Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Music Media

CDDB No Longer Allows Grip Users to Connect UPDATED 243

Posted by michael
from the type-them-in-yourself dept.
ezln23 writes: "I have been a regular user of Grip for CD Ripping and MP3 encoding for quite a few months now. Today when I attempted to rip a new CD I bought, I received this message. "Your CD player application is either not licensed to use the Gracenote(tm) CDDB(tm) service or its license has expired. If you are unsure what this means, please see our web site at http://www.cddb.com/lic/Grip. If you are a developer and feel you have received this message in error or wish to get your application licensed, please contact support for assistance." I guess the predictions in this article were correct." We've also received submissions about kscd and other applications that query CDDB, so it looks like CDDB has cut off everyone who didn't pay up.Update: 03/10 02:28 PM by H : It looks like it was a short-lived thing - I can connect fine to it this morning - and I can assure you, I haven't paid.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

CDDB No Longer Allows Grip Users to Connect

Comments Filter:
  • You gotta read the fucking licenses. The license is everything, that's how you know what you're donating your effort to. You think just because they give you shit without paying for it it's a "free effort"?

    Was this the original license? IIRC CDDB was originally a separate, free online database and only got all pushy after having been acquired by someone else.

    Oh well, if you're not using FreeDB by now, consider this your golden opportunity. We'll see how CDDB likes it now that no one enters any new songs into it. The public made them what they are, and the public can tear them down just as quickly.

  • by joemaller (37695) on Friday March 09, 2001 @05:19PM (#372810) Homepage
    From reading the notes, I doubt this will affect many people. I just ripped a few CDs tonight from SoundJam and it worked fine.

    However there is an irony regarding the Napster/RIAA lawsuits if this was extrapolated out and the CDDB started restricting access to their database. In very measurable ways, the CDDB is helping the RIAA to filter Napster. Of course there is still the FreeDB (thankfully), but play along for fun.

    The RIAA's injunction against Napster works by filtering file names, most of which come from the CDDB. Consistant file names make the injunction workable. Removing the CDDB would cause a large number of people to input their own names with all the associated inconsistancies, making filtering all the more difficult. I find this quite funny. It's only too bad the RIAA didn't target the CDDB and only later realize how much it was helping their jihad against their customers and themselves.

    joe maller
  • So make your own free *DB service. I'm sure everyone will appreciate it. I'm sure the submissions will be flowing in hot and heavy and in a few months you'll have more than Gracenut has.

  • I've heard a lot of people allude to the story of CDDB at one time being free, supported and built up by volunteers entering information, and then at some point turning evil and proprietary. Can someone recount the story in a bit more detail? For instance, how did a company gain control over what was once a volunteer effort? At what point did it become clear that they were going to make everything so painfully commercial (patents, licencing, and other ugliness...)?

    --
  • From memory, to write an applciation that uses CDDB, you must:

    1) Advertize for CDDB. You must put their logo on your application somewhere. There were some restrictions about size/placement/visability/etc.

    2) Use CDDB exclusively. You cannot allow users to enter a different server name, such as freedb.

    3) You must not store or redistribute the data you get from cddb. This is including, but not limited to submitting the data back to freedb. I believe caching is allowed, at least for local use only. Not sure about putting the data into ID3 tags and the like.

    4) You must agree that all data submitted becomes the exclusive property of gracenote.

    5) I think commercial players have to pay a license fee, but free ones don't.

    Note: I read this a long time ago, and can't be bothered to look it up. The license may have changed, or I may be mistaken.
  • It's not the content they are selling, it's the bandwidth delivery mechanism, which someone has to pay for, else their ISP (apparently globix.net being at least one) would pull the plug for non-payment.

  • Oh sure, paint yourself into a corner...
  • Some cds do, theres a track title format already in place, it works on a few very new cd players and very new cds, I've seen a couple ... but on the whole the industry has no desire to make it htat much easier to make mp3s ...
  • Since FreeDB is an obvious alternative to CDDB now, why don't we make it at the very least, equal.

    Since the CDDB database is searchable via their webpage [gracenote.com] why doesn't everybody just copy 'n' paste as many entries possible and submit them to FreeDB. Since all the entries were user-submitted is copyright an issue here?

    There are thousands (millions?) of people reading this article and comment, think how many submissions could be added to FreeDB tonight alone.


    "I am a man, and men are
    animals who tell stories."

  • The proxy can get the data from cddb (that users entered) and submit it to freedb.
  • by norton_I (64015) <hobbes@utrek.dhs.org> on Friday March 09, 2001 @06:51PM (#372827)
    However, the free (beer) license is still nasty, as it requires you to use cddb exclusively. So if you let you users have a choice between freedb and cddb, you can't be licensed. Also, you have to put their logo on your program.

    As a side note, I wonder what this does to people with firewalls that strip/mangle/replace the User-Agent HTTP header? or is the filtering only on their cddb protocol, not http?
  • So Gracenote appears to be exercising judgement in what it believes to be authorized/unauthorized MP3 players (didn't recognize Sonique, did recognize Realjukebox), presumably to make the burning of copy-protected CD's less convenient. I especially like the we-dont-really-care-if-your-player-really-is-licen sed-but-not-on-our-list wording: "That application does/does not appear to be a licensed CDDB-Enabled Application."

    But what about people coding their own MP3 players or CD players, for release as a new product? I see Gracenote offers a "Non-Commerical developer's license" for such a situation, but it's limited to 100 end-users until Gracenote validates the license.

    Yet what really stinks is how Gracenote is currently featuring an MP3 encoder (N2MP3) that apparently incorporates the LAME open-source MP3 codec, even tho LAME itself is not on the CDDB list. I.e. you can't use LAME itself with CDDB, but you're more than welcome to buy this commercially distributed rehash which does.
  • by fhwang (90412) on Friday March 09, 2001 @05:23PM (#372831) Homepage
    The obvious response to a move like this is to say: "Hey, everybody, use FreeDB [freedb.org]." Which I agree with, but I also have to wonder: If everybody starts using FreeDB instead of CDDB, will they be able to afford it?

    There's a lot of non-trivial work involved with running a database like this, and it seems like it might not scale well. If FreeDB ever gets extremely wide adoption, won't the costs of running it become nearly insurmountable? CDDB can finance this because it charges fees. IMDB [slashdot.org] is (I believe) owned by Amazon, and because its data is mostly dispensed via a web site and it can slap ad banners on the top. None of these options would appear to be available for FreeDB.

    I am not posting as a nay-sayer: I'm quite ignorant about a lot of the logistics & financial considerations. I'd appreciate it if somebody more intimately familiar with the workings of FreeDB -- or any similarly large, free online DB -- would comment on this.

