Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Courts Government News Your Rights Online

Gracenote v. Roxio CDDB Suit Settled 158

Posted by timothy from the who-owns-what-words dept.
An anonymous reader writes with this update: "As reported via the usual sources, Roxio announced today that the lawsuit (read all about it on slashdot) with gracenote has been settled. To fresh up your memory: Gracenote ('cddb') sued Roxio because they switched from cddb to freedb for identification of audio CDs. Discussion on slashdot was active, especially questioning if gracenote really owned the titles. David Hyman, Gracenote CEO, added, 'We look forward to a long and mutually successful relationship between our companies through this new license for intellectual property and current and advanced music recognition services.' End of quote. Do I need say more than 'corporate lawyers'?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Gracenote v. Roxio CDDB Suit Settled More

Gracenote v. Roxio CDDB Suit Settled

Comments Filter:

  • Gracenote is Rambus (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Nailer ( 69468 ) on Tuesday January 08, 2002 @05:01AM (#2802924)
    Anyone else see the parallels?

  • In other words (Score:5, Insightful)

    by eclectro ( 227083 ) on Tuesday January 08, 2002 @05:02AM (#2802927)
    Let's give Gracenote a couple of dimes to shut them up, it's cheaper than litigating this thing for years.

  • Sealed agreement? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by bani ( 467531 ) on Tuesday January 08, 2002 @05:03AM (#2802928)
    What are they hiding?

    Maybe the fact that Gracenote's suit had no merit whatsoever, and in order to save face, they licensed cddb to Roxio instead of being publically bitchslapped?

  • Settlement (Score:5, Interesting)

    by GnulixRulz ( 453448 ) on Tuesday January 08, 2002 @05:20AM (#2802948) Homepage
    It is likely that Gracenote paid Roxio either cash or gave them access to some of their assets.

    I looks like it is more critical to Gracenote to have an agreement with Roxio, rather than vice-versa. The masses don't care where their CD information comes from, they just use Roxio's software, and it works. Roxio has the pick of either CDDB or FreeDB, both are reasonably complete.

    Gracenote, on the other hand, has to compete against a free service, and this seems like a bid to stay competitive by allying with a company that gives them access to a large part of the market, while keeping the option of shaking down smaller vendors of software, that users might want to switch to in the future.

    • I looks like it is more critical to Gracenote to have an agreement with Roxio, rather than vice-versa.

      It's worse than that. It _is_ critical to Gracenote -- they need to keep users, as the health of the database is dependent on quality submissions of new listings.

      Gracenote originally made a big deal about how their new "paid" service was enhanced, managed, and filtered to provide better data. They may actually have convinced Roxio of that claim, but for some reason I doubt it.

      Reid

    • Works? (Score:2, Offtopic)

      by BLKMGK ( 34057 )
      Umm, there are a few people running WIN2K who have had MASSIVE problems even after a supposed fix was released. While this software used to be considered cream of the crop it would seem that Nero is coming on strong - for a LOWER price. Users of EX-CD were forced to pay upgrades for WIN2K and now for XP, Roxio is shooting themselves in the foot. A quick search yielded this thread which seems to confirm this.

      http://www.devhood.com/messages/message_view-2.a sp x?thread_id=1502

      Now that they've done this deal with GraceNote I'm certainly less than thrilled with them. Nero will probably be my next purchase if HotBurn Pro and CloneCD don't continue to fullfill my needs. Hrm, and this DMCA crap with CloneCD sux but I guess it makes a point...
      • Fuck'em all! If you have to use Windows, use DiskJuggler. BTW what is the DMCA stuff with CloneCD? I haven't upgraded, and if they have made the new version difficult to use, I probably won't.

        Jaysyn
      • Not that I'm a big Roxio fan, but contrary to what Roxio's web site says, Easy CD Creator 4 does work fine on WinXP as long as you upgrade to the latest version, and download the compatibility update from windowsupdate (it specifically says Easy CD Creator version 4.2+ works when the patch is installed).
        • The Roxio website doesn't mention that because they need you to upgrade! How else do they expect to pay their lawyers? I'm glad I warezed a 5.0 "upgrade" for a relative's CDR when the bundled 4.0 failed under XP. At least these sellout bastards didn't get any of his money.
    • Not only was Gracenote's suit without merit, but Roxio might have sent some signals that they would challenge Gracenote's very ownership of the data. Both together would have been, um, bad for Gracenote.

  • Does anyone know more details? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by jchawk ( 127686 ) on Tuesday January 08, 2002 @05:33AM (#2802960) Homepage Journal
    "Roxio, Inc. (Nasdaq: ROXI - news), the Digital Media Company, and Gracenote today announced the signing of a multi-year license that provides Gracenote CDDB as the exclusive CD recognition service to current and future Roxio customers through Roxio's Easy CD Creator, Toast and SoundStream current and future products. Concurrent with the licensing agreement, Gracenote and Roxio settled all litigation between the two companies in a sealed agreement."

