Poll: Do you have interest in the Digital Rights (DRM) Stripping iTunes Applications?

[MacRumors]

Vote: Poll: Do you have interest in the Digital Rights (DRM) Stripping iTunes Applications? (http://www.macpolls.com/?poll_id=407)

[PlaceofDis]

not at all, the limits that the DRM gives me is plenty enough that my gf and i can all share the music we download off of the iTMS. i think these drm cracking tools are out there for the "just because" reason to show that they can crack the drm... if i dont want a song to be copy proteceted ill just burn it to a cd and re rip it

[IndyGopher]

Vote: Poll: Do you have interest in the Digital Rights (DRM) Stripping iTunes Applications? (http://www.macpolls.com/?poll_id=407)

I voted No, but that is not entirely accurate. I have interest in them only inasmuch as I want to see people stop ruining a Good Thing. There is some comfort, I suppose, in knowing that if Apple were nuked tomorrow, these applications would allow me to preserve the music I paid for the right to listen to, but I strongly doubt that this is the motivation of most who write and download these programs.

[Laslo Panaflex]

Can't you just burn a CD and re-rip and strip the DRM? I voted no, becuase really I don't need to strip the DRM, it's pretty fair. The only real reason people develop anti-DRM programs is to "stick it to the man". I can find better things to do with my time rather than stripping DRM from songs that already do what I want, burn to CD and transfer to iPod.

[wrldwzrd89]

I was never a file-sharer nor do I use the iTMS. I also have only one Mac and one iPod - no Linux machines or anything else like that. Therefore, DRM-stripping applications are of no use to me anyway (and I wouldn't use them even if I did use the iTMS AND had at least one Linux machine).

[wordmunger]

If I used it, I would use it regularly, so I replied "yes, for regular use." What I haven't decided is whether it would be worth the bother. The reason I'd get it would be to provide a backup of my music in case Apple goes belly-up a few years down the road, or the ability to make things like MP3 CDs. I'm not interested in illegal file sharing.

[Photorun]

What's up with people posting stuff of Apple's demise? They're five billion in the black, that's better than Gateway or Compaq. Reports of Apple's demise are, as always, exaggerated.

[wordmunger]

What's up with people posting stuff of Apple's demise? They're five billion in the black, that's better than Gateway or Compaq. Reports of Apple's demise are, as always, exaggerated.
The road to corporate ruin is paved with companies that once had five billion in the bank. I'm not saying Apple is about to go bust, I'm just saying that if they do, I don't want them to take *my* music with them.

EDIT: FYI, Compaq no longer exists; they were bought up by HP, with $13.94 billion in the bank.

[idkew]

i just don't like the fact apple can de-authorize my computer and never let me use my music again, as they see fit. (i.e. iTMS goes under... apple goes under... both highly improbable, but possible)

therefor- i want to have the ability to de-DRm my music in case such a problem ever were to be imminent.

[Tideswimmer]

I have several albums from ITMS. So far, I haven’t come close to even knowing the DRM restrictions are in place.

I can’t even see that if I remain in the realm of true “Fair Use” that I will ever bump into Apple’s DRM wall.

I think the DRM structure Apple uses is more of a security blanket for the RIAA, who right now still feel the need to prove they are relevant. Which is not to say they can cause a whole lot of trouble as they pass, kicking and screaming, into the tar pits of history. If Apple’s exceedingly generous DRM structure (you know it’s a whole lot more liberal than the RIAA would allow) allows them a little comfort as they go, I say leave the DRM alone.

[areyouwishing]

I said yes regularly, but i probably should have put no...

I have 2 computers authorized that i don't want authorized anymore that I can't get to ever again... and it was a pain in the ass until apple decided to let 5 computers use the songs instead of 3. What I REALLY want is for apple to make a button on iTunes to un-authorize all computers so you can start over again... it wouldn't hurt anything.

[SiliconAddict]

Yes. I rip the rights off and convert it to MP3 so I can play the music on my Pocket PC.

[DoktorFaust]

Yes! I want to be able to listen to my music on my stereo system with a Slimp3 player. Apple doesn't offer a solution similar to the Slimp3 player, and until they do (or license fairplay), I'm going to strip the DRM and play MY music *legally* on my home system.

[longofest]

If I could easily use the music store songs in the pro applications, then I would be fine never stripping the DRM. However, as it is, I need to be able to use my music that I have bought in my Final Cut Express projects. I wish they would add a Music tab like in DVD Studio Pro or iPhoto and iMovie that directly accesses your music library.