  • by mpe (36238)
    No, only the versions that you put under GPL remain so. If you create a new version, you don't have to put it under the GPL as well.

    Only if they are either outside the US or create a completly new piece of software. Otherwise the draconian "derived work" part of US copyright law would appear to apply.
  • You could always:

    connect to cddb server as fake client

    pick random 32 bit integer

    does it match ? yes: copy to local db

    no: pick random existing entry from local db, write as new entry
  • While Fair Use might be an issue as to whether a service like CDDB is legal in the first place, I don't see how it applies here.

    CDDB has a service that it provides - a database of CDs, songs, and artists (btw- a database that they built of the labor of volunteers). Connecting to their servers to get the information is at their discretion. Grip doesn't have that discretion. Grip tries to establish a connection to CDDB servers that CDDB doesn't want. The information is available elsewhere, namely FreeDB [freedb.org]. This isn't a result of a bad law, it's a result of CDDB being an ass and changing the rules of how an application can connect to it.

    While I dislike CDDB and their restrictive agreements for developers and end-users alike, and while I think this action is kinda low, they are within their rights as a service provider. Would an ISP be justified to cut off a deadbeat account? This is a similar situation.

    -sk

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 09, 2001 @05:26PM (#372842)
    As of yesterday, Gracenote has posted a *free* (FREE, NO COST) license to freeware developers. As long as your application makes you no money directly or indirectly, then you won't have to pay anything to use the CDDB service.

    I believe even Grip would be eligible for this, assuming it really is revenue-free.

    FYI, the CDDB blockage is not targeted at Grip, but rather only allows licensed applications.
  • You idiots! All you /. people ever scream is FREE FREE FREE. You want the world and you don't want to pay for it. I want a free OS - I want free music - I want a free database. Well, FU all - someone has to write the OS - someone has to write and perform the music - someone has to setup and maintain the databases (as well as machines, Internet connectivity, etc.)

    ...
    Buy a license or don't. I don't care. But don't bitch about companies that are just following simple supply and demand.



    Well, you've got it. Basic consumer nature: pay less. Basic business nature: get more. It's not an either-or thing, it's both, and the tension is what makes the free market work.

  • by JetJaguar (1539) on Friday March 09, 2001 @09:48PM (#372853)

    You sir, have no clue what you are talking about! This companies' database was built on the backs of people like myself who freely contributed to it, WITHOUT compensation. You are critical of us for wanting something for nothing, but turn a blind eye to the fact that the CDDB owners did get something for nothing! They didn't have to pay a soul to compile all the CD information, it was given to them, and now they expect us to pay them to get back the very same data that we contributed for free! I say screw them the same way they have screwed us! It's only fair.

  • Go to delphion.com and look up U.S. Patents 5987525, 6061680, and 6154773.

    Ok, first off, if the issue is why pay for something when you can get it for free, then you should do your patent searches at www.uspto.gov [uspto.gov] instead of Delphion.

    Second, Patents 5987525 and 6154773 are for syncronizing an audio CD with a web site via a plugin, which doesn't apply here.

    Third, Patent 6061680 is the one which covers database lookup. It was filed in July 1999. CDDB had been around a lot longer than that, and thus similar programs existed concurrent with the early days of CDDB. One such was a project called Disco that was programmed by an Apple employee and had clients on multiple platforms. This was in use at least by 1997. CDDB was small and independent in the beginning, and they didn't think to file a patent in time to really cover the database, at least if those 3 patents you site are the only ones they hold.


    ------
    WWhhaatt ddooeess dduupplleexx mmeeaann??

  • by dpol (189913) <dpol AT swipnet DOT se> on Friday March 09, 2001 @06:52PM (#372856) Homepage
    We're using Gracenote's CDDB2 service in one of our commercial applications and we don't pay Gracenote a dime. You only have to pay Gracenote if you charge for your software and have a very large number of users (more than 250,000 or something like that). There is a "free" license that states that if you don't make money off your product in any way (including but not limited to banner advertising), you don't have to pay, no matter how many users you have.

    I suppose that the software the story mentions makes use of the original CDDB1 service; Gracenote has said that they will someday terminate this service and move all of its users to CDDB2. I'm not sure that this is what happened, though.

    Also, I'm not certain that Gracenote has released the CDDB2 UNIX SDK yet. The Win32 SDK has been available for quite some time now and consists of a well-defined set of COM interfaces. The Win32 SDK is well-documented and supported by Gracenote. We've been very happy with the level of support we've received (again, for free).

    Provided that the UNIX/Linux SDK has been released and there are no license issues, any free software (as in beer at least) could make use of CDDB2 and Gracenote's servers free of charge.

    Note that I don't touch on whether it was right of them to use the community-entered data in the first place; most discussions on Slashdot seem to center on this issue.
  • by DeeKayWon (155842) on Friday March 09, 2001 @04:56PM (#372858)
    Considering Grip uses FreeDB by default, it shouldn't affect too many people.
  • I freely submitted to their database many of my "offbeat" CD titles a few years ago thinking this was a cool idea. Last I checked, those submissions are still there. Now the assholes want to charge for information they sucked from the community?

    Dipshits!
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 09, 2001 @04:59PM (#372866)
    Those CDDB bastards took Internet-contributed and generated data and decided to license it (and charge) back to the Internet community.

    But I guess that's why we have free alternatives like freeCDDB [freecddb.org].

  • by Bob McCown (8411) on Friday March 09, 2001 @05:00PM (#372868)
    ...use a service that requires a license fee, dont pay the fee, get cut off.

    and the problem is?

  • Seems to me if the government wants to keep making more laws...they should start making more laws protecting fair use. i.e. you cannot discontinue service to users if their actions do not violate fair use. Under a law like this, CDDB could be held accountable for disallowing users of Grip and any other ripping/burning software that are legal in and of themselves.

    God forbid, of course, that the US might actually pass a law protecting consumers.


    FluX
    After 16 years, MTV has finally completed its deevolution into the shiny things network
  • If CDDB merged with FreeDB and offered a free service, how would they make money? For better or worse (mostly worse), CDDB is a for-profit operation.

    The point of having two is that we can choose to use the free one, instead of supporting people who took publicly contributed data and made it proprietary.

