 1 or 2 per second.
You can't copyright a protocol; if they use Microsoft patents then there might be some problems, even if they did a 'clean room' implementation.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
O'Reilly has a piece up (http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/network/2002/07/2 2/OSCON_day1.html)that looks at "Why now?" and "What took you so long?" Rob Glaser and some Real engineers are coming to OSCON to make their case straight to OS developers.
The site talks about open-sourcing the Helix server, as well as the encoder. While the server isn't too much of a surprise, given the success of the Quicktime one, what is the encoder going to be?
You said that it won't be the Real format, which is fine, but what formats will it encode for? Windows Media? MPEG? Or is it more just a pluggable framework for codecs?
"I may not have morals, but I have standards."
You don't actually have to do a 'clean room' reverse engineering unless you are probably going to end up with lots of bit-for-bit stuff that looks like it was copied. In the case of Compaq and the IBM bios, you didn't have much space, and you weren't really doing much, so there was a really good chance that lots of the data would be exactly the same if it was going to work. If Compaq didn't use a clean room IBM could sue for copyright violation because the data would be the same.
Most of the time you don't need a clean room.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
the Real player format is one of the crappiest formats out there? Real player as a format probably peaked around 1998 when no one had broadband. Now people can't be bothered by the pathetic real media format. What Real should do is open up their own codecs so people can finally convert the godawful .rm file into something better
...as their claim is that the BnetD developers actually *copied* portions of Blizzard's code rather than reverse engineering and rewriting it. They have dropped the DMCA component of the complaint, the latest (amended) version of which is here.
IANAL, but it seems that honest to goodness reverse engineering is still legally safe, for the time being.
:wq
Does this mean that Streambox will be able to resume development of the Streambox Ripper?
"Under the Ubiquitous 'Value' Network strategy, Sony aims to create a secure (emphasis added), user-friendly environment where people can enjoy a wide variety of online digital media contents via various networked CE devices and PCs."
If Sony's definition of "secure" is what I think it is, then that means that they expect that this platform will contain DRM features to "protect" their content.
DRM is fundamentally incompatible with open source. If, as I am given to understand, the only thing closed-source about this release is Real's codecs, then there are no barriers to arbitrary saving, copying, and redistribution of downloaded streams. There will no longer be such a thing as a 'stream-only' Real feed; the software can be altered to not respect the appropriate bits. There is no security for the likes of Sony when consumers have control over their own computers - it flies in the face of their DRM strategy.
So what's up? Has Sony et al changed their mind about what defines "secure?" Has this consortium decided to give the content industries the cold shoulder? Or, if this is to contain some form of concession to the ??AAs, what technical shape will it take?
If they did reverse Windows Media, does this mean that we can reverse Real's streaming technology and make an open-source alternative to their crap?
Sweeet!
Well, that's the reason my company is bailing out of Real's products and going windows media (well, the 2nd reason I suppose):
1. Real's server license costs and arm and a leg. Thousands of dollars a year. Windows Media server can be installed (for now) for free on MS Server operating systems.
2. Real's player is an absolute pain in the ass to set up. Have to dodge around dozens of registration pages, email address requests, deselecting "additional bonus spam", etc. Then you get bombarded with advertising, and disabled features.
Windows media - just doubleclick on the link on MS's web site, and it's installed. Done.
Real REALLY dropped the ball on streaming media - they used to have a near monopoly on it, but the additional crap they shoveled on us made it useless.
"Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." - Charles de Gaulle
Finally the worst media system/ player will be open sourced.
BUT, if they want to still leave the Draconian interface for enabling it, I have no qualms with that. :)
-jc
"What thou shalt not, I shalt did!" -Bart Simpson
During the Q&A session of the webcast:
Perens: I've been reading questions off of slashdot, most of which have been positive.
Glaser: Are you sure you have the right URL?
(Score:-1, Wrong)
* "Thou shalt not circumvent thy neighbor's technological measure."
