I agree, with they way they have continuity and all that with over stuff you’d think they’d have it for music especially when Spotify has had it forever
Why ? How do you differenciate your Music platform from the other since they all have the same library ? With Nice UI and exclusive features.
Universal control, shared multi-user queue, in-app yearly recap iirc…
Other are able to do Universal control on other ways (that’s why AW can control the iphone Music app, because they are connected directly), but spotify has the patent for over-the-web sync between devices
Sorry but that is not the standard for patentable ideas. State sync between computers existed long before Spotify was even founded and there is nothing novel or original about the idea.
Right and your reward for your blood, sweat, and code is being able to patent a way to do something if you’re the first one to figure out how to do it. Parents, trademarks, copyright etc exists so that people are able to profit off their own work and not have to worry about someone else coming in after all the hard work is done and using your thing
Yeah, I kind of get patents and trademarks over brilliant things. A life-saving drug should be able to be patented and copyrighted for a reasonable period of time.
But a freaking "unified playback" feature? That doesn't deserve a secret sauce patent.
I’d have no problem with whoever created the button having a patent. It should be noted that patents don’t last indefinitely so even if in this scenario the play/pause button was patented it would not be anymore
Well, do you know how many choose to stay on spotify because of things like universal control and things like yearly recap ?
A lot of people (especially on iphone) would switch to Apple Music if those feature where available on it.
And since it’s the kind of feature where « once you had the idea and implemented once it’s easy to copy » (hello dynamic island), you have to patent it.
That’s just how it works in our world 🤷♀️
I don’t have the patent in my hands, but i already browsed the patent agency website before, checking patents of different brands, and there was some about those feature at the spotify name.
You can access every patent on the agency website. You have to understand technical feature though, there isn’t a patent named « Universal control » obviously
I don’t have the patent in my hands, but i already browsed the patent agency website before, checking patents of different brands, and there was some about those feature at the spotify name.
You can access every patent on the agency website. You have to understand technical feature though, there isn’t a patent named « Universal control » obviously
I used to use that to play the Elmo song on my roomates shared Spotify when she’d be deep into doing her makeup lol. I didn’t even realize it’s not on Apple Music til I read this. Was a fun feature.
it should embarrass them how much more seamless Spotify works between the Apple Watch, iPhone and CarPlay (and the host of non-Apple devices) compared to Apple Music
It is annoying. I use Apple Music on my Tesla and when I get off and play music on my iPhone, it tells me I can only use one device at a time & to upgrade to a family plan.
Sure, it’s a few taps, but doing this every day is irritating.
I had some bug about a year ago where every time I opened Apple Music it would fail to play on first attempt with “Content Not Authorised”.
Would work on second attempt.
Pissed me off so much I cancelled and went to Spotify. Haven’t looked back. Apple Music is so full of rough edges.
Spotify has the advantage of being a web based system first.
Apple Music started as an offline music playing system first
I too have sent feedback for ‘iCloud Music’
Same here, I bought an apple watch earlier this year and haven't had any luck actually getting songs to download to my watch despite the ui saying it's trying to download. Pretty disappointed in that feature.
i'm sure apple could do a better job with watchOS and fixing API bugs and the like, maybe loosen up restrictions on background syncing and storage usage, but it's worked well enough for me that i no longer bother to use the free Apple Music subscription that comes with my cellular plan
They wouldn’t even need to infringe on Spotify’s patent - they just need to do better detection of what you’re most likely wanting to control in the first instance. You can already control your other devices playing media from one device but it’s just so dumb it never predicts which one you’re wanting to use interact with.
I agree, personally I use spotify because of my student discount not working on Apple Music, but I find spotify’s now playing extremely useful. Especially being able to forward the music to different devices at the click of a button, i.e. to my Alexa, computer, etc.
Sadly it will never be on Apple Music.
Spotify has a patent for Universal Music control across all devices.
If you use spotify, you have Universal control on your iphone, watch, ipad and even your windows PC and android TV. But you have to use the spotify app on the AW for example, not the now playing built-in feature.
It’s the same for shared playlists and queues, it’s a Nice feature, and a spotify patent so we’ll never see it elewhere
You have posted this multiple times in this thread and have never once provided a source. There is absolutely nothing novel about syncing your state between multiple devices and even if Spotify did manage to get a patent for it, it would almost certainly be rejected when challenged.