So, right now I have to go through a complicated process in order to strip the DRM from the song, especially since QT 6.5.1 and iTunes 4.5 came out. The process is akin to having to burn the song, and then re-rip it, but I actually do it by using Quicktime to transfer the .m4p to a .mov, and then using Compressor to conver to .aiff. Ends up with a big file and if you were to re-encode at AAC, it would be very lossy, but now at least I can use my music in my FCE projects.

p.s. Don't tell too many people about that technique. I don't want to Apple to then plug up that hole as well...

[idkew]

Yes! I want to be able to listen to my music on my stereo system with a Slimp3 player. Apple doesn't offer a solution similar to the Slimp3 player, and until they do (or license fairplay), I'm going to strip the DRM and play MY music *legally* on my home system.

well, not really legally. you are breaking the license but circumventing the DRM. once you do that, you no longer can legally listen to the music.

but- i sure agree with what you are doing. doesn't make it legal though. ;)

[montecristo]

I said yes regularly, but i probably should have put no...

I have 2 computers authorized that i don't want authorized anymore that I can't get to ever again... and it was a pain in the ass until apple decided to let 5 computers use the songs instead of 3. What I REALLY want is for apple to make a button on iTunes to un-authorize all computers so you can start over again... it wouldn't hurt anything.

You can deauthorize any computer from another computer, as long as you log into iTMS with your account. That way if 5 authorized computers die, you don't have to worry. Check it out -- Apple already lets you do what you want to do.

[Dippo]

Well I had to vote yes. Apple won't support the cheap MP3 player I have so the music must be converted.

Of course if I really wanted to break the DRM, I would buy the CD :p

[Le Big Mac]

Yes! I want to be able to listen to my music on my stereo system with a Slimp3 player. Apple doesn't offer a solution similar to the Slimp3 player, and until they do (or license fairplay), I'm going to strip the DRM and play MY music *legally* on my home system.

I say yes, for myself, because I'm honest. I, too, would like to be able to use my purchased music on machines that don't have the fairplay codec--for example, Tivo. I'm not looking to trade/sell/P2P my music, so Apple shouldn't care about me.

Of course, I understand the greater need to prevent the dishonest people in the world. Unfortunately, most things are now geared to prevent the dishonest, not to help the honest. Oh well.
:(

[areyouwishing]

You can deauthorize any computer from another computer, as long as you log into iTMS with your account. That way if 5 authorized computers die, you don't have to worry. Check it out -- Apple already lets you do what you want to do.

the "deauthorize" computer menu item only does the current computer you are on... but i did find through a little searching, a form on the internet to make the request to de-authorize all my computers.

[DoktorFaust]

well, not really legally. you are breaking the license but circumventing the DRM. once you do that, you no longer can legally listen to the music.

but- i sure agree with what you are doing. doesn't make it legal though. ;)

Yeah, I figured someone would call me on that -- the point being that I'm still using the music correctly under the intent of the law, just not to the letter of the law (assuming that the intent is that I don't sell, distributed, or publically broadcast the music)...

[MacFan25]

No, I really don't have a use for any of the DRM Stripping Applications. The songs I purchase from the iTunes Music Store work flawlessly on my iPod, and I have no other devices on which I want to play them on.

[bennetsaysargh]

i voted no. i have no need to. there are legitimate reasons though, like using it on unsupported devices, but if i ever get one, i'd still use my ipod for music.

[iJon]

i used to be, but apple fixed that with allowing 5 computers to be authorized. i have 3 computers that need to be authorized, but may play them elsewhere too sometimes.

iJon

[SiliconAddict]

the "deauthorize" computer menu item only does the current computer you are on... but i did find through a little searching, a form on the internet to make the request to de-authorize all my computers.

Guys correct me if I’m wrong but I thought I read somewhere Apple would do this for you ONLY once. My biggest concern about activation is two fold.
1. System’s hard drive crashes. I can’t deactivate. I just lost one acct system.
2. I install a new OS and forget to deactivate. I just lost one acct system.
3. Windows totally crashes on me to the point it no longer boots. I just lost an acct system.
Etc. etc. etc. There needs to be a remote (e.g. NOT on that computer.) method of deactivating an authorized computer. I’m for the previously mentioned idea of being able to log onto your iTMS account and deactivating there but there are obviously inherent methods of circumventing this. Example. Deactivating a system and then add another system. Deactivate. Add another system. Deactivate and so on.

[guytoronto]

I'm Canadian, so I don't have the iTMS yet, but from what I gather, this is a non-issue.

1) Buy music from iTunes.
2) Archive on AUDIO CDs.
3) Archive on DATA CDs.
4) Done!

