Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Disables PyMusique Hack

I was hoping for this to quickly force out iTunes 4.8, but I guess that's not happening...Maybe iTunes 4.8 will come when 3rd party accessories for the iPod Shuffle arrive (as in Never! :rolleyes: )
 
ZeitGeist said:
Which makes it a DMCA violation, and then Apple's option are far more 'fun'. Yes, I know that technically any protection can be circumvented, but we're also talking 'real-world' here.
Click to expand...
Implicit assumption in your post: that whomever does this job does it in the USA. It Ain't Necessarily So. Remember, folks, the USA has a population of two hundred million (give or take). The planet as a whole has some thirty times that number.

For instance, to the best of my knowledge, Russia does not have the DMCA, or any local equivalent. Russia also happens to be home to many talented programmers. I will let you draw the obvious conclusion.
 
salmon said:
What about if they could control how you could show people your family photos, because the file format was patented, and they decided to start charging $0.25 every time you looked at a picture? Or if they decided you could only rent all of your entertainment content (which is what they really want to do anyway). Or because your Great American Novel you wrote is in a proprietary format, they get a royalty payment if you want to publish it?
Click to expand...
Why would you choose those kind of file formats? Look at what happened to the "disposable DVD" format -- it was rejected by the market. Look at the problems that subscription music services have had -- they've been pretty much rejected by the market (so far). In both of these situations, the rejection has been largely because of the restrictions the format places on the user. So why shouldn't the market work in other cases as well? Why would the only alternative be to break the law, rather than education and lobbying?
 
Update to news story: CNET reports that DVD Jon has reopened the back door in the iTunes Music Store, again allowing Linux users to purchase music, as is his team's stated purpose.

Thank you to member therevolution and others who have reported this news.
 
Apple legal is coming now. There is no other way to stop this. Apple killed support for the ITMS on pre 4.7 itunes. I hope this guy gets murdered finically by apple.
 
quagmire said:
Apple legal is coming now. There is no other way to stop this. Apple killed support for the ITMS on pre 4.7 itunes. I hope this guy gets murdered finically by apple.
Click to expand...
This was stated a few posts up, but here it is again:

Keep in mind that he's in another country, one where the DMCA does not exist and where the type of work he's doing is not illegal.
 
Tulse said:
Why would you choose those kind of file formats? Look at what happened to the "disposable DVD" format -- it was rejected by the market. Look at the problems that subscription music services have had -- they've been pretty much rejected by the market (so far). In both of these situations, the rejection has been largely because of the restrictions the format places on the user. So why shouldn't the market work in other cases as well? Why would the only alternative be to break the law, rather than education and lobbying?
Click to expand...
The success of iTMS as a result of "reasonable" DRM has been overstated, I suspect. I haven't used any other service, or read any reviews about other services, so that really is just a suspicion.

The problem with relying on the market to keep DRM in check is that once DRM has completely replaced all other ways of getting your content the industry can decide to impose whatever draconian limitations they feel like without the threat of someone switching to a less restrictive competitor. When the studios stop releasing VHS tapes, your only choice will be a CSS encoded DVD. Luckily with DVDs the limits on their use have already been set in stone. Not so with online music however, because the RIAA can simply coerce Apple or any other distributor to change the limitations and it happens instantly.

The other problem with the market approach is that it assumes that the industry association (think cartel) will not come up with a standard DRM scheme that it forces all of its members to adopt. Such was the case with the MPAA and CSS.

The reason why education and lobbying are not options is because they are expensive. Those of us on this side of the battle have resources, but they are knowledge based not money based. The necessity of breaking the law is indeed unfortunate. However breaking the law is not always a bad thing - especially when the law is unconstitutional or unethical.
 
Doctor Q said:
Update to news story: CNET reports that DVD Jon has reopened the back door in the iTunes Music Store, again allowing Linux users to purchase music, as is his team's stated purpose.

Thank you to member therevolution and others who have reported this news.
Click to expand...

*shrugs* Good. The core reason why he put out DeCSS was because the industry ignored Linux for DVD playback. And the result…And so the same has occurred with Apple. I don’t feel sorry for them in the least.
 
therevolution said:
This was stated a few posts up, but here it is again:

Keep in mind that he's in another country, one where the DMCA does not exist and where the type of work he's doing is not illegal.
Click to expand...

Does it stop apple from killing the Super shuffle or the iPod mini ripoff? I think as long as the software is made by an American company, the rights to that American company about security and all that stuff should be international. If it is not, that needs to change.
 
mnb said:
The previous version only had a Windows.exe installer and the python source tarball (which is pretty much worthless on it's own).
Click to expand...
Actually, we had a py2exe windows version (jon made that) and a deb file for Ubuntu systems. I use Ubuntu so that's what I focused on packaging for. Plus the source tarball, of course.
 
therevolution said:
Keep in mind that he's in another country, one where the DMCA does not exist and where the type of work he's doing is not illegal.
Click to expand...
Yes, but he did this, knowing that it was clearly illegal in this country. Just because he found a way to avoid legal responsibility, doesn't mean that what he did was right.
 
Yes, but he did this, knowing that it was clearly illegal in this country. Just because he found a way to avoid legal responsibility, doesn't mean that what he did was right.
Click to expand...

Oh, so because I clearly know that using a camera phone is illegal in Saudi Arabia I shouldn't be able to use mine? Or because I also know that chewing gum is banned in Singapore I shouldn't touch trident? I guess I'm just finding a way to avoid the legal resposibility of doing those things because I'm not living in those countries. What is wrong with you? The planet is not subordinate to the US. Your argument hold as much weight as a wet piece of toilet paper.
 
chimerical said:
Yes, but he did this, knowing that it was clearly illegal in this country. Just because he found a way to avoid legal responsibility, doesn't mean that what he did was right.
Click to expand...
Why should Jon give a flying **** what your country thinks is legal? You aren't better than everyone else, you know.
 
