Slashdot Mirror
Clear Channel Buys Patent For Instant Live CDs
An anonymous reader writes "According to this Rolling Stone article, and this article at P2P, everyone's favorite monopolist, Clear Channel, is bullying DiscLive and other companies in the available-after-the-concert live CD business by forbidding them from operating in their venues.
Looking at the actual Clear Channel patent itself, it's obvious that, unlike what is said by their Instant Live program head Steve Simon, their patent is very specific, and doesn't cover all media types and all onsite production, so isn't CC just standing behind a bogus patent to continue to act like a monopolist? Anyone have prior art to invalidate their patent?"
At least they are my favorite monopolist. Who is ClearChannel anyway?
Anyone have prior art to invalidate their patent?
Back in 1988, I recorded a Pet Shop Boys concert on DAT, and got mugged outside the stadium. Does that count as instant distribution?
.. is for someone to patent the rest of the media types?
It should be obvious to anyone whose ever used a multi-CD burner, or recorded a concert.
Third of Nine
Well, um, yes.
If your a big enough venue (read thosands of seats) then most likely your all ready owned by a large corporation. Clear channel does not support small venues, and in most cases goes out of its way to destroy them. So it britney can't play at the target center, so be it.
TruePunk | Games
Anyone remember the Grateful Dead's policy on bootlegging, how they encouraged it and even gave a special area at the front of the stage for bootleggers to stand and get a decent recording?
Isn't this an instant recording of a live event? Hasn't this been going on for 20 years?
Sunday you're Thinking Different, Monday you're a huge tool, paying too much and waiting to think like everyone else.
if someone downloaded warez from some BBS and burned it on a CD, that sounds like burn on demand.
I remember a UIL band contest where the band director received a cd of there performance just after they played. This was somewhere back in 98...
i think it's called a tape recorder.
The RIAA sues ClearChannel for illegally suing anyone for any reason having to do with music before they had a chance to get in on the fun.
Until Howard Stern starts marketing concerts under his banner. Then Clear Channel may have someone to actually compete with and silly patents won't be attractive anymore.
~S
Patent doing it with... Floppy, USB-memory, CDR, CDRW, HDs, CF I, CF II, SM, MS, MSP, MMC, SD, xD...then some "optical media", "magnetic media", "solid state" and/or catch-alls.
Why must it be "novel" just because you can't do it in EZ Cd Creator? Cdrecord has had the ability to record from stdin since its creation. Sound has been in a block device (/dev/dsp) since OSS's creation. Piping a block device to stdout has been available since... cat. I have been piping sound from /dev/dsp to oggenc to disk (live) and from disk to oggdec to cdrecord (later) for 3 years in a live environment.
I support the general idea that CC shouldn't be getting a patent on something as simple as this.
I think, however that you lost sight of the big picture. Making Money. I support Open Source, but what takes priority, the client with 5k in his hand asking for a website, or my to-do list for my blog software, or another OS project.
Business today thrives on one company working against the others, being first to market still carries some value, I think that this is what CC is doing. Plus, If I'll say, If I see a concert at the Verizon Wireless Arena, and want to get a copy of the show, I'll buy one.
Maybe I miss the point, Maybe I'm too tired for this now.......
When I saw this on Ars Technica yesterday, I was going to put another mark on my slashdot ESP - I was sure to see this come up. Oups, I forgot it in one of my 50 browsers now open...
Hmmm, crispy. I just hope not everyone will run away scared by this. The patent will hopefully be invalidated, or shown not to cover the whole process.
Check with any large church. They have been recording and releasing their services immediately afterwards, some on CD, some on tape, depending on the size of the church and the length of the sermon.
Some of us consider that a performance, and its been done on tape for over 30 years.
You'll also need about $100,000 in bribe money.
Oh wait a minute, Live Music CD's
can anyone name any patents in the domains that intrigue most /.'ers that have actually been invalidated because of prior art? any? even one?
A patent is supposed to be [1] Not immediately obvious to an expert in the field, and [2] provide some new and original technology.
However, this concept is rather obvious - record a concert from various audio and video sources then compress the data onto a CD. If they have a patent on this process, then it might be defendable. But I can't see how they can defend the concept of recording a live concert onto a CD.
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
Having read the patent, it is for editing the content while it is still being captured. It was filed in 2001.
IANAL, but it seems as though if you capture each song, and then edit them after the song is captured, then you have invalidated this patent.
The idea is that your ticket to the event entitles you to "download" up to about 40 minutes worth of music (IIRC) from the event, using a "secure" DRM system.
My wife and I went last summer and I went to download my "fair share" of the music when I got home. Guess what? The music is in a proprietary format and you need a special client to be able to download and decode it. The client is only available as a Win32 .EXE
Sorry guys, I only have Solaris and Linux at home. I emailed and protested politely and was ignored. The client is called Wippit. I emailed them and got no reply, despite the fact that allegedly they welcomed feedback from non-Windows users asking for clients for other platforms.
Stick Men
Grateful Dead at Live Music Archive
For years our church would have a cassette of the day's sermon available immediately after the church service. This is going back like 15+ years. Maybe it's not the same as the parent that CC is seeking. I didn't really RTFA :-)
Umm, hello? When have media companies ever been interested in the advancement of technology. If it wasn't something that was specifically their hands only, they've resisted everything. Radio, tapes, CDs, DVDs, VCRs (didn't thank wanker at the head of th MPAA say something about it destroying civilization as we knew it) MP3 players. Maybe they liked TV, since they figured 28 minutes of advertising could profitably pay for two minutes of content. bah. When the revolution comes, the heads of big media should swing just after the Lawyers and the heads of organized religion.
