No DRM in Headphones for New iPod Shuffle

[MacRumors]

The Mac web has been abuzz over the past few days regarding the possibility of an "authentication" or "DRM" chip included inside the headphones for Apple's new iPod shuffle released last week. After several days of investigation, explanations, and misunderstandings, the chip appears to contain no authorization or encryption component.

Following up on comments from iLounge regarding the existence of such a chip, Boing Boing Gadgets discovered the chip located inside the new iPod shuffles' headphone control module. The discovery touched off speculation that Apple had added the chip as a means to force third-party manufacturers to pay a licensing fee in order to produce headphones compatible with the new iPod shuffle.

Macworld, however, contacted an Apple spokesman about the matter. While the spokesman confirmed the existence of the chip, its intended purpose is said to be related to the "Made for iPod" program alone. Boing Boing Gadgets was also able to speak with Apple and received what is so far the clearest explanation regarding whether the chip contains DRM:

Just spoke with Apple. There is no encryption or authentication on the chip, so clones could conceivably be made, just not with "Made for iPod" official certification. And now we know!

Article Link: No DRM in Headphones for New iPod Shuffle

 

[Mykbibby]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5G77 Safari/525.20)

Well that's great to hear... The less DRM the better.

 

[kolax]

Good news! I read the Engadget article and paniced - I'm not a fan of the iPod headphones, and didn't fancy paying a premium price for 3rd party headphones because of this proposed DRM.

Happy now!

 

[PeteB]

It's actually a prototype of a mind-control chip.

 

[Markov]

Good. I don't think everyone really wants DRM part of their daily lives...

DRM annoys the hell out of me.

 

[GeekLawyer]

BoingBoingGadgets really came into their own in this whole story. That quirky little band of "happy mutants" stayed a step ahead of the established media.

Good on them. And good on Apple for less DRM.

 

[InkMaster]

May I be the first to say YAAY!

I personally don't care for the shuffle and would never buy it, but nice knowing that those who will get it be able to use whatever they want with it.

 

[Consultant]

Yes, also the Apple Insider article explaining what IS DRM.
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...or_ipod_shuffles_new_authentication_chip.html

 

[mr_matalino]

Everyone...just...relax

 

[JMax1]

And knowing is half the battle!

 

[Jayomat]

i haven't heared of that "feature", better said restriction, but it would have been the most **!"§%&!`? thing apple has ever made...

 

[alexbates]

Good, Im glad to hear that other headphones might work in the future.

I hope Apple doesn't decide to do this with other iPods later though.

 

[edolecki]

Excellent! I have been hearing tons of bad voodoo being aimed @ Apple over this now debunked rumor.

 

[lunarworks]

It doesn't matter if it's true or not: The story can't be undone. All the haters will continue to say that "Apple has DRM in their headphones!", even though it's been disproven.

 

[Eric S.]

Better news, but I still won't be buying one.

 

[50548]

Everyone...just...relax

And once more the PC fanboys come with their FUD about this headphone DRM, which ends up as a lot of BS, of course...Apple doesn't need to do that when it's on top of the game for years and years already.

 

[Scottsdale]

Maybe people shouldn't be so damn quick to accuse without having a clear understanding of what they are accusing Apple of doing in the first place.

Apple should bring lawsuits for harmful damage to reputation by ALL that reported the inaccurate information. Congrats to Mac Rumors for getting this right.

Honestly, this is Apple's business anyways. Why shouldn't they have the right to decide who gets to sell parts that work with Apple devices. THEN, it is the consumers choice whether they want to deal with an Apple company that will not work with their worthless Bose headphones... JK, I know there are a bunch of Bose haters/lovers on this site.

But seriously, we all know that Apple requires APPLE hardware to run OS X, why shouldn't it require Apple licensing at a minimum if companies wish to profit off Apple's iPods? At the same time, opening the availability will usually create a WIN-WIN scenario where Apple will get more iPod sales if people can buy their own headphones when Apple is getting paid for the headphones in the $79 price to begin with.

The rumors sometimes go overboard though, and here is a perfect example. A bunch of the other sites reported this information as verbatim FACT.

Way to go Arn and crew. Waiting reflected accurate reporting here.

 

[Gasu E.]

It's actually a prototype of a mind-control chip.

...did you ever wonder how it is that the iPod always seems to play the very song you want to hear at the time?

 

[Le Big Mac]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5G77 Safari/525.20)

The less DRM the better.

It's not even DRM, even under the theory of what it does. It's a chip that could require a proprietary connector, which is also a problem, because it means everybody would have to pay to play.

I hope this report is correct, and the others wrong. I don't really want an Apple Tax on accessories for iPod.

 

[Voidness]

It doesn't matter if it's true or not: The story can't be undone. All the haters will continue to say that "Apple has DRM in their headphones!", even though it's been disproven.

Exactly. A misinformed statement in iLounge's Shuffle review spread to all tech blogs like wildfire, who took this statement as an undeniable fact and started their sensationalist blogging.

 

[amac4me]

Maybe people shouldn't be so damn quick to accuse without having a clear understanding of what they are accusing Apple of doing in the first place.

...

Way to go Arn and crew. Waiting reflected accurate reporting here.

I couldn't agree more!

 

[slffl]

Well what do you know? Yet ANOTHER rumor that turns out to be untrue, but posted on all the flaming anti-Apple zealot websites like Gizmodo, Digg, and Engadget.

Also, I bet the retractions don't get the attention the made-up-rumor does.

 

[Eric S.]

Ars Technica is still reporting that third-party headphones require an Apple-supplied chip, although it is one that does not do authentication:

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2009/03/third-party-headphones-do-require-apple-supplied-chip.ars

 

[8CoreWhore]

So the world is not ending after all?

 

[Scottsdale]

So the world is not ending after all?

Not until December 21, 2012!

Whatever you do, DON'T HOLD OFF ON BUYING THE NEW iPOD SHUFFLE FOR 3+ YEARS... At $79, live a little.