Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
After reading all the negative reactions here I am a bit surprised. Perhaps these reactions are due to the fact that quite a number of people don’t really understand what this is all about.

First of all, this is not an attempt to break the FairPlay DRM scheme. The software basically works like this: It takes a Real DRM protected song bought from the RealPlayer Music Store and decrypts it and encrypts it again in a way that is compatible with FairPlay. That’s all there is to it… no format conversions or loss of quality, because Real also uses AAC as the basis of their music store. If Real didn’t make any mistakes the resulting file should look exactly the same as a regular iTMS file.

How exactly did Real achieve this? Well, I don’t know, because I am not a employee of Real. But this is what I would do, if I were to create such a program. Thanks to DeDRMS and Hymn a.k.a. PlayFair it’s not that difficult actually. But first some background information on FairPlay:

If you rip a CD with AAC in iTunes it creates a MP4 container with a standard AAC audio stream. A FairPlay protected file is basically nothing more than a MP4 container with an encrypted AAC audio stream. If you have the key you can decrypt the encrypted stream using the Rijndael algorithm. That is all you need to play a FairPlay protected Everything is based on existing standards: AAC, the MP4 container format and Rijndael encryption. Nothing revolutionary here.

When you buy a song from the iTMS it encrypts the song using a randomly generated key. That key is stored in your account on the iTMS server. When you authorize your computer it will send all the keys in your account to the computer you are using. When you de-authorize your computer it will remove the keys from the computer you are using. So, when your computer is authorized it has the keys it needs to decrypt the encrypted files.

When you transfer a protected song from iTunes to you iPod it makes a copy of the key and places it on the iPod. The iPod basically contains a repository of all the keys it needs to play the protected files you moved to your iPod.

In reality it is a bit more difficult than I explained above. But everything you need has already been reverse-engineered. How to decrypt is known. How to access the keys on the iPod is known. How the access the keys from iTunes is known and Jon Johansen recently even released a program that allows you to contact the iTMS server to receive the keys directly from Apple. Every component that one would need to create such a program is known.

So, what would I do to make files compatible with the iPod? First of all you need a plain AAC file (Real uses DRMed AAC files, but since they created the DRM scheme, they know how to decrypt their own files and turn them into regular AAC files). Next you need to generate a random key and encrypt the AAC file with it and store it into a MP4 container. Creating a random key is simple. The encryption scheme is also a standardized scheme, so that should be pretty easy too. Storing the file in a MP4 container is also easy, because that is also a public standard.

The next thing you need to do is move the file to the iPod and store the randomly generated key in the key repository on the iPod. Since the iPod is little more than a mounted harddrive this shouldn’t be a big problem either. The only potential problem is the format of the key repository. Since we already know how to read keys from it, it shouldn’t be a big problem to solve though. And that is all there is to it. The iPod has the protected file and the key to play it. Of course, you can’t play the file in iTunes, but after reading the description on Real’s website it doesn’t look like they allow that either.


Finally, I you aren’t yet bored with this very long post, I also have an opinion on the legality of such an application. First of all, there are several ways to protect ‘IP’: trade secrets, copyrights, patents and trademarks.

Apple no longer can use trade secrets to protect FairPlay, because everything you need to know about it is already public knowledge. Once something becomes public knowledge, it can’t be protected by trade secrets anymore.

Apple has a trademark for FairPlay, which means Real can’t give it’s application the same name. Since Real uses the name Harmony for this application this isn’t an issue.

Apple doesn’t seem to have a patent on FairPlay DRM technology. Probably because the system they use is an pretty straight forward implementation of common DRM techniques. Nothing Apple invented, just stuff that Apple implemented based on existing techniques. So stopping Real using patents seems unlikely.

Copyrights are also problematic. Copyright only protects implementations of ideas, not the ideas itself. Two separate implementations of the same functionality is allowed by copyright law. Take for example Safari and Internet Explorer. As long as Real doesn’t use any source code that is owned by Apple they are not violating Apple’s copyrights.

Unlike utilities like Hymn a.k.a PlayFair and DeDRMS, the application Real built does not break the copy protection scheme used by FairPlay, it merely builds files that are compatible with FairPlay. So it doesn’t look like a DMCA violation. In fact the DMCA specifically allows reverse-engineering to achieve compatibility.

All that is left is that Real is messing up Apples plans to stay the sole supplier of legal downloads for the iPod. Although I love Apple, that is something they can’t prevent from happening. I’ve never seen a law that tells us that you can’t mess with Apple’s plans.
 
Quobobo said:
Jesus, you people are touchy. I for one think it's great that Real is willing to go to these lengths to ensure iPod compatibility. Not to mention that they actually put quite a bit of work into making RealPlayer a good OS X app (the same can't be said of another, much larger company with a competing media player...).