ClearChannel acts immorally to make as much money as possible while producing nothing but law suites and noxious gas. Apple creates damn good products, ideas and such and then protect their creation. That's the difference. Your not + Insightful your + Short Sighted and - Thought.
vampirical
In its current format, it is just being abused by big business to stifle innovation, and as a means to create an income though suing anyone any everyone who even remotely does something similar to what they have a patent on.
This is the only solution, and should be done as well as a complete re-write of the copyright laws, and civil lawsuit laws, as they too are now just a revenue stream for big business.
This is also fast becoming the case here in Australia too as Australia becomes America through the FTA (Free Trade Agreement).
Well that is my AU$0.02 (US$0.014178) worth.
Third of Nine
Well, um, yes.
"But it is a business, and it's not going to be 'we have the patent, now everybody can use it for free.'"
Best Comment Ever
But this time. ClearChannel patented bootlegging + dubbing + corprate logo. The only thing new there is the legitimacy of the copy, and that's essentially only new in the US and only in so far as people aren't talking about bands who weren't freindly to such activities. This is akin to someone inventing a hotdog cart, and you patenting selling hotdogs from a cart.
There are probably only a thousand or so professors in universities around the country that can demonstrate prior art to this trivially obvious idea. The people who signed the patent should be killed as a warning to others who non-sensically take it upon themselves to waste the time of the bureaucrats in the patent office.
And do it like room 101 from 1984. Only no rats threatening to chew through ones face. Make them angry, malnourished rats in a plexiglass tube stuck to their pooper. Have them actually chew through the people, and televise it. Then award each rat a Presidential Medals of Freedom.
Screw patents.
If you can't get people to buy it from you, then move out of the way of those who can.
This is getting insane.Free Mac Mini Yeah, it's
I'm waiting for the Clear Channel apologist and bootlickers to come out of the woodwork.
Clear Channel must be broken apart.
Their boss won't pay his bills!
As far as prior art goes, the patent looks exactly what thousands of churches do every service, record to CD and cassette. Bigger churches actually mix the sound, make special tracks for special events within the service. Now wouldn't that be a nice media circus, big bad CC goes after America's churches, synagogues, and whatever-else-have-you.
Do you know what happens when a bitch slaps his master's wrist?
They control about 1,200 radio stations. That seems like a lot until you realize that there are around 20,000 radio stations in the U.S. This means that they control around 6% of stations. 6% is nothing like a monopoly. If Microsoft controlled 6% of computer desktops, who would be complaining?
Second, they don't even control radio in major markets. If you check, market by market, they sometimes have as many as 1/4 or 1/3 of the stations in major cities. Again, this is well short of a monopoly.
If you don't like Clear Channel, turn the dial.
I won't defend what they are doing here with the CDs. It is outright wrong. However, I will defend them from attempts at censorship (like the protests against the FCC ruling) and against ludicrouse charges that a company that owns 6% of the nation's radio stations is an out-of-control monopoly.
Same old story. Patenting of trivial processes seems to be a one-click affair these days.
But how much of a problem will this be for small (< 500) venues and lesser-known artists who don't sell out big arenas? I know a lot of indie electronica artists who improvise a lot, which would be interesting to have captured for later.
Somehow a "live" CD from a sing-back dance show (my view of your average Britney and friends show) doesn't seem like a too exciting prospect...
Well, because if I brought a recorder into a concert, recorded the concert, then started handing out copies to my buddies I'd get arrested. Honestly -- people have been attempting to do this "on-the-sly" since the birth of portable cassette recorders -- and getting arrested for it too. I would say that it's not only a plain and obvious invention, but the only reason that there isn't a mountain of prior art is because: 1) the bands weren't interested / knowledgable / didn't care about it and 2) the fans couldn't do it themselves because the law prohibitted them from doing so (not that people didn't try).
Dumb, dumb, dumb.
Come on, records of Live appearances are not a new technique, neither is selling CDs a new technique, so how can one patent the concept of recording and selling a CD, be it minutes after a concert or month?!
Bitten Apples are still better than dirty Windows...
As I understand the patent, the unique thing is that it's for editing sound and video "live" as the stuff goes to media. Doesn't Tivo pretty much do this, with an ability to edit out commercials at recording time? Of course Tivo is generally used to record off-the-air instead of live, but that doesn't seem particularly relevant - an AV source is an AV source, right?
Griner; James C. (23916 57th Ave. SE, Woodinville, WA 98072)
One of these ass-clowns practically lives within wakling distance!!
Well, I know one guy who's going to be signed up for all the mail-order information about penis pumps, gay thai sex tours, and whatever other awful things I can find.
They patented the computer.
If you take a look at it, they could have patented the computer, a sound board, a radio station recorder, a camcorder, a cassette duplication system, a tape deck..
This is getting SO out of hand..
= Grow a brain...
Nothing more to say
For some reason, it seems that the more companies stress how much they "welcome feedback", the less likely you are to actually get some sort of response.
[or when you do, it's some sort of form letter, telling you that you're very important to them, and they'll look into it, but from the wording of the form letter, it's obvious that they've misunderstood what your issue was]
If they have a feedback mechanism, but don't go out of their way to over-hype it, then you might have a chance at getting a response from a real person. [eg, you have to go through the automated FAQ on The History Channel to get to the link for freeform comments. Although, the response to asking why they're always showing programs about Hitler still seemed like a form letter -- but it was at least a relevent response to the question.]
Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
Clear Channel is seeking an injunction against Democratic voters for infringing on voting methods, recently patented to ensue Republican elections....
Mod Karma -1: I sed bad wurds. If I cep my mouf shut, I wud be at riyses.
Anyone have prior art to invalidate their patent?
Howsabout every Grateful Dead concert from the 70's and beyond? IIRC The Dead encouraged bootleg taping and selling of their concerts.
"Lawyers are for sucks."
- Doug McKenzie
to some one skilled in the art.
This is yet another fine example of patenting the obvious. Most of the patent is important sounding (or not) filler. I love lines like "The editing module is communicatively connected to the event capture module."
