- Related Stories
-
'BadApple' podcasts first in iTunes
June 20, 2005
But that reputation stems at least as much from his habit of thumbing his nose at those in power. He has fought major lawsuits from the big record labels and Microsoft, losing tens of millions of dollars in the process, but ultimately coming out ahead each time.
He started the original MP3.com in mid-1997, when the digital music phenomenon was just beginning to hit the cultural radar. The company was ultimately sued by the major labels and music publishers for copyright infringement, and was sold to Universal Music Group after striking settlement deals that neared $200 million. CNET Networks, the publisher of News.com, now owns the MP3.com domain name and uses it for an unrelated business.Robertson's latest target is Apple Computer, whose iPod music player and iTunes software currently dominate the digital music world nearly as successfully as Microsoft controls the PC operating system and office software markets. In midsummer, he quietly launched a site called BadFruit, which beat Apple CEO Steve Jobs to putting links to podcasts into iTunes with a piece of software called BadApple.
The latest version of the BadApple software available on that site now allows people to use Apple's iTunes software to sync their music collections with non-Apple MP3 players. Robertson says he's pursuing the project--an offshoot of his MP3Tunes music store, which sells independent music in MP3 format without copy protection--in order to encourage the development of interoperability between different music platforms.
This may not be his top priority. After all, he's also running Linspire, which provides a Linux-based operating system, and the Gizmo Project, a Skype competitor that offers free Net calling.
But as history has shown, it's worth watching what Robertson is doing, whatever it is. There's usually something about to happen.
Q: The BadApple project is something you're managing, right?Robertson: Yes.
What's the idea behind the project?
Robertson: Well, I think there is a battle going on right now between, you know, proprietary formats and open standards. On one side of the war, you've got big corporations like Microsoft and Apple coming out with their FairPlay or some other highly misleading description of their technology, trying to battle for a proprietary world. DRM (digital rights management) of course is the big cornerstone of that. I believe it's up to technologists and people like myself to pull the world in the other direction, which is open standards.
I asked Steve Jobs to put FairPlay onto Linux and he said "no." I mean, flat-out no. That's not a world I want. I want a world where people can choose any hardware device they want, any operating system, and not have to re-buy their music every time they get a new device. I think open standards are the key to that. What we were trying to do with BadApple is pull the world more towards an open direction.
You initially provided podcasting support for iTunes, and the software now allows you to sync music players that are not iPods with iTunes. Is BadApple an umbrella for various different things, or is what we see now the end goal?
Robertson: No, it's not the end goal at all. I mean, I think it's just an example. Why shouldn't you be able to use any player, and shop at any store, and get your content in any format? Those are features, those are capabilities that consumers should have.
This is not just a tiny hack that we threw together. The goal here is to open the world and to force these big guys to interoperate, which they don't want to do.
Are you looking at other software programs such as Windows Media Player as well, then? Or are you mostly focused specifically on Apple at this point?
Robertson: Well, you know, the BadApple plug-in is focused on the iTunes universe because that's the leader today. But I think if you broaden your perspective and you look at what Microsoft is trying to do with their "Plays for sure" campaign, it's no different. The only difference is they haven't had as much success as Apple.
But Microsoft is still trying to lock in every hardware device into only their system, and that's not right. That's not the way the world should work.
Have you had any contact with Apple over this, or have they contacted you?
Robertson: No, no contact.
You have a history of running up against the biggest people in the spaces you're in, and then winding up in courts. Do you have any fear of that this time?
Robertson: Well, if you are asking me, will Apple sue us, I hope not, because what we are doing is the right thing.
But you know what, when you tangle with the big guys, sometimes you end up in court. That's why it's imperative for the technologists and the people like myself. Now is the time to plant the flag and stand up. Don't wait five years to the point where they will be unmovable.
How has the MP3Tunes project been going?
Robertson: It's been going good. It's so much different than MP3.com, because at MP3.com I was the leader. We were the leader by any measure that you had. It's almost like starting over with MP3Tunes, where you're like, OK, how do we get relevant, how do we get into the game so that we can have an impact?