  • by chrisbolt (11273) on Friday March 09, 2001 @05:35PM (#372876) Homepage
    ...is MusicBrainz [musicbrainz.org]. They are currently supported by FreeAmp and the API, server, and the actual database are all open. Modifications and updates to the database are done with a moderation system, and if your suggested change gets five unanimous Yes votes, it is automatically committed to the database. Check it out.
  • What right do they have to impose any condition on the use of the information they stole (by taking the information ostensibly to provide a free service) from the Internet community?
  • I'd be willing to contribute stuff/money to FreeDB, to help the costs issue. I'm by no means rich, but it they asked, I'd likely toss something their way. If they setup a Paypal account, or somesuch, I imagine that many others would be willing to help keep a community supported service alive.
  • by WNight (23683) on Friday March 09, 2001 @05:38PM (#372881) Homepage
    Why not set up a site that proxies CDDB queries. Point all the programs that ARE affected to this site, it generates CDDB requests that appear to come from programs that CDDB allows.

    And no, I don't consider it cheating, theft, or underhanded in any way. CDDB lied to the community about the purpose of the DB, enlisted help under false pretenses, and then locked off access to a DB that many people had helped to create.

    If we have to change an identifier in a query to get around their fraudulent business model it sounds good to me.

    Fucking assholes who're willing to sell out everyone else just for a buck...
  • If you go to their web page and search for:
    Linux/Unix, All applications that encode/play mp3
    the search form kindly informs you:

    "For Unix/Linux:
    There are no players that meet that description."

    In other words, use linux? switch to FreeDB please :)

    I hope this will put a dent in there buisness, and they might consider rethinking there buisness plan? Specialy after all the contreversy about who owns what, and didnt -I- give them the information they are charging for now?



    -- Chris Chabot
    "I dont suffer from insanity, i enjoy every minute of it!"
  • So you do it slowly over the course of a year or so... maybe they won't notice. :)

  • As mentioned before, they are now checking if the application is "licensed." Since XMMS is not licensed with them, it no longer can access their database.

    XMMS defaults to FreeDB, but in my experience CDDB has had a lot more of my discs than FreeDB does. So it's a shame I can no longer use it.

    Times are going to be interesting; people will soon likely rewrite their CD database apps to allow users to arbitrarily specify the application's ID string. Lynx, wget and Konqueror already allow this when it comes to web pages. Gracenote's response to that behavior ought to be interesting.

  • by Danse (1026)

    No, only the versions that you put under GPL remain so. If you create a new version, you don't have to put it under the GPL as well.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 09, 2001 @05:47PM (#372908)
    You idiots! All you /. people ever scream is FREE FREE FREE. You want the world and you don't want to pay for it. I want a free OS - I want free music - I want a free database. Well, FU all - someone has to write the OS - someone has to write and perform the music - someone has to setup and maintain the databases (as well as machines, Internet connectivity, etc.)

    All of these things take resources - time, and money particularly. If there are people out there willing to do these things out of the goodness of their heart - so be it. But you should be GRATEFUL that you can run an OS (Linux) that is free. You should *not* however EXPECT it. If you want it free - then YOU setup a DB - YOU write an OS - and YOU start writing and performing songs for free.

    If people (corporations) have the resources and they feel they can break even, or even make money by charging people, they would. These are called *services*. They are a primary part of our society and our economy. There are goods and services. Why does everyone on /. think that all services related to computers should be free? You don't expect to get a haircut for free do you? (Maybe you do...but then what kind of quality do you expect?)

    The notion seems to be that software and data, in any form, should be free. In reality, software and data crosses that fine line between goods and services. You are really paying for the service of someone to write the software / create the data (songs, etc). But since it only has to be written once, the cost is spread over all the people who buy it. Either way, in the days before computers, neither goods nor services were free. So why should the gray area in between all of a sudden be FREE?

    Bottom line: CDDB runs a service. It is not a free service. Deal with it. Companies who create commercial ripping software are willing to pay for the license, so they don't have to rely on a free service such as FreeDB. If they pay for a service, they can expect a certain level of reliability (uptime, and accuracy should be expected). This is worth something to them - and they pay for it. They, in turn, pass the cost down to you when you buy their software. If DB reliability and accuracy aren't a concern to you, use FreeDB. Communities are great, but they can't rule like good old fashion supply and demand can. Russia proved that very well.

    Buy a license or don't. I don't care. But don't bitch about companies that are just following simple supply and demand.
  • by tswinzig (210999) on Friday March 09, 2001 @05:48PM (#372911) Journal
    Werd to free music. Werd to free information. Werd to the people.

    Werd to the fact that running an internet resource costs money.
  • With regard to your point about free services being unable to exist without revenue, gosh--I can't imagine that there could have been any internet at all before all that commericalization arrived. (That was
    sarcasm, in case it wasn't readily apparent.)


    Gee, wrong again! The internet wasn't free even before it was commercialized -- it was paid for by the government and education institutions.
  • by Danse (1026)

    I think the problem some have is when pro-community people start stating that profit is evil.

    Or in this case the problem was that CDDB lied about their intents to the people who helped build their product, and then proceeded to restrict access to those who wouldn't pay for what they helped to build. No, profit isn't evil. Using deceptive and fraudulent tactics to profit is evil.

  • by Danse (1026)

    Look, nobody is pissed that CDDB wanted to make a profit. People are pissed because CDDB deceived people in order to build their product.

  • Heh... doesn't matter who owns the names of the songs. If you compile a database of pretty much anything, you can copyright it.

    If I compile a database containing only content owned by other people, such as say, an O'Reilly Nutshell book, can I still copyright it? Where do you draw the line? Just because you re-type something doesn't make it your own.

    You're not copyrighting the names, you're copyrighting your collection of information. CDDB did that with their database and they don't own the song and
    album names any more than we do.


    No, CDDB cut off free access to the database. The result is the same, but it wasn't done in the same manner.

    So, if i create a list of all the tracks on an album, I have just as much right to protect that list as they do to protect their database.

    But YOU did not create that list of all the tracks on an album! The company and artists that created the album did! Why do you think you now own the copyright to that list? Because you re-typed it?

    Damn, I've gotta go now ... time to re-type all these books I've collected over the years, and start selling them!

    If they incorporate my list under false pretenses, then I should have some recourse against them.

    They didn't collect the information under false pretenses -- you simply assumed what the pretenses were, and your assumptions were false.
  • by Danse (1026) on Friday March 09, 2001 @10:45PM (#372918)

    Boy you've got some gall!

    You don't own the names of the songs you entered -- the artists that wrote the songs do, if anybody.

    Heh... doesn't matter who owns the names of the songs. If you compile a database of pretty much anything, you can copyright it. You're not copyrighting the names, you're copyrighting your collection of information. CDDB did that with their database and they don't own the song and album names any more than we do. So, if i create a list of all the tracks on an album, I have just as much right to protect that list as they do to protect their database. If they incorporate my list under false pretenses, then I should have some recourse against them.

