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
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.
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.
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
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.
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
This might be great, you're right. But it won't be: this is Real we are talking about, the pioneer of the clunky-as-all-hell media applications that do nothing for anyone but barely stream audio and crash when the juices start flowing.
On the one hand, it is nice that Real is doing this for Open Sourcers, but, on the other, what other choice did they have?
So, before anyone wets their skeeves with dreams of Open Source-everything, be prepared for this to be the first in an unwieldy trend of crap being released to be saved by open sources, with no credit given back to them.
Some people say don't look a gift horse in the mouth, well this isn't a gift horse, it is just another media dinosaur waiting in the bushes to rip everyone off.
But hey, I could be wrong.
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
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!
a team of "virgin" programmers
Is there any other kind?
"Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!"
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."
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.
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?
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...
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