This reminds me of a patent from a competitor. They submitted an application for a ridiculously broad and simple idea. As compensation for the idiocy of the patent body, they stuck the word unique into almost every sentence i.e. "This is a Unique idea that communicates Unique data between a base station and a number of Unique Transponder..." (It goes on like that)
A Patent is NOTHING more than a lenience to sue, that you buy from the government. As we have seen so many times lately, for a large company like Clear channel, the threat of a long legal battle is all they need to put a big dent in the competition. For any person or company that can't afford a 1 to10 million dollar legal bill, the validity of their, or the other guys patent is immaterial.
It is very disheartening Dr. Null
The real question is does anybody have a sackful of lawyers, and a corresponding sackful of cash for each lawyer?
Even if somebody did show prior art, they can just amend their patent to work around it.
Your patents system is broken. Fix it.
"A goldfish was his muse, eternally amused"
sorry, i'm from europe, so i tend to not understand some things. i can understand if someone puts some nice things together with a lot of duct tape, calls this "bicycle with 8 wheels" or "telephone" and gets a patent for that. however, what i do not understand: someone buys some products and uses them exactly the way they are supposed to be used and gets a patent for that. really, i do not understand that.
beer as in "free beer"
The hard work of transparent windows is not to come up with the idea, but to implement proper support for it in your windowing system. By using transparent windows in your system, you automatically publish it, thus there is little or no value in the patent publication. Same with business methods: by using them, you make them known.
The patent system was never designed to allow monopolisation of every cool idea (otherwise we'd also have patents on book plots and drawing styles), because that results in blocking all independent creators who build something based on that idea. Of course, big businesses love that, because a patent on an idea is much broader than a patent on a particular implementation/invention and thus gives them a much broader monopoly, but it's bad for the free market and society as a whole.
Have a look at this presentation for more on the idea/invention difference, the goals of the patent system and how software patents work against them.
FWIW, I'm posting this from my iBook and my other computer is a G4, waiting to be replaced by a G5. So I'm definitely not some anti-Apple zealot, many would even claim the reverse :)
Donate free food here
Nope not a typo, a convenience I indulge myself in while typing on forums, boards, etc. I know it's a bad habit but I haven't got around to breaking it. I am interested in your counting ability now that you've brought up errors. Maybe in your rage of grammtical thinking you added another "your" in front of the - Thought.
vampirical
Well, innovative is pretty broad. One could count their one button mouse as innovative (thought a long time ago) even though mice had been around since the 60s.
Their most recent innovative? A completely composited graphics system accelerated by the graphics processor on the computer. Or, perhaps a high speed connection standard (FireWire or i.Link) for medium distances and point to point communication.
But, even "little" things like single handedly driving USB peripheral design by simply declaring it so and refusing to ship any other interface on their computers definitely count as innovative. Intel had been trying to do that for years but couldn't get any of the major PC vendors to commit. Up until the iMac there were no USB devices (well, hardly any). In one stroke they changed the whole peripheral market.
And, these are just a few of the latest. You have no idea what you are talking about. They don't get called Microsoft's R&D or the the most innovative company in personal computing for nothing.
I noticed on the clearchannelsucks webs site, just a bit farther down from their article, this item is siting there.
I wonder if CC is looking at the live disk as a promotional opportunity to sell to advertisers, and that's why they're barring artists use of their own live recordings? I guess they figure that if they have the patent, they can control the use of the technology, and then turn around and lisence advertising on the live CD to Pepsi, or Budweiser, or whomever is willing to pony up the cash to have their ads "inserted" onto the live tracks.
And I doubt there are many artists who would be willing to do that on their own, given the backlash from fans.
Which made perfect sense to me.
naah sig schmig
Corporate America has been telling us for decades that unregulated free markets, i.e., competition, is the best economic system. Now via patented business plans, they've essentially eliminated all competition. What's capitalism without competition? Corporate fascism.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
I'll give you the "new" part since it's close enough (35 USC 101), but "expert" is flat wrong; way too high a standard.
35 USC 103(a):
A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
"A person having reasonable skill in the art," e.g., a reasonable (not average, a "reasonable") person in the recording/CD distribution field.
This post was edited to be less of dick about it, but if /.ers are going to discuss the law, we should at least attempt to do it intelligently like we do other subjects (for the most part).
-truth
I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...
A slightly-crippled version of something that is already out there? Steps backwards are not innovation.
"But, even "little" things like single handedly driving USB peripheral design by simply declaring it so "
They didn't, actually. There were PCs with USB at exact same time (as when the iMac came out), and things gradually changed over to USB as new peripherals came out. Apple did not "make it so". They did very little to change the USB situation. Apple's design blunder of leaving off standard ports merely forced iMac users to buy converter dongles to get things to work in the USB ports.
"They don't get called Microsoft's R&D or the the most innovative company in personal computing for nothing."
The innovation is mostly smoke and mirrors, and Microsoft has not gotten anything from Apple in ages. Remember what Jeff Goldblum said: the iMac is blue. Far and away the most influence Apple has had in the past 20 years is the iMac colors: a fad that resulted in translucent George Foreman grills and staplers. You are right on Firewire and the "composite graphics" thing, however.
"In one embodiment, the present invention provides an event recording system that has an event-capture module, an editing module, and a media recording module."
That's a recording studio.
It just happens to be at the event, and the timeline is compressed to enable them to sell copies by the time the concert ends. There is no invention there at all, just a bunch of blue-arsed audio-engineering flies. As for prior art:
- recording a live concert off the radio
- recording a live concert off the TV
- any artist who has recorded a live album (although this obviously has the time issue)
- church services (we record ours to disk and master to CD when the service ends)
- any broadcast corporation that archives live programmes. That's all recorded to tape, ready to syndicate to other stations instantly.
