A group of underground programmers has posted code online they say will reopen a back door in Apple Computer’s iTunes store, allowing Linux computer users to purchase music free of copy protection. The release comes just a day after Apple blocked a previous version of the program, called PyMusique.
‘DVD Jon’ reopens iTunes back door
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
damn, these guys are good. What can i say OSS developers are the smartest!!!!!!
If I can buy good quality songs from iTMS, and play them on Linux without any DRM, I think I am totally interested. If everybody who has been sitting on the fence started to buy music using this tool, maybe we could make Apple notice.
The last time he was lucky and he didn’t go to jail… I am afraid that this time Apple will really pursue his imprisonent or even worse, large amount of “damages”…
Hopefully Apple won’t do it, but I have a feeling that he won’t be so lucky this time.
This guy from Norge is fast. This shows how pointless is to sell music which is partially own by users.
I’m sorry, but these Linux Evangelists are truly fighting a losing battle. As more and more of the digital world goes to DRM (for better or worse), these guys are going to find themselves spending all their time trying to get crap to work that ‘just works’ on other platforms.
While I understand the ideology that goes behind their efforts, I think a more effective strategy would be just to stop buying the crap in the first place instead of wasting your life away trying to panzor stuff to work with your equipment and/or OS. It’s obvious that you have companies who simply aren’t interested in doing business with you, so why even bother to patronize them? If you walked into a department store and all the workers there were insulting your inelligence, how many times are you going to go back?
I’ve said it many times and I’ll say it again: digital entertainment is not air – you don’t HAVE to have it. The sooner that people realize this, the quicker we can put these bastards out of business.
They merely enforced use of the iTMS 4.7 protocol (shutting out old version of iTunes) which PyMusique didn’t support. All it took was implementation of the iTMS 4.7 protocol (which was clearly a trivial change) to re-open the “hole”.
Clearly what’s really needed to fix this problem is for them to add DRM server side instead of client side.
DVD Jon appears to be only the spokesperson for a larger group. He feels safe as the spokesperson because he’s in Norway, and already has some court victories. Norway isn’t in the US or the EU, and doesn’t have a law like the DMCA that forbids cracking DRM systems. There was already an attempt to prosecute him for his role in cracking DVD encryption, and it failed.
Apple could probably have him jailed if he ever set foot on US soil (like Adobe did to Dmitry Sklyarov), but assuming he’s smart enough to stay away, it seems Apple would have to convince Norway to change their laws first.
You can’t do DRM only on the server side, as long as you want the client to run on a general-purpose PC or Mac. Apple’s DRM (actually any DRM) requires a program on the client’s computer to enforce its rules. Unless Apple or Microsoft build a machine that enforces DRM all the way down to the BIOS and that refuses to load any non-approved OS, perhaps in a sealed box to make tampering harder, with strong crypto to communicate with the iTunes store, every DRM system is going to be defeated.
Clearly what’s really needed to fix this problem is for them to add DRM server side instead of client side.
This might prove to be a real problem for Apple. The reason they do not encrypt server side now is because of the processing power involved. Unless they are stored encrypted its going to be some serious overhead encrypting all the songs on the fly as they are downloaded.
If they store them encrypted then its no better than the DVD encryption that John already broke as there will need to be a key in the software or one that is transmitted from the apple server for the clients to use in decryption.
All methods of securing this data are flawed.
DRM itself is cryptographically flawed in theory and all practical implementations to date have failed.
If I buy music, (or any other intellectual property like books, movies, software) I have certain rights, and by golly I want to be able to have protection under the law. Corporate america has been sticking it to the average joe for a while now, time to fight back! fight the power!
— wow that was a rush, now back to my normal mild-mannered self 🙂
Unless Apple or Microsoft build a machine that enforces DRM all the way down to the BIOS and that refuses to load any non-approved OS, perhaps in a sealed box to make tampering harder, with strong crypto to communicate with the iTunes store, every DRM system is going to be defeated.
Trusted Computing, anyone?
But seriously, that wouldn’t stop crackers either. They’d have to get some draconian legislation preventing people from tampering with the computer. Something I truly fear and hope will never happen. You never know in the US these days..
For what?
This time, hes NOT breaking DRM at all.
The iTunes Music Service sells music without DRM. Its the iTunes client that decides to add DRM to songs you purchased. Hes just providing an alternative client for accessing the service, which happens to not add the DRM. Apple has every right to block its use, but just like with Real’s attempt to work with their system, this is not somthing they can actually sue you or get you arrested for.
“This time, hes NOT breaking DRM at all.”
But he is in breach of the iTMS TOS if he uses his creation to get music from the iTMS.
Did any of you Linux users take the time to write to Apple and ask them for a iTunes client for Linux?. DVD Jon isn’t even a Linux hacker – he does his hacking on Windows (hence the hack on DVDs and iTunes).
Really this is pathetic when people start cracking other people’s products just because there’s no Linux client. You’re going to ruin it for all of us. DVD Jon, you owe me $150 – for wasting my time as I had to download iTunes 4.7 because of your antics.
DVD Jon, if you love iTunes so much, go out and buy a Mac and iPod – you’ll get more chicks that way than boasting about cracking DVDs and iTunes.
Screw DVD Jon… Really…
He’s gone too far. Apple is actually providing a fairly unrestrictive setup, and this jackoff is going to screw up a good thing… So…
Screw DVD Jon.
This cat-n-mouse game will always exist – and not only for iTunes. But I bet there are some Linux “customers” out there that would play by the books if they could – but asis they can’t. Because there is no “legal” support on Linux. So – instead of the cat-n-mouse game then why not provide that support instead? Those that then still misuse the service then have no defense in court. Because they could just have used the “legal” support instead. But this is not only about selling music, is it? It’s also about selling Apple hard-n-software, isn’t it?