  • by Danse (1026)

    That's not our problem. If they wanted to sell the database information, they should have told people that up front. As it stands, their "product" was created through fraudulent means. They lied, plain and simple.

  • by jamiemccarthy (4847) on Saturday March 10, 2001 @06:41AM (#372920) Homepage Journal
    "Ive submitted info to CDDB before, so they can make money off of my time now? I say no."

    "As did I. I must have submitted information for close to 100 CD. I did not get paid. I thought I was donating my time to a free effort."

    You gotta read the fucking licenses. The license is everything, that's how you know what you're donating your effort to. You think just because they give you shit without paying for it it's a "free effort"? I think you know that's not what "free" is all about...

    Go read at http://www.gracenote.com/terms.html [gracenote.com]:

    "Proprietary Rights Information

    "The contents of this Site are protected by the copyright laws of the United States and around the world, including international treaties. No use of the CDDB Content, database or other content on this Site is allowed except as expressly stated herein. All rights not expressly granted are reserved. Copyright © 1996-1999 CDDB Inc"

    That's not exactly the goddamn GPL.

    I'm looking around for a place on their site where they tell me what rights I have to the information that I donated to them. I don't find anything. I find obscure licensing terms which they force their applications to adhere to, like (just one example):

    "End users must register with CDDB2 the first time they access the service with your application."

    Here's a rule of thumb: if something is free like in speech, you will learn this within 60 seconds of visiting their website for the first time. Free projects are proud of being free. If you find yourself clicking around page after page, hoping to find some magic words about distribution rights and can't find any, that's how you know it's proprietary.

    Jamie McCarthy

  • Please, explain to me how this is theft.

    Sure. It comes down to this: they never told people that they were going to charge them to access the information that they were submitting. Had they done so, one of two things might have happened. People might have accepted this and continued to submit entries to the DB. Or they might have decided that it wasn't worth their time or effort and they wouldn't submit anymore (and then CDDB ends up with a much inferior product). What CDDB did was take everyone's submissions under false pretenses. That's theft. If they can own the copyright to their database, then I should own the copyright to the lists of tracks that I submitted. Since they incorporated my copyrighted information into their database under false pretenses, I should have some recourse against them.

  • Now, Ive submitted info to CDDB before, so they can make money off of my time now? I say no. [Its my time because i had to type in the names, etc. ] I dont like this....

  • by Danse (1026) on Friday March 09, 2001 @10:59PM (#372924)

    So make your own free *DB service.

    FreeDB already exists. That doesn't change the fact that Gracenote deceived those who helped to build their product. Apparently ethics are unknown to hardcore capitalists. All that matters is the money.

  • I just ran into this as well from using some custom developed scripts; however, the scheme by which cddb/gracenote/whatever the name du jour is uses to 'authenticate' licensed users is just the already-existing 'hello' part of the cddb protocol. So, an application can simply pretend to be one of the licensed applications (xmcd 2.5, for one) and everything works fine; the modification for this in the FreeDB.pm perl module is trivial. There is nothing that Gracenote can do against this; they are simply trying to make life difficult.

    It is in any case ridiculous that cddb.com has decided to do this, and we should definitively support the freedb.org [freedb.org] efforts by entering data for CDs that aren't already in the database -- now if only there was an official procedure for 'correcting' freedb entries :-)

  • For the author, derrivative works need not be released under GPL because the author was not bound by GPL, only the people who accepted the work under GPL are bound by it.

    Except that, as far as I understand US copyright law, the author of a "derived work" is NOT the copyright owner.
    But only an entity representing the copyright owner can licence the code.
    The only appearent exception would be where both programs are created by the same entity, which would appear to be impossible in the case of CDDB.
  • I'd like to make a few points here. According to the CDDB lic Grip should have free access to the DB with out cost to anyone.

    This is the Non-Commercial License and Database Access Agreement. Please read this Agreement carefully. It permits non-commercial use of the Gracenote CDDB® SDK with certain types of computer software applications listed on Schedule B, referred to as a Licensed Application.

    Now if you are a commerical user CDDB will charge you if you make money off your app basiclly CDDB wants a cut. Honestly I cant blame them I run some servers myself and I imagine keeping a large datbase running with all those users AIN'T cheap.

    Now about CDDB2. The orignal database was the one that the users created. CDDB2 being the new version is supposed to have added support for not just song names and artists but lyrics and a bunch of extras that are explained here. [cddb.com]

    As for whats happening to GRIP its a bum deal. Being an open source project the creator is obvisouly making no money off his project. Which in reality may mean that CDDB broke thier contract and that they may be open to a court case (IANAL).

    From the looks of it Grip was probaly removed becasue of the type of software it is however last time I checked it is still not wrong to rip a CD and make MP3s but who knows what tommorw will bring.

    For a detialed version of the FREE agreement click here. [gracenote.com]

    Don't kill me for spelling im lazy!

  • I don't belive this got posted. Yeah it's stupid that CDDB doesn't work with grip, but afaik, it does use freedb as a default. I just ripped a track a minute ago. I guess it is news for nerds, but not very important......
  • just a thought. is cddb still allowing users to submit data? if so wouldnt it be nice if everyone submitted false data. a database full of bad data doesnt really sell that well.

    use LaTeX? want an online reference manager that
  • by Alex Belits (437) on Friday March 09, 2001 @06:04PM (#372938) Homepage
    There is no "economics" involved -- running a free service is CHEAP if you have anything else on a colocated server at some ISP. If it isn't cheap for you, look for someone for whom it is, and very likely he will do that.
  • by trapperlake (307211) on Friday March 09, 2001 @05:51PM (#372939)
    Well yes and no.

    The real value to CDDB in particular is that they have accumulated a watershed of TOC's to CD's in the world.

    When you insert that disc, it's not just dumb luck that CDDB knows it's one disc from another. As you all probably know the same "release title" can have different TOC's due to the disc mastering and pressing process.

    The quaility of the CDDB service is that you all have helped make it a deep watershed of TOC inventory for every title.

    In the game of matching a CD to it's meta data it's important to realize that the signature of the track offsets (it's Table Of Contents) varies from pressing to pressing. If CDDB is able to aquire the unique TOC's of the same CD release then they are better in position to give accurate data once the next query comes for it.

    And so on.. so pretty soon for any given CD title, like Pink Floyd Dark Side of the Moon (which has over 100 different TOC's from all the pressings that it has had over the years) you're bound to be farily high on rate of successful query..