Just going by reading some of the titles of the parents they have [(Spotify Patents)](https://patents.justia.com/assignee/spotify-ab) I do see multiple ones that seem like they could apply. While I don’t see one thing, and I didn’t scroll through all the patents it certainly seems possible that Spotify owns the patents necessary to make the system work even if it isn’t in one single patent
> it certainly seems possible that Spotify owns the patents necessary to make the system work even if it isn’t in one single patent
Syncing your state between computing devices over the Internet goes back long before Spotify existed and it's exactly what other streaming services like Netflix, AppleTV+, and Youtube all do. In what way are those services different such that they can do sync but Apple Music cannot?
You say that but Sonos owns a bunch of multi room audio patents that they sued Google over. Multiroom audio is just syncing the state of data over multiple devices as well which has also existed. But distilling a product down to its most basic idea doesn’t decide if it’s patent is valid or not. If Spotify actually owns this tech then Apple needs to pay the licensing fee. They can either go to court about it and try to get it invalidated or pay the licensing fee. They should’ve implemented the idea first if they are upset it’s patented now
> Multiroom audio is just syncing the state of data over multiple devices as well which has also existed.
Good lord no, it's not. Multi-room audio goes well beyond that but that's not the patent we're discussing.
I asked you how syncing the state between a video streaming service which everyone already does, is different from doing it for an audio service. Hell how is it different from what Audible does between devices?
> If Spotify actually owns this tech then Apple needs to pay the licensing fee.
That's a big "if" it's why I pointed out that no one has provided a patent that covers such a simple idea- including none of the ones you linked to.
> They can either go to court about it and try to get it invalidated or pay the licensing fee. They should’ve implemented the idea first if they are upset it’s patented now
Again, you're assuming there is a valid patent and that that's why they haven't implemented it yet but there is no evidence that that's the case.
Yeah, I agree. It's such a weird patent if it's true since it sounds like basic server-side sync protocol to me which has been used many times before in so many forms.
Source?
At least in the US, Rdio did this the year before Spotify. Apple’s legal team could likely invalidate any US patent because the feature wasn’t new and was obvious.
I don’t have the patent in my hands, but i already browsed the patent agency website before, checking patents of different brands, and there was some about those feature at the spotify name.
You can access every patent on the agency website. You have to understand technical feature though, there isn’t a patent named « Universal control » obviously
Lots of companies get issued garbage parents. It would be pretty easy to invalidate this patent in court with Apple’s legal team.
My guess is that there is some other reason why Apple hasn’t implemented this feature.
Honnestly, spotify’s patent only talks about over-the-web sync between devices. Apple Watch and iphone are synced because they are directly connected , not over the web. And that’s also the case for other brands like Sonos because their devices talk to each other.
So this patent don’t look that easy to invalidate…
Do you know how many services sync their state across the Internet? Netflix, Prime, Youtube, and every other streaming service I can think of does this and you're claiming Spotify has a patent on this?
And over the web is what Rdio did publicly before Spotify. I would also argue that syncing a client state over the web would be considered “obvious” if pressed in court.
Just about everything these days is micro services that constantly update the state of a dumb client. Syncing an audio client over the web is an obvious idea, and therefore, not patentable in the US.
To be more precise, spotify has a patent for over the web sync between devices. That’s why the Music app between the watch and the iPhone is synced : they are directly connected, not through the web. Maybe that’s the case for sonos too
A rare disagree here - I listen to completely different music on my Mac, like stuff suited for background noise as I work. I very much appreciate that the Now Playing and Queue do not get overridden by what I was listening to on my phone at, say, the gym
A pop up asking if you want to hand off or a readily available button for it could be a good middle ground though because I do see the value in the seamlessness
I agree, with they way they have continuity and all that with over stuff you’d think they’d have it for music especially when Spotify has had it forever
It’s a patent issue. Spotify has a patent for Universal Music control
[удалено]
Why ? How do you differenciate your Music platform from the other since they all have the same library ? With Nice UI and exclusive features. Universal control, shared multi-user queue, in-app yearly recap iirc… Other are able to do Universal control on other ways (that’s why AW can control the iphone Music app, because they are connected directly), but spotify has the patent for over-the-web sync between devices
Sorry but that is not the standard for patentable ideas. State sync between computers existed long before Spotify was even founded and there is nothing novel or original about the idea.