    All I took away from the article was that it was more profitable for both companies to just work together, rather then work to make their lawyers rich.

    This article seems kinda lite on information due to it being a sealed deal. Does anyone know anything further?

    If you ask me I think this is a case of a company leveraging a large bank roll and good lawyers to further their product reach, not unlike some other large company. :-)
    • All I took away from the article was that it was more profitable for both companies to just work together, rather then work to make their lawyers rich.

      This article seems kinda lite on information due to it being a sealed deal.
      Well, that's all you're supposed to take away from it. The so-called "article" was a Roxio press release--the sort of thing that only superficially resembles "news," and that reputable journalists immediately rewrite into a more neutral story. The whole function of a press release is to say, "la de da, aren't we a great company?" Of course you won't find very much actual information there.

      Happy 600th-posted-Slashdot-comment to me!

  • We need more information (Score:3, Interesting)

    by johnburton ( 21870 ) <johnb@jbmail.com> on Tuesday January 08, 2002 @05:35AM (#2802964) Homepage
    It's not clear from reading this story who settled with who. (Forgive me if I missed the point somewhere!)

    I can't believe that Roxio would have had to settle as surely they can get this information from whoever they like. So presumably they were given some incentive to do this... Which seems a little strange give that they were having legal action taken against them.

    We need more information...
    • A) Gracenote was suing Roxio so a settlement would probably be in their favor. You don't typically sue somebody and walk away with less than you started unless you lose and have to pay legal fees.

      B) A settlement by its nature is a compromise between the two parties usually out of concern for ever escalating legal fees.
  • Roxio's software sucks. The only reason I know of anyone using it is because it's bundled with nearly every CD-R drive sold. End-of-story. There are several other better applications...including my favorite, NERO burning ROM.

    Give me freedb or give me death!
    • Roxio, or rather Adaptec EasyCD, used to be the best general-purpose burning software by a long shot, but they gave up that crown years ago.

      Now its a bloated, buggy piece of crap, easily outdone by many other burning applications.

      The real kicker is that when I finally realized I never used the software anymore (EasyCD 5.0), I deinstalled it and it removed a critical driver file (that it hadn't even installed itself), bringing down my Windows 2000 system hard until I could restore said driver from the install CD. Based on looking to Usenet for answers, this isn't all that uncommon of a problem when one attempts to deinstall this piece of crap under Windows 2000 or XP.

      Way to go Roxio!

      • On Windows, I use an old copy of EasyCD for burning disks. Works fine and has all features I need.

        But I do most of my burning under Linux these days, using Gnome Toaster. Gnome Toaster rocks; it burns data or audio with equal ease.

        http://gnometoaster.rulez.org/ [rulez.org]

        steveha
    • No shit. When I was using Windows, my first burning prog was Nero. I loved that program. Then i lost the CD, wasn't aware of the "demo" version, and could only find that Roxio POS at CompUSA. UGH! What a horrendous, crash prone program!
    • That's pretty bold - Toast Titanium on the Mac is really pretty fantastic, and I've been using Toast 3.5.7 on another Mac for YEARS without a hiccough. Maybe Roxio's ware is fine, and it's your OS that's a POS?
    • The only reason I know of anyone using it is because it's bundled with nearly every CD-R drive sold. End-of-story. There are several other better applications...including my favorite, NERO burning ROM.

      Another reason why the TDK VeloCDs are awesome.....bundled Nero. To anybody who never wants to make coasters again, and especially if you rip audio cds (can you say 32x rip?), buy a VeloCD.

    • Clarify that with adding "Windows".. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by EvilStein ( 414640 ) <spamNO@SPAMpbp.net> on Tuesday January 08, 2002 @11:04AM (#2804072)
      Please don't forget that Roxio also makes Toast for the Macintosh, which most certainly does not suck. Toast 5.0.2 has been the most worthwhile software purchase I've made in quite a while. Never had it crash, it's dead easy to uninstall, they fixed the conflicts with Apple's own Disc Burner (which won't work for me on my spare-parts beige G3/300 with my CD-RW) and they even sent me a few free blank CD-R discs just for bothering to register the product. I haven't burned one single coaster in *months* (which is rare for me! heh)

      Overall I've been really happy with Roxio and especially Toast. I don't have much experience with their Windows products, so I cannot speak for them.
    • fro what it's worth, and perhaps it's simply due to some bad settings, but when I used Nero a bunch of cd players and cd-rom drives wouldn't read the discs I made, whereas using ecdc every disc worked just fine

  • Not the end of the matter (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jdfox ( 74524 ) on Tuesday January 08, 2002 @05:42AM (#2802973)
    So we have a "sealed agreement", under which Gracenote backs down from their utterly contemptible and indefensible suit. This should not be the end of the matter, folks.
    If we users allow corporate parasites like Gracenote to operate this kind of hit-and-run prospecting on OUR data, we will all lose in the end. With deep enough pockets, one of them is bound to succeed eventually.