Oh come on people. If you want the file without the copy protection either buy the cd, or buy the song from iTunes and burn it to a cd and rip it again. Don’t screw things up for legitimate users because your too lazy to burn and rip a cd.
Out of curiosity what rights does Apple’s DRM deny you? I think you may be hard pressed to find a single legal right you’re denied.
Yes.
And no reply.
Same thing for QuickTime player (even if commercial)
or the missing QT codecs.
No reply.
IBM, Novell replies my emails.
Even Microsoft replies my emails.
Apple.com no.
This serves Apple right, from being selfish, greedy and two-faced.
Again we could have an ally here, but Apple prefer to lick MS’s butt
than to play nice with Linux.
So what to expect?
DVD Jon taking the piss out of DRM again.
… And Anonymous – I bet he gets way more chicks cracking DVDs and iTunes than your average fashion student who readily succumbs to ads.
He is a leader of a group, he got status, he is indepedent – he is not a mediocre but very good at what he does – girls prefer that.
And this guy actually believes this sort of act will force Apple to make iTunes for Linux?
What is this guy mentally retarded or am I missing something?
He is doing because he can.
Not as a political statement, although sure u can interpret that way.
We couldn’t play many DVDs on Linux.
How unfair is that?
For years and years, so Jon thought errr .. ok – and cracked it.
Probably the same thing occurred to him with iTunes.
I don’t know this is speculation.
But interesting to note that after Jon broke the DVD stuff.
Commercial DVD players appeared on Linux (TurboLinux)
And then some free legal ones (depending which country you are in).
This act won’t make apple make iTunes for linux.
iTunes is not open source and to create and maintain a version for linux is too much work. Focusing on their 4% market and the 80% windows market is OK for them.
furthermore it is my belief that Apple doesn’t give a rat’s arse about strict enforcement of DRM. They want to be compliant with the law, they want to do what they can to make the labels happy in order to license and distribute their content, but other than that they are out there to make money. If they could sell music without DRM, they would.
How many People have Macs? Probably about as many as are running Linux. This software effectively doubled iTunes potential customer space.
I’ve already purchased 7 songs, and that’s $7 more than Apple would have without this software!
How many People have Macs? Probably about as many as are running Linux. This software effectively doubled iTunes potential customer space.
Yeah! Now we just need a Windows port!
.
.
.
Oh silly, me, iTunes is already out for Windows. They’ve at best added a fraction of a percent to sales.
> Yes.
> And no reply.
Why no reply?. Did I’m-putting-a-billion-dollars-on-linux-IBM ask Apple? I’m sure that if IBM’s looking out for Linux, they’ll pay Apple a few $Ks to port iTunes for Linux and Apple would be only too happy.
> Same thing for QuickTime player (even if commercial)
> or the missing QT codecs.
Is Linux ready for the desktop?. Countless articles say no so – no wonder Apple and Adobe have no interest in your 0.2% marketshare. But again, I ask you, if you really want Quicktime on Linux, get all your slashdot buddies to cough up $5 and take that to Apple and you’ll have Quicktime – money talks and BS walks. You linux guys think of everything as some kind of entitlement.
Don’t like commercial products – go right ahead and make your own iPod like product and iTunes like Store and see if that becomes popular?. I’m pretty sure that you can get all your slashdot reading friends interested and make fashion statement.
“no wonder Apple and Adobe have no interest in your 0.2% marketshare.”
You do know that both HP and IDC believe that desktoplinux has already surpassed Apple in MARKETshare. In terms of userbase, by 2006-07.
>You do know that both HP and IDC believe that desktoplinux has already surpassed Apple in MARKETshare. In terms of userbase, by 2006-07.
If that’s true, please tell me why would Apple not port or do they see people who use desktop linux are people who aren’t going to spend a dime on anything – after all the major reason for running desktop linux is to get a free OS on a cheap machine.
If Linux has surpassed Apple’s marketshare then why are you messing around with a 3rd place market-share company’s products? If Linux is so hot, i’m sure HP and Novell can come up with cool stuff like Apple.
…and everyone else believes desktop linux and pirated windows has a combined marketshare higher then that of mac. a very large portion of the sudden increase was to russia and china….
this may fly under the radar since it’s only available for linux and will not interfere with itune’s windows client.
> Why no reply?. Did I’m-putting-a-billion-dollars-on-linux-IBM ask
> Apple? I’m sure that if IBM’s looking out for Linux, they’ll pay Apple > few $Ks to port iTunes for Linux and Apple would be only too happy.
How am I supposed to know why they prefered not to answer?
I can guess though – cos they dont care period.
> Is Linux ready for the desktop?.
err.. its on mine
if it wasn’t – i wouldn’t be able to type this.
better still ask an Apple/Linux user
he would answer better, because at least he’s been exposed to both.
> Countless articles say no so
Yeah countless articles also said Saddam Hussein had WMD.
Believing what you read is so gooooood.
> no wonder Apple and Adobe have no interest in your 0.2%
> marketshare.
err don’t mix two completely different entities together.
if Adobe had no interest they wouldnt port Adobe PageMaker recently to Linux.
Or bother at least giving a hand with Photoshop running under Wine.
Their developers aid Photoshop run more stable even though its emulated.
> But again, I ask you, if you really want Quicktime on Linux, get all
> your slashdot buddies to cough up $5 and take that to Apple and
> you’ll have Quicktime – money talks and BS walks. You linux guys
> think of everything as some kind of entitlement.
Dont be naive.
You know that such a move is bad publicity for Apple.
Let’s all collect $5 and give it to Bush/Blair etc for him to withdraw troops from Iraq.
