Slashdot Mirror
RealNetworks Sues Dutch Webmaster Over Hyperlink To Freeware
An anonymous reader writes "In the ever lasting contest for the most idiotic lawsuit, RealNetworks has sued a Dutch man for posting a link to a competing freeware program that allegedly infringes on RealNetworks' intellectual property. The company also secretly obtained a court order that resulted in confiscation of all computers belonging to the man and his family. The 26-year-old has already incurred over €66,000 in legal fees and if he loses the case, he's facing €210,000 in fines. Where are the Anonymous when you need them?"
In this case Real Alternative, which breaks RealNetworks patents and copyrights. Sure, suing for linking to it is pretty stupid, but US government seems to be closing sites that link to TV series too. Blame US laws, not RealNetworks.
God damn it will you PLEASE learn the difference between "looses" and "loses"? You really must be a moron if you can't remember such a simple distinction.
... that RealNetworks is still in business.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
The late 90s called and they want their bloatware back? Seriously though, this is a preposterous linking case and something really needs to be done about this kind of claptrap. Progressive Networks *ahem* I mean RealNetworks, needs to look in the mirror and perhaps produce software someone would actually want to use, I can still hear the screams of my Pentium 150 as it tried mightily to load this software only to see the dreaded Buffering. It is a throwback sad week.
Yeah, except for current events relating to vigilante action against corporations that harass people and draw the ire of a large group of reasonably tech savvy people with something to prove. Other than that, totally unrelated.
Even people that believe in pre-destiny look both ways before crossing the street.
I don't get the reference to DNS. If a web page has a link on it, what does it's existence have to do with DNS?
Max.
How ironic is it that this post ends by asking where anonymous is when you need him / them, and starts with 'an anonymous reader writes'?
Real Alternative.
I would answer each legal document starting with 20 or 50 pages blank with a "buffering" in the middle.... and throw some in the middle too.
I'd paste random ads over the documents which make utterly impossible to see what is written while I'm at it.
Sounds like something someone fed up with all the legal shenanigans might say if they have given up hope of any real civil law reform.
Sadly, that's not at all an unreasonable position these days.
They also could not have posted a better advert for real alternative. Watch the Streisand effect begin ....
Surely this is a prime case of closing the stable door after the horse has bolted? The point in RealAlternative is to be able to play back media encoded using RealNetworks' formats, without having to install RealPlayer. I haven't seen anything encoded in those formats for several years, meaning I've had no use for either RealPlayer or RealAlternative. Does *anyone* still use either?
It worked on my 386 back in the day. It was the first live audio stream I ever heard on my computer.
They went downhill from there. Their nice tidy player got rewritten and then the whole thing went spammy.
In the Netherlands, all national government websites offer their video's in RealVideo as a fallback for QuickTime, which is itself a fallback for Windows Media Player, which is a fallback for Flash.
Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
I don't get, how is DNS involved in this?
However, Edskes wasn’t hosting the software, but just redirected to other sites for the actual download. The complaint turned out to be based on a hyperlink to the software.
so far so good: he linked to some software, one can argue if this is illegal - but anyway.
RealNetworks claims Edskes failed to remove the link to the software, and the reference in the DNS directories existed after February 12, 2010. However, the hosting provider checked backups and confirmed the removal of the link.
WTF? either the complaint is based on hyperlinks or DNS redirects (did he use different subdomains for the codec packs?). it shouldn't be too hard to write one stringent and logical artical about this case.
Doesn't RealNetworks know about the Streisand Effect? I didn't know about the Real Alternative until this case got filed, and now I've just downloaded Real Alternative and installed it on two PC's. YES! No more stupid RealNetworks bullshit to put up with. It is sad the Dutch webmaster had to be sued, but the rest of the world benefits. I guess in a backwards way, Thank You RealNetworks, for bringing this to my attention.
So, by your own logic, when you mention to your friend to "take care" around that drug den down the road, you should be put in jail for aiding and abetting the drug trade. We see links to goatse here all the time. The image itself is morally wrong, but the links are not. *IF* Real Alternative is in fact breaking the law then Real Alternative should be held accountable - Not some poor schmuck who simply says "look at this" via a link.
What you are advocating is akin to thought crime. If you don't conform and think the way "we" tell you too, you should be punished. The problem is just who gets to decide what is "right". In every single instance or situation. What happens when this so called "right" does not align with your own personal views? Do you bend over and let them spank you until you see the light? Sorry, but I'm sure glad I don't live in your world and can make up my own mind what links I'll visit, what software I'll install, or even what I'll have for lunch today.
But said software isn't illegal in Europe, Real Networks are suing a European over alleged patent rights, those patents aren't valid in Europe.