    The financial pressure against this kind of opportunistic horseshit must not end with a quiet "sealed agreement", and the lawyers all shaking hands and walking away. Don't use Gracenote's products, via Roxio products, sub-licensed technology on Windows, or any other vendor. Vote with your wallet. Use and help build free alternatives like freedb [freedb.org]. The business case for Gracenote to try it again will be much tougher to build, next time they're tempted.
    • I agree I do not like this concept of "sealed agreement". CDDB sued via a patent. But since it was dealt with a sealed deal nobody knows what has happened with the patent. So in other words yet another company may get threatened by CDDB. In moments like this you really begin to wonder about capitalism!!!! I love competition and freedom like the rest of us, but man this secrecy thing bugs me...
    • Let's not forget that Roxio has agency in the matter, too. It's clear, given this lawsuit, that Roxio would have utterly annihilated Gracenote in court because a.) the suit was without merit and, b.) Roxio has the full faith and credit of Adaptec behind them, meaning that they can put probably ten times the legal resources on this case as puny little Gracenote. Thus, Gracenote obviously initiated the settlement and probably ended up paying a fair sum for the "privilege" of providing database access gratis to Roxio for quite some time. So Roxio's principalled stand is essentially bought off by some cash and stock. I'm not sure which bothers me more, that sellout or "hit and run prospecting" on our data.

  • This whole thing smells of rotten fish... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Firehawke ( 50498 ) on Tuesday January 08, 2002 @05:44AM (#2802974) Journal
    Well, a settlement usually means that one side has a clear advantage at the courts.

    Now, using that basis, and the fact that the whole deal is a hidden arrangement, one could guess that one of the two sides obviously didn't want the public to know about this.

    Okay, fine.. who has the most to lose by a public disclosure? Gracenote, I think. Follow this logic:

    If Roxio was about to lose the case, Gracenote would rather have it public so that nobody else attempts to go without their service.

    If Gracenote was about to lose the case, they could approach Roxio behind closed doors to offer them better incentives-- perhaps even PAY Roxio to use the service-- if they'll settle and keep their mouth shut about the conditions. Why would they do this? Because if it were well known that Gracenote couldn't control the 'industry' on CDDB, then nobody would bother to pay for their services in the face of a cheaper alternative.

    Unless I'm completely missing something here, that's pretty much the best guess I can come up with.

  • This is a defeat (Score:2, Redundant)

    by Baki ( 72515 )
    On roxio.com is says:

    "Roxio, Inc. (Nasdaq:ROXI), the Digital Media Company, and Gracenote today announced the signing of a multi-year license that provides Gracenote CDDB as the exclusive CD recognition service to current and future Roxio customers ..."

    Even if they got the license free (to save the face of Gracenote) then still this is a defeat because they gave in and no longer shall use freedb.
    This establishes the absurd idea that using freedb might be illegal, and this claim hasn't been dismissed now. I can only hope that other companies/software shall continue to challenge Gracenote and offer freedb integration instead.
    • "Roxio, Inc. (Nasdaq:ROXI), the Digital Media Company, and Gracenote today announced the signing of a multi-year license that provides Gracenote CDDB as the exclusive CD recognition service to current and future Roxio customers ..."

      Hmm. I'm a Roxio customer and Gracenote CDDB certainly isn't an exclusive cd recognition service to me. I don't think they yet have the power to agree to that on my behalf.
    • Bah! How long before someone writes a hack to fool roxio's software into using the free alternative.

      All this does is encourage people to hack existing software to do what it is supposed to do instead of forcing users into one service...

  • The key issue (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mpawlo ( 260572 ) on Tuesday January 08, 2002 @05:50AM (#2802986) Homepage
    The key issue - who's the owner of the database - is not yet settled. A class action suite, filed by all the users who contributed to the CDDB database should be the only way to resolve that issue once and for all. However, I have a very hard time seeing that happen.

    The thing you might learn from the CDDB history and the creation of the free version of CDDB - freedb [freedb.org] - is that licenses do matter - even if the project is a volountary and open one to begin with.

    Mikael

    • A class action suit, filed by all the users who contributed to the CDDB database should be the only way to resolve that issue once and for all.