** "Thou shalt not manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in circumvention devices."
Do you read me, pooky?"Intellectual property has the shelf-life of a banana." - Bill Gates
I saw no mention of open sourcing the player, or even mention of anything that would necessarily do encoding... It seems the portion being open sourced would be transport and delivery, and even the license to that would be restrictive.
This is a move to appeal to providers starting to go on the fence regarding Windows Media, not to end-users. This will offer the most tweakable solution to vendors and potentially a way to make the most efficient server in town, without opening the realmedia format. They know full well the minute they do that alternative players will pop up that don't show ads, that don't 'call home' to real, and offer an easy to use interface that is easier to get at than real will allow its player to be, and their player software will fall by the wayside.
Without the ads/private information provided by their player, their business model would fall apart and they know it. They've been thus far relying on being encumbant to power their usage, and in the face of the Microsoft behemoth, that is going away.
They are perfectly willing to sacrifice ad revenue and excessive personal info collection for their linux player for the sake of claiming to be more cross-platform (even their developing RealOne player doesn't do ads and doesn't even offer the 'gold pass' option). If they were sure that the information would only be used for linux and other 'fringe system' decoding, they would gladly open up their format. They don't seem to like developing their non-windows versions as they take forever to do so, and that would mean they no longer had to worry. Mplayer has had some success with their binary codecs, and I doubt they could care. The current linux user base would provide more bad than useful data anyway in their forms and not tend to be influenced by Real's marketing. Linux is just a nice platform to say 'look, look, does Windows media or quicktime work natively with linux? we must be better, we are cross-platform!"
But the second ZoomPlayer had realmedia support, Real could kiss RealOne's popularity goodbye, and then next stop, chapter 11....
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
I think the real player has got to be the worst player on the web. It streams like crap. The audio always falls off. It stalls and keeps to audio going all the time. WMV(windows media 8) and quicktime are the way to go. I hope with a opensource reel player perhaps someone will make it work and be a usefull setup.
Dan Mayer: my blog, essays, art, etc
Sounds like all that is necessary is an example of time-division multiplexing. Perhaps they could get somebody from AT&T who was doing this in the 60s.
If I remember correctly, though, Microsoft has a patent on the ASF format scheme itself. The granting of this patent in the first place was ridiculous - (thought sadly commonplace these days) - ASF is a very simple format for multiplexing video/audio/whatever over a single stream. There's nothing innovative about it.
Very true, Microsoft owns this and numerous other rediculous patents, and, to be fair, plenty of other companies own software patents of varying stupidity as well.
But this only matters to the United States, which seems to be doing all it can to make itself the technological backwater of the world, hamstringing itself with software (and business-method) patents, criminalizing reverse-engineering (DMCA), and now attempting to criminalize general computing itself through government mandated DRM (SSSCA/CBDTPA/BPDG) [the latter of which may happen through the back-door via the FCC, with no new legislation debated or passed, if Senator "Disney" Hollings has his way].
Once this source has been released (assuming it has been released under a free license) it will be in the wild, so to speak, and remain free in the rest of the world even if those of us unfortunate enough to be living under the American Regime are not permitted to use it.
Either way, releasing this under a free license would be a good thing. It remains to be seen, however, just how free Real's license turns out to be.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
1) quality audio is not high on their priority list
2) control of content is high on their priority list
3) they are customer (encoding tools sales), not end-user ('free' player) focused
4) they envy MS and have tried to be the audio version of the Borg (they already have a track record for silently collecting data on you habits)
Neither Real Networks nor MS appear to be friends of open and quality audio on the internet / computer. Both must be resisted at every turn.
Realmedia already tried to push an open source version of their player, many a years ago. That code *never* worked, and was just a ploy to gain some recognition.
Hasn't Realmedia also fought and sent out of business anybody who tried to reverse engineer/store their streaming format?
Nothing good can come from these people...