- any of those 'cut an album in an hour' compos
In short, this is a crazy patent - they've simply patented doing something people have been doing for ages, but doing it slightly faster.What the devil did they see as "questionable" in this song?
Louis Armstrong "What A Wonderful World"
I see trees of green, red roses too
I see them bloom for me and you
And I think to myself, what a wonderful world
I see skies of blue and clouds of white
The bright blessed day, the dark sacred night
And I think to myself, what a wonderful world
The colours of the rainbow, so pretty in the sky
Are also on the faces of people going by
I see friends shakin' hands, sayin' "How do you do?"
They're really saying "I love you"
I hear babies cryin', I watch them grow
They'll learn much more than I'll ever know
And I think to myself, what a wonderful world
Yes, I think to myself, what a wonderful world
The only thing that's even close is the colours/faces passage -- but if anyone's going to find offense in that, they should do society a favour and walk around with blinders & earplugs to protect their overly delicate sensibilities!
What town is this? I bet that Clear Channel owns around 1 in 5 of your town's stations, not "most".
You're right, I replied too quickly with poor wording (like now :)
Still, the presence of a lot of those songs on such a list is "questionnable" to say the least. But Clear Channel knows what's best for us I'm sure.
is so people don't read crap like the parent to this
Haven't artists been recording and mixing live concerts for years? How can Clear Channel have a patent on this just because now those same artists are able to press that same recording to a cd the same night?
The obviousness is rediculous. Just because joe artist has a fast cd burner shouldnt limit his abiltiy to sell recordings of his work to the public just because he performed it at a publicly accessable venue. That CC owns that venue shouldn't limit the artists abiltiy to record and sell what drew people into that venue to begin with.
This is CC way of extortion...problem is if it weren't for those very artists CC would have a really nice empty theater....
I'm really getting sick of all the business process patents. Selling concert CD's immediately after the show is nothing new; how many thousands of live albums are available on the market today? This method is just faster distribution than before; it's not an original process. Would you award a patent to a record company for selling live albums in stores a month after the concert? Of course not! So why do they get a patent for selling it 15 minutes later in the venue?
Maybe they could patent the actual recording/distribution kiosk design, because that would take some original, creative engineering to make it work. But the idea of "selling CD's after a show" is nothing new.
$8.95/mo web hosting
Why is it taken as assumed that acting as a monopolist is a bad thing in all cases?
Okay, so CC is coming down with even more restrictions, what are we to do? It's preaching to the choir, we already knew CC was evil in the first place, so this isn't informing anybody. Is this supposed to incite people to demand legal action as was taken by the government against Microsoft?
What about those of us who believe in capitalism and don't view monopolism as necessarily a bad thing or something which confers negative traits automatically? Must we all be indentured into group-think to survive the jungle of assumption here?
I bet there's not a single software-related patent that's been issued in the last ten years that couldn't be overturned by prior art. Stuff that seems cutting edge now was being mulled over twenty years ago, sometimes thirty or forty years ago.
At the risk of being off-topic but kind of still on-topic, have you all seen where PanIP's lovely "Automated Sales" patent got overturned recently? Unless PanIP can convince the USPTO to overturn its decision, it looks like there will be no more lawsuits against e-commerce companies coming from PanIP, unless they think they can stand on just their automated transactions patent, and that one under review, too.
There's a link to the story at the old website of the PanIP Group Defense Fund, at youmaybenext.com.
You are in error. No-one is screaming. Thank you for your cooperation.
TV, RADIO, has been doing just what the patent claims is CC's invention, for decades....
Live prodcast are not "live", they are recorded to provide a delay, before distribution...
These recordings are often edited, then sold later to increase revenues...
karma, hah...
Let's see:
I can't record the concert myself for later listening.
I can't take so much as a photograph so show my friends how great my seat was or any other purpose.
I can't buy a sanctioned recording of the concert.
I can't bring in a bottle of water or a crumb of food from outside.
Is Clear Channel also working on inventing that flashy thing from Men in Black, so after the show is over they can wipe the very memory of it from the brains of the concertgoers?
Yes. The ones who complain that CC controlls everything and has ruined radio have no idea what they are talking about. Perhaps their radio came with the pre-set programmed with a Clear Channel station, and they are too dumb to press tuner buttons, and think that the radio only gets one station, the CC one.
As subject. To invalidate a patent is to have it revoked by the Patent Office / courts.
They take all the joy out of life! It makes me so depressed. One of the finest experiences I've had in the last year is getting a DiscLive CD right after the Pixies show in Spokane. The artists got a cut, I didn't have to lug around recording requipment and the DiscLive guys are AWESOME.
You can read more about them on the "All around the world - Pixies live" forum on frankblack.net for one. There service is a GOOD THING and it hurts no one but the greedy bastards at Clear Channel. You should have seen the smiles on the 1000 or so people who go CDs that night. Everyone was HAPPY.
In our corporate run world soon we will all be slaves to the patents and morals of a handful of monopolistic companies. We can line up and listen to whatever clear channel wants us to listen to and pay them a hefty sum to do so.
It just makes me sick to my stomach. Every GOOD THING in the world gets taken away. Call me a whiner, but this just depresses the SHIT out of me.
I was doing that a decade ago with mics, mixer and two cassette decks - and I can safely guarantee that thousands of Deadheads were doing it two decades prior to that.
You're fired.
Sincerely,
Your boss at ClearChannel
PS: Thanks for the link. The RIAA has been contacted and that site will be shut down soon.
I just read the exact wording of the patent and the only thing it seems to incorporate beyond just recording sound to the media is that it does so "as it happens". And can be sent to multiple devices to record. Go to any recording studio in the world and they will have that exact same ability. The only thing this patent REALLY specifies is that it can be used at a concert. BS. Also, even if the courts ever upheld it, I believe you could technically get around the patent by just recording the audio first, and then just burn after the performance was over. Sure, you'd maybe have to wait another 5 minutes before you could leave with your disk but I sure wouldn't care if it meant those leeches didn't get my dime.