      Yes, but. First, the suit would need to be started, by someone willing to take on Gracenote, who would need to see the point. Which would mean that:

      1. The suit would have to have legal merit. Being that everyone who contrinuted to the CDDB only had an agreement (of any sort) with the distributor of the software they used, and the distributor had an agreement with the CDDB, it might be very difficult to demonstrate that the CDDB owes its contributors squat.
      2. The suit would have to be financially viableMy understanding is that this sort of suit almost invariably becomes federal, that they're not cheap, and the limited set of legal firms capable of suing them would need to determine that the suit would at least allow them to recoup their expenditures. Also a factor is the risk entailed by any legal shakiness (see previous point.)
      3. Enough of the potential participants would sign onto the suit While this might seem the most trivial problem on Slashdot, if the claimant list is short, a federal judge would probably kick it out. How many contributors actually feel like they were hurt? (Although, more positively, but more depressingly, how many would sign on if they thought they could get damages?) More difficult would be to demonstrate the veracity of the claimant list. Is everyone on that list really a contributor to the CDDB? How can this be proven?
      Now as an aside, I feel faintly ridiculous affirming that I am in fact not a lawyer, since it should be obvious by the fact that I'm expressing legal opinions in public without a fee. If I were a lawyer, this would be unethical. Or something. However, I did pay very good attention way back when in civics.

  • As far as I can see it (i.e. as an outsider), the only reason Roxio would have gone with Gracenote on this is if Gracenote convinced Roxio that going with FreeCDDB was going to be a bad thing long term.

    How could they convince them of that? Well they likely told them they were going after FreeCDDB next, which while they're unlikely to win, will possibly shut down freecddb in the short term (I know this is unlikely to happen in real terms, but that's probably what they convinced Roxio they would do).

    Conclusion (even if I'm wrong): lawyers suck. ;-)
  • Anyone know how to get Audiacatalyst use FreeDb?

  • What more to say (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 08, 2002 @06:24AM (#2803015)
    Do I need say more than 'corporate lawyers'?"


    "must die"

  • CDDB in Roxio's Toast (Score:2, Informative)

    by wevah ( 102835 )
    In Toast Titanium 5.1, CDDB (cddb.cddb.com) is indeed the dafault CD Info Server in the preferences. However, this is freely editable to whatever you wish (freedb.freedb.org, for example). It works fine.

    • However, [the box containing the address of the CDDB server] is freely editable to whatever you wish (freedb.freedb.org, for example).

      In the next release, watch it become a list-menu with no "Other..." item rather than an editable text box.

      Besides, as I wrote here [slashdot.org], Gracenote is phasing out CDDB1.

  • that ever annoying cddb (Score:2, Interesting)

    by tuzza ( 541522 )
    i dont know HOW it works, but i DO REMEMBER entering in HEAPS (probably a hundred or two) albums in the early days... i never got paid narthing for that - go free and public!

  • Wait a second here... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 08, 2002 @06:50AM (#2803029)
    Let's pretend I'm not a rabid Free Software supporter for just a minute:

    Can you really call a list of artist/album/track info "Intellectual Property"?? OK, I may not agree with your argument that code/fiction/art/music you create is or isn't IP, but to call a fscking a list. A LIST of someone else's creative works IP? Isn't that just a bit too far? So, if I make a long list of train stations around the world, that list somehow "belongs" to me, as IP? Someone please explain this absurdity to me.

    Posting anonymously because I never bothered to make an account.

    • No. (Score:3, Informative)

      by schon ( 31600 )
      Can you really call a list of artist/album/track info "Intellectual Property"?

      Short Answer: No.

      Long Answer: As a general rule, No - it is not possible to copyright data in a database; it is possible to copyright the format of a database, but the data in that format can not be protected by copyright.

      Do a search for "Feist Publications, Inc. vs. Rural Telephone Service Co. Inc. (1991)" for more information.
    • Can you really call a list of artist/album/track info "Intellectual Property"??
      I'm sure most people here would agree that it's not. The point is that whether it is IP or not it plays against Gracenote. If it isn't IP then they can't stop FreeDB duplicating the service and they can't stop someone like Roxio switching to FreeDB. If it is IP then it shouldn't be owned by Gracenote anyway since they didn't produce it and no-one assigned them the rights.
  • Since freedb and Gracenote are essentially forks from the same base a while back (Gracenote wanted to start making money from it, and freedb wanted to walk the free path), I believe that their protocols are similar to a large extent (read: except for the odd whizbang addition made since the split). Shouldn't it be possible to just point the Gracenote domains to the freedb IPs in ones's /etc/hosts, c:\windows\hosts or equivalent to point all the Gracenote using programs to freedb?
    • Answer: Sort of

      Freedb is compatible with CDDB version 1 whilst Gracenote now uses CDDB version 2. So if your application is new enough to use CDDB 2 it won't work with Freedb.