I'm not sure if Slashdot is doing a Google and providing context relevant quotes or it was just pure chance, but the quote at the bottem of my page today sure seems relevant to this story and the state of Real networks - " For certain people, after fifty, litigation takes the place of sex. -- Gore Vidal"
N.B. this user is far too lazy to write a witty and intelligent sig.
So we should make google and other search engines illegal? They link to the "illegal content" all the time and they know it (just try to search for piratebay). Also if i write an article on my blog about file-sharing and include link to the pirate-bay, i shall be prosecuted according to your logic? No! Making linking to dubious content ilegal is serious threat to free speech. Czech pirate party is currently fighting for the right to link by launching the site http://tipnafilm.cz/ where they link to several thousands of copyrighted movies. See http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/07/linking-is-not-a-crime-czech-pirate-party-declares-war-on-anti-piracy-unionlinking-is-not-a-crime-czech-pirate-party-declares-war-on-big-content.ars for more details.
I am considering removing all hyperlinks from my private website and possibly replace them with a link to a Google search that might return the page. Can't risk your life being destroyed nowadays by a stupid hyperlink.
Wait, in what way is a man's anus morally wrong?
... is that Real still exists as a company.
How is that even possible?! I thought we'd seen the last of them years ago; not even the most pathetic company trying to make a web presence seems to think them relevant enough to use.
Oh right, I guess that's why they've switched into lawsuit mode - it's easier than innovating.
Your nick seems dutch enough, so i'll assume you are a fellow dutchman, but seriously? I can't even remember seeing a video on a govt website...
And OMG triple fallback, now i feel even worse about paying taxes
People, what a bunch of bastards
Should there be standards regarding when linking to illegal content is prosecuted? Certainly.
Well, that's your opinion. Not everyone agrees.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
Well, triple fallback would be something I enjoy seeing in a government... if it wasn't only for propaganda drivel but actually important matters.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Does he have a paypal account?
If someone posted details of one here would you trust it anyway?
Then please post.
Now, this dates back /years/ ago but at some point I was really happy with the RealPlayer that I decided to license it. It was simply awesome; I started it up and could view just about anything. From US news broadcasts to Japanese TV series right down to stuff from India and Germany. (this was "pre-Youtube" time so to speak).
Then other solutions emerged (and my interest slowly waned) but guess what? Next time I started the app. (a few years later) I was greeted with "you should upgrade!", which I didn't do. Why? I was happy with the way it was.
Add another few months and this time I wasn't able to run the program anymore period. "You need to upgrade" was all which was said, of course without any options for a real upgrade. I could pick another "free" player and that was basically it. My paid for enhancements were gone. Heck; my whole player was gone.
DON'T TAKE MY WORD FOR IT... Just set your disdain aside for a moment and look at the realplayer product page. Question: do you see anything there which hints at upgrade options for existing users ? Well, there aren't any.
Realplayer was the best learning experience for me (and all in all not /that/ expensive fortunately) to never buy anything from Real networks again.
The article title is a bit disingenuous. RealAlternative is NOT freeware. It is simply Real's codecs, repackaged without the adware crap and player software. Now on the scale of copyright infringement this is pretty insignificant, but the codecs are still Real's property and it is their prerogative to decide the terms under which the software is distributed. I'm pretty sure the terms forbid repackaging and redistribution of the codecs.
On the other hand, it's also incredulous that linking is deemed illegal. That's just bullshit. They should go after whoever distributed the repackaged codecs, not people who link to said site.
Actually, I'm not sure RealAlternative is even needed anymore. VLC/ffdshow/ffmpeg support all the RealVideo codecs, and also RealAudio with the single exception of the SIPR codec.
Well-known websites like chip.de still link to and actually host Real Alternative 2.0.2 files, even Wikipedia has a link. â66.000 seem to indicate that the man has a terrible lawyer and/or corrupt judge...
"I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)
comment buffering...
http://filehippo.com/software/multimedia/
Real Alternative, Quicktime alternative, K-Lite Codec Pack, you name it.
How come I should care about legality of given software in any given country? Do you really propose to put yourself under chinese or madagascarian software patent, copyright and hacking laws?
Wait, they're still alive? How come?
Now the problem is: this kind of thing calls for a boycott, but, um... what one could possibly boycott that RealNetwork makes or offers that one would otherwise want or even have to use?
After the way the Dutch handled Apple's case against Samsung, I am not surprised at the way they're treating this guy. Dutch legal system sucking US legal cock much?
Google Translate reports "verhuur-zoekend-gedrag" as Dutch for "rent-seeking behavior".