    Which is what the QOS issue is about too.

    CDDB has this watershed of data, and they are going to leverage it to it's maximum, which means makign deals with software/service vendors to get revenue for every player/service deal is available.

    In the mean time it would be really great to just re-aim your player/system to freedb and use them.

    Let freedb accumulate their database to actually be competitive with CDDB in the spirit of collecting the most CD meta data that is out there. The end result should hopefully be a viable alternative to CDDB which is free, open and really out of reach of any MPAA or similar forces.

    The information is free, and needs to remain free.

    This is possible and quite easy to do. Why more Napster users aren't installing a freedb plugin that will automatically "snarf" up the cd meta data from their own disc and send it to freedb is interesting.. Why people using Napster aren't already on the bandwagon is interestin. Millions of Napster users all with a plugin to feed the freedb database? Nice.

  • Removing the CDDB would cause a large number of people to input their own names with all the associated inconsistancies, making filtering all the more difficult.

    Better yet, pollute the CDDB with alternative names. CDDB identifies CDs based on the number of tracks and their playtimes. Most of the time this is unique to a CD, but every once in a while you'll be asked to select which CD is the one in question. This is because two CDs happen to have identical numbers of tracks with identical playtimes. So, how about we start making up alternative names ('Meta11ica' is an earlier example cited on SlashDot) and submitting them to CDDB. Then when someone is ripping a CD, they can easily select one of the alternative spellings for the filenaming. This also has the salutatory effect of hosing the CDDB, which appears to be richly deserved.

  • This affects abcde [lly.org] too. Put this in your abcde.conf to get it to use FreeDB:

    CDDBURL=http://freedb.freedb.org/~cddb/cddb.cgi

    Oh, and if you simply have to use abcde with Gracenote's database, do this search and replace:
    s/$NAME+$VERSION/xmcd+fuckyougracenote/

    Abcde's default database will change to FreeDB in the next release.

  • Your words bely an apparent unfamiliary with the history of CDDB (now Gracenote). At its inception, the CDDB software and database were under the GPL. Thus, it was quite reasonable for submitters to infer that their submissions would remain free.

    Not only that, before the commercialization, the *servers* were run by volunteers who provided disk space and bandwidth for free. This is what allowed the project to grow so large and valuable, at which point the author sold out. All of the volunteers were sent a message saying that we were no longer necessary, and that we should give them our snail mail addresses so the new company could send us a nice gift. Never even got that, dammit. :)

    --

  • Hello,

    Gracenote does not show the the necessary TOC to identify the CD.
  • those that don't pay the extra fee can have the servers blocked. I don't see why it should be any more than a couple bucks per month, but any ISP would make it more than necessary.

    Definitely this. I would refuse to use an ISP that charged extra across the board due to Napster and the RIAA. I don't use Napster or view streaming videos or any of that shit, why should I pay for everyone on my ISP doing so? Rather, I should pay a lower fee because a.) I'm not using up so much bandwidth and b.) I'm not getting copies of the RIAA's materials, so I don't owe them a fscking dime.

    I much prefer the pay-per-bandwidth model, which I believe will be getting more accurate in the future until finally it will be metered as commonly and ubiquitously as power service is now. I can only hope that in the future all the bandwidth isn't controlled by AOL or its subsidiaries, who seem to be gobbling up every small ISP in sight... (sigh)

    -Kasreyn

  • by FattMattP (86246) on Friday March 09, 2001 @07:44PM (#372959) Homepage
    I agree that it will get expensive for them once it starts getting really popular. But you'll see people step up to the plate to offer bandwidth. More than likely there will be regional DNS entries like us.freedb.org and europe.freedb.org. These might use round-robin entries to point off to different servers much like distributed.net does for their keyservers now.
  • Considering Grip uses FreeDB by default

    FreeDB infringes U.S. Patents #5,987,525; #6,061,680; #6,154,773, and other patents issued or pending, and foreign counterparts. See also non-commercial license terms schedule C [cddb.com].


    All your hallucinogen [pineight.com] are belong to us.
  • We all know what's next. They'll be awarded a patent for the "delivery of CD title and track information over a networked service" and attempt to shut FreeDB down.
  • CDDB should be free for one specific reason. The database was created by the users when it was free. IMHO this is blatent theft.
  • The problem is that they started out a community-based collection of title information that was painstakingly entered by thousands of users in the belief that they wouldn't pull something like this.

    Funny, I don't remember ever being promised anything by gracenote. I got way more from them then they ever got from me. I input the CD's I found that were not there, but most of the time I downloaded from them. I received a service from them in exchange for helping them build up their database. That was the deal.

    Where exactly did it say you get access to CDDB for free, forever, because you simply typed out the names of songs that someone else wrote?

    What Gracenote did is essentially the same as the Red Cross declaring itself a for-profit agency and charging for its services, while keeping all the donations made for it while it was a non-profit.

    A horrible analogy. What gracenote did was start charging for a useful service in the only way it can -- hitting the application builders that enhance their programs with its functionality.

    I am looking forward to the day they go out of business and/or are made irrelevant by free alternatives.

    Please study economics. These "free" alternatives are only free to YOU, not to the person running them. Do you think internet bandwidth and hardware resources grow on trees? Why don't you offer to pay a monthly service fee to FreeDB to help?

    Nah, you just want something for nothing.

    And I hope the executive scum responsible for the decision die a slow, painful death. But I'm not bitter.

    Nope, you're just SELFISH.

    -thomas

  • This one really peeved me. I use Notify CD Player, a wonderful little Windows app that hasn't rev'd in 2 years but still works fine on Win2K. It's well designed, unobtrusive, and requires minimal resources.

    Today when I get this licensing error, I check the list of "approved" CDDB 1 readers for Windows, and Notify CD Player is listed! So then I send e-mail to their listed contact.

    I get a polite but firm "fuck you". When I go to reply to them that they still have it listed as a "supported" application, surprise!, it's been removed.

    Since I can't seem to contact the orignial developer, I guess I'll switch to the other database, but this is really fucking annoying.

  • this is like any big project that is used by alot of people. the kernel for example has hundreds of mirrors. in fact i'm looking at freedb right now to see if i can setup a mirror on our server at school.

    use LaTeX? want an online reference manager that
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Freenet was designed for this kind of stuff...put it on Freenet, give Freenet it's first real app. At the same time we guarantee that the database can't be "cease & desisted" out of existance due to Freenet's uncensorable nature.
  • by Coward Anonymous (110649) on Friday March 09, 2001 @06:20PM (#372976)
    do they still allow additions and fixes to the DB? start fixin' it wrong... Enough mad people get even and no one will use such an ureliable service anymore.
  • Set your CDDB apps to access www.freedb.org instead. No licensing or patenting nazis there.