As another poster has pointed out, the Real Player License allows any contributor to retain exclusive rights to their contributions in section 11. The parent post is a Misinformation Troll; do not feed.
- You have to keep all the "propitary notices"
- You have to make all your source available under this license. If you distribute binary only then, you must give a way to download the source
- Also you allow Realnetworks use your code any way they want
- You cannot restrict any derived work's license.
The license is at this locations and they claim that all the code will be released under this license.Then all M$ has to do is to create a version of Media Player that includes ALL of Real's protocols
Thats why Raal should GPL the source; that scenario would not be possible without M$ being forced to free the source to Mafia Player, which they will never do.
ATH0 Bitcoin: 1DnwFLXczVZV8kLJbMYoheUrpqHesjxrSi
JPEG becomes patent-encumbered .RA becomes open
Blender is open-sourced
Whatever next???
I imagine that somebody will claim a patent on 9-track tape, and then somebody will wave an 8-track audio tape in the air and shout, "Prior art!!!"
No no no, MS shouldn't include Real's protocols. It's not yet the time to crush Real's client. Now is the time to capitalize on the fact that Real's plans to support MS's format will make MS's format the de facto standard. MS's format is now the safe choice because you know that it'll work with either the MS or Real clients. If I stick to Real's format, I'll only be able to target half that number of clients.
Once MS has the de facto standard title all wrapped up, they can have Real turned into Netscape, Part II with the snap of Bill's fingers.
mplayer can play any of M$'s codecs and file formats (though not transport) and recently has support for Real's codecs in CVS.
I really don't know why anyone didn't mention this before, but MPlayer is now able to link to the Real libraries and play Real formats. Those are closed codecs; but Helix looks like it'll be closed as well - so where's the advantage to using a Real sponsored player, when MPlayer uses all the same closed-source libraries, and the base system is GPL'd? If you contribute to MPlayer (which also plays ASF) then Real can't snag your work like they can with Helix...
So does this mean I can actually listen to streamed RA content without installing spyware?
"Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
Eh?????
"illegalize"?
Ouch.
If I understand their license correctly, they can relicense any changes you make to their 'open' code under whatever license they want. This doesn't sound too bad at first, but consider if you wanted to integrade a Ogg Vorbis library into their player. You didn't write the ogg library, therefore you cannot grant them permission to relicense it, and thus it can't be used.
-- jason
They say they figured out Windows Media by intercepting communications between clients and servers. Now I know we all like reverse engineering, but isn't this illegal since they're essentially going to profit from it (else they wouldn't be doing it, Real.com is about extorting money and little else)
-Billco, Fnarg.com
I have to apologize, but I've seen this misspelling so many times on /. that it's just about driving me up a friggin' wall!
On top of that, it seems to be spreading across /. like some sort of weird "enfection"!
Don't ask me why this bugs me so... I can't explain it. Other gammar and spelling mistakes don't faze me. This one, on the other hand, is the visual equivalent of fingernails on a chalkboard, or biting down on tinfoil, or... yet get the idea.From the online Mirriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary:
Main Entry: ridiculousPronunciation: r&-'di-ky&-l&s
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin ridiculosus (from ridiculum jest, from neuter of ridiculus) or ridiculus, literally, laughable, from ridEre to laugh
Date: 1550
synonym see LAUGHABLE
- ridiculously adverb
- ridiculousness noun
"Great men are not always wise: neither do the aged understand judgement." Job 32:9
Thats why Raal should GPL the source; that scenario would not be possible without M$ being forced to free the source to Mafia Player, which they will never do.
Um, no.
Perhaps you didn't read all the bits about reverse-engineering-from-data-streams. So what if the code that originally produces the data streams is GPL'd? The GPL won't matter if the new code isn't based on the GPL code, even if both sets of code do the exact same thing. Or are you a fan of AT&T's failed "brain-tainting" argument?
Sheesh, maybe both of you should not have married a girl that you hate.
