iTunes Sharing at Colleges

[MacRumors]

Yale's Daily News (http://www.yaledailynews.com/article.asp?AID=23898) reports on the increasing use of iTunes software at the Yale college campus. It appears to reflect a growing trend (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/10/20031029143038.shtml) amongst colleges where iTunes' ability to share music playlists is turning out to be a very popular feature.

When iTunes 4.0 was originally introduced in April (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/04/20030428141644.shtml), it incorporated a much anticipated feature that allowed users to share music with other iTunes installations across the internet. The feature was quickly exploited (http://news.com.com/2100-1027-1001121.html?tag=nl) drawing concerns of piracy. As a result iTunes 4.0.1 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/05/20030527185116.shtml) limited shares to Local Networks, which tend to be utilized in single households. College dorms, however, also bring together numerous users on a single local network allowing these students to share songs via iTunes.

[theipodgod16]

Good. This means that they probably are being slowly driven away from kazaa and the like.

[maelstromr]

This makes me happy...another example of an evolving technological world and a kick in the teeth for record labels. Way to go Apple for pressing the envelope and changing the way computers (and music) work!
It's getting better all the time...

[Gren]

This is a feature that will soon be (quietly) dropped in a update. Mark my words.

[trebblekicked]

the sharing feature does rock. At a café last week, i had seven libraries available. Very cool stuff.

i just hope the RIAA doesn't go after that feature. i can almost hear the execs complaining about disposable income, top demos and castrating sales.

[kansast]

I wonder how long before Apple has to put a stop to this as well.. which I think would suck!!! I just don't see.. although obviously more convenient.. it's like blasting your stereo (to share) or making cassette copies for your friends (to share) which has all been going on for many years !!

[P Rush]

This is a good thing, a very good thing. More people with itunes, the better. This is giving apple a good reputation as a quality software developer, as well as a foot in the door in the windows world. They may not be seeing the financial benifits of it now from colleges and universities all over North America using itunes over LANs, but these students will be the ones buying the ipods and hopefully Macs in the near future.

Apple's underlying goal was to sell their products by getting to their consumers with itunes. Its working.

P RUSH

[jxyama]

i really hope RIAA will stay out of this and not squash it. they really need to get on with reality - digital music is here to stay. i don't condone piracy, but they need to do their part to adopt and change their business model. selling music CDs at $15+ is not a viable model any more and they need to come to terms with it. i see DVD movies routinely being sold for lower prices than CDs... how can that be? i see CD-R's for sale at 10 cents a disc. how can that be?

[stoid]

This type of sharing is illegal though just as Kazaa is. I guess that you could rationalize that it is not as bad as Kazaa because they are not actually copying the music just listening to it. Regardless I am working on a little pamphlet sheet thing to slip under dorm room doors advertising free music to get through the thick skulls of the other students here on my Windowss only campus. I don't think that the IT will mind the added internal bandwidth (shouldn't even be that high?) because finally this past week bandwidth used by students finally exceeded that of the Blaster Virus.

[Vector]

i doubt the college trend will result in a large increase in song sales, but it should get more people interested in apple and ipods. i know of many people at my university that have downloaded itunes, but none of them buy songs. everyone other than myself just downloads from kazaa or whatever service they use and then use itunnes to play and share the songs.

[pgwalsh]

Originally posted by trebblekicked
the sharing feature does rock. At a café last week, i had seven libraries available. Very cool stuff.

i just hope the RIAA doesn't go after that feature. i can almost hear the execs complaining about disposable income, top demos and castrating sales. It's my understanding that you can't download the music, so I don't see the problem? Even if someone develops a hack, Apple isn't offering the product as a download tool like Kazaa.

This is great for Apple. Maybe people will see how easy it is to use and look at other products by Apple. :cool:

[maelstromr]

It's NOT the same thing as KaZaa...I won't bore you with the legal reasons, BUT Kazaa GIVES the files to others, this just allows people to listen in, like someone listening to one of my CDs. They aren't burning, copying or taking anything.

[Wash!!]

I went to FYE music store and so their prices they were out of this world $15-$20.00 for a CD is just crazy. Just to see the difference I looked up an album I bought with itms for $9.99 and in the store was for $17.95 that is just nuts...

[Phil Of Mac]

Perfectly legal, and less antisocial than blasting your speakers in the dorm. Good stuff.

[d00d]

As much as I'd like to share my playlists with everyone else, the fact is that no one else shares, not even with a password protected share. Instead, if I turn mine on, I get a couple leachers that give nothing back. I put a password on mine and restricted its use to my computers alone as a result.

This is at U-Mass by the way.

[JohnGillilan]

Here is a screenshot of my iTunes this morning . . . its the shortest I've seen it in a while; usually the list is twice that at "peak" times.

[Phil Of Mac]

Where are you? I'm at WSU and the most we ever get is 4...

[phlops]

I can attest to the popularity of sharing. Here in one of UMich's bigger dorms (1100 students), there's 36 shares up right now, while at peak times it's gone up to 57. Before iTunes for Windows hit the streets there would be 2 or 3 at low times, and up to 8 or so at the peaks. Within a day of iTunes for Windows being released at least 20 extra people were always available.

To this day, I still get messaged by people around the dorm asking how to install iTunes or how to share their music. People are definitely very excited about this feature.

[rodnarms]

If I was a record executive I would not have a problem with this. Essentially the streamer is only accessing the file. They do not own it, they cannot transfer it to their iPod, they cannot burn a CD, they cannot use it in iLife. If you really like a song then you are going to spend the $.99 for the freedom to do what you want with it.

Actually this is a safe way to discover new music. Most people are not in college forever. When they leave they no longer have access to those massive playlists. They will still have to spend money.

[Big Lar]

Until iTunes for windows came out, there were 1 or 2 shared playlists at this campus of 2600 students. Now there are around 14. The disappointing thing is that there is very little variety. Most of the playlist read pretty much the same.

[OSXpert]

I'd know that list of shared playlists anywhere. definitely USC...ive counted times when weve had 80 playlists on at once...its fun!

[Einherjar]

Hearing about all of these other guys getting dozens of shares is making me sad.


Each floor of the dorms at the University of Rochester has it's own subnet, so we only get the people that live in our particular wing of the building.. :(

There's usually about 7AW shares in my wing (AW, After Windows), up from an initial 3.

[baby duck monge]

this has, of course, been one of my favorite features since it came out in itunes 4. i can remember many a party saved from crappy music by the ability to access extra playlists. at our school of 1800 there were always about 10 or 15 shared playlists with just macs. now that we have windows sharing, too, that number has easily doubled, and at peak times there may be up to 40 shared libraries at a time. yay for spreading the wealth.

::edit::
our entire campus is on the same subnet, BTW. that is quite helpful. also for rendezvous chatting.
::edit::

[michaelrjohnson]

All I have to say is that this is WONDERFUL. There is nothing wrong with this type of sharing. It's the ultimate try-before-you-buy scenario. To all of the pessimists or non-sharers out there, look at it this way. With iTunes, you CAN NOT copy the shared songs (without a hack), and if the person on the other end puts their comp. to sleep, turns it off, or closes iTunes, the streaming automatically ends. Therefore, I have NO posession over their songs, the sharer HAS control. This is awesome, I get such a variety of music to listen to, and it's different all the time.