    In kscd (my CD player of choice) simply click on the preferences button, set your CDDB server to "www.freedb.org http 80 /~cddb/cddb.cgi". Other CD players should have similar configuration procedures.

    Problem solved.

  • by cameldrv (53081) on Friday March 09, 2001 @05:02PM (#372980)
    I know that there was a bill in congress to change the law on this a couple of years back, but at least as of a few years ago, it was completely legal to copy a database wholesale, as it did not constitute a creative work. CDDB is clearly not a creative work, so perhaps someone can just setup a sneaky bot to download their entire database and move it to FreeDB.
  • by Pituritus Ani (247728) on Friday March 09, 2001 @05:03PM (#372982) Homepage
    The problem is that they started out a community-based collection of title information that was painstakingly entered by thousands of users in the belief that they wouldn't pull something like this.

    What Gracenote did is essentially the same as the Red Cross declaring itself a for-profit agency and charging for its services, while keeping all the donations made for it while it was a non-profit.

    I am looking forward to the day they go out of business and/or are made irrelevant by free alternatives. And I hope the executive scum responsible for the decision die a slow, painful death. But I'm not bitter.

  • by Azog (20907)
    If you compile a database of pretty much anything, you can copyright it.
    If I compile a database containing only content owned by other people, such as say, an O'Reilly Nutshell book, can I still copyright it? Where do you draw the line? Just because you re-type something doesn't make it your own.

    Are you a copyright lawyer? I don't think so! Neither am I, but I am sure that people can and have copyrighted collections (databases) of information that they put together - even if the information itself is free. The classic example, was phone books. If I recall correctly, the legal case that set the precedent was a company that was scanning, copying and selling phonebooks, because "all the information in them was public domain". They were sued and lost. You are not allowed to do that anymore. The copyright theory has something to do with a legal concept called "sweat of the brow" - if you put a lot of work into collecting information together, you can copyright the collection, even if all the data in it is public domain.

    Read up on it. Copyright law is stranger than your intuitive idea about what is wright and wrong. Of course, there is a fuzzy line in there somewhere - a few pages of data probably wouldn't qualify. As they say, Ask A Lawyer.

    And of course, retyping a book is a completely different thing. Don't confuse the issue. That would not be a collection of data, that's just a copy of information taken from ONE PLACE.

    Better check your own assumptions.

    Torrey Hoffman (Azog)
  • Actually, they could have used a much less insidious, but lucrative model: aggregate statistics.

    Every time someone accesses the cddb database, they log what was accessed. Then they sell this information to the record companies to find out how popular their music is with a certain market. Additionally they could implement a top-40 style service for the record companies
  • by Greyfox (87712) on Friday March 09, 2001 @05:04PM (#372990) Homepage Journal
    Grip has been using freecddb for as long as I've been using it, and that's where I've been sending all my CD info when I run across the rare one that they don't already have in the database.
  • But be sure to copy their DB to FreeDB first... or else it would be a karma packback for the community too.
  • You know, this reminds me of once back in the early almost-pre-Web days of the Internet (circa 1994-1995), I was merely a clueless luser with a shell account at a local ISP. Back then, PPP was a relatively new thing and you needed programs like Slirp or Twinsock to emulate it on your shell account, or pay an expensive hourly fee to get it. It was much more convenient and faster to dial in with a program like Qmodem or Telemate (or Telix, etc, choose your favorite). You could get your discussions, porn, and illegal software by accessing tin/trn for newsgroups, you had pine/elm for mail, irc with various cool scripts and bots for hours and hours of fun, and could telnet to various MUD/MUSHes for even more hours of fun.

    Anyway, getting back from nostalgic recollection, the ISP I was using at the time made an announcement on their /etc/motd -- they were thinking about setting up an IRC server. I was truly puzzled. The ISP was a commercial venture to make money through providing shell accounts (and later PPP dialup access). How could anyone increase their profit by wasting valuable server resources and bandwidth by setting up a free chat service which anyone could login from anywhere without a fee? So I went to the few newsgroups that had been setup locally by their system administrator and asked the owners. (By the way, these local newsgroups specific to that ISP were kind of funny because it could also stab them in the back. It could either provide a valuable resource for the customers to ask questions, or the customers could rant and rave about the shitty service, to be read by the other customers as well.) There I learned a valuable lesson. The ISP system administrator replied that the Internet was a "shared community resource". You could benefit immensely from the internet through such things as newsgroup peering, anonymous ftp, publicly available MUDs. In fact, the internet was really based upon the idea of *freely* *shared* *community* resource at its roots. If everyone tried to offer a service and charged for it, then the Internet would have died at its inception. And the people who joined this community truly learned this concept and were educated by the other people in the community -- as I did. It's sorry to see that the hordes of people jumping on the bandwagon later on never learned this principle. Rather than learning to give back, the majority became the mass of clueless AOL newbies spamming and ruining the newsgroups with their "Me Too!" posts. Rather than learning the benefits of cooperation, people learned to line their pockets with what other people freely provided.

    But I think that the spirit(?) of the Internet hasn't wholly been lost. There are still those who still remember its valuable lesson. And that is why I fullheartedly support projects Linux and open source in general. Open source software and its users have given the Internet so much: INN newsgroups servers, sendmail, Apache, BIND, wu-ftpd... the Net would never have existed if the authors had all charged for their software, we would all have been using AOL or MSN.

    So, a message to those that came after me. Please learn that giving back and contributing to the community is not wrong! Making a profit should not be the only incentive for doing anything -- passion for your work, and being part of a community can be much more rewarding. Please don't let the lesson that the Net has to teach the world die in vain!
  • There certainly was a bill to strengthen protection for databases, but according to Bitlaw [bitlaw.com], databases are protected when they are a compilation that adds value by selecting, arranging, or coordinating the underlying information. A compilation is a value-added coallation of what may themselves be basic facts.

    It's important to understand, as that same article mentions, that the underlying data itself is not protected. It's the compilation itself. CDDB certainly counts as a compilation of data, even if they are turning out to be a bunch of greedy f*cks.

    -b

  • Aparently XMCD and a few other GPL clients have licenses to use the CDDB. Why not just use their license and call grip a derivitive of XMCD?
  • Gracenote are the same fuckers (sorry but I'm just pissed now ) who shut down lyrics.ch. I really am getting tired of people fucking up the internet. I think all the big corporations are pissed now that the bubble has burst and are looking for any way possible to get money back. I still say something like Hak Nam (Idoru) or the Walled City (All Tommorow's Party) is the only thing that's going to save those of us who have been using the internet longer than these punkass corporations. Maybe freenet is the answer.