I recall seeing a show on Discovery about a year or two ago about how the Grateful Dead have been recording their own live shows and selling the CDs right after said show for several years as a way to side-step the commercial distribution channels. In the show, they reported that their net income increased many-fold over what they were paid from their RIAA member distributor (Imagine that, directly selling their CDs and taking all the profit vs getting $0.01 out of every $!)
Also, as others have mentioned, this most definitely is both obvious and a natural evolution of recording equipment capabilities. This "patent" should have been denied, since they're attempting to generically patent an existing process by merely putting a few time sensitive words in.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
Then isn't the two-button PC mouse also crippled?
From what I can make out of this image, the first mouse was a three-button one.
If someone made a 200-button mouse, would it be less crippled? Would a keyboard without the Scroll Lock key be crippled?
If the UI doesn't need a second button on the mouse why should there be one?
I don't know if Apple had much to do with the expansion of USB, but at least they figured it was better to have one interface rather than all the different ones we have on our pcs.
How often do you use the COM-port, and how often do you use it because it's better than USB?
How about those annoying floppy drives?
Read the friendly patent:
1. An event recording system, comprising:
(i) an event-capture module to capture an event signal and transform it into a primary event file that is accessible as it is being formed;
(ii) an editing module communicatively connected to the event capture module, wherein the editing module accesses and parses the primary event file into one or more digital track files that can be recorded onto a recording media; and
(iii) a media recording module communicatively linked to the editing module for receiving the one or more digital track files, the media recording module having a plurality of media recorders for simultaneously recording the one or more digital track files onto a plurality of recording media.
Unfortunately, we have some CC radio stations here in Indy. I've already made the conscious choice not listen to any of them. We have some very good independent stations here that are much better, anyway.
A lot of weirdness happened in the days immediately following 9-11. The list was one of them, but it NEVER amounted to a company ban. Generally speaking, CC doesn't operate this way.
Another urban legend: that CC banned the Dixie Chicks after they mouthed off overseas. Some CC stations did exactly that, but it was a local decision, not through Corporate. We were told to make the call based on our own markets. The only company I know which actually banned the Chicks was Cumulus.
This is my post. There are many others like it. If you don't like what you read here, go try one of the others.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Negativland in the past has allowed fans to connect recording devices directly to any open sockets on the master control board in order to record their shows.
Negativland = Multiple audio streams
Fans = Multiple recording devices
Negativland + Fans = Prior Art
You also get liner notes, possibly some picutres and a wonderful jewel case in which to protect and cherish your investment for years to come, all at a reasonable cost (reasonable for CCE, mind you).
You can also buy the CDs well after the fact at suck--, uh, participating partners' retail outlets.
Monopoly indeed. Look at some of the press articles from the DiscLive site. CC and DL have been going to toe to toe for a while with this. Of course, from this one article, it is clear that CC clearly has the upper hand: "But who will have final say over these recordings? Simon says, "As the promoter/venue owner we do not need special permission from the promoter/venue owner to record shows."
I can see CC refusing mechanical licenses to to DL as they are the 'owners' of most of the venues.
Note that DiscLive has applied for a patent too:
"DiscLive has developed a patent pending proprietary technology that enables the mass-production of CDs and DVDs within minutes of the end of a concert."
As a frequent gatherer of legal live recordings, I think the prior art is with the fans, as they are the ones who have been plugging into soundboards and passing out free CDs immediately after a show that allows live recording, since the day laptops came with burners in them. One just need to look at a site like FurthurNet to see the hundreds of legal recordings available for download (their software and registration required to download), many of which were issued immediatley after the show.
It seems to me there's a dual standard for prior art: If you want to invalidate a patent, you must show that someone did essentially the exact thing covered in the patent. This is generally quite hard, because generally the patent will have enough detail that everything anyone comes up with is just a little bit off.
On the other hand, when it comes time to enforce the patent, anything that looks vaguely like the patent is forbidden.
So, you could build a Direct-To-CD system with technology pre-dating the patent that isn't quite like the one in the patent, and even if you could prove that system was used for that purpose before the patent was filed, it would not invalidate the patent if shown as prior art. On the other hand, try to use that system today and you'll get sued.... you might win, but you'll probably lose.
Someday, I hope to see a defense to the tune of "I was using this system before the patent" for a system like the one described in the previous paragraph, and see what happens to the patent then when the two conflicting standards both come into play at once.
(Of course, there's a reason the patents are broad: A narrow view of these patents would be almost impossible to infringe, rendering the Patent Office nearly meaningless, and that's anathema to a bureaucracy.)
Anonymous yammering Coward, monopolies are bad. That's why they're illegal in the US, regardless of BushCo's fondness for them. The Sherman Antitrust Act, the landmark legislation protecting the people from monopolies, trusts, and cartels, was passed a century ago, after the robber baron monopolies squeezed people so hard that there was a near collapse of the economy outside the insular circuits of the monopolies' cabals. They're always bad. Believe what you want about capitalism - unless you're the monopoly, they're bad for you. Drop the crap about "group-think" and read a book.
--
make install -not war
Come on. Go to any reheasal hall or studio. Everyone does live to 2 track then burns it to CD for distribution to the band members before they leave the building. This is so fuckin' blantly obvious. Does anyone here know that the patent was filed by a lawyer in Texas. I guess now that there is a patent for this, that ALL GOVERNMENT BODIES, INCLUDING CONGRESS, ALL US COURTS, TRIALS, HEARINGS, etc can not produce a CD of their proceedings or be brought up on patent infringment charges! Ha! That'll teach them to mess with the big corporations. I think we will all have to learn to read shorthand?