How should I promote the downloading of iTunes for Windows here at my university?

[gfunk]

as a student at Yale, I think the YDN is missing the most crucial parts of the iTunes use here. Seems like most people around here have iPods (i can count 10-15 people in my dorm that have iPods). Walking around campus, at least 1 out of every 2 people who have headphones on have the distinct iPod earbuds, and who knows how many use their own headphones (I do).

People dont say "im going to buy an mp3 player", they say "Im going to buy an iPod". That, as has been said many times before, is where apple makes its money.

[LethalWolfe]

If sharing gets axed it will be because of users hacking iTunes to be able to d/l songs (just like what happend before when sharing was first introduced). All it takes is one d*ckhead to spoil it for everyone.


Originally posted by jxyama
i really hope RIAA will stay out of this and not squash it. they really need to get on with reality - digital music is here to stay. i don't condone piracy, but they need to do their part to adopt and change their business model. selling music CDs at $15+ is not a viable model any more and they need to come to terms with it. i see DVD movies routinely being sold for lower prices than CDs... how can that be? i see CD-R's for sale at 10 cents a disc. how can that be?

And not to hijack this thread, but...

Movies make money at theaters, from movie rentals, from TV deals, and from DVD/VHS sales. A label is much more dependent on CD sales to make money than a studio is on DVD sales. You aren't paying $15 for the physical media, you are paying $15 for the content of that media and all the associated costs related to content creation and distrubition.


Lethal

[trebblekicked]

Originally posted by pgwalsh
It's my understanding that you can't download the music, so I don't see the problem? Even if someone develops a hack, Apple isn't offering the product as a download tool like Kazaa.

This is great for Apple. Maybe people will see how easy it is to use and look at other products by Apple. :cool:

sorry. i'll clarify:)

from an aging business model's perspective, this feature canibalizes sales. Why would a Yale student buy a song for ¢99 when it's almost always available for free over the subnet? Additionally, college students and high school students have more "disposable" income than some other demographics, and it just may be that the RIAA was looking for a way to get this group to spend more money on music, not just stop downloading from Kaaza. I wasn't thinking that the RIAA would sue apple or itunes users; more like they'd request/demand removal of the shared libraries feature in 4.2.

That said, i agree with you. There is nothing wrong with this feature. It's a great way to discover new music, and it doesn't violate copyright laws any more than radio does.

In the digital market, the consumer truly runs the show. you need to make concessions to the consumer if you want their buck. the sharing feature seems to me to be a reasonable concession.

[F/reW/re]

What happend to iTunes 4 for Mac is a fact on the Windows version as we speak. Download MyTunes and you can download any song from anyone on your network. Not just play it, also download it into your own computer.

mod. edit - No piracy links.

[LethalWolfe]

Originally posted by F/reW/re
What happend to iTunes 4 for Mac is a fact on the Windows version as we speak. Download MyTunes and you can download any song from anyone on your network. Not just play it, also download it into your own computer.


And so ends sharing via iTunes...


Lethal

[trebblekicked]

Originally posted by F/reW/re
What happend to iTunes 4 for Mac is a fact on the Windows version as we speak. Download MyTunes and you can download any song from anyone on your network. Not just play it, also download it into your own computer.

well, we have our d*ckhead, Lethal. :(

[crees!]

Originally posted by F/reW/re
What happend to iTunes 4 for Mac is a fact on the Windows version as we speak. Download MyTunes and you can download any song from anyone on your network. Not just play it, also download it into your own computer.

Christ, how bout you edit your post and remove that link before the world goes up in flames.

As I was just going to mention, the only way to save networked songs is to use a 3rd party app., ahem. Figures a Windows user would create such a specific thing to work with iTunes. Oh, and 10 days after the release of it too.

So if this saving network crap blows out of proportion it would be nice to see that feature removed from Windows versions but still intact on the Mac. Serves them right.

BTW, I hope this kid gets the ****** smacked out of him by Apple and the RIAA.

[Tulse]

Audio Hijack and Wiretap will allow you to record anything audio on the Mac, so there really is no way to prevent copying.

[crees!]

Originally posted by Tulse
Audio Hijack and Wiretap will allow you to record anything audio on the Mac, so there really is no way to prevent copying.

True, but labeling a product to exclusively do just that, rip from iTunes networked libraries, is totally different. Everything has a purpose and this isn't for the good.

[F/reW/re]

Originally posted by Tulse
Audio Hijack and Wiretap will allow you to record anything audio on the Mac, so there really is no way to prevent copying.
Record a compressed audiofile sounds awful! Ripping will always be a fact either you do it digital or analog with your CD-player connected to audio inline on your computer.

[sethypoo]

Originally posted by rodnarms
If I was a record executive I would not have a problem with this. Essentially the streamer is only accessing the file. They do not own it, they cannot transfer it to their iPod, they cannot burn a CD, they cannot use it in iLife. If you really like a song then you are going to spend the $.99 for the freedom to do what you want with it.

Actually this is a safe way to discover new music. Most people are not in college forever. When they leave they no longer have access to those massive playlists. They will still have to spend money.

There are, in fact, ways to copy music from shared playlists on iTunes. I'm not going to say how, because I don't want to be labeled as starting (or ending) anything.

It's *not* completely safe from pirates. I use iTMS, but I have discovered a way to access and own someone's shared playlists. Please note I AM NOT A PIRATE and I legally buy all my music, but when I saw this shared feature on iTunes, I knew it was a little too good to be true. I did some looking around, and found that putting someone elses's files, in AAC or MP3 format is remarkably (and frighteningly) easy.

This worries me! Some dumb college kid will exploit this and bam, the RIAA b*tches will come down upon Apple and, quietly, we will lose our sharing capabilities.

[sethypoo]

Originally posted by F/reW/re
Record a compressed sounds awful! Sure, ripping will always be a fact either you do it digital or analog with your CD-player connected to your audio inline.

No, sorry, there are ways to get those ripped tracks to sound great on iTunes, via AAC or MP3.

[sethypoo]

Originally posted by crees!
BTW, I hope this kid gets the ****** smacked out of him by Apple and the RIAA.

Be nice.

[segastyle]

apple should reintroduce the sharing across the internet as well. it was a great feature. yes people found out how to circumvent it, but those are the same people that already know how to get free mp3s. PLUS, the music bought from the itunes music store would not be stealable (well, one could copy the file, but it wouldn't play on an unautherized computer).

the fact is, people who want to steal music are going to steal music -- there's 100 different ways. even before computers and cdburner and the internet people were making tape copies. by stripping out features that "honest" people really enjoy and use, all the riaa and apple would be doing is upsetting their customers (not hurting theives). and all that will do is make more people sympathetic to the people stealing music.

[sethypoo]

Originally posted by segastyle
apple should reintroduce the sharing across the internet as well. it was a great feature. yes people found out how to circumvent it, but those are the same people that already know how to get free mp3s. PLUS, the music bought from the itunes music store would not be stealable (well, one could copy the file, but it wouldn't play on an unautherized computer).

the fact is, people who want to steal music are going to steal music -- there's 100 different ways. even before computers and cdburner and the internet people were making tape copies. by stripping out features that "honest" people really enjoy and use, all the riaa and apple would be doing is upsetting their customers (not hurting theives). and all that will do is make more people sympathetic to the people stealing music.