Some people have claimed that, like the MPL, the RPSL give Real Networks the right to use your code created under that license commercially. This is not true.
Specifically, if we read section 4 of their license, we see that: Further, we see that Real Networks does not really expect to get anything of value to themselves from the efforts of Open Source programmers; specifically, in section 11, we see: The specific effect of the combination of these sections is that they seem to believe that they will not get anything commercially useful from the Open Source community that they are attempting to create, since they are not requiring the ability to commercially distribute the code under terms other than the license... which is not applicable to their commercially distributed code.
-- Terry
...Linux wouldn't be suitable as a server or client in nearly as many situations as it is today. Believe it or not, lots of people still do use SMB, and support for it on Linux makes it possible to use it in such an environment.
Much in the same way as support for Novell networking made Windows a more suitable client and server in many environments.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
If it is in effect nothing more than patenting a file format, that sounds like it could be fairly easily challenged in court if someone had the money and time to do so. Patenting a file format is just the computer equivalent of patenting a particular layout of an encyclopedia -- it's one particular scheme for arranging information.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
I can understand the "too little" part of the "too-little-too-late" comment, but why too late? Don't we want to encourage companies to open up their source code, even if they're not the first to do it? It's quite clear that Real has a significant product, and if they're willing to open up even part of it, especially after all this time, that's better than not at all, right?
Perhaps this should've been from the "too-little-better-late-than-never" department instead?
From what I understannd, Real are going to release some of the source code for their new player (excluding the codecs).
The original poster said that M$ could use this source code in Mafia Player, without having to return any code to the public (under the proposed licence, which is not the GPL).
This has nothing to do with reverse engineering of streams, but rather the source for the new player which anyone can incorporate into other software, without the rest of the source for the new product being subject to release.
ATH0 Bitcoin: 1DnwFLXczVZV8kLJbMYoheUrpqHesjxrSi
Just off that page they have a whitepaper on their server performance. Not surprisingly, they claim to beat WM by 125% on NT2K.
However, they also claim that RM/Redhat 7.3 beats WM/NT2K on the same hardware by 340%, *twice* as fast as WM/NT on the same hardware!
MS doesn't need to.
RealNetworks publishes their streaming protocols for all to use (just not the codecs).
Actually it is quite possible for a cult to be accidental. That is, an organisation of people develops cult-esque behaviour without the intent of doing so.
Any group with the intention of 'converting' new people over to join them has that danger. Of course, it is very difficult to detect intent in such situations.
According to meme theory it really doesn't matter if a cult is constructed and/or operated by people with a conscious intent to defraud or true believers who are working from the highest of motives. What matters is whether the system of ideas converts those holding them into machines to propagate itself into the minds of others.
It's just like creating an operating system that is robust against crashing: For this purpose it doesn't matter if a bug that allows a crash is exercised accidentally by an application program bug or deliberately by a malicious user - it still crashes the system, and if the bug is present it will eventually be activated. The only difference between the buggy app and the malicious user is that the malicious user MIGHT trigger the OS bug earlier.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Don't you know they have a word for it: bait.
it's "Merriam-Webster," you knob.
Main Entry: knob
Pronunciation: 'näb
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English knobbe; akin to Middle Low German knubbe knob
Date: before 12th century
1 a : a rounded protuberance : LUMP b : a small rounded ornament or handle
2 : a rounded usually isolated hill or mountain
You probably mean NCP.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Is stealing bread wrong when you have none ?
;-)
Is stealing codecs wrong when you have none ?
Into todays world codecs are like bread, within
now and ten years tv will be dead, everyone will
use internet streams and if we dont watch out we
will have to pay M$ even to watch the News,
which is telling you to hide in a Bunker,
cause the Media War just broke out, but you will
never know cause you think stealing is WRONG!
Stealing is wrong if it hurts real life people,
like stealing the bread of someone who is nearly
dieing from hunger. I like Robin Hood
Seems a bit strange from a company who's SDK comes with some of the following classics:
> You can't use the SDK to develope a transcoder.