    Now everyone make sure you support FreeDB and tell these bastards that we don't need them.

  • by Pituritus Ani (247728) on Friday March 09, 2001 @06:30PM (#373007) Homepage
    Funny, I don't remember ever being promised anything by gracenote. I got way more from them then they ever got from me. I input the CD's I found that were not there, but most of the time I downloaded from them. I received a service from them in exchange for helping them build up their database. That was the deal.

    Your words bely an apparent unfamiliary with the history of CDDB (now Gracenote). At its inception, the CDDB software and database were under the GPL. Thus, it was quite reasonable for submitters to infer that their submissions would remain free.

    Where exactly did it say you get access to CDDB for free, forever, because you simply typed out the names of songs that someone else wrote?

    I didn't say that anyone should have "access to CDDB free, forever, just because . . ." Gracenote should be compelled to release all tracks provided by users to the public domain, however. Not the same thing. This remedy wouldn't require that they run servers "in perpetuity" (as another posted said).

    A horrible analogy. What gracenote did was start charging for a useful service in the only way it can -- hitting the application builders that enhance their programs with its functionality.

    The analogy is a very good one. Your saying it is horrible doesn't make it so. Had they announced plans to charge up front, no reasonable person would have had an issue with their actions. As in the hypothetical Red Cross example, this wasn't the case.

    Please study economics. These "free" alternatives are only free to YOU, not to the person running them. Do you think internet bandwidth and hardware resources grow on trees? Why don't you offer to pay a monthly service fee to FreeDB to help? Nah, you just want something for nothing.

    Thank you for that oh-so-enlightened ad hominem attack and "econ in a nutshell," Dr. Friedman. It dovetails so well with the rest of your completely specious argument. I don't feel the need to wear my education on my sleeve. With regard to your point about free services being unable to exist without revenue, gosh--I can't imagine that there could have been any internet at all before all that commericalization arrived. (That was sarcasm, in case it wasn't readily apparent.)

    Nope, you're just SELFISH.

    Thanks again.

  • by WNight (23683) on Saturday March 10, 2001 @09:00AM (#373009) Homepage
    If I show you a product, something no-cost, and ask your help in enhancing it and distributing it to those who need it, then once you've helped me, I start charging for it and keep the money, you're entitled to some.

    AOL ran into a similar thing with their volunteers. You aren't allowed to solicit unpaid volunteer effort toward a for-profit enterprise.

    Because CDDB was free, and not just free to access one at a time, but free to download, while they were soliciting their volunteers, they made the expectation that they would remain that way.

    Besides, they're claiming to have the copyright on this compilation. Copyrights are usually distributed among all the authors, unless those authors SIGN AWAY their copyright. There was no contract so any rights they had are still theirs.
  • I'm not saying I *like* the idea of having my bandwidth monitored, but I don't see any options that aren't considerably worse. The internet is a new thing, it's still in flux, but I see it settling down as another "service" that everyone will want to have in his house.

    The American Dream has been updated: Now it's not only a house in the suburbs, SUV, 2.2 kids, a dog and a wife, it also includes broadband internet access.

    So if bandwidth is going to become a commonplace service, I'd MUCH rather pay for what I'm using instead of being forced to subsidize the RIAA just because I "might" download their stuff.

    -Kasreyn
  • by alewando (854) on Friday March 09, 2001 @05:06PM (#373011)
    If we keep mirroring the database, then we'll never be fully under their thumb. Download a copy from one of the existing mirrors [freedb.org], and keep the movement alive.
  • Actually, they have a number of very strong claims.

    1) Volunteer effort in a for-profit enterprise must be rewarded. The volunteers received nothing for their work. AOL was hit with this and had to pay a significant ammount to all their chat-room supervisors, etc.

    2) The copyright on the compilation should rest with all the contributing authors. As is, they're violating the copyrights of most of their contributors by distributing it in the way they do.

    3) By advertising themselves as a free (as in beer) project when they asked for help, they offered an implied promise that they would stay free. Or at least that the work put into the project wouldn't be made proprietary by them.

    #3 has been tried in the US before. A community center sought community assistance in fixing itself up, buy machines, etc. Then once done, they mentioned that they weren't really a community center, that they were a company who bought an old community center. They were now going to charge for access to the exercise equipment, etc.

    It was ruled that the volunteers were owed fair wages for the efforts they were tricked into providing. The company went bankrupt, the city bought them back, and they're now a community center for real.

    I don't remember where, it was an article in something like Reader's Digest. But there are a fair number of other cases like that, though maybe not such a perfect test case.

    Suffice it to say, Gracenote asked for help, didn't specify that it was for a future pay-to-access project, and now they don't have all the rights over the DB or access to it.

    They could start charging for it, it's their bandwidth, but they'd have to do it based on bandwidth instead of 'access to the information' which they don't legally control. And in that case, a do-gooder could download it and setup their own system competing with theirs on bandwidth sales.
  • What I'm describing here is financial reality. Nothing is truly free. Costs are paid for by someone, always, and what I'm hearing here is that most people don't give a crap so long as it's not them shelling out the dough.

    I don't see that at all. What people are complaining about is when the rules of the game are changed midstream. If they want to charge money for the database, that's certainly their right, and I say more power to them.

    However, when I spent my precious time typing in song names and sending them up to their database, there was no indication that one day I would no longer be able to freely use it. The only right thing for them to do is to look at the timestamps on each record when deciding whether or not a client needs a license code to retrieve it. If something was entered before the change in terms, then it should be available to everyone. If, on the other hand, someone entered song titles under the new terms, those records could fairly be covered by them.

    Anything less is outright deception, it's shoddy business, it's biting the hand that fed them. I can only hope the hand doesn't stick around for more.

  • And who pays for the government and educational institutions? And who pays them?
  • cddb did offer something to the community: they hosted the database, and it's my understanding, dealt with the costs involved.

    the community gave cddb something: the data.

    if my understanding is correct, they should be free to do anything they like with the service. if they want to begin to charge for it to offset their costs, or to profit, so be it.

    however, ownership of the data is more tricky. when someone conducts a poll, individual respondants contribute data to it. but it's accepted that the company that goes to the work execute the poll rightly owns the data, and can profit from it however they wish. this seems to suggest that they own the cddb data, and can do as the like

    however, I can also see the situation where individuals contribute to a work, such as building an object. then one of them takes the object to a museam, and charges admission to see it. in this circumstance, it seems totally right that those contributing had an understanding of ownership that was violated. perhaps there was no contract, but I would think it's plausible a court would find that all the individuals are entitled to a fair share.

