Use WM Recorder To Record Windows Media Audio/Video

[Ed Hansberry]

<a href="http://www.wmrecorder.com/index_pocketpc.php">http://www.wmrecorder.com/index_pocketpc.php</a><br /><br />If you have ever had a webcast you would prefer to listen to on your Pocket PC at your convenience rather than be forced to listen to it when you are near a broadband connection, WM Recorder might be the application for you.<br /><br />"WM Recorder is a revolutionary new way to record Windows Media™ video and audio streams to watch on your Pocket PC or laptop. No internet connection required!"<br /><br /><img src="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/images/hansberry/2003/20031019-wmrecorder.jpg" /><br /><br />This app might be just the ticket for me. I have a 2 hour weekly radio broadcast I like to listen to but it is right in the middle of the work day on Tuesdays and I just can't take the time out of my day to listen. I usually wind up paying $3 for the MP3 compilation later in the week and listening to it in the car from my Pocket PC.

[WirelessJunkie]

Pretty usefull tool but i miss the ability to automatically cut the stream every new id tag "à la" StreamRipper32 (which is limited to mp3 streams). Moreover, the ripped stream is often buggy when played back on my pocketpc although it's ok on the desktop. Maybe i need to verify some option. Otherwise, having nearly half-size files with nearly the same quality as mp3 files is always good when you don't have monstruous storage cards.

[troyrogers]

http://www.highcriteria.com/

You can catch ANY audio stream to MP3, split it eight-ways to Sunday, encode to any quality you like, and even schedule recording times (pretty much unlimited # of schedules).

I`ve tried other encoding/stream ripping apps and I`ve always found them to be lacking in some way. TotalRecorder has NEVER let me down.

[crazy0000]

Well this is pretty cool, but i would have to get a bigger storage card if i wanted to put it to use.







P.S. I guess I forgot about the different time zones so I was sleeping while people were posting, thus ending my first post challange.

[Vincent M Ferrari]

Ah, but Troy, it also captures video. Total Recorder is limited to audio.

I use it to put content on my site or to save an interesting video to show someone else later. Total Recorder is great for audio, but doesn't do anything else.

[darrylb]

So does it allow for scheduling? Also, what about real media clips. Can you record those too?

How does it record - based on the analogue sound after conversion or by reassembling the digital bits on arrival from the net?

Thanks

[TomB]

Darrylb, why would you ever want RM clips (shudder)? At any rate, Real Media is very careful to shoot anything down that infringes on their copyrights so the only way is DIY (only for master techs). Which brings up an interesting point in the never-ending discussion on copyright ethics. Ed when you pay $3 for the MP3, doesn't all or some of that money go to the person who creates the show? Being able to record someone else's creative work is wonderful - but if they wanted you to have the access, they wouldn't have locked the file and you could save whatever you streamed to disk.

For instance, many small bands stream locked files to let people hear their work so that some listeners will go on to buy it. There is no way for them to make money if you defeat their locks by recording the stream. Since all artists need to promote their work yet still make a living - it seems these programs are one more nail in the coffin of artists being able to earn a living in the digital age. Kinda strange when you think about it. These programs are coming from a guy who originally was trying to make a living by selling content!

BTW- human nature being what it is, I am pretty much thinking that government has to intercede very soon. Either all artists get paid by the government (tax-payers) to turn their work over to the public or someone HAS to figure out a way for all people whose work can be distributed without permission to get paid for their work. It is very clear to me that no one in the world can protect a digital file. Ultimately, that means the only protection creatives have is the good will and honesty of the people who use their work.

[darrylb]

Darrylb, why would you ever want RM clips (shudder)? At any rate, Real Media is very careful to shoot anything down that infringes on their copyrights so the only way is DIY (only for master techs). Which brings up an interesting point in the never-ending discussion on copyright ethics. Ed when you pay $3 for the MP3, doesn't all or some of that money go to the person who creates the show? Being able to record someone else's creative work is wonderful - but if they wanted you to have the access, they wouldn't have locked the file and you could save whatever you streamed to disk.