> You can't convert to any in-between format on disk in case someone 'borrows' it.
> You can't use it to add support for real into products that support other formats (E.g. MS, Apple).
I'm not saying that a players for other OS's is bad, but why do I get the feeling (WARNING PARANOIA MODE ON) that there trying to keep people distracted. "Come and play with our code. Don't bother about those other 'real' open source ones, use ours!"
Is it just me or is the timing a little too good (E.g. last month Xiph talk about Theora, and last week Vorbis goes gold.)
I'd like to thank Bruce for all of his help in distilling what we are offering. Bruce was in our press conference with his 802.11-equipped laptop helping to put out accurate information from a trusted source. We hope we can still win him over (as well as the rest of the community) when it comes to the value of our offering, which we think is quite substantial.
Additionally, I'd like to thank Eric Raymond and Brian Behlendorf for also being here today, and for their valuable feedback in making sure we're doing the Right Thing(tm). We've also discussed many aspects of this with Emmett Plant and Jack Moffitt of Xiph.org/Vorbis fame as well as Tim O'Reilly and the folks at O'Reilly & Associates, and we're very excited about the opportunities on that horizon. Last but not least, I'd like to thank CollabNet for their incredible help on the launch, and we're looking forward to working with Mark Murphy and the rest of the crew to make Helix into a success.
With regards to the business model, I feel I should respond. This is a very deliberately measured approach to joining the open source community. We have a responsibility to our shareholders to continue to make a profit over the long haul. In the short term, this means withholding some technology to continue forward without drastically altering our current business model.
In the long term, we will be thinking very deeply about how to resolve the business paradox of making money while giving stuff away. It's not new territory for us, but this is certainly a new application of that expertise. Bruce, Eric, Mark Donovan (@RealNetworks) and I had a very interesting conversation at lunch about this, and I'd like to continue this conversation with the them and the rest of the community at OSCON this week.
At any rate, we're very excited about this foray into what's a brave new world for our company. As with any company shifting away from a mosty proprietary software model, I imagine we'll have the occasional faux pas and hiccup. However, I'm incredibly excited about the step we've made, and
hopeful that we can have a fruitful partnership with the community (and if someone can come up with a non-nausiating word for "synergistic"...I'll use that too!)
Rob Lanphier
Program Manager -- Interoperability
RealNetworks
This sounds a lot like reverse engineering CSS so that the information in the movie may be used by someone?
Or is it that the DVD is not a computer program, so it is immune from the interoperability part?
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
So the article is incorrect.
== Paul Rickard, Editor of The Microsoft Boycott Campaign ====
The original poster didn't say that, reread it. What he is saying is that Real can't exactly reverse engineer Microsoft's protocols, release a product that uses those protocols (whether its OSS or not is irrelevant) and then bitch and moan if Microsoft does the same thing to them. By releasing a product that includes reverse engineered WMV/WMA support, Real is giving Microsoft a license to do the same with the .RM/.RAM formats. If Real were to try to sue MS in this case it would look pretty dumb and also be thrown out of court really quickly.
IIRC, the author of VirtualDub figured out the structure of ASF, added support to his program (in version 1.2 or so) and was asked by Microsoft to remove it, which he did (so he wouldn't get any legal problems). And he wasn't even trying to access the compressed audio / video data itself directly, because he did that comfortably via the API, just the wrapper file format around it.
Excellent... Sheer genius... The best corporate battle I have seen to date... Helix will sink Corona, and the only winners are the people at large...