This 'patent' is another glaring proof of the broken federal system. It is far too vague to be legitimate. Since I cannot fix the patent system I will start at the evil empire. I already boycott ALL CC stations (all suck now anyway) and I will not buy any of their 'Live' crap, or go to a CC-sponsored concert (since they have no hard-rock presence in Dallas this is also easy). I'd boycott advertisers on their stations but that would require listening. It's time to start skimming the gene pool.
parent post doesn't deserve -1. I made a mistake in my original post, using the word "ban" where I should have said "deprecated temporarely". Worst part is I have mod points but obviously already commented on this thread.
Einsturzende Neubauten (http://www.neubauten.org/) had problems with this on their recent US tour. Clear Channel acknowledged their prior art outside the US by only charging them a token fee to record in this country.
Boy was the band upset. They have been doing this outside the US since at least 2000.
-c
Should not this patent have failed under the "obvious to a practicioner" part of the patent process?
I shall have you know Microsoft is my favourite monopolist.
My mistake. Although the patents that I have seen defended successfully, are those that have been written by experts.
As in, only experts would come up with something non-obvious to a person of ordinary skill?? Isn't that the defintion of expert?
I think what you're saying is that you've only seen non-obvious patents be defended as non-obvious. Imagine that.
Your solution to stop corporations from (for lack of a better description) owning ideas is to remove the one law preventing them from trampling REAL innovators? You do realize, don't you, that if there were no patent laws, a corporation would be able to copy the ideas that inventors work hard to come up with, and produce the invention without having to compensate the inventor for the idea. Can I have some of what you're smoking?
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
DATHeads listserve shows explicitly how just about every medium and/or technique for recording shows and making them available immediately afterwards has been fully examined for, oh say 30 years or more.
I wonder if I could patent reading a tablet PC in the john. Apparently I should try. I still can't believe someone can patent single-clicking something to buy it. That is just an abuse of government-issued monopoly.
According to George Carlin, when he came to my town, CC and CCE are totally separate and that is why he is not leaving CCE because of the Stern brouhaha.
Augment the delivery method with a slip of paper sporting a unique URL to claim your prize.
To hell with it -- make it a torrent. It'll end up as one soon enough. Ask the RIAA.
No, they've patented the system that does it
If the patent is broad enough to read on all systems that could possibly do it, then they've patented doing it.
I've just read the patent, and it appears that the first claim covers breaking a live recording into tracks (.cue file anyone?) and then sending the audio to digital media recorders.
Every time a patent article comes up, we see all of this hoopla about prior art.
/. mind, it invalidates the patent but the mega-corp *still has the patent*
Tell me, have any of these absurd tech patents been overturned because prior art existed? Or are we all just waving our arms in the air saying "Oh, we had that before!" and then doing nothing?
It doesn't matter if prior art existed if absolutely nothing gets done about it. Sure, in the
The RIAA has little if anything to do with live albums other than that a label may contractually own copyright in all musical recordings made of a performer's voice. If a recording artist managed to negotiate such a clause out of her contract with the label, then the label lacks grounds to complain.
The NMPA and the performing rights organizations, on the other hand, have their fingers in every musical pie, even more so than the RIAA and its member labels.
Cdrecord has had the ability to record from stdin since its creation.
The patent covers adding track start/end cues during the performance and then using the equivalent of 421 burners (or any other plurality of digital media recording devices). Can a user of cdrecord pipe in a .cue file created in real time?
The patent covers adding track start/end cues to a live digital recording and then sending the result to a duplicating machine. Tapes don't have track cues.
So? They have a small minority of stations. Apparently, you ahd him have a problem of CC making its material too popular, so the advertisers flock to it. What next, do you want to legislate popularity???
"Rather than refuting this claim, you say to him simply"
Sorry. I missed this by not pointing out the fact that there are more non-CC stations than CC stations, and the artists can go elsewhere.
" not 94%, which would include talk radio, religious stations, etc"
and rock, and pop, and country, and classical, and...
"Its difficult to argue that Clear Channel has done anything illegal. "
Maybe they have. Certainly this CD news about them is onerous. In any case, this company that controls a minority of radio stations is not a monopoly of any kind.
"Clear Channel's effects should be looked at more from a sociological or ethical standpoint, rather than legal, and then the company will appear far more disturbing"
Only if you are some sort of fascist who believes that the government should control everything, including the airwaves, if there is something "sociologically bad" about the content.
" The impact on our culture can easily be seen in the list of Grammy and Oscar nominations (especially the Grammy's!). "
"is familiar with the latest Celine Dion (remember the Titanic media circus? It wasn't that good of a movie, was it?) "
It was a pretty good movie; the best out that year anyway. Celine Dionne? Yes, I heard her on the radio all over the place. In heavy rotation. Guess what? Not one of these stations I heard doing this was Clear Channel.
"Anyway, I could write a huge essay on this matter, but I won't waste my time."
Get over it. Some people like different stuff than you do. That's the way it works out. There is no imaginary cabal at work.
So now the dubious monopoly case rests on the fact that while CC controls a definite majority of stations, it actually DARES to air the right quality material so it ends up being the most popular. This was one of the points of the movement to censor Clear Channel last year: the protesters were actually trying to censor the company for daring to serve its audience.
Yes, I have prior art and own all rights to this technology. No, I won't show you any of it but intend to sue everyone mentioned in this article.
Darl McBride
We should at least make patents non-transferrable.....
This could at least keep large companies from swallowing up every good idea that comes along...and potentially squashing it...
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
It is quite relevant. A company controlling an undeniable minority of radio stations is not in any way a monopoly. This is honest, and gets to the heart of the matter. No deceit is present, unless you claim that 6% = monopoly.
"If you look at Infinity's web site, they emphasize the number of their stations that are in major markets, and I dare say that Clear Channel is similarly concentrated."
