Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Deleted iPod Owners' Songs Downloaded From Competing Music Services Between 2007 and 2009
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's not taken this long the lawsuit is from 2005 and is just now getting to trial it's spent 10 years winding it's way through the justice system.
Under a rock? I wish. I live with 3 women (wife and two daughters). That is definitely between a rock and a hard place.
/wife reads quote over shoulder
/smacks back of head
I feel that except I only have one daughter, but I add a mother-in-law to the mix
Except that Google does this on a scale that is 100 times bigger, and Googles business entirely relies on selling ads, and therefore Google absolutely cannot be trusted with any private data, because my personal information is what allows Google to make money.
----------
What are the bets that this is not what Farrugia said, but how someone interpreted what he said?
----------
That wasn't Samsung, that was - forgot their name, HP bought them out then closed them down later. They were run by some ex-Apple employee, could be Rubinstein?
Every USB device has a built-in ID that identifies the manufacturer and the model. I'd say that if iTunes detects a USB device that identifies itself as an iPod made by Apple, but it also detects that this device is _not_ an iPod, then you would suspect that there is some nefarious purpose where someone tries to hack into your computer and it is 100% correct to shut that device off. You wouldn't want until the news comes out of hackers breaking into Macs using faked iPods.
GUISE,
This is NOT about Apple deleting music that you didn't get from iTunes. Like music you ripped from a CD or music you downloaded from Napster or Bittorrent or whatever.
This is about Real Networks (of RealPlayer fame) reverse-engineering FairPlay (Apple's DRM scheme) and applying it to music they sold you. That made the music look as if it came from the iTMS, enough that the iPod could play it while still being encrypted with DRM which Real was required to do back then. (Normally, iPods could only play DRM-encrypted files from the iTMS).
*That* is what rubbed Apple the wrong way. Not that you got your music from some other source than Apple's iTMS. iTunes started out *without* the store, remember? (In fact, iTunes started its life as a product called SoundJam.)
Google 'fairplay harmony' for some more info.
This is NOT about Apple deleting music that you didn't get from iTunes. Like music you ripped from a CD or music you downloaded from Napster or Bittorrent or whatever.
This is about Real Networks (of RealPlayer fame) reverse-engineering FairPlay (Apple's DRM scheme) and applying it to music they sold you. That made the music look as if it came from the iTMS, enough that the iPod could play it while still being encrypted with DRM which Real was required to do back then. (Normally, iPods could only play DRM-encrypted files from the iTMS).
*That* is what rubbed Apple the wrong way. Not that you got your music from some other source than Apple's iTMS. iTunes started out *without* the store, remember? (In fact, iTunes started its life as a product called SoundJam.)
Google 'fairplay harmony' for some more info.
Personally it really should be about HOW a company makes their profit. I'm not a fan of "It's just business" type of thinking as that tends to mean someone is being an *******. Honestly making a profit is fine. Being greedy to the point it has a negative impact on people is not so good.
The WSJ article makes it sound like a bogus 'error' was generated when iTunes detected 'foreign' songs, caused users to rest their iPods, and then deleted foreign songs during the reset. If the story is true, that is the kind of crap corporate behaviour that rapidly loses people's trust. (Anybody else getting sick of the boogie-man hacker/terrorist being used as an excuse to limit our freedom and privacy when we use digital devices?)
If this story is not true, why hasn't Apple corrected the misinformation?
If this story is not true, why hasn't Apple corrected the misinformation?
the typical "Apple can do no wrong" attitude from a selective few makes me chuckle a little.
I'm starting to see why some view Apple fanboys as somewhat a cult.
I'm starting to see why some view Apple fanboys as somewhat a cult.
If the uPod were truly corrupted by side-loading music files then I could see a very valid reason for restoring the entire device. This would of course load the music again from iTunes but not the side-loaded music.
So did Harmony actually corrupt iPods? If not, this is a problem.
So did Harmony actually corrupt iPods? If not, this is a problem.
yeah, my iwhatever had music on it from amazon and emusic and it played and sync'd just fine
I don't understand. I had the original iPod (10GB version), the black iPod with video (60GB version) and a couple iPod Shuffles. In all cases, the majority of my MP3s were *not* purchased from iTunes. In NOT ONE iPod did my music suddenly vanish. It sounds more like "user error" (and/or having the iPod set to autosync with iTunes) than an evil Apple conspiracy, which everyone looking for a handout today will suggest.
While I don't necessarily disagree, I'll throw this angle out there - is it so bad that a company wants to protect its devices from possible malware etc.. so that the user experience is fantastic? ie. let's just say, hypothetically of course, that x user dloaded songs from a competitor and for whatever reason, there was a problem.