Ok, we know Real is a sneeky company. But it must mean something when they use the words "Open source". I mean, come on! This is great news. And any opposing force against M$ is welcome. Real can't go all the way, but it's a step in the good direction. Don't be blinded by idealism. We are not living in a perfect world were sources are open for everybody, nor will it ever be. I wouldn't want my crufty code to be viewed either. :P
The streambox vcr client sent the "secret handshake" to a realmedia server, and realmedia sued over this because it was very easy to 'fake out' a streaming server in this way, and then ignore the 'don't save' bit.
http://www.law.uh.edu/faculty/cjoyce/copyright/rel ease10/Real.html
"KeyLabs' test results indicate that Helix Universal Server allows more connections to Windows Media 8 content than WMT. For instance, the Helix Universal Server running on Windows 2000 Advanced Server is able to deliver over twice as many (122% increase) 20 Kbps Windows Media Audio streams than WMT. Helix Universal Server running on Red Hat Linux 7.3 is able to deliver over four times as many (344% increase) 20 Kbps Windows Media Audio streams to Windows Media Players than WMT. The same hardware (Dual Intel Pentium III Xeon 700 MHz) was used for the referenced tests. "
What if it's easier, cheaper to stream (Server) under Linux + Real Server. Many companies will inmediatelly adopt it.
If many sources use it (and it will be in their own best interest, after all MS is the player that can take the MOST bucks from companies pockets, and so it's always the worst choice (if OSS erans critical mass)) then it will "just work".
And Real will make a short term profit and maybe a larger profit in the future. A decent, honest profit I mean.
The alternative is:
1) Lose market share
2) Lose sales
3) Lose capital
4) No investment
5) goto 1 (5 iterations)
6) file for Chapter 11 and sell IP rights for a few bucks
OSS is the price to pay if you are not in love with the Monopoly. And even then, when the Monopoly doesn't need you anymore, you are toasted ("extend").
unfinished: (adj.)
They're going down and, by god, they're taking those sonsabitches with 'em. Or at least a little chunk.
Course I could be way off on that, but ain't it fun to dream?
Personally, my focus isn't nearly so much a client-usage issue as it is a server issue. Right now, the only reason we have any MS boxes on our production network is for windows media streaming.
If I could replace those WM boxes running w2k (which still need frequent rebooting despite the best efforts of what are presumably skilled MS tinkerers) with a couple sturdy linux boxes capable of handling more clients, and more pliable to my security requirements, it's an all ways around win for myself on an headache level, and for the company on a maintenance level.
Besides, and correct me if I'm wrong here, the helix server has reverse-engineered and therefore emulates the WM media streams... which means that the WMP should be able to play those streams anyways.
So, all current clients supported, new realmedia 9 format supported, single point for ease of maintenance, future open sourcing (in whole or in part) and I get to yank out the last remnants of microsoft from my network.
I'm personally having a hard time seeing how this is going to be a negative, unless the helix server is terribly insecure (which I'll mitigate by chrooting et al if possible), doesn't work as advertised or gets yanked by future lawsuitage.
"People will pay big bucks for the luxury of ignorance."
they're only open-sourcing Microsoft's codecs, not their own :-)
maybe MS will pay them back by reverse engineering and open sourcing real's codecs?
OK. Lets do it this way.
... ALL of Real's protocols" NOT "reverse engineers ALL of Real's protocols".
The smartest thing that M$ could do is just let Real do it. Then all M$ has to do is to create a version of Media Player that includes ALL of Real's protocols
M$ will do this by incorporating the Helix source code into the Mafia Player codebase. The post says "includes
If the Helix source is released under the GPL, then the source for that new, derivative player must be released. Real have chosen a licence that does not make this happen.
If Real want to PREVENT the scenario that the poster has laid out, all they have to do is GPL the source of the Helix based player.
This has nothing to do with M$ separately reverse engineering the protocols belonging to Real, which, AFAIK will be actionable.
give this new version a nice interface with less advertizing clutter and make it available as minor free update available as part of a service patch. Not that we have never seen this done before, right? Do these companies ever learn?
Indeed, will they ever learn? Real have a huge amount of momentum behind their player. The majority of the world doesnt care if the source if GPL or not, they just want an app that works.