There are some places where they might stream something over the net (e.g. a broadcast or somethig) but also offer it to download (but not for free), so they might broadcast in RM, but offer the download in MP3. The issue of copyright is interesting. If it is a "radio" broadcast, presumably they dont have a problem with people taping the show (or do they). If it is therefore a RM broadcast, why not anticipate that people can record the streamed data to disk using CoolEdit or something like that?

[applian]

So does it allow for scheduling?
How does it record - based on the analogue sound after conversion or by reassembling the digital bits on arrival from the net?



WM Recorder records by capturing the stream, and making a WMV or WMA file on your PC. This is the only way to do video. It works great for audio, too.

As far as scheduling goes, we are working on a VCR-like add-on, which should be available in a couple of weeks.

Also, if you're just into Radio, use our Replay Radio product. This one has a built-in scheduler, and records audio in all flavors, including Real, Shoutcast, etc. There's also a Pocket PC add-on for Replay Radio as well that lets you skip over the ads, like a TiVo.

You can learn more about Replay Radio here:
http://www.replay-radio.com

Best Regards,

Bill Dettering
Applian Technologies Inc.

[TomB]

"If it is a "radio" broadcast, presumably they dont have a problem with people taping the show "

Sorry, boardcasters (TV and radio) pay every time they use a piece of music. That's the way it has been for 80 years in the USA. In fact, many netcasters had to shut down last year when a court determined that re-broadcasts over the net were just that and broadcasters had to pay a bit under three cents per song per stream! Normally commercials pay for the use of music, but in this case a one hour program with 10,000 users and ten songs could cost thousands more then the over-the-air broadcast. To have people breaking the "locks" on those streams with programs like Bill's made things even worse. Thus my original post. If programs like the ones mentioned here keep allowing the general public access to copyrighted works without payment - forget the RIAA - any artist, filmmaker and/or writer's means of earning a living is at risk. Since about ten million people in the USA earn their livings and pay taxes as creatives, we don't want to think about what would happen to the economy if this goes unchecked. That would be like the entire City of New York being cut from the tax rolls and going on unemployment!

BTW - since the only streams you would need these programs for are the locked streams you can't save to disk (copy protected), these programs violate the DMCA - so get 'em while you can. Oh, and make sure you don't go Googling for cracked versions of Bill's work! It would be extreme irony if people started taking the programs without paying that let them take music and video without paying! :)

[Ed Hansberry]

BTW - since the only streams you would need these programs for are the locked streams you can't save to disk (copy protected), these programs violate the DMCA - so get 'em while you can...
So, how do these programs differ from VCRs, TiVos and cassette tapes? It is nothing more than time shifting. Personal use such as this doesn't violate the DMCA.

Now, if you "taped" these programs then provided them for download on your web site, that would be a different matter.

[Duncan]

I have to agree with Ed - these 'stream' recorders are no more than the equivalent of TIVO or ordinary tapes. I believe US law makes provision for private use (in the UK it is technically illegal to tape anything without permission from the copyright owner - we have no fair use clause - but it is also universally recognised that people tape things so our blank cassettes have a 'tax' applied which gets paid to musicians).

Increasingly we expect to be able to time-shift when we watch or listen to things and broadcasters have to work round this...

[jeff]

Does this differ from ASFRecorder in any way other than pretty buttons and price tag?

[DavidHorn]

If I want to record audio from a stream, I use the Creative Recorder that came with my Audigy and the What-U-Hear option.

I then give it a 30 run through WaveStudio to remove any silences from stream interruptions.

Perfect and free.

[TomB]

Ed and Duncan, I don't know where you are from but what I am saying only applies to USA residents - even though the core point makes sense in terms of all "creatives."