If you want DRM free music, re-rip from the AUDIO CD. I know this would be the best way to do it for my Sony MiniDisc player.

If your system crashes, you have your orginal backed up DATA versions.

What's the problem?

[Savage Henry]

I'm Canadian, so I don't have the iTMS yet, but from what I gather, this is a non-issue.

1) Buy music from iTunes.
2) Archive on AUDIO CDs.
3) Archive on DATA CDs.
4) Done!

If you want DRM free music, re-rip from the AUDIO CD. I know this would be the best way to do it for my Sony MiniDisc player.

If your system crashes, you have your orginal backed up DATA versions.

What's the problem?

I'm from the UK, and I couldn't agree more with everything there.

[rueyeet]

I voted "yes, regularly". There are many legitimate reasons that FairPlay can be a pain in the kiester.

As SiliconAddict notes, it's too easy to lose one of your authorized systems. Yes, you have some limited recourse here, but don't be forgetful on a regular basis....
If you have older Windows computers, Linux boxes, or want to use a portable layer other than an iPod, you're out of luck.
If you'd like to stream your tunes over one of those wireless MP3 thingies, you're out of luck.
If you'd like to/need to use one of your purchased tracks in the other iApps, or in the pro apps, you're out of luck.
Should the RIAA ever get antsy enough to yank their content from the iTMS (far, far more likely than Apple going out of business, though that could happen too), you're out of luck.
If you can hear the loss of quality caused by burning and re-ripping, you're out of luck.

The upshot being that yes, as long as the iTunes + iPod combination is your chosen solution, you'll be perfectly happy being strictly limited to it. For anyone else, FairPlay's going to be a hindrance even to the legitimate fair use of their music, plain and simple. There's just too much "out of luck" in this list of mine.

I don't support filesharing, but believe that DRM is a case of locking the barn door after the horse is well and truly gone. I can download anything I want for free, but I'll use iTMS because it saves me the work of finding, downloading, quality-verifying, and correctly tagging free music. But the fact that it saddles me with restrictions--even livable ones--in return for the privelege has always been a bit galling.

[Bunzi2k4]

I think i have one installed on my machine here somewhere... i figured i should have it just in case if i need it for some reason, but if i can burn it, and then re-rip it, then there is no need for one of these programs.

[Le Big Mac]

Yeah, I figured someone would call me on that -- the point being that I'm still using the music correctly under the intent of the law, just not to the letter of the law (assuming that the intent is that I don't sell, distributed, or publically broadcast the music)...

Don't think that Apple's licensing terms are completely consistent with the law. They're not. Copyright law and digital protection schemes don't necessarily protect the same thing. And a lot of protection schemes prevent "fair use" of copyrighted material in an effort to prevent illegal copyright violations.

[Doctor Q]

I wouldn't use a DRM stripper, but I would like to know how effective my precautions are against losing my music some time in the future. I'm still not quite clear about it.

If I've backed up my protected AAC files to CD, but then I have to do a clean O.S. installation because my hard disk died (so I couldn't deauthorize it), and then I restore my music files, will they work again? Will I have lost one of my 5 computers? Do I need Apple's help?

[Fender2112]

I voted yes for occasional use. It's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it. :)

[ZildjianKX]

I voted yes for occasional use. It's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it. :)

Well said.

[thecombatwombat]

OK, I don't get this whole burning and reripping argument. How is this less illegal than stripping the DRM? It does effectively the same thing right? You've still circumvented the protection haven't you? How does this violate Apple's agreement less? Or the DMCA for that matter, seems you'd just be making your CD burner/itunes a nice corporate approved "circumvention device."

It seems to me if you're going to rerip, you might as well just go with the lossless solution.

Also, anyone who said for occasional use want to explain a situation where you would only want it for occasional use? I don't mean to troll, but why would you only want to strip some songs and not all?

[Nermal]

I can't access iTMS because I'm not in the US. But were it available, I would use a DRM-stripper so that I could play my purchased songs on my Sony player.

[wordmunger]

I'm Canadian, so I don't have the iTMS yet, but from what I gather, this is a non-issue.

1) Buy music from iTunes.
2) Archive on AUDIO CDs.
3) Archive on DATA CDs.
4) Done!

If you want DRM free music, re-rip from the AUDIO CD. I know this would be the best way to do it for my Sony MiniDisc player.

If your system crashes, you have your orginal backed up DATA versions.

What's the problem?

Ahhh... if it were only that simple. As we've learned, CD is not a reliable form of backup, so if we truly want to archive successfully, we must re-rip the CDs. Yet another step, causing a loss of quality, and completely wasting the CDs themselves. Wouldn't it be simpler to skip the CD step? If the result is the same, why shouldn't I just use anti-DRM software?

