Patenting the use of all episodic media on the Web might sound absurd, but the US Patent and Trademark Office has granted just such a patent, to a company called VoloMedia. It’s a significant issue, one that could threaten the freedom of all media distribution online. Wherever you are in the world, you can help.

Intellectual property law was created in order to protect genuine inventions and innovation from exploitation. But predatory patents, based on bogus claims and attempting to stake out broad rights, threaten to do just the opposite.

Here’s a new idea: fight back.

Lawyers are the heroes this time. The Electronic Frontier Foundation’s patent-busting project aims to take down unfair patents that threaten common-sense uses of technology. A number of these have applied to music and audio. The EFF has already won a big victory against what had been the worst offender – media giant Clear Channel actually successfully patented recording live shows. (No, really — recording a live gig, then burning them on the spot. The EFF was able to bust that patent.) The advocacy group also scored significant victories against patents on sending and receiving online streams and encoding media. (If someone thought they could patent your ears and charge you royalties for hearing, they probably would.)

Lawyers alone haven’t won these battles. The EFF’s clever twist is to crowd-source its case, by getting people like you to help the group document “prior art” – in plain English, to prove that something existed before the patent. (Without basic chronology, I could claim to have discovered electricity.)

In short, you can help save the freedom of online content.

VoloMedia’s Bogus Patent – And Why It’s Dangerous

VoloMedia has been granted a patent for “providing episodic media.” The patent is broad enough to endanger any independent podcast or episodic media producer. Over the summer, Volomedia’s own Murgesh Navar sidestepped concerns about patent abuse to brag on the company blog about just how broad that claim was – that even non-RSS-based episodic media belong to them:

With specific reference to our newly issued 7,568,213 patent, it was filed in November 2003, almost a year before the start of podcasting.  This helps underscore the point, that for nearly six years, VoloMedia has been focused on helping publishers monetize portable media…. and has continued these efforts with the addition of a wide array of smartphone-based applications.  The patent that issued yesterday helps to tie together and reinforce the value of the various technologies and services that VoloMedia has developed to help accomplish this objective.  VoloMedia’s intent is to continue to work collaboratively with key participants in the industry, leveraging its unique range of products to further grow and accelerate the market.  Today, podcasting is 100% RSS-based.  However, the patent is not RSS-dependent.  Rather, it covers all episodic media downloads.  It just so happens that, today, the majority of episodic media downloads are RSS-based podcasts, which is why we titled our announcement the way we did.

Aside from the “before the start of podcasting” lie – and I believe “lie” is the only accurate word – it’s the implied threat that should send a chill down the spine of anyone using the Internet. Make no mistake about it: VoloMedia wants anyone doing podcasting, via any mechanism, to work with them. From that same blog entry:

The impact of a strong growing IP portfolio is such that we would expect new entrants into the podcasting arena to have a collaborative relationship with VoloMedia, just as do many of the current players.

From the patent itself, as approved, the technology VoloMedia claims to own is described as:

A method for providing episodic media, the method comprising: providing a user with access to a channel dedicated to episodic media, wherein the episodic media provided over the channel is pre-defined into one or more episodes by a remote publisher of the episodic media; receiving a subscription request to the channel dedicated to the episodic media from the user; automatically downloading updated episodic media associated with the channel dedicated to the episodic media to a computing device associated with the user in accordance with the subscription request upon availability of the updated episodic media, the automatic download occurring without further user interaction; and providing the user with: an indication of a maximum available channel depth, the channel depth indicating a size of episodic media yet to be downloaded from the channel and size of episodic media already downloaded from the channel, the channel depth being specified in playtime or storage resources, and the ability to modify the channel depth by deleting selected episodic media content, thereby overriding the previously configured channel depth.

Plain English translation: if what you’re doing with media has episodes, you owe VoloMedia.