Sure Bush and Blair smile to the camera receiving a huge cheque – like a TV show prize.
You know Apple wouldn’t accept that (seriously can’t believe u said that)
> Don’t like commercial products – go right ahead and make your own > iPod like product and iTunes like Store and see if that becomes
> popular?.
Huh?
I bought tonnes of commercial products for Linux.
Games (Vendetta,Uplink,Doom3,Unreal…)
Utilities. Even Proprietory Office Software for Linux.
(Textmaker/Planmaker)
> I’m pretty sure that you can get all your slashdot reading friends
> interested and make fashion statement.
Slashdot would be the last place on earth for me to seek friends lol
never exchanged private messages ever with anyone in there
let alone added any to my contact list
now LUGs and help forums sure I made and met many nice friends
First of all, this isn’t related to Linux. There is already a way to run iTunes on Linux. Also there are programs to strip DRM from music files and play those files on Linux or any other operating system like FreeBSD without iTunes. His new program just makes it easier for me to do what I can do already without jumping through hoops. His application doesn’t allow me to download music for free. It allows me to pay for music just as everyone else. I’m interested in buying music from Apple Music Store and I shouldn’t have to be treated like a criminal even before buying anything from them. I don’t know what’s the big deal. Who is hurt by this program? Apple is making money and I’m getting music. Sounds like a fair deal to me.
“…and everyone else believes desktop linux and pirated windows has a combined marketshare higher then that of mac.”
Everyone else? I dont see your point. Are you disagreeing with me or just reinforcing what I said?
I’m sorry, but these Linux Evangelists are truly fighting a losing battle. As more and more of the digital world goes to DRM (for better or worse), these guys are going to find themselves spending all their time trying to get crap to work that ‘just works’ on other platforms.
how is he a linux evangelist? and there are very, very few dvd jons out there. most people who spend all their time trying to get crap to work that ‘just works’ if used in a legal fashion are on windows, not linux. i would also say that it is the commercial platforms struggling to keep up, not the crackers.
While I understand the ideology that goes behind their efforts, I think a more effective strategy would be just to stop buying the crap in the first place instead of wasting your life away trying to panzor stuff to work with your equipment and/or OS. It’s obvious that you have companies who simply aren’t interested in doing business with you, so why even bother to patronize them? If you walked into a department store and all the workers there were insulting your inelligence, how many times are you going to go back?
once again, he is the exception, not the rule. and it sure worked with drivers, new linux distros support my hardware FAR better then windows. and that is because of the community, not corporations choosing to work with them.
I’ve said it many times and I’ll say it again: digital entertainment is not air – you don’t HAVE to have it. The sooner that people realize this, the quicker we can put these bastards out of business.
honestly, 99% of mainstream stuff is garbage anyways, and it has been that way for quite awhile now. i do my best to turn my friends on to stuff on indie labels, and havnt bought a cd put out on a major for years. there are a handful of bands i do listen to on majors, but i refuse to buy their albums, merch, or go to their shows, simply because while i want to support them, i have no desire to support the industry that owns them.
that being said, its far easier to illegally obtain an eminem or britanny spears track then an against me song. most people dont care about what has happened to music, they want the garbage, just for free. those people really are theives, and i have no more respect for them then i would for someone who sells adobe silvers on the street.
once again, he is the exception, not the rule. and it sure worked with drivers, new linux distros support my hardware FAR better then windows. and that is because of the community, not corporations choosing to work with them.
Look, I’m not saying that Linux doesn’t work with hardware, I’m speaking specifically about DRM here. For example, when the next generation of DVD comes out (HD-DVD, Blu-ray, or whatever) with a new ‘badass’ encryption on them, how long are hackers wanting it to work in Linux going to have to work in order to crack it? And then risk getting sued? All I’m saying is that if there are a few million desktop Linux users, if you guys could arrange some kind of mass boycott, it would probably be a lot more effective than playing these stupid ‘cat and mouse’ games.
Truthfully, AFAIK, these companies don’t have a legal obligation to support your platform of choice, so when you choose to run a ‘niche’ platform and something is not compatable, I certainly don’t feel sorry for you. I understand why you’re doing it, but don’t feel sorry for you.
I hate DRM as much as the next guy. Hate the RIAA and record labels.
And I have no problem with Hymn. I hope people strip the DRM off of songs since they pay for it.
But this is a thrashing. Forced to upgrade, and there were many reasons to stay on an older version of iTunes. This is just going to give regular users headaches.
What’s worse, this is going to empower the record companies to demand more strict DRM.
Keep messing with Apple. Keep the hating. If they fail, we’ll all be stuck with Microsoft, the company that thought Palladium was a brilliant idea. You’ll be begging for Apple DRM again.
I hope Apple slams DVD Jon, et al., for violation of their TOS with criminal intent. Apple doesn’t need DCMA to bury this punk.
For example, when the next generation of DVD comes out (HD-DVD, Blu-ray, or whatever) with a new ‘badass’ encryption on them, how long are hackers wanting it to work in Linux going to have to work in order to crack it?
Probably not that long… have you seen the code for DeCSS? It’s bugger all… and that was the “new badass encryption” at the time.
If you engage your brain a bit, you’ll realise it’s fundamentally flawed – the disc (of whatever kind) has to play in it’s player. It may be encrypted, but SOMETHING has to have the key – and if a real hacker wants to find it, it will most likely be trivial.
I hope Apple slams DVD Jon, et al., for violation of their TOS with criminal intent. Apple doesn’t need DCMA to bury this punk.
Apple can’t “slam” him for writing this program (at least as it’s been described so far); they can “slam” him for using it. They would have to prove he used it, which may not be as straightforward as it sounds – I’m sure he’s *very* intelligent and has actually thought of this.