[Doctor Q]

Ahhh... if it were only that simple. As we've learned, CD is not a reliable form of backup, so if we truly want to archive successfully, we must re-rip the CDs. Yet another step, causing a loss of quality, and completely wasting the CDs themselves. Wouldn't it be simpler to skip the CD step? If the result is the same, why shouldn't I just use anti-DRM software?My guess is that Apple's goal is to make removing DRM inconvenient and lossy, both of which will limit its use. Maybe doing so is even part of their agreement with the record companies. Apple has not made it impossible to remove DRM, and I don't think they want to. They are treading the fine line between customers and the record industry.

[johnnowak]

Not sure if it is kosher to ask but... where can I get me one of these apps anyway? I've only bought two albums from the ITMS, but still.

[IndyGopher]

Not sure if it is kosher to ask but... where can I get me one of these apps anyway? I've only bought two albums from the ITMS, but still.
Do a search for DRM on versiontracker.

That said, I don't think kosherite law applies here.

[idkew]

My guess is that Apple's goal is to make removing DRM inconvenient and lossy, both of which will limit its use. Maybe doing so is even part of their agreement with the record companies. Apple has not made it impossible to remove DRM, and I don't think they want to. They are treading the fine line between customers and the record industry.


i agree. i think apple's goal it to make it too hard for the majority to break the drm, but for those who are in the know, i don't think apple minds, as long as the "know" is small and the ignorant is large.

[simX]

If you'd like to/need to use one of your purchased tracks in the other iApps, or in the pro apps, you're out of luck.

Um, no. FairPlay allows you to use purchased tracks in the iApps and Pro Apps. There's no need to circumvent the DRM for this need.

Should the RIAA ever get antsy enough to yank their content from the iTMS (far, far more likely than Apple going out of business, though that could happen too), you're out of luck.

Um, wrong on this point too. The whole point of iTunes is that once you download it, the music is yours. The RIAA can yank their content, but that doesn't allow them to prevent you from listening to the music you bought when the content was online.

If you can hear the loss of quality caused by burning and re-ripping, you're out of luck.

Wait... so you're saying you want DRM-stripping apps because you want to strip the DRM? That's SUCH a good reason for wanting to strip the DRM, it's almost obvious! :rolleyes:

Your first three points are fine, but those last three don't hold water.

[idkew]

Um, wrong on this point too. The whole point of iTunes is that once you download it, the music is yours. The RIAA can yank their content, but that doesn't allow them to prevent you from listening to the music you bought when the content was online.


sorry sim, you are wrong on this one. you NEVER own ANY music you buy from iTMS or from a cd... you are licensed to use it iTMS, and you do not own the copyright to a CD.

go read your license agreement. apple may revoke your license at any time for any reason, at any time, at any reason. ;) if you have not de-drm'd your music before this, it is wasted bytes. you will be unable to unencrypt it (assuming apple has a way of mass de-authorizing all music).

[Nermal]

you NEVER own ANY music you buy from iTMS or from a cd... you are licensed to use it.

go read your license agreement.

I don't recall receiving a licence agreement with any of the CDs I've ever bought.

[idkew]

I don't recall receiving a licence agreement with any of the CDs I've ever bought.


humm..... wish i had a cd near me...

i do know for a fact you do not own (the copyright to) the music. if you did, you would be collecting royalties on it. just like Wacko Jacko is doing with the Beatles catalog.

[simX]

sorry sim, you are wrong on this one. you NEVER own ANY music you buy from iTMS or from a cd... you are licensed to use it.

go read your license agreement. apple may revoke your license at any time for any reason, at any time, at any reason. ;) if you have not de-drm'd your music before this, it is wasted bytes. you will be unable to unencrypt it (assuming apple has a way of mass de-authorizing all music).

Well then if you never own any music you buy from the iTMS or a CD, your point is still wrong. According to you, the RIAA could come to your house, and tell you to fork over your CDs, even though they DON'T have DRM on it. So, again, the need to strip DRM from iTMS files is nonexistent in this case.

[iFranky]

One point which everyone seems to be overlooking is that it is _not_ ok to circumvent the DRM even if its for your own, personal use. Like it or not, Apple sells these songs on the iTMS on its own terms. The fact that you may or may not be able to break the terms of sale without their knowledge is neither here nor there, you are breaking the terms of the license agreement.

I don't believe that just because something is illegal that it is also immoral. However, I feel that entering into a contract where one party (Apple) is doing so in good faith, with the intention of breaking the terms of sale where it is not a legally 'unreasonable contract' is unethical.