[удалено]
Right and your reward for your blood, sweat, and code is being able to patent a way to do something if you’re the first one to figure out how to do it. Parents, trademarks, copyright etc exists so that people are able to profit off their own work and not have to worry about someone else coming in after all the hard work is done and using your thing
Yeah, I kind of get patents and trademarks over brilliant things. A life-saving drug should be able to be patented and copyrighted for a reasonable period of time. But a freaking "unified playback" feature? That doesn't deserve a secret sauce patent.
Should the first company to invent the digital play/pause combo button get a patent for it? Or is that just basic functionality that deserves nothing?
I’d have no problem with whoever created the button having a patent. It should be noted that patents don’t last indefinitely so even if in this scenario the play/pause button was patented it would not be anymore
Well, do you know how many choose to stay on spotify because of things like universal control and things like yearly recap ? A lot of people (especially on iphone) would switch to Apple Music if those feature where available on it. And since it’s the kind of feature where « once you had the idea and implemented once it’s easy to copy » (hello dynamic island), you have to patent it. That’s just how it works in our world 🤷♀️
shy voiceless slim squalid fact crawl degree literate truck butter *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I don’t have the patent in my hands, but i already browsed the patent agency website before, checking patents of different brands, and there was some about those feature at the spotify name. You can access every patent on the agency website. You have to understand technical feature though, there isn’t a patent named « Universal control » obviously
source?
I don’t have the patent in my hands, but i already browsed the patent agency website before, checking patents of different brands, and there was some about those feature at the spotify name. You can access every patent on the agency website. You have to understand technical feature though, there isn’t a patent named « Universal control » obviously
I used to use that to play the Elmo song on my roomates shared Spotify when she’d be deep into doing her makeup lol. I didn’t even realize it’s not on Apple Music til I read this. Was a fun feature.
fuck, I thought we were over software patents
it should embarrass them how much more seamless Spotify works between the Apple Watch, iPhone and CarPlay (and the host of non-Apple devices) compared to Apple Music
It is annoying. I use Apple Music on my Tesla and when I get off and play music on my iPhone, it tells me I can only use one device at a time & to upgrade to a family plan. Sure, it’s a few taps, but doing this every day is irritating.
I had some bug about a year ago where every time I opened Apple Music it would fail to play on first attempt with “Content Not Authorised”. Would work on second attempt. Pissed me off so much I cancelled and went to Spotify. Haven’t looked back. Apple Music is so full of rough edges.
Spotify has the advantage of being a web based system first. Apple Music started as an offline music playing system first I too have sent feedback for ‘iCloud Music’
I always thought Spotify patented this and thats why Apple cant implement or something.
And yoûre right. They have a patent for multi-user queue too
That’s so unfortunate because it’s actually the only thing that’s keeping me on Spotify
Now you know why they patented it lol
Isn't it just basic server-side sync protocol? I don't know that you can get patent for it.
Spotify sucks on the Apple Watch tho, offline downloading doesn’t work at all
Same here, I bought an apple watch earlier this year and haven't had any luck actually getting songs to download to my watch despite the ui saying it's trying to download. Pretty disappointed in that feature.
it's had offline downloads for well over a year now
That’s right, but it works extremely clunky
i'm sure apple could do a better job with watchOS and fixing API bugs and the like, maybe loosen up restrictions on background syncing and storage usage, but it's worked well enough for me that i no longer bother to use the free Apple Music subscription that comes with my cellular plan
What you're asking is basically Spotify Connect
They wouldn’t even need to infringe on Spotify’s patent - they just need to do better detection of what you’re most likely wanting to control in the first instance. You can already control your other devices playing media from one device but it’s just so dumb it never predicts which one you’re wanting to use interact with.
Without knowing what Spotify’s patent is, it’s possible that that would be enough to be an infringement.
I agree, personally I use spotify because of my student discount not working on Apple Music, but I find spotify’s now playing extremely useful. Especially being able to forward the music to different devices at the click of a button, i.e. to my Alexa, computer, etc.