Exactly. You've nipped it in the bud.

I just figure that those who are going to steal are going to get the less-than-perfect copies of songs, whereas we'll get high quality AAC songs with no downloading hassels.

:) :rolleyes: :D

[beefcake]

I need to get more people in my dorm on iTunes. I currently have 2 users' playlists under my Shared Music list. Disappointing.

[sethypoo]

Originally posted by beefcake
I need to get more people in my dorm on iTunes. I currently have 2 users' playlists under my Shared Music list. Disappointing.

Yeah, I get between four to eight, here at UC Davis. I need more!

[RandomMacGuy]

Baltimore? JHU?

<-- JHU

I share.

[beefcake]

Originally posted by RandomMacGuy
Baltimore? JHU?

<-- JHU

I share.
JHU Wolman

[killmoms]

Here at JMU things are subnetted, so not everyone is on the same one, but there's enough, and there's been an explosion of playlists available in iTunes.

And yes, if the RIAA thinks they can completely stop digital theft of music, they're fooling themselves. It's always going to exist, and acting as the Music Gestapo isn't going to win them any friends. Keep enough features in place to keep the honest honest, try to stop the theives, but don't break your backs. The majority of users aren't smart enough to "hack" iTunes, and those that are will. That doesn't mean good features should be taken away.

But, of course, when has "fairness to the consumer" ever been part of the RIAA's mantra?

--Cless

[stoid]

So the ultimate question here is, is campus sharing as described a legal act? It seems to me that since it pops up to tell you that it is only for in home personal use or something like that, it seems that sharing over a college dorm network would violate some agreement and therefore illegal. Anyone with some knowledge in the field attest to the legality (or illegality) of this use for iTunes? I want to publicize this in a big way to a campus that knows not the light, but if this is illegal even in the smallest way I don't want to be trouble on campus for violating computer use policies (very strict here at Northwest Missouri State University.)

Also, roughly how much bandwidth does this consume, I do not want to bring the anal IT department down on me. (If you had to deal with a campus of 5000+ outdated Gateway WinTel boxes crawling Win2K you'd be anal too!)

[maelstromr]

This is absolutely legal...as long as you don't actually steal the music by copying it as our friends so generously demonstrated earlier...again, if you just LISTEN you're ok, if you POSSESS a file that you didn't buy, you are stealing.

How wise would it be for a company like apple to create and advertise a product that violates the recently clarified copyright laws?

[stoid]

If in fact it is perfectly legal, what is the best way to go about explaining the install and set-up process to a bunch of head in the mud Windows users (not that all Windows users are head-in-the-mud, but the vast majority of those at this campus are.)

[Westside guy]

iTunes has become popular at my work as well (I'm a Web person at a state university). We seem to get a broad cross-section of music; probably because we've got a mix of faculty, staff and grad students on our subnet. It's kind of funny to see what some people have on their playlists - white middle-class professors with album after album of rap, for instance. :-)

One of my younger co-workers was going through my playlist, critiquing it song by song. Maybe this is turning into a huge sociology experiment.

[JohnGillilan]

Yeah, its funny you bring this up. For me, iTunes Sharing has primarily served as a reminder as to most people's god awful taste in music. :D

[ITR 81]

Any streaming media is legal because it's just like someone broadcasting over your radio. Now if you record a broadcast song it's not same quality as say on the CD. This is the same with streaming audio. Yes, I can record it but the sound is downgraded from the compression...and if you want to make it into a MP3 or ACC file then it gets compressed again. Each time the file gets compressed it loses audio quality. The RIAA knew iTunes did this since 4 so if they wanted to say something they would said it a long time ago.

Now RIAA and Apple can go after the 3rd parties but I doubt it since the sound quality is just simiply not there.

[billzeller]

Hey guys,

As the programmer of MyTunes, I thought I'd throw in a word here.

Firstly, I'd like to thank everyone for the kind words.

trebblekicked
> well, we have our d*ckhead

crees!
> BTW, I hope this kid gets the ****** smacked out of him by Apple and the RIAA.

I only wish you the best. Really. Well, I honestly wouldn't mind if you tripped when climbing off your high horse, but I'm not going to resort to personal attacks.

Secondly, let me restate that I do not condone any illegal action used with my software, let alone copyright infringement (not 'stealing', as it's been inappropriately called).

Am I at fault? I've broken no laws, I've committed no crime. If you want to copy books and sell them, is Xerox at fault? If you bash someone over the head with a Powerbook, is Apple responsible?

Blame the criminal, not the guy who writes free software.

This was edited beacuse it contained the url of the site containing MyTunes. If you're looking for MyTunes, do a google search.

[Aqua OS X]

Dude... who cares?

In college everyone is already sharing music by blasting it in the quad, blasting it in the dorms, leaving CDs in the living room for roommates to play, etc etc.

People will share music in college. With or without MP3s or iTunes.

Shess. Would the RIAA fell better if I charged my friends 99$-per-song to listen to my CDs in my car or my dorm room?

[Trowaman]

I love itunes, the sharing we have now violates no copyright infringements but the monster you have created. . .it gives people an illegal hand at work in it. This could lead to an unindorsement of the RIAA and give them a reason to shut down our college sharing. All you did was give them an excuse. If you leave your program available, iTunes will loose its music sharing capablities so hacks like you could not alter them. I will ask you kindly and with much enthusiasm, please, destroy your program for the good of us all. Please be happy with what you have.

Consider this for a while, do you want to lose what you have now?

[billzeller]

It's sad when, as a result of fear, censorship is advocated.

[LethalWolfe]

Originally posted by billzeller


Am I at fault? I've broken no laws, I've committed no crime. If you want to copy books and sell them, is Xerox at fault? If you bash someone over the head with a Powerbook, is Apple responsible?

Blame the criminal, not the guy who writes free software.





First off, welcome to the forum. Second off, yer analogies are a flawed.

Thirdly, there is no use for your hack other than to circumvent<sp?> part of the copy protections built into iTunes which could be seen as a violation of one of the provisions of the wildly popular DMCA. Also, Apple has come down on people who have hacked apps in a way that goes against Apples business/marketing plans. Such as, the iDVD 2 hack that allowed iDVD to see FW burners, and the FCP 3 hack, aka the dane hack, that allowed users to trick FCP into unlocking more RT effects. Would you mind posting back when Apple Legal contacts you? I'm curious to see how long it will take. Anyone wanna start a pool? ;)


Lethal

[Wash!!]

Originally posted by billzeller
It's sad when, as a result of fear, censorship is advocated.
By you doing this program have undermine the whole "legal" sharing thing it's too bad that the win community are not as honest as the mac community... there are some "bad apples" out there but overall we are more honest that the win people...

[stoid]

Originally posted by billzeller
Secondly, let me restate that I do not condone any illegal action used with my software, let alone copyright infringement (not 'stealing', as it's been inappropriately called).

You wrote a program with the sole and ONLY purpose of performing an illegal action. Those who write viruses for free are considered criminals. The only outcomes of this action are negative.