For those in the USA, the difference between timeshifting and this software, is that the broadcast content you are shifting is not CURRENTLY copy-protected. If the Internet streams you want to save now won't allow you to do this, it is because the author has chosen to lock them or copy protect them. These programs, including Bill's, get around the lock or non-cached streams by copying the decompressed audio or video. Of course, getting around a lock or copy-protection violates the DMCA and that is a felony with a very heavy penalty for those caught and convicted using it.

The only solution is to either have USA legal representatives AMEND the law and substitute another mechanism for the artists to get paid or accept that you are breaking the law as it stands. Committing a felony may sound like overkill for taking another person's work - but if everyone could do this with no consequences it is easy to see that there would be no reason for anyone to ever pay for content. As mentioned earlier that would EVENTUALLY wipe out all forms of publishing and broadcasting.

As far as your rights to "timeshift," those will always exist as long as the content is not copy-protected unless the Betamax Decision is somehow reversed. However that will soon be limited on copy-protected over-the-air-files that contain a do-not-copy flag. Completely discounting the law and ethics, you folks need to come to grips with the fact that content is USUALLY another person's property. Like any other property, if you use it, you should in some way pay for that use - if you don't - you remove one of the major points/rewards of continuing to produce work as a "creative." Ed and Duncan how long would you guys last if you couldn't earn a living for the work you did? Why would you even bother to continue working?

[TomB]

PS - guys, I don't want to get into a big copyright battle. I just wanted you to know that streams are locked for a reason. We need to figure out a way that artists we enjoy hearing and seeing don't get burned by our new found "digital freedoms," legal or otherwise. I hope you guys see the point I'm trying to make...

[Ed Hansberry]

As far as your rights to "timeshift," those will always exist as long as the content is not copy-protected unless the Betamax Decision is somehow reversed. However that will soon be limited on copy-protected over-the-air-files that contain a do-not-copy flag. Completely discounting the law and ethics, you folks need to come to grips with the fact that content is USUALLY another person's property. Like any other property, if you use it, you should in some way pay for that use - if you don't - you remove one of the major points/rewards of continuing to produce work as a "creative." Ed and Duncan how long would you guys last if you couldn't earn a living for the work you did? Why would you even bother to continue working?
It has nothign to do with stealing. It has to do with the fair use doctrine. When you time shift, you are clearly not violating 3 of the 4 basic points of the fair use doctrine, and the courts are more likely to side with the user than with an artist when that is the case. It is when you are clearly violating 3-4 that the user has no chance and it is going to be looked at as theft/stealing/infringement, etc.

[TomB]

Hey Ed! I never used the word stealing because these waters are pretty muddy. Fair use is a rule of thumb used by judges case by case - not a law. I am pretty sure that breaking encryption no matter what the intent is a problem. As you mention, there is no way of really knowing how a judge will rule until you are in front of him being tried on a felony count. That doesn't make me feel real comfortable about using Bill's programs. Of course this begs the core question of when or if is it acceptable to violate the wishes and rights of the artist who locked the stream in the first place to protect his work.

The good news is we are about to finally get a court decision soon that will codify what we can and can't do under the law. 321 Studios is now in court over the legality of their DVD x Copy® software. Although this is about the legality of the PROGRAM and not its use, it should give us all a better idea of what is legal in the USA. To be frank, this is a good thing. It lays down some rules to live by AND if the rules are not acceptable, lets us challenge them without having to commit a felony to do so.

No matter what the outcome though I'd like us NOT to forget that somehow, we have to take care of the people who make their livings from the content they create. As mentioned Ed, you would be upset if you stopped getting paid for whatever it is you do to pay the rent...

[disconnected]

I thought that 321 Studios had decided to drop their appeal? Which is too bad, because it would have been interesting to see how the higher courts ruled on it.

[TomB]

Disconnected, I thought I saw Robert H Moore, President of 321 Studios saying he was going to ride this right to the end. It sounds like I have missed something pretty critical! A quick search of the web didn't show anything recent on the case, can you bring me up to speed?

[disconnected]

TomB,

Sorry, I think I must have imagined it, because I can't find it now either. It's possible I was thinking of the 2600 Magazine case, although that was some time ago.