Apple have been trying mightily to lock people into their product; you can’t play the songs directly on other music players. This was pretty predictable, since it’s well known that itunes music store doesn’t make any money; it just sells ipods.
They haven’t bothered to help the Linux market at all; now somebody’s figured out how to access it using a free bit of software they’re crying foul. Like they couldn’t see that coming…
A true capitalist allows no artificial interference by the government, and as a result property is defined by nature rather than law.
I think you are merging the idea of a free market and that of capitalism. No I know the two generally go together, but you can have capitalism without a free market. Infact there is no pure free market.
Capitalism is really just about allowing private ownership.
Also in terms of nature defining property, it seems to me that there is IP ownership natural law. After all you will hear kids say, “That was my idea”. If there was no ownership they would not say things like that. Basically IP rights allow people to monetize their ideas, concepts etc. Now I am not saying that all IP law is good, just that there is at least some basis for it in Natural Law. At least as far as I can see.
Why no reply?. Did I’m-putting-a-billion-dollars-on-linux-IBM ask Apple?
Wow. I’ve never seen someone change the subject so fast.
You asked if he had asked Apple. He did, as a potential customer. IBM would not be a customer in this situation, so it is irrelevant to ask why they didn’t ask Apple.
I’m sure that if IBM’s looking out for Linux, they’ll pay Apple a few $Ks to port iTunes for Linux and Apple would be only too happy.
In the words of Jon Stewart: Whaaaa?
First, IBM’s not “looking out for Linux.” It makes money with Linux, mostly on servers. They might have an interest in office workstations as well. iTunes, a consumer product for downloading music, is pretty irrelevant in that equation.
Is Linux ready for the desktop?
Sure it is.
Countless articles say no
Don’t believe everything you read.
no wonder Apple and Adobe have no interest in your 0.2% marketshare.
You misplaced your decimal, it’s 2% (2.5% actually), pretty much the same as the Mac market share.
But again, I ask you, if you really want Quicktime on Linux, get all your slashdot buddies to cough up $5 and take that to Apple and you’ll have Quicktime – money talks and BS walks.
No need. MPlayer plays QuickTime movies better than Apple’s own player. Apple missed an opportunity there. In fact, Apple’s strategy is to ignore Linux, act as if it didn’t exist because it wants to be perceived as the only alternative to Windows. The reason they don’t make QuickTime Player or iTunes available for Linux is that they want to make it a less attractive platforms for those who’ve had enough with Redmond (and sell their hardware with it, of course). If all they wanted were additional iPod+iTunes customer, they port the players to Linux. This would be fairly trivial thing to do, therefore we can conclude that other factors are at play.
You linux guys think of everything as some kind of entitlement.
You have to fight for your rights if you don’t want to lose them.
Don’t like commercial products
Who said that? Not me. Not the vast majority of Linux users and developers I know.
go right ahead and make your own iPod like product and iTunes like Store and see if that becomes popular?
So the message to Linux customers is “we don’t want your business, start your own damn music service”?
When did ignoring potential customers ever made business sense?
“Screw DVD Jon… Really…
He’s gone too far. Apple is actually providing a fairly unrestrictive setup, and this jackoff is going to screw up a good thing… So…
Screw DVD Jon.”
No, more to hell with Apple and their lawsuit-happy, anal-retentive, Bill Gates wannabe, megalomaniac boss. They bring all these problems on themselves.
It’s true that capitalism and a free market can come apart as concepts, though in the definition of capitalism I checked before posting (after all, this isn’t Slashdot) the free market concept was included:
“An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market.”
That was from Answers.com.
While it seems they can easily be separated, I’m not sure how genuine any separation is. If the government interferes in the free market, it almost always does so as a privileged entity if not a self-granted monopoly. Such activity is not merely a market movement, but also an attack on private property rights. For example, I ought to be able to use my property to start a mail delivery service, but I am not allowed to do that in the US. So I think that in practice, government activity in the market (making the market less free) goes hand in hand with diminished property rights (making private property less marketable).
As for IP and Natural Law, I didn’t mean to suggest that there was no basis for IP in our intuitions. By Natural Law I mean the basic assumption that everyone has the right to attempt to keep on living, and all that this entails. Property rights are generally thought to derive from that basic right, since humans need food, shelter and clothing to survive. This doesn’t mean, however, that anything that could have market value were it made artificially scarce *ought* to be made artificially scarce. Nobody needs to be a full-time IP creator in order to ensure their own survival, and for thousands of years IP was created in people’s spare time (or by commission, which still works just fine).
The reason I find IP to be artificial is that it doesn’t protect the actual thing of value that the artist has: the ability to produce ideas. The commission model is very natural. You pay an artist to, say, sculpt something and he does. The artist gets paid and you get your sculpture. On that model you actually pay the artist for the thing of value — the thing you couldn’t do for yourself — which was to create the shape of the sculpture out of nothing.
IP allows the artist to collect pay for something else entirely: the reproduction and distribution of his idea. Already being in possession of the sculpture, you have no further need for the artist if you want duplicates. You can simply use the original to make a mold, and then create as many copies as you want. The artist had better have held out for a decent commission, because that’s all he gets. But with IP, you are forced to pay the artist for something you don’t need, namely the reproduction of his original work. That is the artificiality here. When you are forced to pay for something you don’t need in a free market, it’s not really a free market. And the thing that makes it unfree in this particular way is the government, who enforces IP law.
Anyway, that’s what tickles my “artificial” bone about IP, that it forces the odd market situation of being forced to pay for services I have no need of.
Apple, if you don’t know, negotiated the leniant DRM deal they could get from the record companies.