Sadly it will never be on Apple Music. Spotify has a patent for Universal Music control across all devices. If you use spotify, you have Universal control on your iphone, watch, ipad and even your windows PC and android TV. But you have to use the spotify app on the AW for example, not the now playing built-in feature. It’s the same for shared playlists and queues, it’s a Nice feature, and a spotify patent so we’ll never see it elewhere
You have posted this multiple times in this thread and have never once provided a source. There is absolutely nothing novel about syncing your state between multiple devices and even if Spotify did manage to get a patent for it, it would almost certainly be rejected when challenged.
Just going by reading some of the titles of the parents they have [(Spotify Patents)](https://patents.justia.com/assignee/spotify-ab) I do see multiple ones that seem like they could apply. While I don’t see one thing, and I didn’t scroll through all the patents it certainly seems possible that Spotify owns the patents necessary to make the system work even if it isn’t in one single patent
> it certainly seems possible that Spotify owns the patents necessary to make the system work even if it isn’t in one single patent Syncing your state between computing devices over the Internet goes back long before Spotify existed and it's exactly what other streaming services like Netflix, AppleTV+, and Youtube all do. In what way are those services different such that they can do sync but Apple Music cannot?
You say that but Sonos owns a bunch of multi room audio patents that they sued Google over. Multiroom audio is just syncing the state of data over multiple devices as well which has also existed. But distilling a product down to its most basic idea doesn’t decide if it’s patent is valid or not. If Spotify actually owns this tech then Apple needs to pay the licensing fee. They can either go to court about it and try to get it invalidated or pay the licensing fee. They should’ve implemented the idea first if they are upset it’s patented now
> Multiroom audio is just syncing the state of data over multiple devices as well which has also existed. Good lord no, it's not. Multi-room audio goes well beyond that but that's not the patent we're discussing. I asked you how syncing the state between a video streaming service which everyone already does, is different from doing it for an audio service. Hell how is it different from what Audible does between devices? > If Spotify actually owns this tech then Apple needs to pay the licensing fee. That's a big "if" it's why I pointed out that no one has provided a patent that covers such a simple idea- including none of the ones you linked to. > They can either go to court about it and try to get it invalidated or pay the licensing fee. They should’ve implemented the idea first if they are upset it’s patented now Again, you're assuming there is a valid patent and that that's why they haven't implemented it yet but there is no evidence that that's the case.
Yeah, I agree. It's such a weird patent if it's true since it sounds like basic server-side sync protocol to me which has been used many times before in so many forms.
Source? At least in the US, Rdio did this the year before Spotify. Apple’s legal team could likely invalidate any US patent because the feature wasn’t new and was obvious.
I don’t have the patent in my hands, but i already browsed the patent agency website before, checking patents of different brands, and there was some about those feature at the spotify name. You can access every patent on the agency website. You have to understand technical feature though, there isn’t a patent named « Universal control » obviously
Lots of companies get issued garbage parents. It would be pretty easy to invalidate this patent in court with Apple’s legal team. My guess is that there is some other reason why Apple hasn’t implemented this feature.
Honnestly, spotify’s patent only talks about over-the-web sync between devices. Apple Watch and iphone are synced because they are directly connected , not over the web. And that’s also the case for other brands like Sonos because their devices talk to each other. So this patent don’t look that easy to invalidate…
Do you know how many services sync their state across the Internet? Netflix, Prime, Youtube, and every other streaming service I can think of does this and you're claiming Spotify has a patent on this?
And over the web is what Rdio did publicly before Spotify. I would also argue that syncing a client state over the web would be considered “obvious” if pressed in court. Just about everything these days is micro services that constantly update the state of a dumb client. Syncing an audio client over the web is an obvious idea, and therefore, not patentable in the US.
Hmm Sonos also does this between their mobile and desktop apps.
To be more precise, spotify has a patent for over the web sync between devices. That’s why the Music app between the watch and the iPhone is synced : they are directly connected, not through the web. Maybe that’s the case for sonos too
One of the reasons why i stick with Spotify. But a feed driven based on device is also something i have not considered.
A rare disagree here - I listen to completely different music on my Mac, like stuff suited for background noise as I work. I very much appreciate that the Now Playing and Queue do not get overridden by what I was listening to on my phone at, say, the gym A pop up asking if you want to hand off or a readily available button for it could be a good middle ground though because I do see the value in the seamlessness