Look, it is very simple. DVD Jon has already been to court for circumventing the security on DVDs. He was sued by the swedish(?) equivalent of the MPAA. Guess what? DVD Jon won! I have no doubt that DVD Jon will win again if Apple dared to sue him. DMCA is an abomination of a law, and I'm glad that there are a lot of countries that doesn't have an equivalent. Personally, I will definitely be rooting for DVD Jon, and be laughing very hard when Apple legal gets their nose slammed. (though I doubt that they will even try to sue him)
 
Amaranth said:
Why should Jon give a flying **** what your country thinks is legal? You aren't better than everyone else, you know.
Click to expand...

You're absolutely right, but I never claimed that. You're making it look like I implied that to strengthen your argument against me, and you're also turning this into a personal attack (when it was clear that I wasn't personally attacking anyone).

People are using examples of fighting for personal rights as reasons to validate breaking the law, yet nobody's forcing anybody to purchase music with DRM. People know that they're getting DRM when they choose to buy music from iTMS. It sucks, yes. But nobody's forcing anything on anyone.

I retract my argument anyway. I just wish that the follow-up posters had responded in a more mature manner.
 
I think people on both sides should calm down a little, or else this thread is stopped and/or wastelanded...

"PR Jon" is probably quite safe from Apple's lawyers, as long as he's not stupid enough to travel to the US (remember that Russian hacker) or somewhere more friendly to the US than Norway... because with current Norwegian legislation circumventing or cracking DRMs are not illegal... that might change pretty soon, with the (much mentioned) new Infosoc-directive from EU which when passed as a new law in Norway, and eventually, in the actual EU, probably will make it illegal to do this...

So, just as the DeCSS-case where "PR Jon" was aquited, unless Apple get him on American ground, they probably wont be able to do anything as Norwegian law cannot be given retroactive powers**...

**I have no idea if that's really the english term for what I'm trying to say: That when a law is passes, then it (normally) cannot be used to prosecute cases older than the law...

So, even if you consider "PR Jon"s actions as ethically wrong, or see him as a hero of the Linux guerilla, he's not breaking any Norwegian laws, yet...
 
Mitthrawnuruodo said:
I think people on both sides should calm down a little, or else this thread is stopped and/or wastelanded...

"PR Jon" is probably quite safe from Apple's lawyers, as long as he's not stupid enough to travel to the US (remember that Russian hacher) or somewhere more friendly to the US than Norway... because with current Norwegian legislation circumventing or cracking DRMs are not ilegal... that might change pretty soon, with the (much mentioned) new Infosoc-directive from EU which when passed as a new law in Norway, and eventually, in the actual EU, probably will make it illegal to do this...

So, just as the DeCSS-case where "PR Jon" was aquited, unless Apple get him on American ground, they probably wont be able to do anything as Norwegian law cannot be given retroactive powers**...

**I have no idea if that's really the english term for what I'm trying to say: That when a law is passes, then it (normally) cannot be used to prosecute cases older than the law...

So, even if you consider "PR Jon"s actions as ethically wrong, or see him as a hero of the Linux guerilla, he's not breaking any Norwegian laws, yet...
Click to expand...
I agree. This thread is getting quite heated. Do you have a link to information on this upcoming Infosoc law? As it turns out, "retroactive powers" IS the correct term, based on your description of what you meant.
 
wrldwzrd89 said:
I agree. This thread is getting quite heated. Do you have a link to information on this upcoming Infosoc law? As it turns out, "retroactive powers" IS the correct term, based on your description of what you meant.
Click to expand...
Found this official site which shows that a large number of EU countries actually has implemented the directive as law, already...so I have to take that back... :eek:

...my only excuse is that I'v only followed the Norwegian debate, first in the DeCSS case, and recently over the Norwegian implementation of this directive, which today seems like it will be passed as one of our main parties, has turned from 'no' to 'yes' (Norwegian article).
 
Mitthrawnuruodo said:
**I have no idea if that's really the english term for what I'm trying to say: That when a law is passes, then it (normally) cannot be used to prosecute cases older than the law...
Click to expand...
There's a Latin phrase for it: ex post facto. Here's a short definition.
 
chimerical said:
People are using examples of fighting for personal rights as reasons to validate breaking the law, yet nobody's forcing anybody to purchase music with DRM. People know that they're getting DRM when they choose to buy music from iTMS. It sucks, yes. But nobody's forcing anything on anyone.
Click to expand...
They are and they intend to.

The DMCA clearly forbids the creation, dissemination, and use of tools that circumvent DRM schemes. The law is so broad that it even makes telling someone where to find Hymn or DeCSS illegal. It also makes it illegal for someone to even describe the algorithm behind Hymn or DeCSS to someone else. This, in my view as a programmer and having some knowledge of US Constitutional law, is clearly a violation of our first amendment rights.

The DMCA contains no provisions that require a market have non-DRM alternatives. It is quite likely the RIAA's intention to have all of their content DRM bound. I suppose we could wait to fight it when that day comes. However, preventing that day from coming by fighting it now seems like a better option.

Furthermore, just because there are other non-DRM options available does not necessarily mean that the DMCA is not in violation of our fair use rights. As an analogy, if Congress were to pass a law that stated: "If a bar or pub so chooses, they may ban all talk about soccer; any patrons who go against the ban can be arrested." Just because you still have the option to go to bars that allow you to talk about soccer, does not make the law any less a violation of our rights.

Edit: I should also point out that PyMusique itself may not even be considered a circumvention tool under the DMCA, since the music files are not encrypted before they reach the consumer. I'd need to reread the DMCA to be sure though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back