It amazes me people blame Apple for DRM. It’s the music companies for the love of god. Do you think Apple is pushing for encrypted DRMs. And do you remember the offerings before Apple got in the market? They were terrible.
Talk about misplaced anger…geeze
Digital protections are futile
Of course digital protection is necassary – Apple’s is incredibly loose compared to Windows Media Player equivalents.
and
Why must Jon spoil it for everyone – once the record companies get worried that their precious songs are being downloaded without protection theu’ll just drop the supply….
and
Whats wrong with the DRM anyway – what is so different between DRM on downloaded files, and the fact that you aren’t allowed to make copies, or rip, and distribute a music CD?
Ben
I see different posts saying that Apple will sue Jon for breaking the TOS of the ITMS. Well, let me wake you up to the real world outside the usa borders: in most european countries EULAs and TOSs have no real legal value.
It does not mean anything that you clicked “I accept”. Contract clauses that strip you of your rights have to be specifically hand signed, in addition to the signing of the contract itself.
It has been proven several times in varous countries: the most you get is a small fine.
If they’re going to go to such lengths to infringe the rights of their customers, then I advise people not to buy their product. It shows that their priority is not the quality of the product. They need to think outside the box. They tackle the problem of getting more people to buy their product not by improving the existing product, but by placing annoying restrictions which strong arm customers. If you’re gonna buy music, first of all don’t buy from a store, I work in a local record store chain (not some corperation, but none the less the owner sits on his ass and profits) and I don’t want to see you, especially if you’re making the RIAA and MPAA rich buying product in front of me… and second, don’t buy from someone who’s arrogant enough to place restrictions on the product, rather than insentives when they are supposed 2 be competing w/ record stores in the first place/
> Of course digital protection is necassary
Because you say so? Would you mind giving a reason?
> and the fact that you aren’t allowed to make copies, or rip, and distribute a music CD
The fact? The fact is that you are allowed to make copies, rip and distribute (to your friends and your family, not in a P2P network) a music CD over here (Germany) unless you circumvent copy protection. So if you have a regular CD all of the above is perfectly legal.
And Norway seems to have more permissive laws than that…
Some posts in this thread have forced me to remind the title of that film “Team America World Police”. (Personally i would have titled it “Team USA world police”, but that is because i studied some geography in school)
)
If norwegian law allows that guy to do what he has done, you will have to get over it. Remember that his program does not download the music for free, hes not stealing the songs, just removing the DRM of the songs he had already paid for, hence the animus lucrandi is not very clear.
Bye
DRM is NOT a necessity. It hasn’t been up till now, and despite what the RIAA claim nobody’s about to starve because of lack of it.
Ben: Whats wrong with the DRM anyway – what is so different between DRM on downloaded files, and the fact that you aren’t allowed to make copies, or rip, and distribute a music CD?
Ever considered that you buy that CD, and you can listen to it anywhere? In your car, on your computer, on your stereo, 30,000 feet over the Atlantic on a Discman…
Whereas DRM-encoded music bought from itunes is able to be played on itunes and ipods, that’s it. Good luck trying to make an aac play in your car…
Yes, it’s trivial to strip it off – which only begs the question of why bother in the first place?
The government here are making noises about specifically legalising medium shifting, which DRM puts a pretty big crimp in – depending how it’s worded, it may even make itunes method of DRM illegal (unlikely, but possible).
One Observer: hes not stealing the songs, just removing the DRM of the songs he had already paid for
Close, but remember it’s not actually removing the DRM per se – the DRM is normally appended by itunes on the client side, whereas PyMusique simply never bothers.
IP allows the artist to collect pay for something else entirely: the reproduction and distribution of his idea
What copyright does is to allow music and other art forms to be commodotized. Instead of everyone running around commissioning the creation of music for lots of money, the music can be produced and the costs of music creation and distribution shared across a much larger base. Therefore increasing consumption of the music. Economics would tell us that increasing consumption is a good thing.
Well you could still pay an artist to create some music for you. You could then still make CD’s and try and sell them. Of course each person you sold the CD to could also make copies and start selling. Basically I cannot afford to commission music to be created on my behalf. I would have to rely on the wealthy to commission music and then basically make it available to me.
I am against the idea of trying to make IP identical to real physical property to. There are limits which the RIAA seems to ignore or not understand with IP. It is almost impossible to show real damages, in the legal sense, with IP unlike real property for example.
With regard to the example of the postal service. There are some arguments for ‘Natural Monopolies’ as I am sure you are aware. The idea being that scale is important, and that mail is a basic service which should be available at the lowest cost to all. Now if I opened up a mail service that in NewYork city only I could probably provide a mail service for less than the USPS. I just would not service other areas becuase the density of mail boxes and cost of transport. So basically I can selectively provide service. That would undermine the USPS ability to provide equal service throught the US.
Now you could argue that other areas are paying less than the actual market rate for mail because NYC is actually subsidizing thereby making the USPS a socialist intstrument. I would agree.
Free markets of course are not perfectly competitive and still need some regulation to operate effectively unless perfect information was available. Unless of course, we are all assimilated and plugged into the collective (Star Trek refeference)
Out of curiosity what rights does Apple’s DRM deny you? I think you may be hard pressed to find a single legal right you’re denied.
It denies me the right to listen to my BOUGHT songs to all my computers, limiting me to listen to only 5 of them, and only Windows/Mac OSes.
It gives me a price arount the 70% of a CD (or more), while it has less than 5% of the distribution, manufacturing, storage and other costs associated with an actual CD. So most of the price is just profit for companies. Furthermore, the price is fixed across all (or almost all) albums. This basically amounts to price fixing.
