

New Apple patent could kill commercial radio - andyking
http://www.mediauk.com/article/34058/new-apple-patent-could-kill-commercial-radio

======
s_henry_paulson
Far fetched question in the headline? The answer is always no.

The author fails to take into account the most basic aspect of radio, and that
is the majority of the people that listen to commercial radio are listening to
it on traditional radio receivers.

~~~
freehunter
If I had a iPhone jack in my car, I would listen to my iPhone's music. If I
had an iPhone receiver in my garage, I'd listen to my iPhone's music. If I had
an iPhone receiver in my office, I'd listen to my iPhone's music.

I don't, so I listen to radio and deal with the ads because there's nothing
Apple can help me with on that front. What Apple should be doing to solve this
problem is something like the Zune Pass or Rhapsody et al: pay to
stream/download music on an all-you-can-eat basis, including preset "stations"
that play brand new music or tunes picked for a specific purpose (ala Sirus/XM
radio stations).

~~~
mnicole
What's stopping you from using a current online radio service with all of
those features through your iPhone?

~~~
freehunter
Obviously that's an option from Rhapsody, Spotify, etc. I use the Zune Pass
(since I have a Zune). My point was that Apple can only help me if I have a
reason to upgrade my stuff to handle Apple's products/services. If I don't
need to upgrade (if my hardware can handle an iPhone), why would I bother
listening to OTA radio?

------
homosaur
Patents don't kill other products, products do. I could make a patent for a
magical frosting generator cannon but until it's on the shelves in a way
affordable to consumers, who cares?

I'm starting to realize more and more that my annoyance and frustration with
HN is more related to the horrible state of the media's quality.

~~~
batista
> _Patents don't kill other products, products do. I could make a patent for a
> magical frosting generator cannon but until it's on the shelves in a way
> affordable to consumers, who cares?_

Captain Obvious to the rescue.

The write of the article of course takes for given that when he talks about "a
patent that could kill radio" he means "a patent that when developed into a
product could kill radio".

The second part is so obvious it doesn't even need to be stated.

------
podperson
Actually it's much funnier than the article realizes. The patent says "such
as" a commercial radio broadcast. What's a lot like a commercial radio
broadcast? Commercial TV.

So Apple cuts a deal with the Cable providers, etc., then starts selling
AppleTVs as licensed set-top boxes with integrated DVRs that -- like the gizmo
in _Contact_ (the novel, not the movie) -- automagically recognize ads and
remove them and then make the content available on demand.

Shortly afterwards, TV production companies are much more amenable to "pay for
content as desired" model such as found in ... oh look, the iTunes store.

Steve Jobs said he'd cracked TV. Does anyone think his idea of an ideal TV
viewing experience included watching ads?

------
cwisecarver
I don't know much about how patents work.

Could this be for their TV? OTA broadcasts are technically radio waves. Right?

All TV commercials on the AppleTV are now targeted to the individual household
based on their metrics about you? Catch the fade-to-black and replace them.
Delay the live signal long enough to catch the fade-to-black when the show is
coming back live?

------
vhf
People saying this patent could kill free commercial radio should also be
saying that AdBlock could kill the free web(-sites, -blogs, etc).

~~~
freehunter
That's a fair point, and some websites have claimed that AdBlock is hurting
them. However, to really do some damage, you need to have a critical mass; you
need enough people doing it to actually make a sizable dent in your income.
AdBlock is popular, but not at a critical mass. Apple products are in position
to put this into the spotlight.

------
ams6110
All media is going to be on-demand at some point. Broadcast is going to be
around only for "live" stuff e.g. sports.

------
lurkinggrue
Wait, commercial radio is still around?

------
taligent
I don't think the author actually bothered to read the patent.

It's explicitly mentioned that the user receives the media stream e.g. radio
or internet audio and then switches to a local media stream. The company he
listed, Absolute Radio is doing the sending not receiving. So the patent
doesn't even apply.

That said why on earth would Apple be at all interested in suing radio
stations. It's completely and utterly illogical given how much they rely on
content providers.

~~~
gtCameron
The author isn't saying that Apple could kill commercial radio by suing the
radio stations for violating this patent, the argument is that no one will
ever listen to commercials again therefore killing the stations revenue
stream.

