Chess can be a fun game to watch, especially when the two players are tech titans; Rob Glaser and Steve Jobs's current match could very well determine the future of digital music. If Jobs wins, your choice in MP3 player could continue to dictate where you can buy online music (that is, iPod users must buy iTunes music). If Glaser wins, your MP3 player will probably support a wider array of online music store options, just like your CD player can play standard (RedBook format) discs from any label, distributor, or store.

Sorry, Apple fans, but I know which scenario I'd prefer.

Considering that Jobs and Glaser have been allies in the past, how did they arrive at such a tense standoff? For a front-row seat, I flew to Seattle and spent a morning talking to Glaser's executives at RealNetworks, trying to discover more about his strategy now that Apple's Steve Jobs has made his latest move. Here's a brief history of the match so far.

The opening gambit
On April 9 of this year, Rob Glaser sent an e-mail to Steve Jobs, proposing that Apple allow the music files purchased from Real's online music store to be playable on the iPod--by far, the most popular MP3 player out there. Glaser reasoned that if he combined the iPod's ubiquity with Real's popular Rhapsody music subscription service, the Real/Apple team would stand a better chance against Microsoft's upcoming Janus subscription service, which will debut this fall and allow users to keep their portable players filled with new music for about $15 per month. The e-mail also allegedly said that Glaser threatened to team with Microsoft if Apple didn't want to activate Wonder Twin powers with Real.

Jobs: E-mail to Knight Four
Somehow, the e-mail managed to get leaked to the New York Times. Sources I met at Real speculated that e-mails between CEOs don't usually get leaked by system administrators working for either party, and I tend to agree. Therefore, I'm not alone in assuming that Jobs leaked the e-mail to the Times himself. This was a peculiar, somewhat hostile way to decline Glaser's offer, but it sure did get the message across: If Apple has its way, the iPod will never play nicely with any online music store besides iTunes.

Glaser puts Jobs in check
Although I could not confirm this with my sources at Real, I would imagine that Glaser spit-taked coffee all over his flat screen when he saw the news. Still undeterred, he rebounded quickly with a bold counterstrike, adding support for the iPod to the store anyway, without Apple's blessing. I asked Real representatives how they pulled this off, and they said that rather than reverse-engineering Apple's copyright protection (called FairPlay), they just figured out how to make FairPlay files on their own. This sounds harmless to me--after all, Real is not removing copyright protection. Instead, it's just translating it to enable a freer market, more similar to the one that exists in the brick-and-mortar world.

Jobs freaks
When Real's announcement of iPod support hit the wires on July 26, I called several contacts at Apple to get a reaction; unfortunately, I hit a voicemail dead end on all fronts. But Apple eventually released a statement, accusing Glaser of having "adopted the tactics and ethics of a hacker to break into the iPod" and stating that Apple is "investigating the implications of their actions under the DMCA and other laws." This statement from Apple is even more ominous: "It is highly likely that Real's Harmony Technology will cease to work with current and future iPods."

Next move?
I think that if Apple's grasp for legal recourse stands a chance, it'll be due to whatever "other laws" it is looking at because I don't think Real's Harmony Technology (which opens the iPod to Real's musical wares) violates the DMCA since the copyright protection is translated, rather than removed.

Whether Apple retaliates using legal code (a lawsuit) or computer code (new iPod firmware that locks out Real Harmony files), the reaction from most consumers is going to be overwhelmingly negative toward Apple. Of course, I'm excluding members of the hard-core Mac faithful in that group--Steve Jobs could sell them a white brick, and they'd wax poetic on message boards about it for weeks. I'm talking about the average consumer who thinks it's reasonable that a music player should be able to play music, no matter where it came from.

Assuming that Jobs risks the publicity debacle of an anticonsumer stance in this chess match, what will Glaser's next move be? According to my sources, he'll do his darnedest to make sure the wall between the iPod and non-Apple-sold music falls once again. This means that over the next couple of months, we can expect Apple to retaliate and lock down the iPod, and we can expect Real to use legal or technical savvy to open it back up again.

Will Jobs defend successfully against Glaser's attempts at openness, or will iPod users gain the right to choose? Stay tuned--this thing's still heating up.

Will Steve Jobs risk a publicity nightmare in order to guard his sacred iPod? Why is Apple so concerned about Real's music store, having already admitted that it doesn't make much money selling music anyway? How will Microsoft's emerging music subscription technology change all of this? Does it really matter where you buy your online music anyway? Post your answers to these questions (as well as general comments) below with our TalkBack feature!