[SilentPanda]

Has anybody started recording lectures with their iPods then sharing them across the campus networks? That'd be cool... :)

[jsd]

I love iTunes Music Sharing. We have a small dorm, only about 250 students, but we get 30 shares on most of the time.

It's super good for Apple, because it gave them almost instantaneous adoption by a lot of people. Of course, some kids are like "Oh, I PAID for MusicMatch, so I don't want to switch." And a few technophobic girls said something like "I don't like listening to music on my computer, I like to blast my stereo through your wall while you're sleeping". But by and large, it's made a lot of PC users Quicktime and iTunes enabled. And iPods are ultra popular.

Still, I can see this being outside of the intended use of the sharing software, and you just know the RIAA is going to make a big fuss, especially if the word gets out to the main media about how much Dorm sharing is going on.

Still you'd think they could live with students doing this for the only 2-4 years that they're able to.

[trebblekicked]

Originally posted by billzeller
Hey guys,

As the programmer of MyTunes, I thought I'd throw in a word here.

*SNIP*

Blame the criminal, not the guy who writes free software.

1st: sorry i called you a d***head. didn't mean it as a personal attack. more like a rhetorical pattern.

2nd: what exactly was your inspiration for this program? what did you intend to use it for?

FWIW: i am in general disharmony with the RIAA. i hate the way they treat their listeners, i hate they way they exploit their talent, ii hate their recent crackdown methods. however, i think iTMS is a step in the right direction for both industry and consumer, and a program like yours (or the mac based DL'ing app/hacks) just makes the RIAA a crankier baby to pacify.

[coolsoldier]

I think Apple and the RIAA would be stupid to disable this feature. Even sharing across the internet was stupid to disable because it's a great way to advertise music. All they need to do is include some kind on on-the-fly encryption to keep other programs from intercepting the stream (as an intercepted stream would be useless).

I can't even count the number of people here at my school who have gotten songs off of iTMS that they have heard over iTunes streams. The fact that *normal* users can NOT use iTunes to pirate music, and they cannot listen to the streams when:

(a)the network is down (happens often on college networks)
(b)they go home
(c)they are using iPods

This alone is enough to get people to click "Buy Song" on a whim :)

[Macco]

Originally posted by trebblekicked

That said, i agree with you. There is nothing wrong with this feature. It's a great way to discover new music, and it doesn't violate copyright laws any more than radio does.

Don't radio stations pay royalties?

[arn]

re: Censorship and Piracy Tools.

Hey all,

Sorry about the MyTunes edit.... .

In general, discussion of tools are ok. Kazaa, Gnutella, mlMac, MyTunes etc... can all be discussed on this forum in general terms.

Discussion of specific illegal activities, however, is prohibited. example: "how do I pirate Photoshop?"

On the same note, in this thread, for the purpose of copying files off of other people's iTunes shares... falls in a more grey area... but prob best we not discuss specifics... but feel free to discuss the implications etc...

It's pretty common sense people.

arn

[Thanatoast]

If I've enabled "look for shared music" in my iTunes preferences tabs, will it then automatically show any shared music folders in the source pane? There's no extra steps I'm missing? The reason I ask is that I see no shared music at all. I've enabled mine, but I can't see anyone else. Is SMU really such a sad campus? :(

[Phil Of Mac]

Originally posted by Thanatoast
If I've enabled "look for shared music" in my iTunes preferences tabs, will it then automatically show any shared music folders in the source pane? There's no extra steps I'm missing? The reason I ask is that I see no shared music at all. I've enabled mine, but I can't see anyone else. Is SMU really such a sad campus? :(

Yes.

WSU was too, and to an extent still is.

[sethypoo]

Originally posted by SilentPanda
Has anybody started recording lectures with their iPods then sharing them across the campus networks? That'd be cool... :)

And illegal.

[LethalWolfe]

Originally posted by Macco
Don't radio stations pay royalties?

Yes.

[sethypoo]

Originally posted by Wash!!
By you doing this program have undermine the whole "legal" sharing thing it's too bad that the win community are not as honest as the mac community... there are some "bad apples" out there but overall we are more honest that the win people...

I don't think that this is fair statement.

We (Mac users) occupy roughly 3% of the pc market. There are less of us therefore there will be less a feeling of "bad apples" within Mac user communites because there are fewer of us to misbehave.

More pc's=more people to write hacks and viruses for them.

[billzeller]

Just as a note, MyTunes is not a hack, nor is it a virus. No iTunes code is modified and no iTunes code was observed, disassembled or reverse-engineered in any way.

[trebblekicked]

Originally posted by Macco
Don't radio stations pay royalties?

good point.

[greenstork]

Originally posted by trebblekicked
sorry. i'll clarify:)

from an aging business model's perspective, this feature canibalizes sales. Why would a Yale student buy a song for ¢99 when it's almost always available for free over the subnet? Additionally, college students and high school students have more "disposable" income than some other demographics, and it just may be that the RIAA was looking for a way to get this group to spend more money on music, not just stop downloading from Kaaza. I wasn't thinking that the RIAA would sue apple or itunes users; more like they'd request/demand removal of the shared libraries feature in 4.2.

That said, i agree with you. There is nothing wrong with this feature. It's a great way to discover new music, and it doesn't violate copyright laws any more than radio does.

In the digital market, the consumer truly runs the show. you need to make concessions to the consumer if you want their buck. the sharing feature seems to me to be a reasonable concession.

I'm sorry, you're assuming that the hypothetical college student in question actually bought music pre-iTunes. I'd venture to guess they were d/l'ing it from Kazaa or other P2P networks. If you look at it this way, Apple and the record industries have nothing to lose and everything to gain, especially when the student grows up and/or the RIAA starts really nailing people.

On your last point. while it may be a concession on the part of the Record labels, it is surely not on the part of Apple. As has been stated already, they're in this to sell iPods.

[greenstork]

Originally posted by Cless
Here at JMU things are subnetted, so not everyone is on the same one, but there's enough, and there's been an explosion of playlists available in iTunes.

And yes, if the RIAA thinks they can completely stop digital theft of music, they're fooling themselves. It's always going to exist, and acting as the Music Gestapo isn't going to win them any friends. Keep enough features in place to keep the honest honest, try to stop the theives, but don't break your backs. The majority of users aren't smart enough to "hack" iTunes, and those that are will. That doesn't mean good features should be taken away.

But, of course, when has "fairness to the consumer" ever been part of the RIAA's mantra?

--Cless

Herein lies the answer to this problem in my opinion. The only way to curb stealing is to offer easy to use alternatives like the iTMS. Combine that with stronger prosecution of offenders and the RIAA should find a balance. Bear in mind that I'm not in favor of this prosecution but I really don't see any alternative for them. I always contend they could lower prices but that's never going to happen.

[greenstork]

Originally posted by ITR 81
Any streaming media is legal because it's just like someone broadcasting over your radio. Now if you record a broadcast song it's not same quality as say on the CD. This is the same with streaming audio. Yes, I can record it but the sound is downgraded from the compression...and if you want to make it into a MP3 or ACC file then it gets compressed again. Each time the file gets compressed it loses audio quality. The RIAA knew iTunes did this since 4 so if they wanted to say something they would said it a long time ago.