That was my reaction too - they provide an extra option for iPod owners, and people's reaction is "Die Real, Die". And to think they call Mac fans extremists... ;)
 
I think RealNetworks has the right to allow their music to be playable on the iPod. It may be possible that Apple locks out Harmony songs, but that could be seen as Apple using its monopoly power in the downloadable music industry. Apple, do the right thing.
 
http://www.realnetworks.com/company/press/releases/2004/harmony.html said:
With Harmony Technology, RealPlayer Music Store supports more than 70 secure portable media devices, including all 4 generations of the iPod and iPod mini, 14 products from Creative, 14 from Rio, 7 from RCA, 9 from palmOne, 18 from iRiver, and products from Dell, Gateway, and Samsung. Generally speaking, Harmony supports any device that uses the Apple FairPlay DRM, The Microsoft Windows Media Audio DRM, or the RealNetworks Helix DRM, giving RealPlayer Music Store support for more secure devices than any other music store on the Internet.

The software seems to translate from DRM to DRM but never actually removes it... I don't think there's a foul there. Apple might be pissed but I think its the right thing.... :eek:

If there is a lawsuit... there's going to be a bunch of them.
 
Now i don't quite see how Apple has a monopoly
"Exclusive control by one group of the means of producing or selling a commodity or service"

THe way i see it, their is a huge market for mp3 players, Apple just happens to have the most poplular one. also there are several Online music stores as well. So Apple not wanting to have rival companies able to play their music is simply competetion nothing monopolistic about it. I see no price gouging, the price in Ipods has been quite steady as have the prices on most mac products! every compnay is and should be allowed to work to maintain their marketshare by legal means. Real is the caompny that appears to be pursuing the non-legal means and should be dealt with accordingly....but that's just my opinion!
 
This is unlikely to have anything to do with the DMCA or EUCD.

Real are (or sounds like they are as it's not out as yet!) taking their copy-protected songs and adding in the necessary bits so that iTunes recognises the file as legally purchased.

They don't care how Apple's DRM works, that would be reverse engineering, all they need to know is what input data they need in order to get the correct output (i.e. allow the file to be played) and from this link news.com
it appears they are using Apples own libraries and very much like they are trying to do the same thing for MS DRM too.

It does not involve bypassing the DRM, quite the opposite in fact, in requires the DRM mechanism to be present.

Regardless, I hope this succeeds - Real, as the underdog in the market now, are the ones working for the consumer to deliver a 'buy once - play anywhere' product.

It is exactly this inability to cooperate that delayed online music sales and allowed p2p to take root and flourish giving us a whole host of draconian legislation to boot. A whole load of incompatible DRM technologies will just lead to a repeat of the same thing in the digital music market. How long before you have to have a specific player to listen to a specific band? Sony Online exclusives sound good to anyone here?
 
I was working under the impression that Apple's monopoly of FairPlay was the singular reason why the Majors allowed their content to be sold through iTMS. I haven't done much looking at iTMS alternatives, but is there another music service that allows one to "own" the song, severed from the online host? I'm surprised that the record companies would see the reverse-engineering (read: "compromise") of FairPlay as favorable.
 
Neuro said:
If Real starts selling AAC tracks at 160Kbit or higher, then Apple will be in trouble. 128 just isn't good enough with some recordings.

:eek:
oooOOOoooo. i hadn't thought of that. i LOVE iTMS, but my biggest gripe is that 128kbps is the ONLY choice of quality. i'm looking to migrate to a 40GB iPod and i chose quality over quantity a while back, so if Real comes along w/ 160/192kbps downloads for $.99, i would seriously consider spending my dollar there (and i hate Real).

right now, my view is that unless it's an album from an artist that i REALLY like, i'll buy it from iTMS. i don't mind giving up a little sound quality for the lower price of the album. BUT if it's someone i really like, i'll still plunk down the cash for the CD for the ability to rip it at 192kbps AAC.
 
½win½lin:
....it appears they are using Apples own libraries and very much like they are trying to do the same thing for MS DRM too.

It does not involve bypassing the DRM, quite the opposite in fact, in requires the DRM mechanism to be present...

What News.com describes here the method which Real uses to play PlayFair DRM protected files. This is something have been doing for a while now and has very little to do with the annoucement that they will be offering PlayFair compatible files on their RealPlayer Music Store.

The mechanism they discribe is actually pretty simple and has been done by others also. Basically it works like this. The PlayFair DRM is implemented in QuickTime. iTunes uses QuickTime to play the iTMS files. If you build an application that also uses QuickTime to play iTMS files it will work without you ever having to deal with the DRM, because that is all handled by QuickTime. Another example of such an application is the open-source Media Player Classic on Windows.


RocksInMySocks:
I was working under the impression that Apple's monopoly of FairPlay was the singular reason why the Majors allowed their content to be sold through iTMS...

I don't think the record companies really care about FairPlay. They only care about the end-results. They want to sell as much as they can and put certain restrictions on how the files can be used. iTMS with its FairPlay DRM is just one way to achieve that goal.

When Real allows users to play their songs on the iPod it actually helps the record companies achieve their goal. Sell more songs. Since Real's FairPlay-compatible files are still protected by DRM with all of the restrictions intact their is no downside for the record companies.
 
Apple Legal has a seizure when rumor sites post images of upcoming products... I can't imagine how upset this will make them.