      Of course Gracenote almost certainly did this on purpose.

      Fsck them.

  • This smells very much like a business decision. I imagine that the choice to use freedb, although perhaps initiated by a coder with an interest in the principles, would have been made on the grounds of "this way we'd pay, wheras this way we wouldn't." And the settlement comes as the simplest, easiest, most profitable way out of it.

    I very much doubt that Roxio's decision makers give a flying fuck about whether their actions are good, bad, or whatever as far as the principle of the thing is concerned.

  • And the irony of it all is... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Black Parrot ( 19622 ) on Tuesday January 08, 2002 @07:13AM (#2803053)

    If this kind of enterprise ever becomes profitable the RIAA is going to step in and say "All your titles are belong to us", and Gracenote will end up paying the RIAA a license fee just to stay in business.

    • I doubt that. Remember, Gracenote helped the RIAA in their efforts against Napster. That's where the "Auto-ban THESE titles" list came from, wasn't it?

  • Looks like Roxio caved in (Score:3, Informative)

    by Adam J. Richter ( 17693 ) on Tuesday January 08, 2002 @07:16AM (#2803058)

    From the Roxio press release at Yahoo:

    Roxio, Inc. (Nasdaq: ROXI - news), the Digital Media Company, and Gracenote today announced the signing of a multi-year license that provides Gracenote CDDB as the exclusive CD recognition service to current and future Roxio customers

    In other words, Roxio agreed to cease offering freedb service, even as an option.

  • likely longterm outcome (Score:4, Interesting)

    by markj02 ( 544487 ) on Tuesday January 08, 2002 @07:25AM (#2803061)
    In the medium term, I suspect "Gracenote" is going to switch to some proprietary audio fingerprinting technique, which is more reliable and robust than the current techniques used by FreeDB and the old CDDB. Furthermore, I suspect that there are numerous patents in the queue on doing this (never mind that it's pretty obvious). In the long term, of course, CDs will be about as important as wax cylinders.
  • That's incredible. Now these scumbags who stole (to use the rhetoric of intellectual "property") the work of all those who entered data to what was a GPL'd database by locking it up have won a battle they can use to bludgeon other companies.

    Thanks, Roxio, for your character and grace under pressure. NOT.

    • Oh, come on. So Roxio let you down--let's not forget that it was Gracenote that they caved in to, and that Gracenote is the entity that locked down the database.

      Don't slam Roxio too hard--they're little more than a middleman who tried to fight and backed down when they saw the writing on the wall. Save your venom for Gracenote.
      • Roxio did not have to cave, they should of switched exlusivly to freedb. That pretty much would of meant the end for Gracenotes long term reviue stream.
        I am willing to bet GrceNote offeree them a special deal, so they can point to other corp. in the market and say "look how big our market share is, go with us!"
        • Nope. I disagree. If Roxio told Gracenote to stick it, then Gracenote would have beaten them into the ground in court. It does not often matter in court who is right, just who wins. Furthermore, "winning" in many cases (and this one would most likely have been one) consists entirely of whoever is left standing the longest.

          Roxio like any other company has a responsibility to themselves to survive[1]. They probably wouldn't have if they had continued to refuse Gracenote's overtures.

          [1] A company's responsibility to survive is arguably their single most important one--certainly it's the most important responsibility to themselves. I would argue that their responsibility to not harm society or the planet is a greater responsibility, but that's a very huge and not straightforward argument.

  • Here is what I smell! (Score:5, Informative)

    by ImaLamer ( 260199 ) <john.lamar@NospaM.gmail.com> on Tuesday January 08, 2002 @09:00AM (#2803417) Homepage Journal
    Considering Roxio is moving towards the pay-for-online music market I'm guessing that the reason for the sealed settlement is because there is something we shouldn't know [yet].

    Look at the big players:

    * Microsoft - Why not, they aren't there yet. WindowsXP has the media player built in, and also CD burning. If you do install their CD writing software you can't use other software because of conflicts. On purpose? They also have their own music format which proves to be great at keeping songs from being copied. Trust me, I've backed up wma files I created and when my system crashed I couldn't play the restored files. [livid]
    * Real - They used to charge for the player, now they are offering more and more for-pay content. This 'Real-One' software also has a built in CD burning component. Let's also bring up the fact that both players mentioned thus far use Roxio 'plug-ins'. Real needs to compete with MS so expect a internet for-pay system from them.
    * Roxio - To my knowledge, the biggest recording software around. If the RIAA wants to be friends with someone, it's them. If we should be expecting a new CD Audio format soon, Roxio will likely be the only ones to let us record using it. Don't say there won't be a new CD Audio format, because there seems to be a new DVD format coming from MS. [don't forget their own for-pay systems]
    * RIAA - The biggest bastards of them all! They want every penny, "all your fair use..." and of course double taxation is their favorite pastime.