It denies me the right to listen to my BOUGHT songs 10 years later, when iTMS is and old and no longer supported technology (yes, I can burn to a CD and rip, but this defeats the purpose, since I can just buy a CD in the first place).
Go, DVD Jon, stick it to the Man!
> It does not mean anything that you clicked “I accept”.
The thing, Renato, is that he did not even click “I accept”. Quoting John’s words: Another difference is that signing up for an account using PyMusique does not require you to sign/click away any of your rights.
.
What “terms of service”?
Whats wrong with the DRM anyway – what is so different between DRM on downloaded files, and the fact that you aren’t allowed to make copies, or rip, and distribute a music CD?
Well considering my home CD player does not have to “phone home” before I can play a CD I’d say there is a major difference.
Then you have the software itself. My copy of iTunes became corrupt and I could not re-authorize my computer on my account. Uninstall / re-install and I had the same problem. Only after ripping a bunch of iTunes reg keys and fully wiping it from my drive was I able to get re-authorized on a fresh install of the program.
I spent over an hour screwing around with a broken program just to listen to a flippin’ song.
Its ridicilous at best putting up with DRM. I stripped all my files after this *experience* and will never be locked to someone’s idea of what is fair use over content I purchase for playback.
“DVD Jon appears to be only the spokesperson for a larger group. He feels safe as the spokesperson because he’s in Norway, and already has some court victories.”
Ahum.
“DVD Jon” didn’t hack CSS himself, he took it from another group. CSS wasn’t even hacked. Your hero “DVD Jon” has also tried to avoid GPL.
Google for “decsstruth.txt”.
Support Apple. Fuck “DVD Jon”.
“Don’t like commercial products – go right ahead and make your own iPod like product and iTunes like Store and see if that becomes popular?”
Already did, thanks. I listen to my music on the open-source open-spec Neuros and buy it from this amazing, advanced place which supplies me with a hard copy of my music, a cool user manual and no DRM at all! It’s called “HMV”.
“What “terms of service”?”
The doctrine of implied acceptance; acceptance of a service’s terms of use can be implied by use of the service. If that weren’t the case, half of the world’s cellphone companies and internet service providers would be in trouble.
> The doctrine of implied acceptance; acceptance of a
> service’s terms of use can be implied by use of the service.
> If that weren’t the case, half of the world’s cellphone
> companies and internet service providers would be in
> trouble.
This is again different from country to country. AFAIK, when a user violates the “AGB” in germany (which I think is more or less the terms of service) and was not “forced” to read them, then he can claim not having it known and only THEN has to accept it or stop using the service. However, I’m not sure how reliable this is and especially if it’s the same for using software (the example I know was about going by train).
Still I’m sure that many countries have rather relaxed laws, both for Jon (since he’s only providing the software) and the end user (since he never sees that he’s using ITMS if the software doesn’t tell him). It then comes down to Apple being stupid as hell to claim payment for the songs without any legally binding contract.
“Who is hurt by this program? Apple is making money and I’m getting music. Sounds like a fair deal to me.”
The use of this product is in clear violation of the iTMS user agreement. Sure, you’re not directly hurting Apple. They’re still making money. But it’s holes like this one that made the recording industry so reluctant to sign on to downloadable music. The DRM is not Apple’s idea, it’s the recording industry. I’m not saying I agree with it, but it’s a fact.
Too many of these holes and cracks and… stupid labels just might pull the plug.
Think that would hurt Apple?
I won’t use it. If I am going to buy music then I get to decide how I use it. Not Apple.
I would like to hear your opinion on something. I have accidentally bought two copy protected CD’s. I know they are easy to rip as you can record the output as a .wav and the rip to any compressed format, but it is a nuisance. Anyway I discovered that iTunes on the Mac anyway has gone to thr trouble of circumventing the copy protection. Even though the CD says it wont play on a Mac iTunes plays and rips effortlessly. Now some of the Windows programs which advertize the fact they can rip copy protected CD’s can’t. Not the new copy protection anyway.
Do you think Apple should have built iTunes to circumvent technology designed to make ripping music difficult? Seems a little bit hypocritical blaming REAL and then doing the same thing yourself. Blocking iPod owners from buying music online from any store other than ITMS is also bad on Apples part.
well, I hope that the linux zealots won’t complain when a company violates the GPL and steals the code, since intelectual property means nothing and contracts or licenses have to be signed to be valid…..
theres been a few people here talk about ip and drm. if you want to understand why ip has never been treated the same as physical property until extremely recently, and how this pretty much spells the death of any sort of real innovation, download and read free culture by larry lessig http://www.free-culture.cc/freecontent/ (under the creative commons liscence of course). definately opened my eyes to alot of things, i highly recommend it.
“All methods of securing this data are flawed.
DRM itself is cryptographically flawed in theory and all practical implementations to date have failed.”
Oh I don’t know. I dropped a hint over at Slashpot, on one possible way. Quite a bit of work on the content provider side of the equation, but remember technology empowers both sides of this battle.
To everyone else. There’s no right in any body of law to be entertained. Your complaints about fair use while technically correct, however as practical matters are ineffectual. Not purchasing the product (or benefiting from it in any manner), and letting the content providers know why your doing so, would be far more effective an action, and give quicker results, than the present never-ending “Cold war”.
People like this DVD Jon are not helping, they are making it worse! I understand his point, that you should be able to do what you will with items you purchase . . . Freedom. But in all reality, this guy is only FORCING the record industry become more strict with their product.
I’m sure if Napster never started this whole illegal swapping of music, the downloads of online music wouldn’t be as strict as it is today.
