Slashdot Mirror
Real Networks Hacks iPod; .rm & Real Store for iPod
alphakappa writes "According to Cnet, Real Networks is expected to announce on Monday that it has found a way to make its songs play on the iPod. Now songs bought from the RealPlayer Music Store can be played on the iPod. Earlier Real had made it possible for songs bought from iTunes to be played on RealPlayer by transparently starting the iTunes authentication in the background. However since Apple has not licensed the technology to make file formats playable on the iPod, the latest Real initiative could be construed as reverse engineering. How would this fare under the DMCA? Or is it just for the tiny ones?"
I wouldn't call AAC open by any means. In my opinion, if you've got to pay an arm and a leg to license the format, its not open. The only open format that is lossy is Ogg Vorbis as far as I know.
I do wish Apple had chosen FLAC for its lossless format. But once again, Apple wants to lock you in to their own product (or at least a product of Dolby again) by providing another lossless format that is not used by anyone.
So all those concert sites with FLAC still can't be played on my iPod unless I convert them.
The IPOD provides a viable music distribution business model and DRM solution that the market has accepted. Enter Real - After Napoleon Glazer THREATENS Steve Jobs and Apples proprietary music distribution system http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/04/16/094454. php Real desides TO HACK THE SYSTEM to sell and profit from such ?
What next - REAL HACKS QUICKTIME since the Real Player Virus has so many iterations that it rarely works and reverse engineers it and markets it ?
What is REAL NETWORKS ? Technology Company - Content Aggregator, Content Distribution Network, Confused ? Or is Real Networks just another company run by a delusional management team that has YET TO MAKE ANY MONEY as they chase down Anti-Trust issues as if would generate revenue ?
What bothers me is that I see a clear pattern - Real asks for protection to get their sub-standard technology on the same footing as media players that actually work - then when they are not allowed to 'sponge' off others work they just hack the system.
Personally we had a situation where we actually were told Real was going to copy our system - re-compile the code in a different language - then not have to pay us. That deal never happened because we felt that Real was acting in bad faith - and above that the ego of management was way out of line with the intention of those attempting to utilize our technology that I am sure Real will attempt to hack. While I am a minor shareholder as a matter of business - Shareholder should look closely at the business ethics and perception of Real Networks in the market place - perhaps that is why they are NOT MAKING ANY MONEY - or for that matter providing the market with products that consumers will pay for. Rhapsody is a subscription service - and while it is based on a system Real aquired - the idea that Real had to poach business and hack a system to sell content is concerning.
To me it gives a whole new meaning to the word anti-trust. Above that if the Labels pay close attention - if Real is allowed to hack - reverse engineer DRM solutions - so should everybody else - and we should not have to pay for it.
I guess Real is safe - since NOBODY would want to hack REAL NETWORKS TECHNOLOGY to attempt to generate a profitable prduct offering.
Though I guess under Mr. Glasers business model -I can re-compile and redesign Helix to create .RM files and offer the system to others.
Finally Real starts to make some actual, profitable revenue and as usual comes out ready to piss off somebody successful and wise enough to know better.
Mr. Jobs - protect the value of my Apple stock - and the purtiy of itunes - DON'T LET REAL NETWORKS SELL THEIR MUSIC TO YOUR iPOD CUSTOMERS.
Mr. Glaser - Figure out what your company IS - and how to increase your profits without creating legal problems while continuing to tarnish the company reputation.
To the Labels - IF this is allowed - DRM will mean nothing if labels support such HACKS - I would of thought that your legal agreements would prevent such poaching - and by allowing such every decent hacker out there will soon breach the protection provided by APPLE for your IP - mark my words, if the Record labels support the reverse engineering of a DRM solution to allow another to profit from sales - then anybody will be able to offer content FOR SALE and playback on devices for which AGAIN you will lose control.
At the end of the day - Real again shows its true colors.
THIS IS TOTAL REVERSE ENGINEERING - READ ON The IPOD provides a viable music distribution business model and DRM solution that the market has accepted. Enter Real - After Napoleon Glazer THREATENS Steve Jobs and Apples proprietary music distribution system http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/04/16/094454. php Real desides TO HACK THE SYSTEM to sell and profit from such ? What next - REAL HACKS QUICKTIME since the Real Player Virus has so many iterations that it rarely works and reverse engineers it and markets it ? What is REAL NETWORKS ? Technology Company - Content Aggregator, Content Distribution Network, Confused ? Or is Real Networks just another company run by a delusional management team that has YET TO MAKE ANY MONEY as they chase down Anti-Trust issues as if would generate revenue ? What bothers me is that I see a clear pattern - Real asks for protection to get their sub-standard technology on the same footing as media players that actually work - then when they are not allowed to 'sponge' off others work they just hack the system. Personally we had a situation where we actually were told Real was going to copy our system - re-compile the code in a different language - then not have to pay us. That deal never happened because we felt that Real was acting in bad faith - and above that the ego of management was way out of line with the intention of those attempting to utilize our technology that I am sure Real will attempt to hack. While I am a minor shareholder as a matter of business - Shareholder should look closely at the business ethics and perception of Real Networks in the market place - perhaps that is why they are NOT MAKING ANY MONEY - or for that matter providing the market with products that consumers will pay for. Rhapsody is a subscription service - and while it is based on a system Real aquired - the idea that Real had to poach business and hack a system to sell content is concerning. To me it gives a whole new meaning to the word anti-trust. Above that if the Labels pay close attention - if Real is allowed to hack - reverse engineer DRM solutions - so should everybody else - and we should not have to pay for it. I guess Real is safe - since NOBODY would want to hack REAL NETWORKS TECHNOLOGY to attempt to generate a profitable prduct offering. Though I guess under Mr. Glasers business model -I can re-compile and redesign Helix to create .RM files and offer the system to others. Finally Real starts to make some actual, profitable revenue and as usual comes out ready to piss off somebody successful and wise enough to know better. Mr. Jobs - protect the value of my Apple stock - and the purtiy of itunes - DON'T LET REAL NETWORKS SELL THEIR MUSIC TO YOUR iPOD CUSTOMERS. Mr. Glaser - Figure out what your company IS - and how to increase your profits without creating legal problems while continuing to tarnish the company reputation. To the Labels - IF this is allowed - DRM will mean nothing if labels support such HACKS - I would of thought that your legal agreements would prevent such poaching - and by allowing such every decent hacker out there will soon breach the protection provided by APPLE for your IP - mark my words, if the Record labels support the reverse engineering of a DRM solution to allow another to profit from sales - then anybody will be able to offer content FOR SALE and playback on devices for which AGAIN you will lose control. At the end of the day - Real again shows its true colors.