This applies both to the supposed 'legality' of stripping the DRM and to complaints about the practical restrictions: if you want to play the music on a plethora of machines or are unprepared to back up carefully then you are purchasing the wrong products. No one's making you buy from iTMS - the convenience of acquisition and great price are a _trade off_ against the things previously discussed.

If you'd like an analogy, buying hi-fi equipment online - its great because you get cheaper prices and don't have to leave your armchair. However, you can't hear what you're getting and if its duff you can't try it out in the shop and it'll cost an arm and a leg to return. It's a trade off.

If you're all so concerned about the restrictions Apple places on the music they sell on iTMS, then don't buy their product, buy it from somewhere else. And be thankful that they're upfront about the restrictions so you can choose! Think, people, Think. :confused:

[simX]

Update as far as your rights to the music you purchase:

I have my physical Joshua Tree CD, and nowhere does it say that I don't own this CD and that the copyright owner can take it away from me at anytime.

Similarly, Apple does not retain the right to revoke your rights to the music you buy through the iTMS. Here (http://www.info.apple.com/usen/itunes/policies.html) are the terms and conditions. Here is the relevant section to content usage rules:

CONTENT USAGE RULES
Your use of the Products is conditioned upon your prior acceptance of the terms of this Agreement.

You shall be authorized to use the Product only for personal, non-commercial use.

You shall be authorized to use the Product on five Apple authorized computers.

You shall be entitled to burn and export Products solely for personal, non-commercial use.

Any burning or exporting capabilities are solely an accommodation to you and shall not constitute a grant or waiver (or other limitation or implication) of any rights of the copyright owners of any content, sound recording, underlying musical composition or artwork embodied in any Product.

You agree that you will not attempt to, or encourage or assist any other person to, circumvent or modify any software required for use of the Service or any of the Usage Rules.

The delivery of a Product does not transfer to you any commercial or promotional use rights in the Product.

Refer to Terms of Sale for more detailed information on Usage Rules.

OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Apple is not responsible for typographic errors.

Apple reserves the right to change the terms and conditions of sale at the iTunes Music Store at any time. Customers are encouraged to review the Sales Policies on a periodic basis for modifications.

All sales on the iTunes Music Store are governed by California law, without giving effect to its conflict of law provisions.

No Apple employee or agent has the authority to vary any of the iTunes Music Store's policies or the terms and conditions governing any sale.

Apple is allowed to change the terms and conditions of sale at the iTMS, BUT IT DOES NOT APPLY RETROACTIVELY. Therefore, at this point in time, once you buy music from the iTMS, no one can legally deauthorize your computer to prevent you from playing it, and no one can tell you to "fork over" the digital bits.

Sorry idkew, you are wrong on this one.

[wordmunger]

hregardless of if you agreeded to a license or not, i do know for a fact you do not own the music. if you did, you would be collecting royalties on it. just like Wacko Jacko is doing with the Beatles catalog.
You're confusing owning property with owning a copyright. If I own a Toyota Prius, I own it. It's mine, and I can do whatever I want with it. That doesn't mean I can set up my own production facility and distribute Priuses to all my friends.

The same thing is true with owning music. If I own a CD, it's mine and I can do what I want with it: play frisbee, make a coaster, or make a backup copy for personal use. I just can't distribute it freely to all my friends.

The problem arises when we start "owning" the bits on our computer. It's something property law hasn't quite come to grips with. Imagine if I could make duplicate Toyota Priuses for "personal use" at any time, for free. Would I be "stealing" from Toyota if I did this? Or could Toyota legitimately argue that I shouldn't have a spare copy of my Prius at the office, just in case I want to pop out for lunch sometime. What if it was easy to "delete" my Prius accidentally? Should I be allowed to keep a spare, "just in case"? What if I could only drive my Prius if I successfully logged on to the Toyota servers first? What if my car was a Delorean--made by a company that's now out of business? Would I be out of luck?

[DigDug]

I voted yes, but only for one reason: the TiVo "Home Media Option" which streams music from my Mac to my stereo doesn't support any AAC, let alone protected. I've had to do the burn-and-rerip thing with stuff I've bought from iTMS, and there's a significant loss of quality.

This is unquestionably fair use but I'd rather not have to bother... so I say yes, until TiVo can play songs from iTMS directly.