If this patent were allowed to stand, and if VoloMedia were able to successfully enforce it, it would have a chilling effect on all Internet distribution. Regardless of the likelihood of their legal success, that underlies the fundamental problem with patent law – it has come completely unglued from reality. That alone ought to motivate people to fully document these issues and try to effect change.

Wondering why you haven’t heard of VoloMedia if they supposedly invented all episodic content online? Right now, they advertise “solutions” for advertising and analytics, an iTunes plug-in, and branded mobile apps for platforms like the iPhone. That’s it. RSS and previous formats date back to the 1990s, with the intention of covering episodic media across formats, just as the VoloMedia patent claims. These were published standards years before VoloMedia’s claim. That’s why demonstrating the details of this history become so important: they could strike down VoloMedia’s bogus patent.

Help Write Episodic Content’s History

VoloMedia’s patent twists the law, and common sense. But the same laws also provide for disproving a patent. If you can prove that an invention existed prior to the date for which a patent is claimed, you can undo the damage.

For that reason, the EFF is asking for your help. Knowing the readers of this site, I imagine there are people out there who know those details, or know people who do.

You’re all old enough to remember the Age Before Fall of 2003, right?

Here’s the call to action:

In order to bust this patent, we are looking for additional "prior art" — or evidence that the podcasting methods described in the patent were already in use before November 19, 2003. In particular, we’re looking for written descriptions of methods that allow a user to download pre-programmed episodic media like audio files or video files from a remote publisher, with the download occurring after the user subscribes to the episodes, and with the user continuing to automatically receive new episodes. You can read the entire prior art request here, and if you have something that could help, please send it to podcasting_priorart@eff.org or fill out the form on our Volomedia page.

For more information:

EFF Tackles Bogus Podcasting Patent – And We Need Your Help

Patent Busting Project: VoloMedia

Prior art serves a second purpose. Part of the reason predatory firms can abuse patent law is because technology’s history is so poorly written. I would like to see these kinds of bogus patents struck down, but I’d also like the real history behind today’s technologies to be told. So even beyond this legal battle, I hope that we begin to make the story of technologies like what is now called “podcasting” accurate, complete, and fair. Future generations of technologists will thank us.

Certainly, the VoloMedia patent, if enforced, would do tremendous harm to media today. The entire strength of the Web is that it doesn’t have to have homogenized distribution channels, that anyone can publish without centralized outlets or “collaborative relationships” with any big partner.

If you’ve never cared about intellectual property policy before, this might change your mind. No one should be allowed to un-invent the Internet.

There’s no question that GarageBand represents one of the better values in music software, especially since even Apple expect a lot of its users will simply acquire it with their Mac. It still ranks high on software you’d recommend to a beginner on a budget. Apple’s decision this year to add lessons, interactive lessons that introduce you to musical concepts, and to invite famous artists to play familiar songs, is a fantastic idea.

The Artist Lessons themselves, however, have been relatively few in number. I expect more are coming, but so far the only release since GarageBand came out was this week’s three episodes, featuring Sting and Sarah McLachlan.

Yes, that’s right, here’s Apple’s artist lineup: Sting, Sarah McLachlan, Fall Out Boy, Norah Jones, Colbie Caillat, Sara Bareilles, John Fogerty, OneRepublic, Ben Folds

So, at worst it feels a bit like the 1990s, and at best, like the tour schedule at Long Island’s Jones Beach. The issue here is, musical tastes are varied; part of what drives people to music in the first place is personal expression. There are a total of just 13 songs on the platform, all picked by Apple. Some of the lessons are pretty good, and the production values are slick, but there’s not enough quantity to satisfy people hungry to learn music and the choices overall are bland.

With all due respect to Apple, though, you can’t expect Apple to provide everything. Some artists and publishers have already built their own lessons. It’s time for others to step up, too.

The blog Synthtopia is pretty succinct in its headline:

Apple Garageband FAIL

I agree with Synthopia that the solution should be opening this up as a platform for people to make their own lessons:

“turn GarageBand into a video podcast store that lets you watch free and commercial educational music podcasts.”