These people got on a march demanding freedom to use music how they like. But instead of fighting this constructively, they hack the programs. Don’t blame Apple, Microsoft, or others on how it is. It’s the RIAA! By doing these acts on these companies, like iTMS it’s only forcing the RIAA to pull back. If this keeps up then you can kiss online music good by, and go back to paying 20 bucks for a 10 track CD with copy protection and limited to what CD player you can run it on.
Personally I wish DVD Jon would just disappear. He’s not helping at all!
Has anyone thought about why there is no iTunes Music Store for Linux? iTunes requires Quicktime. Apple makes lots of money licensing Quicktime to multimedia corporations for use in CD and DVD presentations. If they make a Linux version they would have to make it Open Source and release the code. I think it’s pretty strange how many people here cannot understand the thinking behind that and support cracking someone else’s code for something that is not a necessity in life or computing.
—–I’m sure if Napster never started this whole illegal swapping of music, the downloads of online music wouldn’t be as strict as it is today.
—–
If napster didnt start this, we would not have the P2P innovation in networking be so widespread, AND we would NOT have any downloadable content
” If they make a Linux version [of quicktime] they would have to make it Open Source and release the code.
just because you are releasing software FOR the linux OS, doesn’t mean that you have to make it open source. There exists commercial software for linux.
Consider it restoring the balance. For too long we’ve watched these greedy pigs get rich and give nothing back. Now, they’re being made to give something back even though they don’t like it. It’s almost like karma. God forbid, the entire entertainment industry comes crashing down because of DVD Jon, and we are forced to go see local theatre and musicians who actually work a real job in addition to peforming live. If a group of youngsters can bring Hollywood and the music industry to their knees, I say more power to them.
> AND we would NOT have any downloadable content
B.(F).S!!!. Real Networks started the whole downloadble content phenomenon – and prior to that you had websites with .wav/.mid/.au/.mpeg videos that you could click and download. P2P has only made file sharing simpler without any logging in or password protection or any real locks on content.
It’s surprising coming from someone at >media<.umb.edu.
P2P has its uses – mainly in things like downloading public information and voip but not “copyrighted” media. Does your uni use P2P to transfer school records or protected information? Nope – I think not. Do you get your grades report card via P2P? Do you submit your assignments back to your prof via P2P?
Just remember content most often has restrictions like books. The free stuff can always be stuck on websites/ftpsites and downloaded without any fuss or muss (that’s what mp3.com was all about).
“Real Networks started the whole downloadble content phenomenon – and prior to that you had websites with .wav/.mid/.au/.mpeg videos that you could click and download.”
Yes, and do you remember how incredibly shitty Real audio quality (let alone video quality) was until version 8 or so? And .wav files on personal web pages as a method of mass music distribution…uh huh, yeah, don’t make me laugh.
“If napster didnt start this, we would not have the P2P innovation in networking be so widespread, AND we would NOT have any downloadable content”
You have no idea what you were talking about. The industry was already moving to downloaded content. P2P, and people like DVD Jon force the companies to restrict the heck out of it. I’m saying if Napster didn’t bring this idea to the spotlight, the restrictions today would be less and more free.
But the true point, people like DVD Jon are only forcing more restrictions with their hacking tactics. Companies have the right to protect their media, hense Copyright, and they should get paid for their work. Period.
If people really have a problem with this, then start talking to actual artists and recommend they start an “open source” type of record industry.
> Yes, and do you remember how incredibly shitty Real audio quality (let alone video quality) was until version 8 or so?
Yes, remember how we were all on dialup (unless you were at the uni or worked for IBM/Sun/Cisco/MS)?
So what’s your point?.
As for wav files on personal pages…how’s that different from sample mp3s on http://www.brittanyspears.com?. You don’t seem to grasp that P2P is just a download mechanism like FTP or HTTP. P2P has NO content publishing system inherent to it. You stick a file on P2P and voila someone at the other end can download it – but can you stick any kind of rights and permissions – say if I’m your instructor and I want to send you your semester grade card via P2P so that ONLY you can read it (unless you want 100s of your friends to know you flunked my class)
I really do not understand how people can stand up in defense of large corporations like Microsoft or Apple.
http://www.downhillbattle.org/itunes/
(read here for more info)
personally I disagreed with Apples “fairplay” restrictions especially when they tightened them down a year ago (10 burns to 7). I mean what’s to stop them from cracking down on what they consider “fairplay” even more?
this countries corporations and the mindless numbskulls who praise them are going to hell in a handbasket. The consumers don’t even realized they are getting bent over, while the corp america sticks it up their ass.
Seriously, they are just like the oil industry bent on keeping the status quo, even though times and distribution models are changing. It’s no longer feasible to disallow copying of material as it’s SO EASY. It’s no longer feasible for the recording industry to assrape it’s clients. (both the consumers and the bands.)
Think about it before you defend apple or RIAA or any other corporation.
ask yourself this one question
are you on their bankroll?
To all those people that keep complaining about DRM or iTMS. No one is putting a gun to your head and forcing you to download from the iTMS. If you want to you can go to allofmp3.com or whatever that russian site is and get all the DRM free music you like from there.
The iTMS adds DRM to the music you purchase and you don’t like DRM? Why do you use that service then? Just go looking for something else.
I really don’t understand some people. DRM is bad, DRM is bad. Yes it is, and if you want to show them you don’t like DRM: *don’t bloody well buy into it*.
[I’m going to do some smackdown so you all may want to look away]
“I really do not understand how people can stand up in defense of large corporations like Microsoft or Apple. ”
Funny how that “Persumed innocent” thing works out.
“personally I disagreed with Apples “fairplay” restrictions especially when they tightened them down a year ago (10 burns to 7). I mean what’s to stop them from cracking down on what they consider “fairplay” even more? ”
Consumers not doing business with them used to be the prefered way.