[idkew]

Well then if you never own any music you buy from the iTMS or a CD, your point is still wrong. According to you, the RIAA could come to your house, and tell you to fork over your CDs, even though they DON'T have DRM on it. So, again, the need to strip DRM from iTMS files is nonexistent in this case.

i don't see your point. converting the files, burning a cd, and creating even lower quality song is not an option for me. 128kbps is already too lossy.

and, if i understand what you are saying, i don't think purchased cds have the same license, but apple has all the rights when it comes to iTMS songs. i never said a store bought cd is the same as a digital iTMS song.

from the license agreement for all iTMS songs:
You acknowledge that some aspects of the Service, Products, and administering of the Usage Rules entails the ongoing involvement of Apple. Accordingly, in the event that Apple changes any part of the Service or discontinues the Service, which Apple may do at its election, you acknowledge that you may no longer be able to use Products to the same extent as prior to such change or discontinuation, and that Apple shall have no liability to you in such case.


i am not try to show you up or prove you wrong. this isn't a pi**ing match. i am simply stating that apple has the power in the relationship, and can do what it wants at its will, including de-authorising everyone's music.

[idkew]

You're confusing owning property with owning a copyright. If I own a Toyota Prius, I own it. It's mine, and I can do whatever I want with it. That doesn't mean I can set up my own production facility and distribute Priuses to all my friends.

The same thing is true with owning music. If I own a CD, it's mine and I can do what I want with it: play frisbee, make a coaster, or make a backup copy for personal use. I just can't distribute it freely to all my friends.


you most definitely own the physical cd. you do not own the information it it. you do not own the copyright.

Would I be out of luck?

quite possibly, or, apple could just continue to allow you to listen to the music.

do you remember DIVX movies? You buy the dvd for $5 and can watch it for 2 days or something. Well, I had a DIVX dvd player, and several unopened movies. when DIVX went under, i was unable to ever play those movies again. this is the same situations as could happen with the iTMS.

[idkew]

Apple is allowed to change the terms and conditions of sale at the iTMS, BUT IT DOES NOT APPLY RETROACTIVELY. Therefore, at this point in time, once you buy music from the iTMS, no one can legally deauthorize your computer to prevent you from playing it, and no one can tell you to "fork over" the digital bits.

read the full license agreement, not the shortened one you found:
http://www.info.apple.com/usen/itunes/terms.html

couple snippits:

Termination of the Service. Apple reserves the right to modify, suspend, or discontinue the Service (or any part or content thereof) at any time with or without notice to you, and Apple will not be liable to you or to any third party should it exercise such rights.



You acknowledge that some aspects of the Service, Products, and administering of the Usage Rules entails the ongoing involvement of Apple. Accordingly, in the event that Apple changes any part of the Service or discontinues the Service, which Apple may do at its election, you acknowledge that you may no longer be able to use Products to the same extent as prior to such change or discontinuation, and that Apple shall have no liability to you in such case.


so, apple can "discontinue the Service... at any time... without notice to you. furthermore, "you may no longer be able to use [the] Products to the same extent as prior to such change or discontinuation". seems to apply retroactively to me. they won't ask you to "fork over" the bits, your computer will just become de-authorized, and you will be unable to decrypt the music you purchased a license to listen to.

[wordmunger]

you most definitely own the physical cd. you do not own the information it it. you are licensed top use it.
That's like saying I own my house but not the paint on it. Of course I own the information on the CD. There are limitations how I can duplicate and distribute that information, but not what I can do with the actual "information". I can even resell the CD, information and all.

Furthermore, there is no "license agreement" involved in a CD purchase. All restrictions on its use are covered in copyright law, not a license agreement.

Copyright law allows me to make copies for personal use, backups, educational use, and a variety of other situations.

The problem arises, as I've already pointed out, when there is no physical CD. Then traditional property law becomes murky. And as you have pointed out, when a license agreement is involved, the law becomes even murkier. What if a license agreement conflicts with rights I have been given under the "fair use" provision of copyright law? What if, for example, a teacher wanted to strip DRM from a recording so her students could listen to it in an online class? This is allowed under copyright law, but might conflict with the license agreement. Which takes precedence?

[idkew]

That's like saying I own my house but not the paint on it. Of course I own the information on the CD. There are limitations how I can duplicate and distribute that information, but not what I can do with the actual "information". I can even resell the CD, information and all.

Furthermore, there is no "license agreement" involved in a CD purchase. All restrictions on its use are covered in copyright law, not a license agreement. Which takes precedent?

Per CDs, you got me interested. I am going to try and find out what right we have. But, I think we are arguing over the word own. Yes, you own that single copy of music, but you do not own the recording. You can sell you copy, destroy it, whatever, but you can not duplicate it and sell it, as MJ can with the Beatles. He owns the Beatles' music. You own a single copy of it.