For every major market I have checked, CC has controlled between 17% and 30% of the stations in that large market. Minority, not monopoly share.
"It didn't seem that unclear to me. How about a first-order predicate calculus version?"
Worded as is, it looks like you are saying that CC owns all Denver stations. If you want to make that case, go ahead. It is as baseless as the rest of your argument.
"there's 11% oldies, 11% religious, 11% news/talk, 12% country--if you're a current, non-country performer, that's about half the stations in the US that are irrelevant when it comes to publicity or airplay."
So what do we do about it? Forcibly convert the 12% country stations to rock, so there is more place for airplay?
Virtual meaning "not at all"? 6% control is far from a monopoly.
Hell, what secret is there to it? You have the same CD of the music the current act is "Lip Sync'ing" to...
I can be shrink wrapped and all WAY in advance...
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
A UI doesn't need a mouse, period (there are keyboard shortcuts), but having two mouse buttons makes it easier to use.
" but at least they figured it was better to have one interface rather than all the different ones we have on our pcs."
Apple has never made PCs. In any case, they were wrong. The typical PC still comes with USB as well as standard ports, because there is a need for them after all.
"How about those annoying floppy drives?"
They were only annoying and hard to use on the Mac, due to a lack of a disk eject button. Standard PCs still come with them because there is a use, and the companies tend to serve the customers.
The Specification (the text you quoted) has nothing to do with the strength of the patent. The patent is encompassed in the claims. e.g.,
1. An event recording system, comprising:
(i) an event-capture module to capture an event signal and transform it into a primary event file that is accessible as it is being formed;
(ii) an editing module communicatively connected to the event capture module, wherein the editing module accesses and parses the primary event file into one or more digital track files that can be recorded onto a recording media; and
(iii) a media recording module communicatively linked to the editing module for receiving the one or more digital track files, the media recording module having a plurality of media recorders for simultaneously recording the one or more digital track files onto a plurality of recording media.
If the "media" is a DVD, they aren't "getting around it" by using one.
-truth
I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...
Please vote for one of the following:
A) Microsoft
B) ClearChannel
C) The FCC
D) US Congress
E) SCO
F) The US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO)
G) The RIAA
H) The MPAA
I) The NRA
J) The KKK
And that is different than what we have now how?
Free Mac Mini Yeah, it's
Hate to tell you this, but you are wrong. Unless you are speaking of far corners of the UP that I don't know about. Turn your dial most anywhere and you will get NPR stations, right-wing rant AM radio, classical music stations, oldies, country, alt/hard rock, college stations... and even polka's. and if you tune to the bottom of the FM dial in the middle part of the state, you get CBS TV.
Perhaps you are living in Isle Royale or something. Either that, or you are lamenting the lack of Swahili drum-chant stations and can't understand why you can't find stations devoted to Swahili drum-chants.
I'm surprised that no musicians have commented on this.
So let me get this straight... For the purposes of argument, I'm in a band, performing my own music. I'm already paying a soundman. If I tell my employee to record and make copies of the show for anyone who wants to buy one, I suddenly have to pay Clear Channel a cut?
Fuck that. The death of another good idea.
Because it is the most important thing. The market revenue happens because CC channels dare to provide the content that more people want. There is nothing wrong with that!
""Let's say Microsoft has only one operating system. There are twenty other operating systems. So Microsoft owns 5% of all operating systems"
That is, use totally incompatible examples. For your example to be even close, every box would automatically come come with all 21 OS's on it, and choosing XP, Linux, etc would be a matter of a turn of a switch.
This is like it is with radio: the alternatives are a flick of the dial away. If radio were like your example, every radio would come out of the box hard-wired to Clear Channel stations only.
"Good luck to you and your Clear Channel buddies in your holy crusade "
I don't work for them, and I can't even get them on my radio. From what everyone esays, I don't even want to. However, when last year's effort to get the FCC to censor Clear Channel raised its ugly head, I took it upon myself to become informed about the situation.
As many are aware, Pearl Jam sells recordings of concerts with a few day delay in printing the CDs.
From the Rolling Stone article:
Clear Channel doesn't plan to stop Phish, Pearl Jam, the Who or other bands that make live recordings available days after the show.
I should hope not. The patent was filed September 26, 2001. Pearl Jam been doing their technique since their 2000 tour.
http://biz.yahoo.com/pz/040526/58268.html
Live Disc Recording Patent Not Relevant to Immediatek's DiscLive
Wednesday May 26, 5:13 pm ET
Company Uses Off-The-Shelf Software, Cites Prior Patents
DALLAS, May 26, 2004 (PRIMEZONE) -- Immediatek Inc. (OTC BB:ITEK.OB - News), inventor of NetBurn Secure(TM) digital delivery and copy control solutions, and parent company of DiscLive Inc., says that the patent acquired by Clear Channel does not give it exclusive rights to the business of creating recordings of live performances. Furthermore, after a detailed analysis, the company has concluded that the patent is not relevant to the DiscLive implementation.
ADVERTISEMENT
The concept of recording and rapidly duplicating a live performance, such as a seminar or concert, and immediately distributing those recordings to the attendees, has been known since at least 1994. For example, U.S. Patent No. 5,349,477, issued on September 20, 1994, discusses a system that includes equipment capable of recording a seminar or concert and then rapidly duplicating ``disks'' and ``audio cassettes'' for distribution immediately after the event has ended.
Further, the DiscLive implementation utilizes standard off-the-shelf Steinberg Wavelab software to manage the recording and editing of the concert. This software does not permit the file to be ``accessible as it is being formed,'' as recited in the patent Clear Channel has recently acquired.