Now RIAA and Apple can go after the 3rd parties but I doubt it since the sound quality is just simiply not there.

You're streaming the AAC/MP3 file. It's a digital file comprised of a bunch of 1's and 0's. There is no quality degradation. While the original compression from AIFF caused sound degradation, streaming does *nothing* to reduce sound quality. You're wrong here.

[greenstork]

Originally posted by billzeller
Just as a note, MyTunes is not a hack, nor is it a virus. No iTunes code is modified and no iTunes code was observed, disassembled or reverse-engineered in any way.

While it may not be classical defined as a hack, I see any program specifically designed to circumvent the original design of a program to violate copyright law pretty close to my personal definition. Call it whatever you want but your program is rife with bad intentions.

You've also failed to answer numerous questions about the original intent of your program. I find it ironic you describe folks on this forum as riding on their high horse when you are so quick to squirm out of answering the simplest of questions about your product.

[coolsoldier]

Originally posted by greenstork
You're streaming the AAC/MP3 file. It's a digital file comprised of a bunch of 1's and 0's. There is no quality degradation. While the original compression from AIFF caused sound degradation, streaming does *nothing* to reduce sound quality. You're wrong here.

However, recording it with a program like Audio Hijack and recompressing it does cause a degradation in sound quality. IMO the ultimate solution for everybody involved is for Apple to implement stream encryption in iTunes.

[Wash!!]

Originally posted by sethypoo
I don't think that this is fair statement.

We (Mac users) occupy roughly 3% of the pc market. There are less of us therefore there will be less a feeling of "bad apples" within Mac user communites because there are fewer of us to misbehave.

More pc's=more people to write hacks and viruses for them.
I don't think so even if they are no as many "Bad apples" there is more honesty in the mac community that I seen in the PC world, most of the PC user I deal with and Know always try to find a way to get something for "free" it's just the way the Pc culture is compare to the Mac community, at least in my opinion.

[billzeller]

> You've also failed to answer numerous questions about the original intent of your program

If there were "numerous questions", I missed them.

MyTunes was created with the intent that users could download shared, non-copyrighted music from other computers.

Is that clear enough?

[coolsoldier]

Originally posted by Wash!!
I don't think so even if they are no as many "Bad apples" there is more honesty in the mac community that I seen in the PC world, most of the PC user I deal with and Know always try to find a way to get something for "free" it's just the way the Pc culture is compare to the Mac community, at least in my opinion.

Plenty of Mac users use p2p filesharing also. Why do you think we have Poisoned and Acquisition and mlMac and iSwipe and so on. I don't think windows has a monopoly on dishonesty :)

[greenstork]

Originally posted by Wash!!
I don't think so even if they are no as many "Bad apples" there is more honesty in the mac community that I seen in the PC world, most of the PC user I deal with and Know always try to find a way to get something for "free" it's just the way the Pc culture is compare to the Mac community, at least in my opinion.

This is a sweeping generalization that further paints mac users as elitist computer snobs.

[coolsoldier]

Originally posted by billzeller

MyTunes was created with the intent that users could download shared, non-copyrighted music from other computers.

A noble intent (perhaps), but your program violates the letter of copyright law because it is designed to circumvent a copy protection device. I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but copying files from iTunes is a violation of the DMCA even if they aren't copyrighted songs. As very, very stupid as that is, it's still the law ;)

[Wash!!]

Originally posted by coolsoldier
Plenty of Mac users use p2p filesharing also. Why do you think we have Poisoned and Acquisition and mlMac and iSwipe and so on. I don't think windows has a monopoly on dishonesty :)
True plenty use because there were not alternative to legally buy music on line as most the other service are PC only, hence the reason apple created the itms..But we (mac users) will try to do the "right thing" first as most pc user will not even consider it.

[coolsoldier]

Originally posted by Wash!!
True plenty use because there were not alternative to legally buy music on line as most the other service are PC only, hence the reason apple created the itms..But we (mac users) will try to do the "right thing" first as most pc user will not even consider it.

Maybe. If a greater proportion of Mac users buy instead of pirating music, it can be attributed to the facts that:
(a) A sizable number of Mac users are adamant to support apple at everything they do regardless of cost, and
(b) The average Mac user has more available money than the average PC user, as apple does not sell to the ultra-cheap market.

Also, I suspect there are still plenty of users on poisoned ;)

[greenstork]

Originally posted by billzeller
> You've also failed to answer numerous questions about the original intent of your program

If there were "numerous questions", I missed them.

MyTunes was created with the intent that users could download shared, non-copyrighted music from other computers.

Is that clear enough?

I certainly hope Trinity College doesn't crack down on the distribution of this software from their servers. This could get ugly for you my friend.

[LethalWolfe]

Originally posted by billzeller
> You've also failed to answer numerous questions about the original intent of your program

If there were "numerous questions", I missed them.

MyTunes was created with the intent that users could download shared, non-copyrighted music from other computers.

Is that clear enough?

Funny I don't remember seeing that on your Mytunes site.


Lethal

[greenstork]

Originally posted by LethalWolfe
Funny I don't remember seeing that on your Mytunes site.


Lethal

It's certainly not like he's emphasizing it but it does say something about copyright infringement is illegal on the absolute bottom of the page. His intentions were obviously pure, how could we flame him about it ;)

[billzeller]

No, but you may remember this:

"by using MyTunes you agree to not use it in any manner which may be considered illegal."

"Use at your own risk."

"And remember, copyright infringement is illegal."

Before MyTunes came http://one2ohmygod.sourceforge.net/ , http://www.etek.chalmers.se/~lernvall/itdlgui2.tgz ,iSlurp (http://www.oatbit.com/iSlurp/) ,http://ileech.sourceforge.net/ , and http://isuck.h3q.com/

All for the mac, all allow (or allowed, before the current version of iTunes) you to download shared music. Yes, on the mac. Yes, the platform that you self-righteous b******* (excuse my language, but I feel it appropriate) claim no illegality would ever touch.

This argument could last forever, but I have neither the time or the energy to continue. I'm sure, if you all get your wish, I'll face enough of that shortly.

So throw your best shot, I won't be listening.

[eyelikeart]

before this gets out of hand...

try and relax some...m'kay? ;)

[greenstork]

Originally posted by billzeller
No, but you may remember this:

"by using MyTunes you agree to not use it in any manner which may be considered illegal."

"Use at your own risk."

"And remember, copyright infringement is illegal."

Before MyTunes came http://one2ohmygod.sourceforge.net/ , http://www.etek.chalmers.se/~lernvall/itdlgui2.tgz ,iSlurp (http://www.oatbit.com/iSlurp/) ,http://ileech.sourceforge.net/ , and http://isuck.h3q.com/

All for the mac, all allow (or allowed, before the current version of iTunes) you to download shared music. Yes, on the mac. Yes, the platform that you self-righteous bas*tards (excuse my language, but I feel it appropriate) claim no illegality would ever touch.

This argument could last forever, but I have neither the time or the energy to continue. I'm sure, if you all get your wish, I'll face enough of that shortly.

So throw your best shot, I won't be listening.

