1. Welcome to the new MacRumors forums. See our announcement and read our FAQ

Roxio forbids iTunes song burning

Discussion in 'MacBytes.com News Discussion' started by MacBytes, May 11, 2005.

  1. macrumors bot

  2. macrumors 68030


    as long as Toast 6.0.7 (or whatever version was last released before 6.1) works with Tiger, there should not be any problems.

    the reason escapes me, why Apple does not want that to happen.
  3. macrumors 68030

    Why would Roxio do that with retail music content? I could perhaps understand if they somehow could differentiate between purchased music (either from iTMS or ripped from retail CD) and ''purchased'' music :rolleyes: , but to restrict this seems silly.
  4. macrumors Penryn


    It says "after discussion with Apple," meaning you may not be able to blame Roxio for this entirely. Its probably due to Apple as well.
  5. macrumors 6502

    My guess is that Toast doesn't follow the maximum-playlist-burn restrictions and thus opens everything back up to easy mass-production of CDs.

    Since there are versions that will never be eradicated from the internet during any meaningful timespan that can do this, I'm not sure why they bothered, but it makes sense and is in no way "evil".

  6. macrumors 68030

    I did say Roxio solely, but I was thinking Apple as well, my mistake.

    Still, if you are paying to purchase a retail copy of a song, why would the parties invovle make it more difficult for you to burn your own legitimate music? Doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me, but whatever.
  7. macrumors 604


    I prefer to burn music in iTunes anyway. Toast is great for making hybrid discs and multisessions. Now if Toast can only support the 5 burns per playlist restriction.
  8. macrumors 6502

    Not to pick on you, but, no one owns music that they didn't write. This is the way it has always been... including the vinyl days.
    When you buy music (even on a CD) you are in fact buying a license that carries specific terms of use, the iTunes Music Store (just like other download stores) has its own terms that are different than that of a CD.

    It seams that no one ever really gave these terms of usage much thought until the online music stores got rolling.
  9. macrumors 68030

    I don't take it as picking on me, I really don't know. I figured that if you paid for music (or a movie, etc) that you had the ability to make personal copies with the stipulation that you not distribute them or profit from them. I could very well be wrong, but that was the premis I have been operating off of for some time.

    How does the license from iTMS differ from that of a CD? What is the basic license of a CD?
  10. macrumors 68020


    I doubt it's Apple behind this, indirectly it'll be the record companies and the R**A.
  11. macrumors 68030

    That would make me wonder why they are doing it even more. The R//A was on a huge trip about legitimacy in the music industry and sales of albums vs. downloads. iTMS is distributing legitimate product that they charge for, and I assume the artists get paid for as it should be, just as by way of CD.

    Whether the consumer prefers to purchase a digital file or a tangible one from a B&M store, the main concern was that of monetary exchange and distribution to the artists and parties involved in producing the product. iTMS has a ton of sales, why limit something that was such a hit for the music industry?
  12. macrumors 68020



    In all my CD's and a few albums, I never recall reading a license agreement, having a license agreement read to me or signing anything that legally states I don't actually own what i just bought.

    Perhaps they started to put them on those stupid stickers that covers the spine of the CD which suck to get off, because I never read that crap anyways.
  13. macrumors 603


    My love for Apple is growing by leaps and bounds. I mean between suing everyone in sight, and this kind of crap what's not to love about this company?

  14. macrumors 603



    Because Apple tapped them on the shoulder and said do it. Do you think a company would intentionally take features OUT of a product if it was a major selling point? Bet a paycheck that Micr....sorry Apple leaned on them to do this.
  15. macrumors 68030

    Apparently I am missing something incredibly obvious....
    So why would Apple want Roxio to disable that feature? How is it affecting Apple in any way to have Roxio software able to burn music purchased from the iTMS?

    Be as blunt as you like, I won't take offense. I quite obviously just don't understand :confused:
  16. macrumors 68030

    Gasu E.

    THere's no need for a license agreement. There are copyright marks all over the packaging. It's your legal responsibility to understand what those mean in terms of your rights.
  17. macrumors member

    Just because it is an easy way to get around restrictions imposed on the number of times a playlist can be burned. Apple is just doing what it needs to do to live up to its agreement with the record companies.
  18. macrumors member

    Read the story more carefully. The statement from Roxio says, "this version will no longer allow customers to create audio CDs, audio DVDs, or export audio to their hard drive using purchased iTunes music store content."

    In other words, there is no restriction on music from retail CDs. There must be something in the new Toast software that looks for Fairplay DRM in a file and restricts those songs.
  19. 7on
    macrumors 601



    Because Toast creates temp .aiff files of compressed music before burning an audio CD. People have been intercepting these and using them to pirate the music.
  20. macrumors member

    Not such a big deal really. Burn a CD from iTunes and then use Roxio Toast to copy the CD as many times as you like. Once a file is AIFF, there's no way for Toast to tell the difference, right?
  21. macrumors 6502a

    Of course you could still burn it once in iTunes and then duplicate it as many times as you want to with toast.

    I'm not saying I agree with the dropping of the feature, but is there any non-shady reason that someone would need to burn iTunes songs in Toast? Maybe some extra options?
  22. macrumors 6502

    I still cannot believe you are all so willing to fork over $10 for an album with no art, lower quality, and a bunch of restrictions.
  23. macrumors 68030

    Perhaps the options are even similar, not sure, but I just prefer to use Toast as opposed to iTunes for burning anything. I like the ability and idea of Toast over iTunes....I don't know. iTunes is probably more than adequate, but Toast LOOKS like a burner, iTunes LOOKS like a player. I prefer to keep them that way, even if it is stupid.
  24. macrumors 6502a

    Off topic, and while I understand your point

    1) I rarely buy entire albums
    2) If I did buy a CD I would rip it into iTunes (probably 192 AAC)
    3) and proceed to put the CD somewhere I would never see it again
    4) I buy music for the audio, not the visuals

    I understand that you probably wouldn't handle a CD the way I do, but that is why people (and I) buy stuff off of iTunes.
  25. macrumors regular

    you should blame apple

    You're blaming the wrong people... it's Apple that you should be pissed at. They're obviously the ones who brought this upon you... why in their right mind would Roxio remove functionality from you.

    And yes, this is only for purchased songs... if you rip from physicial CDs purchased in a store or at Amazon you can still burn in Toast.

    It's pretty clear... sure you "own" your music when you buy it from Apple, but only if you use Apple software for burning, Apple hardware that iTunes supports, and an Apple created iPod for playing. I guess freedom of choice is gone.

    Besides... Apple just wants you to stop burning anyway... they want everyone to buy shiny new iPods.

Share This Page