    So how does Gracenote fit in? Maybe there will be a new CD Audio format. That format one day may also have a user-id [.NET?] that makes you check in before you play, rip etc.

    Who knows what they will cook up. They've already produced the copy-protected CD's. Buy Gracenote will likely be the center point where your CD will be cataloged. RIAA provides the artist names, Gracenote provides stats [where, when, what songs]. Gracenote also dishes out the serial number which helps the RIAA catch you when you 'donate' your music to a P2P network.

    Maybe every subsequent copy made from a master disc [or master media file] will have a trailing number which keeps track of how many copies you've made.

    When you pop in that CD you get a call[AIM, ICQ or MSN message]:
    "Mr. Smith? You've copied that disc 47 times. Do you really need that many?"


    This is Mr. Johnson... who the fsck is this?


    Stay there sir, you are BUSTED!


    Fall out for linux users? If we aren't required to use a DRM system by law, freedb will be sued - all non-compliant cdrecording software will go underground and don't expect to be able to play music CD's.

    I know the seal is because one of the two companies are pussies but expect this system to come about. The world is absolute disarray - eXpect Problems.

    • If there are new "Audio-CD" formats, wouldn't it make sense that these new formats include the meta-information currently provided by Gracenote, freedb, etc..

      Actually, don't some existing CD's contain title/track information already?

      Why would there even be a need for gracenote/freedb in the future (besides for helping id 'legacy' CDs)?

      • I can't believe I'm helping them (Score:4, Interesting)

        by ImaLamer ( 260199 ) <john.lamar@NospaM.gmail.com> on Tuesday January 08, 2002 @12:52PM (#2804599) Homepage Journal
        Ok. Go back and re-read my post.

        But just in case [i've been up all night eating chocolate mints] here it goes.

        My point was that Gracenote would only provide a database for disc id's.

        Let's say you make a CD with a Roxio product [or plugg'd app]. Before you eject it the ID is taken from that CD. Not the serial, but the unique ID and it's furnished to Gracenote.

        But how do they know what songs are on your CD? They [being whatever online emusic retailer] knows because you bought it from them. The track list is sent with the ID to Gracenote, they know what songs match that CD.

        Now, here is the fun part. When you play that CD, Gracenote knows what songs you listened to and to what frequency. Whatever app you use to listen to music uploads the stats. Hell, even car radios could do this soon. Of course you get a weekly e-mail suggesting you buy this or that music.

        With a format such as wma, you can listen before you buy. Buy, burn listen. Now, if you put that CD you've legally bought and burned into a CD-Rom and try to rip it, you get a nice little note: "sorry, but you can't copy this custom CD".

        I've just spelled it out for the whole industry. In fact, they only need to find a distribution method. Agree on some restricting format. Come up with a numbering method. Roll out software [XP service pack 3]. And really not make a new format. If they just use Roxio burning soft, then they can come up with some sort of copy-protection method which would burn onto the disc. Considering it's against the DMCA to try to break it, they have the law behind them.

        If they would like to roll out hardware later on, then they would. Maybe a CD player component that shows the information on your TV screen, such as lyrics or what not. All through the internet.
        • Now, here is the fun part. When you play that CD, Gracenote knows what songs you listened to and to what frequency. Whatever app you use to listen to music uploads the stats. Hell, even car radios could do this soon. Of course you get a weekly e-mail suggesting you buy this or that music.

          Privacy advocates have a hard time selling their story to the general public because the worst they can come up with is "you'll get junk mail that targets your tastes". That's no reason to preserve privacy.

          The real reason is that if someone can reliably track your reading and viewing habits, eventually a time will come when you can not read or view controversial material anonymously. Reading Mein Kampf? Your name's in the list now. Running for local office now that you're 45 and you're an established member of the community? Uh-oh, they've got it on record that you looked at some unsavory porn 20 years ago.

          What's that you say? You've got nothing to hide? That's what they all say, but that's not what the system says. The system is reliable. Are you sufficiently well-funded to fight it? It has to be reliable, or else artists wouldn't get paid, wink wink, nudge nudge, coughhillaryrosenjackvalenticough.
          The occasional injustice, the argument goes, is of little consequence next to the inconvenience that businesses face in not being able to track and catalog their customers, and the inconveniences that those who someday develop a motive to use that information for malicious purposes will face.

          Can't happen you say? Look around and see if you can't find any information about Monica Lewinsky, Credit Card records, and a little book called Vox.