The lessons in GarageBand are more than just video files; they include music files and some interactive features. Some sort of authoring tool wouldn’t be a bad idea.

Right now, you can build on the existing open standard of Apple’s podcast support in iTunes – which, in turn, works with a variety of players and mobile devices. In fact, a “podcast” is really just an RSS feed. There’s no reason you can’t add media to those files. Apple explicitly supports the use of PDF, which means you can create podcasts that include video and notation. There’s no way to charge for that, but advertising support is possible. It’s also feasible for some artists that such a feature could be used to promote other revenue streams.

At some point, a retail option could make sense, too. Believe it or not, basic tablature and Standard MIDI Files remain highly popular online. All that’s missing is for artists to start packaging this up and selling on its own.

Maybe Apple will figure out how to build a store for this. But there’s no reason to constantly be dependent on Apple to get it right – or anyone else, for that matter.

And in the meantime, I think lessons are a good enough idea that other people will run with this even when Apple doesn’t. Macworld’s review looked at some of the current alternatives.

Blue’s Snowflake USB claims to be the "first portable USB microphone to hit the market." (I thought they were exaggerating, and then picked up the "USB" bit — okay, fair enough.) It’s just US$79, plug-and-play on Mac and Windows, bus-powered, and comes in a cute case that doubles as a stand or screen clip. Blue’s mics are quite nice — I’m just a little skeptical in terms of how this performs in terms of quality, given its bargain price and small size. Hope to get one of these to try out, and we’ll see.

Oh yeah, that and it costs quite a lot more than $79 list if you wind up having to buy a MacBook Pro to match. Blue has sent along this gear pr0n to inspire us. I’m sure someone has a PC laptop that also would look nice with it.

Snowflake Product Page [Blue Microphone]

The announcement was made at winter NAMM in January, but the version photographed here evidently has some cosmetic tweaks for the final production version.

Should be available now-ish. Any owners of the previous Snowball USB mic (the non-portable version), we’d love to hear from you.

Updated: I knew the Snowball had gotten somewhat mixed reviews (in contrast to some of Blue’s excellent, higher-end mics), but here’s one from CDM reader Thomas for Ars Technica (via comments):

A Snowball’s Chance: Blue Snowball USB Microphone mini-review

Review audio samples

My guess is, while the mic may satisfy less-demanding users, readers here may not mind carrying a little more bulk to get their choice in mics. After all, just about any mic is "portable," and even if it’s a bit of a pain to carry an audio interface, too, the flexibility in getting results could be worth it. This is an interesting design concept, though, so I wonder if other makers will pick up the idea and run with it.

First things first- you could just buy a blank one, but where’s the fun in that?

The CDM staff wanted a mic flag for use at the upcoming NAMM show, and I couldn’t say no to a MAKE-type challenge. Liz McLean-Knight clued me in to this instructional Youtube video:

I found the video to be a bit overly complicated, but it gives you the general idea. You need a small box with a hole through the top and bottom, and you pack the interior with foam to hold the mic snugly. No sweat (theoretically).

I’ve had this little metal project box hanging around for a long time, and it was the perfect shape. A bit of measuring, guessing, and heavy Dremel action gave me a nice mic-sized (if irregular) hole through the center. After a quick consultation with Peter, the decision was made to emulate the feel of this vintage NBC flag. (NBC logo photo from vintagemicflags.com, which has lots of other mic flag images.)

Two coats of black paint later, I was ready to affix the CDM logos. A little bit of paint touch-up, making sure the foam is perforated to allow the mic tight passage, and ta-da! My Superscope condenser is a little slim for the flag, but Peter’s Shure Beta 87C should fit like a glove.

All we need now is a big, foamy windscreen for those hard-hitting reports…

Now Korg are supplementing their existing multi-track digital recorders with the 20GB, pocketable MR-1 (US$899 MSRP), and the 40GB, tabletop MR-1000 (US$1499 MSRP).