Would X user be smart enough to realize it was the file or would they blame the iPod? If it's the latter, would they then complain to other people on social media or person to person thus creating negative publicity about the iPod? ie. my iPod is crap b/c it won't play this song!
I may be stretching, but given the ridiculous possibilities of social media over amplification these days, I don't think it's that far out of the realm.
Apple are control freaks. We all know. Steve wanted the user experience to be perfect and he felt Apple knew how to make that work.
Regarding the actual lawsuit, I don't blame them one bit for wanting to protect something they were creating. I run a business, albeit a small one and if I came up with a service or idea which was going to put money in my bank for food on my table (much like having to report to a board of directors and keeping my shareholders happy), I'd do what I could to protect it.
Cheers,
Keebler
And leasing a car is an even dumber financial move than leasing your music. At least with music, you're only out about a hundred dollars a year with nothing to show for it.
So is Apple being accused of preventing DRM music from other sources from being played in iTunes or from being synced to the iPod (but still playable in iTunes)?
What is all this requirement to restore the iPod about? When you try and sync an iPod with iTunes that has DRM music from elsewhere or when someone tried to use 3rd party software to get DRM music from elsewhere onto an iPod?
This article is so vague..
What is all this requirement to restore the iPod about? When you try and sync an iPod with iTunes that has DRM music from elsewhere or when someone tried to use 3rd party software to get DRM music from elsewhere onto an iPod?
This article is so vague..
If Apple found guilty then Sony is in for it as well, with their tactics with Homebrew, and then Microsoft will be next, hoe far do you go.
Let's be sensible and look what happened, Apple restore the iPod as that is the easiest and simpler option for a user to understand, they restore and any music from the competitors is placed back onto the iPod via iTunes so everything is checked and safe. What the competitors did was to bypass the security to place songs on the iPod with their own software and who knows what state the iPod is in and what issue it had now that it has been hijacted and so Apple did the best thing, restore and make sure every song is safely placed back onto the iPod
These third party's did a bad thing, forcing DRM onto the customer by offering no MP3 or CD creating means so you had to use their software to place contents on a iPod by means of hacking it, at least with iTunes you can take your music to other third parts with no hacking.
Let's be sensible and look what happened, Apple restore the iPod as that is the easiest and simpler option for a user to understand, they restore and any music from the competitors is placed back onto the iPod via iTunes so everything is checked and safe. What the competitors did was to bypass the security to place songs on the iPod with their own software and who knows what state the iPod is in and what issue it had now that it has been hijacted and so Apple did the best thing, restore and make sure every song is safely placed back onto the iPod
These third party's did a bad thing, forcing DRM onto the customer by offering no MP3 or CD creating means so you had to use their software to place contents on a iPod by means of hacking it, at least with iTunes you can take your music to other third parts with no hacking.
Except a company rep confirmed that they did indeed delete music to protect consumers so...
This entire lawsuit is ridiculous. If Apple doesn't want to support music purchased from other sources, it shouldn't have to. Can I bring suit against Sony because I can't play my Xbox games on Playstation? I think Sony is trying to form a monopoly on the video game market by not accepting formats purchased through other developers.
Ahh yes. Because something did not happen to you it could not have occurred. My house has never been robbed. It is BS if anyone ever says they have been robbed. In the end a court will not allow you to just make up stuff. If the plaintiff's lawyers say this happened they have to prove that it did indeed happen and that it was not an aberration, but a common practice that occurred.
----------
You could if you updated your PS4 and it erased your Xbox games in doing so.
Online streaming is awesome, except for when i go over my data cap ever single month.
Online streaming is awesome, except for when take long flights a few times a month.
Online streaming is awesome, except for when i have a bad cell signal and i can't actually stream anything.
----------
must....not....question....apple....ever...must....not...ever...say...a...bad...word...about...apple.
Except, how can they prove this happened? Are they going to go back in time, grab an old iPod and the same music files that they used and then stage the demonstration? Or, are they simply going to load up a current iPod with music from iTunes and Amazon and then reset the device, showing that all music has been deleted? In which case, that proves what exactly?
Rad my post two posts up
"In the end a court will not allow you to just make up stuff. If the plaintiff's lawyers say this happened they have to prove that it did indeed happen and that it was not an aberration, but a common practice that occurred."
I don't think people realize how court works. You don't just throw stuff at a wall. You claim something happens you have to be able to provide some type of proof.
What does any of this have to do with Apple deleting music that was purchased not from them? This alone should be a huge no-no.