If Real think for a second that their player is under attack in the same way that Netscapes browser was under attack, they need to go GPL now, because MS will not touch it if they do.
M$ will not be able to go into court to and refuse to obey the GPL when they spend hundreds of millions ensuring that everyone obeys the licences that their own software is released under.
ATH0 Bitcoin: 1DnwFLXczVZV8kLJbMYoheUrpqHesjxrSi
FYI, MS do have a patent on the ASF format (United States Patent 6,041,345, which is yet another stupid thing to get past the US patent office), so in theory unless you license it, it doesn't matter that you've discovered the protocol by looking at data on the wire.
I'm sure others may have commented on this, but WHY dear god create another license, or two in this case? Netscape did this with Mozilla and is still looking for four hackers so that the codebase can be complete relicensed using an NPL/GPL/LGPL "triple license".
History of the hatred of Real: http://pms.colonpee.com/irc/realplayer.txt
Will this turn out great in a couple years like Mozilla? I hope so, but I doubt it.Phillip
Microsoft do indeed have a patent on ASF. It's number 6,041,345 and you can read it here. It's yet another tragic example of why the folks at the US Patent Office should all be fired - things like this have prior art written all over them. I also find it interesting that the patent is dated March 2000, which is quite a long time after the format became ubiquitous. Anybody think they got scared about the reverse engineering around about then and saw a good way to stop it? And MS try to claim they're not anti-competitive...
BTW, I spoke recently with Michael Bohlin (the program manager of Microsoft's digital media division) and he told me that Corona is going RTP/RTSP, so it might well be that by the time anything to do with Helix serving Windows Media files gets dragged through the courts, no one will be using the MMS protocol anyway. This, combined with it not being illegal to reverse engineer stuff on the wire, means that it's extremely unlikely MS will try to nail Real on charges of reverse engineering. I think it'll be this patent if it's anything.
Patent Abstract
An active stream format is defined and adopted for a logical structure that encapsulates multiple data streams. The data streams may be of different media. The data of the data streams is partitioned into packets that are suitable for transmission over a transport medium. The packets may include error correcting information. The packets may also include clock licenses for dictating the advancement of a clock when the data streams are rendered. The format of ASF facilitates flexibility and choice of packet size and in specifying maximum bit rate at which data may be rendered. Error concealment strategies may be employed in the packetization of data to distribute portions of samples to multiple packets. Property information may be replicated and stored in separate packets to enhance its error tolerance. The format facilitates dynamic definition of media types and the packetization of data in such dynamically defined data types within the format.
Blizzard mayi claim that someone stole their code for BNETD in legal court documents but that doesn't make it a legal find of fact, or in other words the truth. That is just what they are claiming, and to a degree what they have to claim to make the court believe that the lawsuit has some merit and isn't totally bogus to be thrown out before it even starts. Think of it as a claim to prevent their lawsuit from being tossed out as a totally frivilous lawsuit that clog the courts these days that judges try to throw out as fast as they can.
Blizzard may make the claim, but it still doesn't make it true, nor has the court had a chance to rule on it yet.
Well, if you had quoted the relevant part in its entirety you would have included the following:
(after all they have made it clear through their actions that they believe it is perfectly acceptable to reverse-engineer a protocol based on a data stream)
So yes the post did, as a matter of fact, say that the protocols would be reverse engineered. Learn to read.
gud thang you pisted that AC cuz that aint not whut it sed u faggio.
Helix is to Real as:
A) Steven Tyler is to Mick Jagger B) Fred Flintstone is to Ralph Cramden C) Mozilla is to Netscape
The answer is "C" because Mozilla killed Netscape and Helix is gonna kill Real.
The Netscape example sounds a lot like RealNetwork's Helix gamble: Netscape was at the top of the market, Microsoft came out with an inferior competing product, Netscape ignored the threat, Microsoft improved the inferior product, knocked Netscape off of the top and Netscape was forced to open source their software development in a desperate attempt to regain market share.