Shipping right now, these are “1-Bit” recorders, recording “DSDIFF, DSF, and WSD 1-bit formats, as well as multi-bit PCM format (BWF) with resolutions up to 24-bit/192 kHz”. If you’re like me and thought that more bits was better, Korg have helpfully provided a PDF entitled “Future Proof Recording Explained”, to clear up any misconceptions you had about the usefulness of more bits. The executive summary: When you’re sampling really really fast, the only numbers you need are 1 and 0, to indicate whether the sample is up from last time, or down. That’s my only insight on the science part for now, people who understand more feel free to debate the 1-bit revolution in comments.

Hardware Features

MR-1

• 20GB internal drive (6 hours @ highest quality 1-bit, 20 hours @ CD quality, MP3 support apparently available mid-2007)
• Ability to plug in external FAT32 USB hard drive for expanded recording space
• USB 2 transfers
• Rechargeable lithium polymer battery (no word on battery life) or AC power
• Dual balanced mini phone plug inputs
• 2 track simultaneous recording and playback
• Includes stereo electret condenser mic
• Backlit LCD
• Dimensions: 64 (W) x 120 (D) x 24 (H) mm / 2.52″ (W) x 4.72″ (D) x 0.94″ (H)
• Weight 200g (7oz) with batteries
• More specs (including plenty with dB and Hz for the audio nerds)

MR-1000

• 40GB internal drive (6 hours @ highest quality 1-bit, 40 hours @ CD quality, MP3 support apparently available mid-2007)
• Ability to plug in external FAT32 USB hard drive for expanded recording space
• USB 2 transfers
• Power by 8 AA batteries or AC power
• Dual XLR/ 1/4″ inputs with mic pres, phantom power
• XLR and RCA outs
• 2 track simultaneous recording and playback
• Backlit LCD
• Dimensions: 192(W) x 170(D) x 56(H) mm/7.56″(W) x 6.69″(D) x 2.20″(H)
• 1.0 kg (2.20 lbs) without batteries
• More specs

So. Fun times ahead for the field recordists! Now someone should take all of the available options and review them somewhere exotic. Peter is in Hawaii right now. Can we get a couple of these and some decent mics shipped to him so he has something to fill those empty internetless hours before he returns?

CDM’s man in San Fran, Lee Sherman, is on-hand at the WWDC keynote to bring us the latest. We’ll know if there’s anything music-related, or anything related to an upcoming apocalypse (like Apple’s switching to Intel, or pre-installing Windows, or Dell is pre-installing OS X, or Apple is marking all machines with the mark of the beast or something.) And we’re not just copying and pasting from IRC — you can expect our usual spin and distortion.

It’s like you’re there: Hit reload on your browser for the latest. And, for the full keynote effect, get several thousand friends, about 1/2 huddled over their laptops, onto uncomfortable chairs in an auditorium.

(read more)

Biggest WWDC ever, with 3800 in attendance.

iPod is a hit: 76% market share of the player market, 82% of online sales, and a New Yorker cover.

Podcasting: Steve calls podcasting “Wayne’s World for radio.” 8,000 podcasts, and not just amateurs.

Podcasting will be built into the next version of iTunes. iTunes Music Store to have its own directory of podcasts, and Apple will have a New Music Tuesday podcast of its own.

QuickTime 7 for Windows: Available today.

Leopard is coming: Yes, the next Mac OS will be called Leopard, and will coincide with Longhorn

IT’S TRUE . . . APPLE + INTEL: Apple will get a “brain transplant”; the developer kit will include a 3.6G Pentium 4 chip in a Mac. $999, developers only. Developer tools should help ease the transition; Apple’s software will run immediately on the new platform, but some “tweaks” will be required for other apps. See CDM’s separate story, also being updated live during the keynote.