I'm not self-righteous, only self-interested. Programs like yours and the others you mentioned make it too easy to steal music. When it's too easy, record companies take notice. Since many developers hide behind the thin veil of legality, the program itself ends up getting crippled because the RIAA can pressure Apple (read iTunes 4.0.1). So perhaps I am selfish since I have seen what programs like your can do for ease of use. The more successful your program is, the more likely that iTunes users will get screwed. If Rendevous sharing were removed from iTunes, make no mistake, this would be a tragedy.

[LethalWolfe]

Originally posted by billzeller
No, but you may remember this:

"by using MyTunes you agree to not use it in any manner which may be considered illegal."

"Use at your own risk."

"And remember, copyright infringement is illegal."

Before MyTunes came http://one2ohmygod.sourceforge.net/ , http://www.etek.chalmers.se/~lernvall/itdlgui2.tgz ,iSlurp (http://www.oatbit.com/iSlurp/) ,http://ileech.sourceforge.net/ , and http://isuck.h3q.com/

All for the mac, all allow (or allowed, before the current version of iTunes) you to download shared music. Yes, on the mac. Yes, the platform that you self-righteous bas*tards (excuse my language, but I feel it appropriate) claim no illegality would ever touch.

This argument could last forever, but I have neither the time or the energy to continue. I'm sure, if you all get your wish, I'll face enough of that shortly.

So throw your best shot, I won't be listening.

I remember the disclaimers but you still never stated the purpose of MyTunes as being soley for downloading uncopyrighted music from other iTunes users. Not that it matters though because MyTunes still circumvents iTunes built in copyprotection.

Anyway, don't forget to post after someone from your school or Apple approaches you about MyTunes. Like I said, I'm curious to see how long it will take. Again, anyone want to start a pool? :D


Lethal

[arn]

Hey all.

MyTunes is a tool, like many others, which can be used for illegal activities, or could be used very legitimately.

arn

[Rower_CPU]

Exactly. And unfortunately, Apple had to take the ability to stream across subnets out of iTunes thanks to apps like iSlurp et al. The continuation of this on local subnets will either force Apple to remove sharing altogether or result in a crack down on the app writers/users.

[JohnGillilan]

I am a Music Industry Major at USC, and we have spent the last month studying digital music distribution over the Internet. As I have a midterm tomarrow, I came across some information that seems quite relevant to the topic at hand.

In 1998, Congress passed the Digital Millenium Copyright Act.

The act basically made it a crime to circumvent anti-piracy measures and extended liability to indirect infringers (i.e. Bill Zellar/MyTunes). Using the "wheel man" concept, this law can hold one individual accountable for the actions of others. MyTunes would fall under a "contributory infringement" violation, as it gives a material contribution (provides the means) to the copyright infringers.

I would argue that Apple/RIAA could take legal action based on this information. Any thoughts??

[coolsoldier]

Originally posted by JohnGillilan

I would argue that Apple/RIAA could take legal action based on this information. Any thoughts??

It would depend entirely on whether MyTunes has any use other than circumventing iTunes copy protection. It seems to me that it doesn't, so yes, MyTunes is probably illegal under the DMCA.

[LethalWolfe]

Originally posted by arn
Hey all.

MyTunes is a tool, like many others, which can be used for illegal activities, or could be used very legitimately.

arn


I fail to see an legit use for MyTunes if all it does is circumvent copy protection/anti-pirating measures in iTunes and allow d/l'ing of other peoples shared music. If, for example, it was an all round recording app, like Audio Hijack or something, then that's one thing, but it doesn't sound like it is.

Also, this brings up an interesting possibility. If person A is sharing their own copyright songs via iTunes and person B uses an app such as iTunes to d/l those copyright righted songs w/o person A's permission, would person A have any legal recourse (either civil or criminal)?


Lethal

[JohnGillilan]

On that note, could person A (the person who's music is being shared from) be held accountable for contributory infringement if their music is copied ala MyTunes??

[segastyle]

billzeller, i appreciate the fact that you were willing to present yourself on this forum for discussion.

everyone here is missing the real point -- mytunes is just one program in hundreds that allows you to download copyrighted material. that should not prevent apple from allowing sharing features in itunes. i mean come on...if you're in a dorm, and you want the copy the music someone is sharing, what's to stop you from walking down the hall and burning it onto a disc from their computer (that would even include aac or wma protected music).

apple has the contracts with the record labels, they are proving their business model to be a winner, so dammit, reintroduce internet sharing! i want to be able to try out music that itunes doesn't have yet. i want to have found a great new band and be able to let my friend going to school all the way in chreighton to be able to check it out.

[LethalWolfe]

Originally posted by segastyle
billzeller, i appreciate the fact that you were willing to present yourself on this forum for discussion.

everyone here is missing the real point -- mytunes is just one program in hundreds that allows you to download copyrighted material. that should not prevent apple from allowing sharing features in itunes. i mean come on...if you're in a dorm, and you want the copy the music someone is sharing, what's to stop you from walking down the hall and burning it onto a disc from their computer (that would even include aac or wma protected music).

apple has the contracts with the record labels, they are proving their business model to be a winner, so dammit, reintroduce internet sharing! i want to be able to try out music that itunes doesn't have yet. i want to have found a great new band and be able to let my friend going to school all the way in chreighton to be able to check it out.

The business model will no longer be a winner if it turns into another kazaa. The labels will not support Apple if they let users turn iTunes into a pirates paradise. If the labels don't support Apple there is no more iTMS. If there is no iTMS iTunes, the iPod, and Apple take a major hit. IIRC the major labels only signed up for a 1 agreement w/Apple and iTMS so if Apple does not keep things ship shape the labels will just drop iTMS.

Apple has tried it's best to have the most relaxed DRM and give people the most freedom w/their music, but w/that freedom comes responsibility and unfortunetly enough users have repeatedly shown that they are irrisponsible by abusing that freedom.

Why don't you focus on the cause of the problem (the people taking advantage of Apple's attempt to provide a superior product w/great features) and not the symptom (Apple removing features in an effort to keep the iTMS open and not get sued by the RIAA)?

Since it's already a piece of cake to pirate music via other means why doesn't everyone just do that and not ****** up iTunes for the rest of us?


Lethal

[coolsoldier]

iTunes will not turn into "another kazaa". You have no ability to search, and with a few smart technological moves, they can prevent file stream hijacking. As far as recording the audio to get a file, I envision people doing the same thing with napster-style "unlimited streaming" programs.

[arn]

Originally posted by LethalWolfe
I fail to see an legit use for MyTunes if all it does is circumvent copy protection/anti-pirating measures in iTunes and allow d/l'ing of other peoples shared music.

The usual intended use for iTunes sharing is through local home networks.

My PC Laptop <-> My PowerMac

I have a song on my PowerMac that I want on my PC Laptop for whatever reason. I copy the song over the share.

I could also mount my PowerMac's drive or something... but I'm listening to the song I want right now... why bother?

arn

[LethalWolfe]

Originally posted by coolsoldier
iTunes will not turn into "another kazaa". You have no ability to search, and with a few smart technological moves, they can prevent file stream hijacking. As far as recording the audio to get a file, I envision people doing the same thing with napster-style "unlimited streaming" programs.