          Then tell me again that it can't happen and I won't believe you.
          • Hey, I'm not suggesting they actually do this. I like the system the way it is. We pay our tax and we get to copy stuff.

            I just cooked up this big fantasy because this is the type of thing we are going to see from the great media empires.

            At least I trust AOL. Don't ask me why. It just seems that their plan isn't charge for every usage, or even bother tracking you. Their model has always been pay the same rate month after month. [premium services never really took off]

            Give us tiered pricing plans on the mp3's we can legally download. 10 bucks a month for 75MB, 15 for 100MB... let them cook it up.

            My brain hurts.
            • Why would I pay 10$ for 75MB if I can get it for free off Gnutella etc?
              Thats where the music is currently, and thats where I would think it will always be available =D
              • The problem is, first: it's illegal. Sorry, it is. I download mp3s... but damn it is illegal. DMCA?

                If you think music is going to stay free while they are throwing a million new DVD formats at us trying to squeeze more cash out... think again.

                If [for example] EMI signs a deal with KaZaa to distribute music on their label for a price, expect EMI and KaZaa to sue anyone to distributes EMI music any other way. It's that simple.

                You think it's going to stay free? I don't think so. They are trying to find a way to make sure they get every nickel out of you right now. When they do, lawsuits will spring up so fast.

                All of your P2P networks will be watched closely if they aren't shut down. It could take a strong legal precedent to wipe out file sharing across the board.

                It's not about copyrights, it's about distribution rights. It's about who gets what share.
    • > Trust me, I've backed up wma files I created and when my system crashed I couldn't play the restored files. [livid]

      You should've gone into TOOLS -> OPTIONS and under the "Copy Music" tab, unclicked the "Protect content" checkbox. Bingo, un-protected WMAs.

      And before anyone complains that it's on by default, just be grateful (and surprised) that it's there at all. I wonder how many people have unknowingly backed up their music with this 'content protection' on. Does copy protection against "people-who-don't-check-the-options" raise any discrimination issues?
  • I mean, with more and more CD's being released in a "won't play on my computer" [slashdot.org] format, what good is having an on-line database for content that you can't play anyway?
  • Sign up for their developers program. They'll make you sign an NDA*, and once you do, they'll snail-mail you copies of all of their patents. Every time they get a new patent, they'll snail-mail it to you, too. Gracenote gets a _lot_ of patents (all of which seem to my not-a-patent-lawyer-eye to be for the same damn thing), and it can't be cheap to keep mailing them out.

    * Of course, if you ever plan to be a code-submitter to freedb, this may not be advisable.
  • Anybody else notice that this was yet another case of a corporate entity backing down and submitting to Satan (in this case, Gracenote) just because they don't want to get into a lawsuit.

    This is unusual, because this is a corporate vs. corporate case. Most of the time, it involved a corporate vs. person (with no money), and the person folds because he can't afford the huge lawyer fees. In this CvsC case, they can afford the fees, but they don't want to. Especially if it's to defend a free service.

    Of course, the only loser here is FreeDB. They lose what would have been their biggest break, and Gracenote grips tightly to their monopoly on CDDB services. It would have been nice if Roxio had a fscking backbone and would stand up to their decision.

    Not only will I refrain from buying another CD again (because of the copy-protection issues), I'll refrain from using Roxio to burn those MP3s.
  • I wrote a system identical to CDDB at the same time they did, or slightly sooner. (http://mycds.com/) I believe I have a CDR burried somewhere with what might qualify as prior art.

    I emailed legal@eff.org and legal@roxio.com with this information when the suit was started. I never recieved a reply from either.

    I guess patent invalidation wasn't a vey interesting option to them.

    -pmb
  • ...if you're one of the people who were screaming bloody murder because Gracenote had the _audacity_ to try and sell the album/song titles that you spent half an hour entering into their system, maybe you can understand Lars et. al. screaming bloody murder because Napster was trying to make a quick IPO selling (in a roundabout way) the albums/songs that they spent half a year writing and recording.
    Food for thought or what you will.
    • There's a slight difference here... Metallica, et al made music for the expectation of sufficient monetary compensation to make a living from it.

      Those of us who did data-entry for CDDB over the years did it as a service to the music-listening-geek community, with only the expectation that CDDB would continue to be of, by, and for the people.

      Now Gracenote has taken over a collective work without compensating those who produced it, and is charging the people who built it to use it. This is like being charged admission to get into your own house, which strikes me as more outrageous than people downloading copyrighted music to get back at the RIAA because they're tired of paying damn near twenty bucks each for two-dollar CDs with two or three good songs on them.

      Eventually, though, just like they shut down www.lyrics.ch, the RIAA will decide to enforce the fact that the names of songs and albums are their intellectual property, and Gracenote will be the one on the wrong end of the legal gun.