Who’s onboard: Microsoft (Office and Messenger), Adobe.

Jobs wrap-up: “We know transitions.” Something about yin and yang. Uh . . . okay, I’m not into this California mentality, so I’ll leave that alone.

Okay, folks, what do you think? Log in (menu on right on homepage) to add comments. -PK

Even Apple is getting in on the act: Apple will produce its own new music Tuesday podcast.

CDM contributing editor Lee Sherman contributed live from the WWDC keynote for this report.

Podifier, the free Windows podcasting app, has hit 1.0. Drag and drop MP3 files, enter an FTP site, and you can instantly create a RSS 2.0 podcast feed. It’s perfect for creating podcasts like the brilliant Fake Science Lab Report.

So, have you started podcasting yet? Send us the links, and let us know which app you prefer? (Anything for Mac?)

Boing Boing certainly seems to have an axe to grind with ASCAP — after Wil Wheaton blasted ASCAP
for adding podcasting to their interactive license (and later tempered
his reaction, which didn't seem written for publication), Cory Doctorow
last week pointed to a campaign targeting ASCAP for "enforcing" license fees for Happy Birthday. Seems like the target for ire there is mega-media company Time Warner that owns the copyright, not ASCAP, or the copyright law that would allow the renewal.

I'm all for discussion, but let's get the facts straight first. Going
after ASCAP isn't going after the "corporate music industry" — it's
going
after 200,000 members who are song writers, composers, lyricists and
publishers, the
only performing rights group in the US controlled by its members. That
includes everyone from Dr. Dre to classical composer Jennifer Higdon.

ASCAP isn't "hunting down" podcasters, either. I dug up some info on
how ASCAP is handling licensing. (Apologize for the lag with the
original post, but this took some time.) The inclusion of podcasting in
ASCAP's latest interactive licensing agreement is an acknowledgment
that the medium could take off and make money — and that's good news.
It's mentioned in license agreements that include not only podcasting
but technology like Flash files and Internet jukeboxes, too. (read more)

ASCAP Asst. Vice President for New Media & Technology Matt
DeFillipis tells CDM: "Podcasting was not a deliberate inclusion in
ASCAP's current license agreements.  Rather, it is simply one of
the many ways music — and ASCAP's members' music in particular — may
be transmitted to the public, which the US Copyright Law defines as a
public performance for which authorization is required from copyright
owners or their licensing organization."

So, will ASCAP be knocking on your door wanting exorbitant fees for
your non-commercial blog? Not at all. You'll have to go to ASCAP to get
a licensing agreement, and if you qualify for a special individual
license, the cost could be as low as $20 a year, says DeFilippis. Not
every site will qualify, however: "Users who wish to determine if they
qualify for the Individuals
agreement can write to ASCAP at weblicense@ascap.com; they should
include a description of their music uses and a link to the place from
which they make such music available." Other licenses may apply
depending on your site like the web licenses; you'll have to check.

$20 a year and you're fully legal? Sounds terrific. Unfortunately, it's
not quite that simple, says DeFilippis. Internet broadcasting may still
require multiple rights. And yes, this where the RIAA (represented the
label) and Harry Fox Agency could come in.

And here's the case where Doctorow and Wheaton are absolutely right –
complex, costly licensing could be an obstacle to promoting music
online. That could be why LA-area public radio station KCRW has chosen
not to distribute music with their new podcasts.
There is a definite sense among podcasters, even some of the big radio
outlets that are getting into the game, that this is an emerging field
no one has quite figured out yet.

Whether this encourages copyright owners to seek a Creative Commons license
to promote their work by licensing it more freely or not, it should be
up to musicians — up to the copyright owners — to determine what
licensing and ownership is best for them. In the meantime, though,
let's spend energy really finding out how the law works and what will
make the most sense for song creators, not just randomly bashing ASCAP
without the facts. A licensing agency that represents copyright owners
could be the perfect part of a solution for everyone involved.