I meant if Apple left the sharing over internet as it originally was iTunes, especially once released for windows, could have become a huge pirateing mess because of things like iSwipe and MyTunes. And I'm it would't be too hard to create an app that would automatically search all the sharred play lists (which would obviously be much faster than loading each list and using iTunes search function).

arn, isn't your example still illegal under the wonderfully popular DMCA sense MyTunes circumvents anti-copying measures in iTunes?


Lethal

[sethypoo]

Originally posted by Wash!!
I don't think so even if they are no as many "Bad apples" there is more honesty in the mac community that I seen in the PC world, most of the PC user I deal with and Know always try to find a way to get something for "free" it's just the way the Pc culture is compare to the Mac community, at least in my opinion.

Who says though? What are your sources?

Who said Mac users don't try to get things either free or with a discount? Thousands of people get their Apple products with the educational discount, as with the buisness and governmental discounts.

This is your opinion, which is fine, it's just not exactly accurate.

[Thanatoast]

Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
Yes.

WSU was too, and to an extent still is.
Thanks for the info. :)

Incidentally, someone just popped up on my source list and I'm listening to their library right now. This is hella cool. :D

Now I know why everyone loves this feature! I agree with those who don't understand what the freakin' RIAA is up in arms about. I never would have heard some of this music if I hadn't been able to stream it. I'm much more likely to hit up the iTMS if I know what's available, rather than never having heard of it.

[sethypoo]

Originally posted by Wash!!
True plenty use because there were not alternative to legally buy music on line as most the other service are PC only, hence the reason apple created the itms..But we (mac users) will try to do the "right thing" first as most pc user will not even consider it.

That's because Apple was the first and only to put out an online music store.:rolleyes:

[segastyle]

Originally posted by LethalWolfe
The business model will no longer be a winner if it turns into another kazaa. The labels will not support Apple if they let users turn iTunes into a pirates paradise. If the labels don't support Apple there is no more iTMS. If there is no iTMS iTunes, the iPod, and Apple take a major hit. IIRC the major labels only signed up for a 1 agreement w/Apple and iTMS so if Apple does not keep things ship shape the labels will just drop iTMS.

...

Since it's already a piece of cake to pirate music via other means why doesn't everyone just do that and not ****** up iTunes for the rest of us?

what i mean by a winning business model is that DESPITE the current availability of kazaa and other file sharing programs that allow easy downloading of files (a piece of cake according to you), the current music store is STILL a success (online singles currently sell better than cd singles), proving that there are people out there that will buy music instead of downloading it if it's easy and prices and drm are reasonable.


Originally posted by LethalWolfe
Apple has tried it's best to have the most relaxed DRM and give people the most freedom w/their music, but w/that freedom comes responsibility and unfortunetly enough users have repeatedly shown that they are irrisponsible by abusing that freedom.

people have repeatedly shown that they can't or won't drive the speed limit, and that results in something a harsh as a loss of life, not to mention millions in insurance, but car makers don't take it upon themselves to limit the top speed of their cars to 75 mph. and neither does the government.


Originally posted by LethalWolfe
Why don't you focus on the cause of the problem (the people taking advantage of Apple's attempt to provide a superior product w/great features) and not the symptom (Apple removing features in an effort to keep the iTMS open and not get sued by the RIAA)?

and as for the cause of the problem, yes it's people taking advantage of the system, but it's also businesses (the riaa) taking advantage of their artists, and their customers. but the whole point is the people that aren't doing anything wrong are the only ones actually being punished. instead of limited the software's features, why not go after the people making the other software. then they can let the legal system decide.


Originally posted by LethalWolfe
I meant if Apple left the sharing over internet as it originally was iTunes, especially once released for windows, could have become a huge pirateing mess because of things like iSwipe and MyTunes. And I'm it would't be too hard to create an app that would automatically search all the sharred play lists (which would obviously be much faster than loading each list and using iTunes search function).

again, those programs will be made despite what apple does or does not do. hell, i can use ftp to download practically any song ever made. so should the entire ftp protocol be changed and limited so that someone cannot transfer certain types of files?

[LethalWolfe]

segastyle,

You seem to be missing the point that Apple has something to loose, namely the iTMS. Some how Jobs & Co convinced the majors that the iTMS relatively lax DRM would be enough and coaxed the majors into uncharted waters. And I know that Jobs isn't going to sink iTMS less than a year after launch by thumbing his nose at the majors and not deactivating sharing over internet.


Lethal

[segastyle]

no, i understand they have something to lose, and that's the reason why they eliminated internet sharing. i guess my whole point is that doing whatever they possibly can to make the riaa happy is lame, and quite frankly leaves the customers out to dry.

my problem isn't with apple, i know they are doing their best to walk a tightrope with this whole music thing. my problem is with the recording labels, who seem to be spending more effort, time, and money on discovering new ways to "control" and "police" us, instead of trying to make a product that might be appealing enough to bring in the money they want.

i guess you could label me a bitter former customer. i own over 700 cds. but i refuse any longer to shell out 16 bucks for a cd which, if i'm lucky, might have 3 decent songs on it (but there's no way for me to find out because you can't rent cds like movies, and stores don't let you try a cd out).

and so the next time i want to get a friend in california to listen to a cd of mine with hopes that he/she might like it enough to go buy all the cds from that band, i guess i'll have to illegally burn a copy of it to mail to them because every company is so afraid of the riaa that they've even removed nice "honest" ways of sharing something.

and in the meantime, thousands of people will still be acquiring music illegally through other means, and a few extrememly clever ones will be figuring out how to crack the drm on aac and wma files...then what happens?

[LethalWolfe]

segastyle,

I think we are on the same page, I'm just not as jaded as you yet. ;)

I too love to try before I buy, and I've purchased a lot of CDs because I've been able to take bands I'm unfamilar w/for a "test drive." Thankfully I've noticed more artists becoming "internet aware" and putting low-to-medium quality streams, and sometimes MP3's, of their songs on their sites. I really wish more artists would do that. Also, and it's not quite as convient, but around here local record stores (none of the big chains) allow you to listen to any CD you want.

Anyway, I guess I really don't blame people in the entertainment industy (be they execs, artists, or rank 'n file crew members) for their fear of on-line pirating. "Back in the day" time, money, and quality presented natural limiting factors and kept your average consumer from creating very many copies. But now anyone can upload a lossless or uncompressed rip of a song onto a P2P and 10's of millions of users instantly have access a perfect copy of the original. Seeing your source of income become readily avaible for millions of people to download for free is a pretty big pill to swallow. Now I'm not saying the RIAA has handled the situation well, because they haven't, I'm just saying I can understand fear and worst-case scenario<sp?> thinking that is going on.


Lethal

[billyboy]

Dont ban the pirates´playlist ripping software because that software could be used for alternative legal purposes - give them the benefit of th edoubt!. However, get the RIAA or whoever, to get it down in black and white that ripping off Playlists is deliberately circumventing Apple´s DRM software which is illegal and the fine is XYZ big bucks.

When the sharing option is activated, that info flashes on the screen by default. Unlike kazaa, nobody can twist and squirm and say they didnt know that ripping off playlists was illegal.

So, how to implement the law? To make it easier to police, each person offering their playlist for sharing is responsible for the action of those listening in. You have direct control over who shares playlists, and you could even have an option that tells certain people who you think are going to misuse it, thay they can take a hike.