It's a very different place to be, and so what we are focusing on now at MP3Tunes is looking at the new horizon. Is it getting music to your
See more CNET content tagged:
MP3.com Inc.,
Linspire,
open standard,
Steve Jobs,
Apple Computer
Even the "Genius Bar" people couldn't make it work.
This is BS!
learn how to use iTunes then you may not have the problem you
are having. You have to authotize each of your computers to play
the song. This is done by using the username/password of they
account that purchased the song.
I have a hard time believing that the person at the Genius Bar
didn't/doesn't know this. To me, that makes your whole comment
suspect.
1. Select a song you've purchased (in your library or the Purchased Music playlist).
2.Click the Play button.
If the computer is already authorized, the song plays. If the computer has not yet been authorized, iTunes asks you to enter the Apple ID and password you used to purchase the song.
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=93014
1. Authorize your PowerBook
-or-
2. Burn the songs to a CD, which will make your songs compatible
with your PowerBook and allow you to upload them into your
iTunes.
The root of the problem, after eliminating operator error, is a
bad application of Fairplay by iTunes to the downloaded song.
Back then I would have recommend removing and reinstalling
Quicktime then iTunes itself. This was usually completely
ineffective but at least we would have done something. There is
a customer service process for the music store and once in a
great while they may authorize you to download the song again,
but don't hold your breath. Now that I'm not a Mac Genius
anymore I recommend jHymn, a utility which does a fair job
straightening out this kind of difficulty.
Good luck.
Even the "Genius Bar" people couldn't make it work.
This is BS!
learn how to use iTunes then you may not have the problem you
are having. You have to authotize each of your computers to play
the song. This is done by using the username/password of they
account that purchased the song.
I have a hard time believing that the person at the Genius Bar
didn't/doesn't know this. To me, that makes your whole comment
suspect.
1. Select a song you've purchased (in your library or the Purchased Music playlist).
2.Click the Play button.
If the computer is already authorized, the song plays. If the computer has not yet been authorized, iTunes asks you to enter the Apple ID and password you used to purchase the song.
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=93014
1. Authorize your PowerBook
-or-
2. Burn the songs to a CD, which will make your songs compatible
with your PowerBook and allow you to upload them into your
iTunes.
The root of the problem, after eliminating operator error, is a
bad application of Fairplay by iTunes to the downloaded song.
Back then I would have recommend removing and reinstalling
Quicktime then iTunes itself. This was usually completely
ineffective but at least we would have done something. There is
a customer service process for the music store and once in a
great while they may authorize you to download the song again,
but don't hold your breath. Now that I'm not a Mac Genius
anymore I recommend jHymn, a utility which does a fair job
straightening out this kind of difficulty.
Good luck.
Even the "Genius Bar" people couldn't make it work.
This is BS!
learn how to use iTunes then you may not have the problem you
are having. You have to authotize each of your computers to play
the song. This is done by using the username/password of they
account that purchased the song.
I have a hard time believing that the person at the Genius Bar
didn't/doesn't know this. To me, that makes your whole comment
suspect.
1. Select a song you've purchased (in your library or the Purchased Music playlist).
2.Click the Play button.
If the computer is already authorized, the song plays. If the computer has not yet been authorized, iTunes asks you to enter the Apple ID and password you used to purchase the song.
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=93014
1. Authorize your PowerBook
-or-
2. Burn the songs to a CD, which will make your songs compatible
with your PowerBook and allow you to upload them into your
iTunes.
The root of the problem, after eliminating operator error, is a
bad application of Fairplay by iTunes to the downloaded song.
Back then I would have recommend removing and reinstalling
Quicktime then iTunes itself. This was usually completely
ineffective but at least we would have done something. There is
a customer service process for the music store and once in a
great while they may authorize you to download the song again,
but don't hold your breath. Now that I'm not a Mac Genius
anymore I recommend jHymn, a utility which does a fair job
straightening out this kind of difficulty.
Good luck.
This will NOT happen in 3, 5 or even 10 years. Could it happen in 20-25 years? Maybe. However, there will need to be not only large technological advances, but also social and legal changes. Anyone who believes such a pervasive and easy to use system will be implemented within the next 10 years is dreaming. Wake up.
I hope some day you will join us
And all your music will play as one.
Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or lawsuits
A respect for customers by The Man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the songs...