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
if you have problems with deep-linking to downloads on you web page, a simple script can solve it. Not using this method is kind of agreeing to deep-linking.
On the other hand, its not good style to do it like this.
If you link to a web page that contains illegal content, you are abetting in a crime.
This is a fair suggestion, but in this case nothing has been proven to be illegal about this content. RealNetworks claim patent infringement, but has this been proven in a court of law? Until it has, how is anyone supposed to know if it's illegal or not? If I lay claim to patents on iPods, does that mean the entire internet has to sit up, take notice, and stop linking to Apple's website?
Besides that, it is unreasonable to demand that every website owner to be fully acquainted to the legal status of the software they may link to. If it appears to be genuine freeware, how are they supposed to know?
Lastly, and this really should be taken into consideration; RealNetworks were giving their software away for free, with an entirely reasonable business model financed in other ways. All they had to do was ensure their end-users liked it and found it useful. But instead they turned it into a sucky, monstrously bloated, intrusive piece of crap that people (and their computers) hated. They only have themselves to blame if users sought out an alternative.
Should there be standards regarding when linking to illegal content is prosecuted? Certainly.
Absolutely. My recommendation would be never.
Rudolf Hess edited Mein Kampf. He was the very first grammar nazi.
Poo to those guys, the law sucks plain sucks ass.
So a little man has to suffer with a yearly salary loss, loss of computers (thank god new ones are cheap, $99 tablets).
I want to see a judge make a ruling for once taking *ALL* computers away from a corporate entity even though staff had nothing to do with and it might cost the company millions per day in losses.
If you destroy small peoples lives, then fuck it, who cares if you destroy multi corporations too.
1:1 is fair.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
There are lots of video's on the websites of the national government. This is just one example, but there's a lot more. There's a whole team dedicated within the Ministry of General Affairs to the production of video's.
Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
I bet you get shitloads of visits, but no conversions. And you make a name for yourself as a spammer.
People used to talk to beer?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
> RealAudio with the single exception of the SIPR codec.
Uh, what? You seem to be about 2-3 years behind the times:
http://ffmpeg.org/doxygen/0.6/sipr_8c-source.html
Linking is not illegal. Period.
Period.
There is a crack house down on the corner of 6th and Main.
That's directions to a place where illegal activity is likely taking place. It is not illegal.
Nor is a link, which is simply directions to a place.
This case isn't fuzzy. It's completely blindingly obvious. It should not be a crime and suggestion that even more egregious infractions might also be is equally disturbing to me.
Fuzzy middle ground my ass, it's freeware developed from the ground up and he didn't even make it, he merely linked to it.
I assume by "freeware developed from the ground up" you mean "an installer and a few download utilities plus a packaged install of Media Player Classic packaged alongside the codec files right out of Real's own installation package" which is what Real Alternative really is/was - immensely useful for the end-user, but a legal minefield waiting to happen by using Real's own codec files in there.
"I'm not anti-anything, I'm anti-everything, it fits better." - Sole
I've seen that anus and I can assure you that there is definitely something wrong with it. Maybe not morally... but there is something extremely wrong happening there.
"His name was James Damore."
If you link to a web page that contains illegal content, you are abetting in a crime.
Lastly, and this really should be taken into consideration; RealNetworks were giving their software away for free, with an entirely reasonable business model financed in other ways. All they had to do was ensure their end-users liked it and found it useful. But instead they turned it into a sucky, monstrously bloated, intrusive piece of crap that people (and their computers) hated. They only have themselves to blame if users sought out an alternative.
The reality of the legal system is that your opinion of RealNetworks business model has nothing to do with the legal status of anything. If the judge feels that way, he may let it sway him within his range of legal options, but he still should not let it decide the legality / illegality of an action.
Oh, you're right, I am.
Googling a little I find that there's a bug regarding the SIPR support but I guess it's mostly working otherwise: http://ffmpeg.org/trac/ffmpeg/ticket/220
Are you encouraging Anonymous attacks RealNetworks in response to their litigation? I fail to see how greenlighting the last part of the post does not imply an endorsement of the submitter's apparent disappointment about the lack of Anonymous intervention...
Websites are not places.
And it isn't confusing to talk about a website as information stored on a computer, retrievable over a network using certain protocols.
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
What the comment to that bug means is: The decoder is working fine, it is FFmpeg's RealMedia demuxer that has a bug, MPlayer's (which is also OpenSource) works.
...the entire internet now knows of real alternative 2.0.2. Great Job Real Networks! Psst, it doesn't really help to get a secret court order when you plan on bringing the entire marching band and stadium lights with you when you go breaking down the door. Just sayin...
Do you have the She Maister, the one that holds very deep?
