Is QuickTime Alternative legal even?

I know for sure that RealAlternative isn't. That alone should be reason not to post that link...

hhm, quicktime alternative is mentioned on some of the news-pages (such as e.g. betanews), so I guess it's a normal legal freeware app... I didn't heared of it not beeing legal... someone correct me if I'm wrong please, wich I could well be.

why's that?

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....ndpost&p=117369

And if we haven't installed realone player and agreed to this license, how does it apply to us?

Fact is, it is illegal to distribute these codecs that way. And HA can be held culpable for linking to that page.

Fact without proof... I heard this sentence repeated a lot of times lately, and one can pay as much attention to this types of statements as one like to do. Anything goes until someone with enough authority says it doesn't. Are there any sentences against people using this software yet? I haven't heard anything (could be because I'm not so alert? do you have any references?) so then I assume it's fine...

Sure, it's fine until RN gets fed up with people breaking these licenses and start sending cease and desist letters (or maybe sueing them to court, HA included).

But of course, you are not responsible for HA and you can't be held in court because of it. I bet that if it was YOUR site, you wouldn't behave so carelessly.

I can understand your point of view, no problem. I just say I don't agree with it.

Purely hypothetical question since I don't have such a web site. But I'd like to think that I'm consistent and would have the same behaviour.

Remember I said until someone with enough authority comes and tell you, so if I would suddenly receive a notification from a "Real" lawyer (hmm, what should I call them...) I would consider their claims and act according to what I find sensible in that situation. Until then, since there is no prior cases, and since it's not against my ethics I would happily use or even promote it. Well, anyway, since it is hypothetical question it doesn't matter, but it could be an interesting discussion.

Quite egoistic, don't you think ?

Sure, Real might not have gone after people yet, but that doesn't make it legal. If we would apply your assumptions to the real world we would have chaos and anarchy. You are using crackz and warez, fine, that's your business. But don't draw the board into it, which is much more likely to be a target of such lawyers. And yes, there are incidents where warez boards have been shut down.

fyi : karl lillevold from realnetworks mentions gabest's splitter in his FAQ.

Hrmm...




Heh.. looks like I see another one.



So much for that, eh?

FWIW, anything that could be viewed as distributing a copyrighted work without having permissions to those copyrights, HA will consider to be illegal in this context. Whether or not this is "OK" or not in an a moral sense is a different question, but as far as HA is concerned, if we can be possibly be held liable for something like this, then it is unacceptable.