Per Fair Use, please sue Apple. I would love to see the outcome. I think they are infringing on our rights, but, we agreed the the license if we downloaded a song. It can't bother you too much, or you wouldn't have downloaded the song.




edit: after checking, license is the wrong word to use for cds. copyright is a better word.

[wordmunger]

so, apple can "discontinue the Service... at any time... without notice to you. furthermore, "you may no longer be able to use [the] Products to the same extent as prior to such change or discontinuation". seems to apply retroactively to me. they won't ask you to "fork over" the bits, your computer will just become de-authorized, and you will be unable to de-encrypt the music you purchased a license to listen to.

You know, I'm still not seeing anything here that suggests DRM-stripping is a violation of the EUL. As long as you don't violate copyright, and only use the music on 5 authorized computers, you're okay (based on what I see here--I haven't read the whole thing). It doesn't say you have to use Apple's DRM to limit use to 5 computers--you could strip the DRM and "voluntarily" limit use to 5 machines. Honestly, that would be fine with me--I just want to make sure I don't lose the music somewhere down the line. I can be reasonably assured of that as long as the music isn't in a proprietary format and/or protected with proprietary DRM.

[idkew]

You know, I'm still not seeing anything here that suggests DRM-stripping is a violation of the EUL.

From the license:
You agree that you will not attempt to, or encourage or assist any other person to, circumvent or modify any security technology or software that is part of the Service or used to administer the Usage Rules.

[wordmunger]

From the license:

You agree that you will not attempt to, or encourage or assist any other person to, circumvent or modify any security technology or software that is part of the Service or used to administer the Usage Rules.

Well, there you go then :)

It would have been cool if that wasn't there.

This has always been a huge part of my reluctance to use iTMS.

[idkew]

Well, there you go then :)

It would have been cool if that wasn't there.

This has always been a huge part of my reluctance to use iTMS.

yep, same here.


i like cds. i can rip at my preferred bitrate, and the record company can't de-authroize my music.

[wordmunger]

i like cds. i can rip at my preferred bitrate, and the record company can't de-authroize my music.

Well, I don't like CDs. They take up too much room, and I'd rather just have the music on a hard drive. It's a pain to rip everything. Unfortunately the wave of the future may be DRM for CDs as well.

[idkew]

Well, I don't like CDs. They take up too much room, and I'd rather just have the music on a hard drive. It's a pain to rip everything. Unfortunately the wave of the future may be DRM for CDs as well.

not if everyone has a shift key!

wait- i shouldn't say that. i could be sued.

:D

[coolsoldier]

Um, no. FairPlay allows you to use purchased tracks in the iApps and Pro Apps. There's no need to circumvent the DRM for this need.

Not anymore. I know -- I used to use iTMS tracks as backgrounds for my iMovies and iDVDs. With the newly crippled QuickTime, that no longer works. That said, now that Apple lets me authorize all of my computers, I'm not going to bother with DRM-stripping applications for the music I want in my iMovies -- for stuff just to listen to, I'll use iTMS, but for iMovie and iDVD stuff (~25% of the music I download) it's back to p2p.

[Doctor Q]

I hadn't thought about that. If I buy "Born to Be Wild" from the iTMS and I want to use a 5-second sample of it in my home movie, for my personal use, can I do so legally? Can I do so technically?

[idkew]

I hadn't thought about that. If I buy "Born to Be Wild" from the iTMS and I want to use a 5-second sample of it in my home movie, for my personal use, can I do so legally? Can I do so technically?

if you read the RIAA's website, the value of the song could be in that 5-second clip, so I think it may be illegal. not exactly sure. if you are worried about the legality, there is a lot of info on copyright laws at riaa.com.

here is the copyright page (http://www.riaa.com/issues/copyright/laws.asp)

pertinent quote:
Generally speaking, one is not allowed to take the "value" of a song without permission, and sometimes that value is found even in a three-second clip. When in doubt, it is always wise to check with the copyright owner, because in many cases even a small clip of a song may not be "fair use".

[coolsoldier]

I hadn't thought about that. If I buy "Born to Be Wild" from the iTMS and I want to use a 5-second sample of it in my home movie, for my personal use, can I do so legally? Can I do so technically?

In a home movie (assuming you're not talking mass distribution), I don't think it's a problem legally (as even copying entire songs for personal use has been ruled "fair use" in the past -- it's why you can legally rip songs from CDs), except that that feature has been disabled by the most recent version of QuickTime, meaning you have to circumvent the DRM to do it (and the general consensus on this board seems to be that that's illegal; I won't get into that debate again).