RealNetworks is in it's death throes and has turned to suing people to stay alive.
This is a problem with companies that make intellectual property versus real things... they become irrelevant overnight and can't react fast enough. This is where the lawyers enter the fray.
Please be more specific
Why doesn't the gene pool have a life guard?
It might actually fall under extreme porn since what the guy did to his butt was a rather extreme - and extreme porn is illegal in some parts of the world.
But is there a reason why we should be applying a looser standard online than we apply to in-person transactions?
I believe that if your friend tells you of his intent to engage in a crime, and you give him an address he can go to in order to commit his crime, you have just aided and abetted.
I'm not saying that is this case, but it certainly points to the fact that at least some cases of linking should probably be crimes.
Websites do have physical representation. It's called a server
One word: "cloud".
Oh, I'm sorry sir, I thought you were referring to me, Mr. Wensleydale.
that the defendant not only wins the case but turns around and sues the pants off of Real Networks.
Clearly this is a guerilla marketing ploy by RealNetworks. By utilizing the Streisand effect, they hope to boost the offerings of content in their proprietary formats. That can only help them sell their lame tools, which otherwise nobody buys anymore. Perhaps they're desperate, but it's still clever. The interesting question is whether the Dutch courts will eventually punish them for their attempt to hijack judicial process. Oddly, neither http://eff.org/ nor http://edri.org/ seem to have anything to say about the case.
Oh, I'm sorry sir, I thought you were referring to me, Mr. Wensleydale.
Well, by that definition, Windows: Pirate Edition is freeware.
I even got to tell them why I did it ("Because you are suing someone for posting a link to a freeware player that plays RealPlayer files").
I feel better now :-)
Yes, there are codecs which should not be there. MPC - the media player in the package - was built with real's own SDK and can play realmedia files without need of any boundled codecs IF realplayer is installed on the machine. (note: I made MPC originally but have nothing to do with any codec packs)
You are enabling distribution. As such you should be destroyed.
An good analogy is drugs. You are not a drug trafficker, you are a petty drug dealer. That said, where there analogy falls apart are the legal repercussions for said actions. Sure the trafficker is in some trouble, but a first time dealer isn't in much trouble.
So you can disagree with the interpretation all you like, but for me the big deal is the actual damages and how disproportionate they are from reality. This is simply due to corporate America meddling. There are larger issues here at play.
I firmly believe that there is an appropriate time and place for rioting as well. Did you sleep through the Arab Spring? Or do you think that if they had just closed their eyes and wished really hard they would have gotten a new government that didn't suck.?
You sound exactly like a teenager trying to sound mature by toeing the party line.
.. that ruffled some loose feathers -- don't lose it!
[Will the leader of this thread PLEASE consider setting a fine example by improving his or her own grammar before calling other people a moron?]
Still doesn't make it right to get a secret court order to inflict willful damage on a person's property.
I agree. Reads like a sickening abuse by the complainant company that asked the court to grant this disproportionate remedy. I've deleted their s/w application off my two computers that had it, and I will watch out to make sure I don't make use of any product from them again.
I've seen that anus and I can assure you that there is definitely something wrong with it. Maybe not morally... but there is something extremely wrong happening there.
Your signature seems to reflect your comment. :)
"We believe that Internet Explorer is a really good browser" - Steve Jobs, 1997
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
Websites are not places.
Neither are phone numbers, yet they are generally linked to certain places, or people. Should phone directories be punished for providing information to allow people to contact potentially illegal businesses or criminals?
And it isn't confusing to talk about a website as information stored on a computer, retrievable over a network using certain protocols.
It is to my parents, and I would guess to well over half of the 'population' of teh internets. Remember, /. population is not representative of the norm.
"I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
I'm not arguing that linking to a resource should be illegal, I'm arguing for the avoidance of unnecessary analogies.
Some unnecessary snark: you seem to be arguing that your parents are dumber than they really are, simply because it is convenient to your point. I'm pretty damn sure they understand what a phone call is, and calling a server and asking it a question (asking it for some information...) is a much better analogy than visiting a place.
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
How's about something helpful? This guy only posted a *link* to the real alternative.. regardless of whether they're 'legit' or not.. The point is this guy could NEVER afford to fight them.. and their stinking practices of stealing all his hardware and shaking him down must be impossible for him to afford. If we let basterds like Real off, simply because they've got the money and power, we're *all* gonna have to pay down the road.. There must be *somebody* on /. who'se actually made some money off tech or the net..
How's about giving him a hand?
Really!!
Do any of the above yet handle .rm files that use an image map? I have to keep an old version of the RealPlayer (10?) installed to view them as later versions silently omit the ability to play them.