    Honestly, I don't know the law that governs this in the US or anywhere else.

    Honestly, I can't think of a law that could deal with this situation without relying heavily on a court judgement.

    I'd love to hear it if someone does know, or can think
  • You are just confused about running a service and the rights to the data itself.

    As long as someone has a reasonably dependable connection to the internet, they may run the CDDB service. That does not allow them to claim rights to the CD metadata itself. The people who contributed the metadata freely, in the spirit of cooperation only expect to get good data for other CD's back. If Gracenote refuses to run the service, they cannot claim that the own the data. I think FreeDB does have a case for asking for those data.

  • Or you can use freedb.freedb.org:888

    --

  • by yerricde (125198) on Friday March 09, 2001 @08:22PM (#373025) Homepage Journal

    As of yesterday, Gracenote has posted a *free* (FREE, NO COST) license to freeware developers.

    There's a difference between freeware and free software [gnu.org]. The terms of the non-commercial license conflict with those of a certain popular free software license [gnu.org].

    Check this out:

    The Licensed Application will only be distributed for non-commercial use on General Purpose Personal Computers. "General Purpose Personal Computers" or "PCs" are general purpose personal computers consisting of a desktop or laptop model, a display monitor, keyboard and mouse. PCs do not include any attachments or peripherals except an external CD drive, DVD drive, hard drive, printer, scanner and/or analog Audio Equipment such as speakers. An external device that reads TOC and also displays text or graphics is NOT a PC.
    Note that this definition excludes computers with common peripherals such as (/me scans the back of my computer) trackballs, touchpads, drawing tablets, joysticks, floppy disk drives, Zip drives, tape drives, network cards, modems, video capture hardware, etc. (This license is useless, as floppy drives are included with most PCs, and use of a network card or modem is required to access the Gracenote CDDB® database.)

    The real GPL compatibility killer: "You agree not to modify or disable any Gracenote CDDB Client functions or to otherwise interfere with the operation of the Gracenote CDDB Client." Also, "The Client ID must be embedded in binary form in your Licensed Application, and must not be easily extractable by End-Users or other developers."

    Or this:

    You will use the Gracenote CDDB Client and the Gracenote CDDB Database as the exclusive source for CD identification and Data when your Licensed Application accesses such information by reading a CD's TOC or disc identification number and retrieves Data or related data via the Internet. ... Your Licensed Application shall not have or enable a function that permits transmission of TOC or the combination of TOC together with Data to anyone other than Gracenote.
    Translation: "You will not modify, or allow to be modified, the hostname or IP number accessed by the software." Not compatible.

    Of course, there are a couple patents on using a TOC hash as a database key [cddb.com] that keep you from just using FreeDB instead.


    All your hallucinogen [pineight.com] are belong to us.
  • It's possible for the developer of a free client to get a license to use the commercial server. You just have to agree to this itty bitty license. [gracenote.com] All 14 paragraphs and four schedules of it. If anybody can figure out how to write a Linux client that adheres to this monster of a license is truely a master of both code and law.
  • When I entered data into the CDDB database years ago, it was under the assumption that the license was the GPL. I don't recall anyone contacting me to ask me if the bits I entered could be licensed under any other license. I also have to wonder if they've merged the GPLed FreeCDDB database back into theirs at any time. Could a class action suit against them result in them having to remove all user submitted data?
  • The first version I used (?) had cddb as default. Later versions seem to have switched.

    The really neat thing (haven't done in a while) is to set free as the primary, cd as the secondary. So, if it's not at free, they get it from cd, courtesy of me:)

  • Tell me again where it says users have to pay and how much so I know how much effort I should spend fighting CDDB with you.

    Okay, and I'll try to use small words so you understand :). By charging software developers for the right to access the database, they will force the developers to charge (or charge more) for their software. So users end up paying.

  • You should've sold it to them in the first place.

    No, I shouldn't have sold it. Selling it wasn't an option anyway. If users hadn't contributed, CDDB wouldn't even have a product to sell now. What should have happened is that CDDB either remained free to access, or they remove all entries submitted by users unless they are granted permission to use them by the contributing user. People contributed because CDDB was a free service. Had they been charging, very few people would have submitted anything and they wouldn't have a product. They probably knew this as well which is why they decided to continue the deception instead of telling people up front that they planned on selling access rights to developers.

  • Basically what you want is a system for hierarchical distribution of resource data, right? So use DNS! It's already set up to do caching, and bringing up secondary servers is as simple as doing zone transfers. Each CD hash could be it's own sub-domain, and individual tracks would be hosts within the sub-domain (same goes for title/author/etc.) Instead of everything having "A" records, liberally apply the use of "TXT" records.

    Setting long TTLs on records would cache queries on your local name server, so if you listen to CDs a lot on your computer, they might live in your resolver's cache for a long time. Or if you're really hard core, like a school, just set up a secondary for data.freedb.org (or even individual sub-domains to mirror your personal CD collection) and stuff will be cached and updated automagically.

    They'd still need to operate a HTTP server to get around l4m3 firewalls, but if the majority of CDDB users are academic (dunno anything about demographics) or home users, DNS would be very available.

    Heck, you wouldn't even need to actually make changes to FreeDB to get this to work, one would just have to write a pump that would extract the relevant data and create the BIND data files.


    Rev. Dr. Xenophon Fenderson, the Carbon(d)ated, KSC, DEATH, SubGenius, mhm21x16
  • by technos (73414) on Friday March 09, 2001 @05:15PM (#373046) Homepage Journal
    They're charging a fee for our data. There was no 'data submitted automatically becomes the property of..' bullshit. They relicensed our intellectual property without notification or permission.

    So, I am hearby relicensing, sans notification, my submission of the CD hash and track information for all of the rereleases of the Elton John catalogue. Gracenote, you have 24 hours to pull these entries from your database or pay the newly instated license fee, which is a free license to the rest of the database for grip, mp3cddb, and any other remotly useful cddb application I have used recently but can't think of off the top of my head.

  • All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2001 OSDN.

  • The software mentioned does allow the user to use a database other than CDDB, which violates gracenote's "free" license:

    Requires that you use the Gracenote CDDB Database and Gracenote CDDB Client in your Licensed Application as your sole source of Data from the Internet that is based on reading the TOC Data of any CD, Enhanced CD, CD-ROM, Tag ID or DVD media with your Licensed Application;

Never put off till run-time what you can do at compile-time. -- D. Gries

Working...