Each TV owner in the UK lives exactly by this law.

For instance, a TV licence in the UK is per household. If there is no licence and your family is caught watching TV like they have the right to pay zero while 90%+ people in the country contributes, the homeowner is liable to pay the fine, no ifs or buts. And it is a monster fine these days.

On a similar vein, the Sharing playlists feature is, I imagine, offered as a feature so that members of a family unit can share. If your little Johnny is upstairs ripping off your playlists with some ****head´s piracy software, then unfortunately Dad is responsible. Maybe Dad didnt know about Kazaa, but if Dad is sharing his iTunes playlist with Johnny, the box on screen informing him of the law is there to see. So a responsible Dad is likely to have a good go at altering Johnny´s idea of what is right and acceptable. Real bad kids will ignore him, really really bad parents will think its ok, its only like recording th eradio, blah blah- but the majority will be very aware that its a serious "offence". So you are responsible for who listens to your playlists.

It would apply at colleges and universities too. If you look at TV licencing in UK Universities, even if you live in the same building as 20 other students, you arent living as a single household, so each student is responsible for the TV in their room. ie you need a licence per student. By extension, the Playlist sharing facility becomes the responsibility of each student in his household unit. If you choose to let any old Joe listen in, then if that good mate is ripping off playlists, you are going to be nailed too if it comes to light. Self regulation is the key. You soon find out who your friends are, if you tell someone that copying your playlist is illegal, and it gets out that they have been doing exactly that, ....

[Phil Of Mac]

You need to license television sets in the UK? That's draconian!

[segastyle]

LethalWolfe, give it time, and you may be :)

i don't blame the riaa for being scared either. when i saw my first mp3 way back in 1995/96, all i thought was wow, this is too easy, wait until people find out about this.

but it pisses me off that apple has an "honest" way to share music, which could actually help out the riaa, but then removing it because people can make software to circumvent it. the funny thing is, even with that software, it's much more difficult than using ftp or kazaa. remember rendezvous does not work across networks, so for internet sharing, you actually need someone's ip address. kazaa you need nothing.

i'm hoping that with the continued success of the itms, that eventually apple will have enough pull to bring the riaa over to their side. sharing is good. at least, that's what i was taught in kindergarten...

[LethalWolfe]

Originally posted by segastyle
LethalWolfe, give it time, and you may be :)

i don't blame the riaa for being scared either. when i saw my first mp3 way back in 1995/96, all i thought was wow, this is too easy, wait until people find out about this.

but it pisses me off that apple has an "honest" way to share music, which could actually help out the riaa, but then removing it because people can make software to circumvent it. the funny thing is, even with that software, it's much more difficult than using ftp or kazaa. remember rendezvous does not work across networks, so for internet sharing, you actually need someone's ip address. kazaa you need nothing.

i'm hoping that with the continued success of the itms, that eventually apple will have enough pull to bring the riaa over to their side. sharing is good. at least, that's what i was taught in kindergarten...


I think that after iTMS proves itself, well the on-line store model in general, the RIAA will start going on the heavy offensive to try and exploit that business model as much as they can. Movie Studios feared the TV, and TV feared the VCR, until someone realized how they could use the new technology to make an @ss load of cash. :D

I would honestly be surprised if sharing over internet was not reintroduced some where down the line.


Lethal


EDIT: Phil of Mac, the TV license fee in the UK is used to help fund the BBC (which is publicly funded). In the states, IIRC, we do a simialr thing w/PBS, but instead of a license fee the money comes from TV purchases.


Lethal

[Phil Of Mac]

Nonetheless, the enforcement of it seems kind of draconian. They drive around and detect if you have an unlicensed television in your house?

[coolsoldier]

Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
Nonetheless, the enforcement of it seems kind of draconian. They drive around and detect if you have an unlicensed television in your house?

No more draconian than cable and satellite companies methods... Satellite providers require you to plug your set-top boxes into a phone jack so they can phone home, and send signals to "nuke" your box if you don't pay your bills :eek:

Cable companies send people around to check TV cable connections -- US law allows cable companies to actually send employees onto your property (even if you aren't a subscriber) without your permission to check that non-subscribers aren't connected to cable service.

Either one seems too heavy-handed, but the same thing happens here, even if it's by a company instead of the government.

[Phil Of Mac]

But those are agreed upon parts of a contract with the company you're buying service from. Possession of an unlicensed television? That's different.

[coolsoldier]

Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
But those are agreed upon parts of a contract with the company you're buying service from. Possession of an unlicensed television? That's different.

Not quite. Cable companies can come on your property even if you've never done business with them simply on the premise that you might be using their product without paying. The government specifically gives them this right by classifying them as a "utility".

[Phil Of Mac]

Originally posted by coolsoldier
Not quite. Cable companies can come on your property even if you've never done business with them simply on the premise that you might be using their product without paying. The government specifically gives them this right by classifying them as a "utility".

I don't like that part, so I hereby declare that as bad as fining people for unlicensed televisions.

[LethalWolfe]

Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
Nonetheless, the enforcement of it seems kind of draconian. They drive around and detect if you have an unlicensed television in your house?


I studied in London a few years ago and they had a big advertising/scar tatic push. TV commercials, billboards, signs in the Tube (subway system). It was insane. Think of it as a cross between the truthtv/anti-smoking adds, the CIA, and the RIAA. ;)


Lethal

[billyboy]

Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
I don't like that part, so I hereby declare that as bad as fining people for unlicensed televisions.

It may sound draconian or whatever, but having seen the complete mess that is TV in many countries in the world, the TV licence is a brilliant idea. It is a public service to which the whole country contributes $3 a week per household, but if you are a pensioner you get it for free, and the benefits are quite spectacular.

Without wishing to sound too jingoistic, due to the funding and the peculiar scenario that it is state funded but independent of central government, the BBC is the most important and respected TV and Radio entity in the world. We get two advert free BBC channels, which although always open for improvement, do produce an exceptionally high standard of programming. Sport has been their thing, and I think Sky is so good because they really had to produce something special to wrestle the football rights off the BBC.

As far as news goes, you dont watch the news trying to unravel political agendas, the world service radio is just that and their 5 main radio stations are advert free, their documentaries, especially from BBC Bristol are sold all over the world. The BBC is also very innovative and was so ahead of the game with digital that they were nearly hung for "wasting" so much money developing a quirky new technology. A shame though, they arent very Mac oriented!

I have sat through the ****e that is Spanish TV. Spaniards laugh at the idea of paying, yet complain and go slowly mad watching two programmes at once just to avoid the 15 minutes of ads every 15 minutes. There is one of five channels that gives balanced news, the rest are literally a disgraceful extension of each owners politics. That for me is why licencsing isnt so bad.

The concept of men in vans scanning the streets is quite funny, but at least they dont have the right to walk into your home.

[Phil Of Mac]

Well, in the US, we don't have either problem.

[ErikGrim]

Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
Well, in the US, we don't have either problem. Really? How come 60 minutes is only about 45? :P

[Phil Of Mac]

Originally posted by ErikGrim
Really? How come 60 minutes is only about 45? :P

Television commercials are a small price to pay to avoid the Television Gestapo.