[simX]

Not anymore. I know -- I used to use iTMS tracks as backgrounds for my iMovies and iDVDs. With the newly crippled QuickTime, that no longer works. That said, now that Apple lets me authorize all of my computers, I'm not going to bother with DRM-stripping applications for the music I want in my iMovies -- for stuff just to listen to, I'll use iTMS, but for iMovie and iDVD stuff (~25% of the music I download) it's back to p2p.

No, you're wrong. I just tried it with iPhoto 4, and I was able to use my tracks perfectly. People are reporting on MacFixIt the inability to use purchased tracks, but they seem to be specific problems with their systems, not a deliberate disabling of a critical feature by Apple. One of the solutions that MacFixIt suggested was to play your purchased tracks once in iTunes, and then try using it in your iApps.

But no, you can still definitely use purchased apps in iApps.

so, apple can "discontinue the Service... at any time... without notice to you. furthermore, "you may no longer be able to use [the] Products to the same extent as prior to such change or discontinuation". seems to apply retroactively to me. they won't ask you to "fork over" the bits, your computer will just become de-authorized, and you will be unable to de-encrypt the music you purchased a license to listen to.

I don't know where you got from the license agreement that Apple is able to deauthorize your computer. The only thing that snippet says is that Apple doesn't have to continue providing the iTMS service to its users indefinitely. And that's reasonable, considering that the iTMS would have to be shut down if it became really unprofitable for Apple or if Apple went out of business.

But it doesn't say that Apple can deauthorize your computer at any time for any reason. It says they can discontinue the service at any time for any reason. And that's different, because you only need to connect to the internet once to authorize your computer -- after that, you can disconnect it from the internet and it will stay authorized. So authorization doesn't require an active internet connection, and therefore it doesn't require active communication between your computer and Apple's servers. Therefore, even if Apple discontinued the service, it would look to iTunes like Apple's servers weren't responding.

So if Apple deauthorized your computer, it would be doing something OTHER than "discontinu[ing] the Service ... at any time with or without notice to you", so you could sue Apple for breach of license.

i don't see your point. converting the files, burning a cd, and creating even lower quality song is not an option for me. 128kbps is already too lossy.

The point is that you're listing reasons for circumventing the DRM. There's no reason for you to need to burn it to a CD and create a lossy file, because you can play it WITHOUT stripping the DRM. Even if it wasn't DRMed and you burned it to a CD, you would still be losing some audio content because you'd have to convert to AIFF or MP3 first in order for some CD players to use it.

Your point is advocating DRM-stripping just because. And obviously that's not a reason to need DRM-stripping apps.

[coolsoldier]

No, you're wrong. I just tried it with iPhoto 4, and I was able to use my tracks perfectly. People are reporting on MacFixIt the inability to use purchased tracks, but they seem to be specific problems with their systems, not a deliberate disabling of a critical feature by Apple. One of the solutions that MacFixIt suggested was to play your purchased tracks once in iTunes, and then try using it in your iApps.

But no, you can still definitely use purchased apps in iApps.

It works fine with iPhoto, but not with iMovie or iDVD. Try it -- iMovie tries to convert all of it's audio tracks to raw uncompressed data, and with the newest QuickTime, that results in just silence. iPhoto uses the track unmodified, so protected tracks work fine there. But iMovie and iDVD don't have the option to use the encrypted track, and QuickTime won't do the conversion anymore.

[simX]

It works fine with iPhoto, but not with iMovie or iDVD. Try it -- iMovie tries to convert all of it's audio tracks to raw uncompressed data, and with the newest QuickTime, that results in just silence. iPhoto uses the track unmodified, so protected tracks work fine there. But iMovie and iDVD don't have the option to use the encrypted track, and QuickTime won't do the conversion anymore.

Ah, OK, you're right about that. I thought you were talking about all iApps.

[o1b2]

I am in the creative world and i hate when people break a copyright on my photography because they are cheap. Finding everone to sue over this is not easy, and I hate having to pay a lawery for more than getting paid from dead beat clients. I understand people do not get copyright laws. But I am active in them because artist visual, musicians and writers get screwed by people that do what they want with your work. It is one thing if they get writing permissions, Listen I am not rich I am just a person getting by and if someone rips me off, they will pay the price.

The visual platform doesnt have much to stop this problem yet. Canon is working on a software user key, which sounds really up my alley if it is ever released.If you are a developer reading this I would like to let you know there is a good market out there for such a product.

Hey I like free things like everyone else, But some things are ment to be paid for. People put in alot of there time and soul into making stuff. stealing it may make you feel good, but it is not right. I'm sorry but I am one of those That have to stand by this idea. This is really the only thing I really take a serious stand on.