OK, I got a little carried away, but you get the point. This guy is 100% on course and you're ridiculing him? There is very little technological limitation in the way of his vision now except wireless distribution to anywhere. The rest is artificial limits set by the industry with the deliberate intent of limiting what the consumer can do and increasing revenue.
He is right... I should buy a song and be able to listen to it wherever, on whatever. It's called fair use. I purchased the right to listen to the song, not the right to use my iPod. Under no circumstances should I have to buy the same song for again for a different device or PC.
Closed systems directly cause consumers to seek open formats, which usually run afoul of the industries wishes and laws. The industry is responsible for this mess and it will not go away until they pull their heads out of the sand and deliver what the consumers want.
I don't mean that all music should be free. But I shouldn't be expected to keep buying the same thing over and over. Music is a collectible, not a commodity like milk. If the industry can only comprehend a license to listen model, then we should go directly to the musician and buy a actual product directly from them. They would reap much more benefit from such a system anyway and we could all sleep with a clear conscience that we supported the creators of the content we enjoy and still have our freedom to enjoy the product.
This will NOT happen in 3, 5 or even 10 years. Could it happen in 20-25 years? Maybe. However, there will need to be not only large technological advances, but also social and legal changes. Anyone who believes such a pervasive and easy to use system will be implemented within the next 10 years is dreaming. Wake up.
I hope some day you will join us
And all your music will play as one.
Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or lawsuits
A respect for customers by The Man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the songs...
OK, I got a little carried away, but you get the point. This guy is 100% on course and you're ridiculing him? There is very little technological limitation in the way of his vision now except wireless distribution to anywhere. The rest is artificial limits set by the industry with the deliberate intent of limiting what the consumer can do and increasing revenue.
He is right... I should buy a song and be able to listen to it wherever, on whatever. It's called fair use. I purchased the right to listen to the song, not the right to use my iPod. Under no circumstances should I have to buy the same song for again for a different device or PC.
Closed systems directly cause consumers to seek open formats, which usually run afoul of the industries wishes and laws. The industry is responsible for this mess and it will not go away until they pull their heads out of the sand and deliver what the consumers want.
I don't mean that all music should be free. But I shouldn't be expected to keep buying the same thing over and over. Music is a collectible, not a commodity like milk. If the industry can only comprehend a license to listen model, then we should go directly to the musician and buy a actual product directly from them. They would reap much more benefit from such a system anyway and we could all sleep with a clear conscience that we supported the creators of the content we enjoy and still have our freedom to enjoy the product.
Then he crows about the importance of "open"ness. Is that why his latest website uses MP3, a format that patented by Thomson? Why doesn't he use Ogg, a truly open standard?
And, although CNET says mp3.com is an unrelated business, that is actually misleading - they do use that URL for independend music content - similar to the old www.mp3.com.
Then he crows about the importance of "open"ness. Is that why his latest website uses MP3, a format that patented by Thomson? Why doesn't he use Ogg, a truly open standard?
And, although CNET says mp3.com is an unrelated business, that is actually misleading - they do use that URL for independend music content - similar to the old www.mp3.com.
Then he crows about the importance of "open"ness. Is that why his latest website uses MP3, a format that patented by Thomson? Why doesn't he use Ogg, a truly open standard?
And, although CNET says mp3.com is an unrelated business, that is actually misleading - they do use that URL for independend music content - similar to the old www.mp3.com.
Jobs
I think Steve's doing an awsome job with what he's got. It's
better if people were to work with him to bring about this digital
revolution than busy themselves fighting against him. I know
geniuses don't always win, but here's an opportunity to make
great product available to the masses. At the moment, with the
exception of Jobs & Co., what technology you have available to
you is based on how persuasive or cunning the individual is in
selling it to you. Read that article...
-- The aim of technology is to be compelling. That is, to compel
a diffent point of view.
OD
Apple with iTunes seems to be a burning issue of not opening
up. Cry me a river!! I can take no time at all with my purchased
music, burn it and import it back into anything I want. So
what's the big deal?!!
Personally for me a good example where Apple may have
dropped the ball is with the new mobile phone. Apple should
have put in as much effort in designing a phone like they do with
the rest of their products. They could've had the whole mobile
phone industry trembling.