Zach Bair, CEO and Chairman of Immediatek, said, ``Our attorneys have provided Clear Channel's attorneys with this information and more to detail why their patent is not relevant to the DiscLive system and requested that they provide us with specific details if they disagree with our attorneys' analysis or conclusions. In fact, we are so confident of our position that we have invited Clear Channel to do an inspection of our implementation to verify the information we have provided them.
``Although discussions are ongoing, neither Clear Channel nor their lawyers have provided us with any such details as to why their patent is relevant to the DiscLive system, nor have they accepted our invitation to inspect our implementation.''
Immediatek intends to continue rolling out the DiscLive product offering, along with its other technologies such as NetBurn Secure and the NetBurn Portal System, as well as the soon-to-be-announced availability of NetBurns within two hours after a live performance.
DiscLive is the pioneer in the quickly growing market of live discs available immediately after the concert, having sold more live discs at concert venues than its competitors combined, and completing tours from Vermont to California and now also in Canada.
The company's mobile recording and production facility can produce 800 high quality CDs in less than 20 minutes. The New York based company is headed by Rich Isaacson, CEO, and Sami Valkonen, President, each of whom have extensive track records in the music industry. A May 2 headline in The New York Times dubbed the DiscLive offer of legal high quality CDs available immediately after the concert ``Rock's Best New Souvenir.''
Clear Channel currently owns over 722 radio stations and a few dozen tv stations. They're one of the biggest boosters of the Bush administration because of the monopoly-limiting regulatory rollbacks the republicans have perpetrated.
In my area, CC owns six radio stations. You won't hear any local music on any of them, and as a result, the whole local music industry is floundering because the main outlets for promoting music are dominated by a few big corporations.
One thing you can bet on. If Kerry gets in office, he's not going to let the media consolidation continue. That alone is reason enough to make sure Bush gets out, so that companies like Clear Channel can't end up owning a majority of the airwaves and then impose their will on everyone else.
Clearchannel owns 1200 radio stations. Did you forget the AM band? They also own many of the ticket sales outlets which provide ticket sales for the larger venues, and have considerable holding in movie theater chains such as Carmike, AMC, Cinemark, and Century.
What "monopoly-limiting regulatory rollbacks" have been perpetrated? Are you talking about deregulation of the media? Well yes, you could talk about how Clearchannel owns over 1200 stations in the major markets, and provides content to 60% of radio listeners in the US (which happens when you buy radio stations in big cities...duh). But what you and your ilk never bother to mention is that there are 12,500 radio stations (AM FM total all formats public and private). Clearchannel owns just under 10% - some "monopoly". Additionally, the number of radio stations has increased since deregulation occurred, up 15% in markets considered "saturated" (rural markets) and 12% in major markets (urban areas).
In my area, they own none. You still won't hear any local music because most local music sucks. Really. Other than the novelty of hearing it live, 99% of local bands always suck balls. The music industry cannot make a profit with their current discovery, production, and distribution methods so consequently they manufacture acts that aren't even up to the suck-ass level of most local acts, many of whom aren't doing anything but covering the songs put out by said manufactured acts.
But if you're so bothered by it, why don't you start a station? For around a grand you can set up a LPFM station that, in urban areas, is capable of reaching a thousand homes. Play nothing but local music, and sell advertising. Report back in one year.
How can I bet on that? Lets look at John Kerry's words.
Now let us examine Kerry's voting record, and it's impact.
There are over 12,500 radio stations - AM, FM, private and public. Clearchannel owns approximately 1,200 radio stations. So how does owning 9.6% of capital constitute a monopoly? Maybe if you consider that Clearchannel owns stations in major markets, and can reach 60% of the listening audience, you could call it a monopoly IF and only if you could prove that the other 11,000 radio stations are unable to access more than 40% of the market because of clearchannel.
People, grow the hell up. Market dominance doesn't make someone a monopoly. Its the natural result of making a product better suited to the demands of consumers.
The media conglomerates don't own the rights to live performances.
Trading tapes of live shows has always been a way for bands to step around the media mafia and bring the music directly to their fans.
Never go to a show that does not allow taping or pay to hear a band that does not allow non-profit trading. They've sold out. And yes, that list includes Bob Dylan.
Last year at the Timpanogos Storytelling Festival, their was a CD available on the last day with recordings (some with video) of stories recorded live at the festival, including IIRC some from that day. It was a really cool CD that I need to get back from my sister....
Join moola.com, play games to earn money.
Prior art or no, if a big enough company patents something everyone else is screwed. No matter how daft the patent, if you can't afford the legal fees to contest it, or to stand up to ${BIGCOMPANY} lawyers, you will get nowhere other than the poor house. It's not fair.
Stick Men
More like honour! Let's face it, AC/DC songs all sound pretty much the same.
Last time I checked, there were 20,000. You point, however, is obvious to all but the most blithering idiots.
I agree. Let's have an anti-trust action which results in Clear Channel controlling less than 10% of the radio stations in the United States. Sounds like a good idea.
As others have pointed out, this is nothing but a speedup of procedures that have existed for years in the recording industry.
The Sonic Solutions CD mastering system that has been around since some time around 1990 does most of the front end work described. It records while allowing simultaneous editing of the incoming file. What it doesn't allow for, by itself, is multiple workstations, BUT it would be possible to use multiple Sonic Solutions workstations with each operator recording a section of the concert and then combine the sections at the end of the concert. If you put SCSI raid boxes on them, you would have the redundancy mentioned in the patent.
Multi-ganged CD burners have been around forever, too.
I think this would have been obvious to average designer of Digital Audio Workstations.
If they have integrated all this stuff so they can start burning CD-Rs DURING the concert (once you start burning a CD, you can't stop until the end), they have done a very impressive bit of programming, but I don't see anything intellectually stimulating about the concept....
An engineer who ran for Congress. http://herbrobinson.us
He voted for media deregulation. How much more black and white do you need it to be? You people are so filled with hatred and denial that even the truth ceases to matter to you.