      Of course, that's only if the manufacture of computer-unreadable music CDs doesn't render Gracenote irrelevant first.

      ~Philly
  • ``We are pleased to reinstate CDDB services to our customers and look forward to expanded use of Gracenote's services and technology,'' said Chris Gorog, president and CEO of Roxio.

    Mr. Gorog went on to note that the implant he received from Gracenote's Pod People didn't hurt at all. "It kind of tickled," he explained in response to queries from the media.

    -Legion

  • Gracenote sues Roxio because Roxio went with a competitor. They pretend they don't know that suit is entirely frivolous. Gracenote and Roxio settle out of court, under undisclosed terms. Roxio abandons competitor to go with Gracenote.

    Competitor loses, as their business plan now has to compensate for under the table deals. Roxio loses, as no matter how much money Gracenote managed to stuff down their pants it is generally a bad business decision to tie your products to a company who uses the lawyer tax against you as a negotiation tool. Gracenote wins, obviously, as now they have a prescedent against the evil, market-destroying voulenteer version and have regained some (small) iota of respectability. Consumers lose, as Gracenote is attempting to get them to pay for a service whose imput they themselves provide.

    Roxy doesn't like her boyfriend, as he's a stodgy, demanding suit. Roxy finds a happy, crunchy hippie. Her stodgy, demanding suit comes around and beats Roxy up. Closed-door negotiations ensue. Roxy has moved back in with her angry original boyfriend, with the promise that he will never hit her again.

    Does anyone else see a problem with this? Thank goodness our good friend Nero has more self-respect than that.

    • Gracenote wins, obviously, as now they have a prescedent against the evil, market-destroying voulenteer version

      An out-of-court settlement does not set common-law precedent. Only a court decision can do that.

      and have regained some (small) iota of respectability.

      Have they?

  • While toast for the Mac may be nice, Roxio's windows products leave much to be desired. After Easy CD Creater 4, their software has been buggy crap. I don't see how they've managed to buy out the other companies, but one of my favorites, Cequadrat, makers of the fabulously versatile Winoncd and Packet CD were bought out. While winoncd did have its share of bugs, it was still slim, fast and it was veratile. Packet Cd however, was rock solid and for anyone else using UDF format, was far better than the crappy Adaptec AKA Roxio DireCD. It read disks better, rarely ever crashed, supported up to 1gigs through compression and even packaged a udf driver on the disc automatically so that if would read on any windoze pc. Well, after being bought out by Roxio, it has since dissappeared, being replaced by the crappy DireCD. I was very pissed, because I have been unable to find any of the great Cequadrat products. Damn Roxio!
  • Gracenote's lawsuit clearly had not merit and was nothing more than an attempt to shake down Roxio for some money -- namely, to continue paying them for use of CDDB. The idea is simple, fraudulant, and illegal...but it usually works, if the settlement is cheaper than the cost of legal fees. Here's how it goes:

    1. Sue someone on an absolutely meritless lawsuit

    2. Try to make them think you'll take it to its end, so that it will cost them a ton in legal fees.

    3. Ask them for a settlement which would be less expensive to them than the legal fees they'd have to pay to defend themselves from your baseless lawsuit.

    This is in short what Gracenote did. Its a very simply stategy, which needs to be exposed and eliminated. Such fraud should be made illegal with severe financial penalties. Really, its more than just fraud -- its blackmail.

  • While I was at MacWorld today, I asked the Roxio people working the booth if Toast 5.1 (which was released today) will still allow me to connect to FreeDB rather than using Gracenote's database. After a bit of a pause (I suspect they've been getting pretty beat up about it), the folks I talked to said that you will still able to connect to any services that you want. The -default- on -new installs- will be CDDB, however. On upgrades, it will keep your old settings. Clicking on the 'Default' button will set it back to CDDB, but you can change it to FreeDB manually.

    Hopefully for you Windows folks, it will work the same way.

  • I figured people would forget... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by singularity ( 2031 ) <nowalmart@NOSPam.gmail.com> on Wednesday January 09, 2002 @01:35AM (#2808147) Homepage Journal
    If you go back and look at the original Slashdot article, you would see that part of what Gracenote was complaining about was that Gracenote *helped* Roxio write some of the code to access the, and helped Roxio out with some of the protocols they were using.

    Roxio takes the help, and then turns around and make the default *another* DB - a free one that Gracenote is trying to compete with.

    Gracenote had a decent case against Roxio. Gracenote could make a case that there was an understanding that the help Gracenote was providing would help Gracenote out in the end.

Slashdot Top Deals

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (7) Well, it's an excellent idea, but it would make the compilers too hard to write.

Close