“this countries corporations and the mindless numbskulls who praise them are going to hell in a handbasket. The consumers don’t even realized they are getting bent over, while the corp america sticks it up their ass. ”
And calling people “numbskulls” are going to sway them how?
“Seriously, they are just like the oil industry bent on keeping the status quo, even though times and distribution models are changing. It’s no longer feasible to disallow copying of material as it’s SO EASY. It’s no longer feasible for the recording industry to assrape it’s clients. (both the consumers and the bands.) ”
If EASY is the modern definition of “right” then I shouldn’t be hearing any complaints about identity theft.
“Think about it before you defend apple or RIAA or any other corporation. ”
There’s your presumption that some ARE defending the corporations, instead of the equal possability that they may be defending a bigger principle (just as you guys sometimes claim to do).
“ask yourself this one question
are you on their bankroll?”
I have a much better question. Why does your side engage in this intellectual laziness? Instead of actually reading and THINKING about what people are trying to say. You try to demonize them and what they’re saying by accusing them of being a member of…or payroll of…when you know damn well and good, you have zero proof. All you have is that you don’t agree with what they have to say, and you can’t even be bothered to read and think. And MAYBE JUST MAYBE, they may be right. Did you think of that?
[You all can look back now]
“I really do not understand how people can stand up in defense of large corporations like Microsoft or Apple.
http://www.downhillbattle.org/itunes/
(read here for more info)
personally I disagreed with Apples “fairplay” restrictions especially when they tightened them down a year ago (10 burns to 7). I mean what’s to stop them from cracking down on what they consider “fairplay” even more? ”
We defend Microsoft and Apple on these grounds because, it’s NOT them that decides how strict their DRM is! You people are constantly pointing your finger at the wrong company. It’s truly the RIAA/music companies that makes the requirements for how songs are downloaded and treated.
Personally, we should be thanking Apple, they are the only ones fighting for the best rights of the consumers. If the recond companies and the RIAA had THEIR way, we probably wouldn’t be able to download music, or they would force nothing but subscription based business models – like the new napster. Tell me, would you like that!?
“Think about it before you defend apple or RIAA or any other corporation.”
No buddy, you think about it. RIAA holds the strings on everything! Apple is the only company out there that is telling those RIAA stiff shirts what consumers want. You should be thanking them!
DEFEND THE RIGHT PEOPLE! It’s the music industry driving all this DRM, and download music restrictions.
Read about who DVD Jon is in fact here: http://www.chscene.ch/ccc/decss/decsstruth.txt
And stop worshipping him.
Apple isn’t the main reason that music purchased from the iTunes Music Store has DRM on it. It is the music companies!! Why else would Apple put such a lax and easily circumvented DRM on these files? Anyone can strip the DRM without any loss in quality. ANYONE. Ever try this with a WMV, or WMA that has DRM on it? Good luck with the quality in the end. DVD Jon, although you may have a point for what you do, you are most likely going to make the most fair DRM scheme disappear because of your stupid antics. The recording industry is not liking this at all. If I lose my Fairplay rights for something more archaic and medival such as the poor Windows DRM, I’m gonna hunt you down and give a really good kick in the ass!
> Read about who DVD Jon is in fact here: http://www.chscene.ch/ccc/decss/decsstruth.txt
Amazing!. I always thought DVD Jon had no love for Linux. He’s your run-of-the-mill warez cracker.
— QUOTE —
B.(F).S!!!. Real Networks started the whole downloadble content phenomenon – and prior to that you had websites with .wav/.mid/.au/.mpeg videos that you could click and download. P2P has only made file sharing simpler without any logging in or password protection or any real locks on content.
— / QUOTE —
real networks sucked big time back then (of course that was then, this is now). Back then we also had 56k connections. Downloading a MIDI is different from getting an actual music track. MPEGs and WAVs…are you kidding me? They were HUGE (unless you had only a small part of them) – as for .au I have no comment.
Sites existed, but you had to go an hunt for them – that was a royal pain in the rear. – Streamlining distribution was napster’s legacy
— QUOTE —
It’s surprising coming from someone at >media<.umb.edu.
— / QUOTE
Everybody’s got an opinion, i’ve got mine. just because I post from a >media< doesn;t mean that my opinion is the same as yours.
— QUOTE–
P2P has its uses – mainly in things like downloading public information and voip but not “copyrighted” media. Does your uni use P2P to transfer school records or protected information? Nope – I think not. Do you get your grades report card via P2P? Do you submit your assignments back to your prof via P2P?
— / QUOTE —
everything has limitations, so does P2P. I never claimed that P2P was a panacea.
— QUOTE —
You have no idea what you were talking about. The industry was already moving to downloaded content. P2P, and people like DVD Jon force the companies to restrict the heck out of it. I’m saying if Napster didn’t bring this idea to the spotlight, the restrictions today would be less and more free.
— / QUOTE —
I don’t remember the industry moving toward downloadable content – refresh my memory if you will 🙂 . People being people means that even IF downloadable content was more free than today in terms of DRM, people would still share and commit illegal acts and we would be in the same place we are today. IMHO the industry is a giant that takes a long time to move along with the times.
— QUOTE —
But the true point, people like DVD Jon are only forcing more restrictions with their hacking tactics. Companies have the right to protect their media, hense Copyright, and they should get paid for their work. Period.
— / QUOTE —
You are true, to some extent, but misfits like Jon are the ones that move technology, and laws, forward – for better or for worse. I prefer technology moving forward than being stagnant
— QUOTE —
If people really have a problem with this, then start talking to actual artists and recommend they start an “open source” type of record industry.
— / QUOTE —
Artists are already offering up content on their websites. Artists make the bulk of their money from performing
just my 2 cents