If someone can make arranging and porting music as good as
Apple or better I'll go with it.............if it's compelling!!
Everything else is just whinning and backward thinking.
Jobs
I think Steve's doing an awsome job with what he's got. It's
better if people were to work with him to bring about this digital
revolution than busy themselves fighting against him. I know
geniuses don't always win, but here's an opportunity to make
great product available to the masses. At the moment, with the
exception of Jobs & Co., what technology you have available to
you is based on how persuasive or cunning the individual is in
selling it to you. Read that article...
-- The aim of technology is to be compelling. That is, to compel
a diffent point of view.
OD
Apple with iTunes seems to be a burning issue of not opening
up. Cry me a river!! I can take no time at all with my purchased
music, burn it and import it back into anything I want. So
what's the big deal?!!
Personally for me a good example where Apple may have
dropped the ball is with the new mobile phone. Apple should
have put in as much effort in designing a phone like they do with
the rest of their products. They could've had the whole mobile
phone industry trembling.
If someone can make arranging and porting music as good as
Apple or better I'll go with it.............if it's compelling!!
Everything else is just whinning and backward thinking.
Jobs
I think Steve's doing an awsome job with what he's got. It's
better if people were to work with him to bring about this digital
revolution than busy themselves fighting against him. I know
geniuses don't always win, but here's an opportunity to make
great product available to the masses. At the moment, with the
exception of Jobs & Co., what technology you have available to
you is based on how persuasive or cunning the individual is in
selling it to you. Read that article...
-- The aim of technology is to be compelling. That is, to compel
a diffent point of view.
OD
Apple with iTunes seems to be a burning issue of not opening
up. Cry me a river!! I can take no time at all with my purchased
music, burn it and import it back into anything I want. So
what's the big deal?!!
Personally for me a good example where Apple may have
dropped the ball is with the new mobile phone. Apple should
have put in as much effort in designing a phone like they do with
the rest of their products. They could've had the whole mobile
phone industry trembling.
If someone can make arranging and porting music as good as
Apple or better I'll go with it.............if it's compelling!!
Everything else is just whinning and backward thinking.
- Dreamer
-
by shadowself
April 27, 2008 10:00 PM PDT
- A utopia where all "your" music is available to you on any device you are using at any time you want it may be the ultimate desire, but how would you ever implement it? Where would "your" music reside? How would it get distrbuted to the device you are currently using? How will any generic device authenticate that you are you? How will it know what is "your" music? These and many, many more technical questions need to be answered before any such ubiquitous system can even be seriously contemplated.
-
Reply to this comment
-
-
- You may say he's a dreamer...
-
by skeptik
April 27, 2008 10:01 PM PDT
- ...But he's not the only one.
-
View
all 2 replies
-
(66 Comments)This will NOT happen in 3, 5 or even 10 years. Could it happen in 20-25 years? Maybe. However, there will need to be not only large technological advances, but also social and legal changes. Anyone who believes such a pervasive and easy to use system will be implemented within the next 10 years is dreaming. Wake up.
I hope some day you will join us
And all your music will play as one.
Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or lawsuits
A respect for customers by The Man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the songs...
OK, I got a little carried away, but you get the point. This guy is 100% on course and you're ridiculing him? There is very little technological limitation in the way of his vision now except wireless distribution to anywhere. The rest is artificial limits set by the industry with the deliberate intent of limiting what the consumer can do and increasing revenue.
He is right... I should buy a song and be able to listen to it wherever, on whatever. It's called fair use. I purchased the right to listen to the song, not the right to use my iPod. Under no circumstances should I have to buy the same song for again for a different device or PC.
Closed systems directly cause consumers to seek open formats, which usually run afoul of the industries wishes and laws. The industry is responsible for this mess and it will not go away until they pull their heads out of the sand and deliver what the consumers want.
I don't mean that all music should be free. But I shouldn't be expected to keep buying the same thing over and over. Music is a collectible, not a commodity like milk. If the industry can only comprehend a license to listen model, then we should go directly to the musician and buy a actual product directly from them. They would reap much more benefit from such a system anyway and we could all sleep with a clear conscience that we supported the creators of the content we enjoy and still have our freedom to enjoy the product.