Apple should just buy real networks and close them down. RealPlayer is the suck.
 
sinisterdesign:
oooOOOoooo. i hadn't thought of that. i LOVE iTMS, but my biggest gripe is that 128kbps is the ONLY choice of quality. i'm looking to migrate to a 40GB iPod and i chose quality over quantity a while back, so if Real comes along w/ 160/192kbps downloads for $.99, i would seriously consider spending my dollar there (and i hate Real).

Real is actually already selling 192kbps AAC encoded files for $.99. The only thing is they are not compatible with the iPod... something that is going to change very soon :)
 
Seeing Steve with Ipod on the cover of Newsweek marked a "peek" for Ipod and iTMS IMO... this is how usually things are.. same theory applies to trading stocks..
 
reyesmac said:
Thats what Apple gets for not letting other people make a little money off the iPod. More music available for the iPod means more iPod sales, since those files are only playable on the iPod. But since they also own the iTMS, I understand why they don't want everyone to have the codec.

Does Real have a large bevy of artists/labels iTMS doesn't?

Real "supporting" iPod doesn't mean there is more music available, just that you have a second choice in music supplier. That is not a good thing for Apple economically, and in Apple's view isn't a good thing for the consumer (because it fractures the marketplace, makes it possible for the RIAA to set up two tiers of music sales and rights, etc). The primary result of having two iPod music stores will be that one of them ends up getting a "better" deal on music for cheap, and the other ends up getting a much larger catalog of "premium" music. That's the antithesis of what Apple's done so far with the industry (forced a single-price/single-rights approach) and would be bad for the consumer ('cause now I'd have to go to two different stores to find the one song I want).
 
Good step in the future!

This is a good step for Apple and helps protects them of their own conceitedness and will give the iPod even bigger market shares and opens the iPod to other companies as well! This is good news for customers and Apple itself!
Only the "Harmony" technology must work on macs and linux too.. not only windows... :rolleyes:
 
Neuro said:
If Real starts selling AAC tracks at 160Kbit or higher, then Apple will be in trouble. 128 just isn't good enough with some recordings.

While this may be important to some audiophiles out there, I highly doubt enough people even know what their bit rate is, not to mention can tell the difference, to signifigantly hurt apple in this case. Of course it would be nice to offer the best for the cheapest, but I don't see any mass migration over to real because of this.

-Doops
 
Pretty funny how those defending real are mostly macrumors newbies. damn trollers.

I don't think we'll see a lawsuit first. i think we'll see alot of firmware and software upgrades followed by a lawsuit if real keeps up.
 
I read the article on the New York Times, Real seems to have found some kind of technical loophole that allowed them to make their own songs work with the iPod. They don't seem to have violated any of Apple's copyrights in the process. Real's standard has nothing to do with reverse engineering FairPlay, from what I read. I don't see why Apple would be up in arms about this, this can only be good for business as it would sale more iPods. Maybe Steve should have thought this through.
 
Nermal said:
No. Real is licencing their technology so that other music stores can sell iPod-compatible songs.

There is no difference. If Apple doesn't legally block Real from licensing Harmony to music stores, it will lose its ability to block them from licensing Harmony to music players.
 
joeboy_45101 said:
I read the article on the New York Times, Real seems to have found some kind of technical loophole that allowed them to make their own songs work with the iPod. They don't seem to have violated any of Apple's copyrights in the process. Real's standard has nothing to do with reverse engineering FairPlay, from what I read. I don't see why Apple would be up in arms about this, this can only be good for business as it would sale more iPods. Maybe Steve should have thought this through.

Then i'm sure apple will seal this loophole.
 
Shouldn't Apple Just Buy Real

Isn't it about time for Apple to buy Real and switch all the Real streams over to QT?
With Real on the ropes financially, it is likely that some entity would scoop them up for all the licenses they have for media streams. Apple could gain valuable market share against MS WM in the fight for online media dominance.
I highly doubt it would happen though. Apple doesn't seem able to have more than one iron in the fire at a time these days and migrating media AND wrestling with music licensing and content is most likely too much for their resources.
 
Don't know if anyone has posted this because I don't have time to read all 2 billion posts on this topic, but I did read a few that wondered how, exactly, Real is doing this. Check this link from Billboard:

http://www.billboard.com/bb/daily/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000585582

If you don't want to read the whole thing, here's the important part:

Real's solution to the compatibility problem is to give consumers two files of the same song when they purchase a track from the RealPlayer Music Store. The first is the normal file, designed for playback via Real's RealPlayer music management software. The second is a transparent, "optimized" file that is not seen in the music collection but resides on the user's hard drive. This second file is used specifically for transfer to a portable device.

The RealPlayer determines whether a device uses Apple or Windows Media DRM, and then converts the optimized file into the proper format to enable portability. "Users don't have to think about the format," says Sean Ryan, senior VP of music services at Real. "The proposition is: Buy it here; move it anywhere."

The Harmony technology still doesn't allow for tracks secured with Windows Media DRM to be directly transferred to the iPod, or for iTunes tracks to be transferred to Windows-based devices from the likes of Creative and Rio.

So, this seems like a real jerry-rigged solution. Their answer is to put TWO files on your computer of the same song - so there's no actual "compatibility" between their files and the iPod, or any other player. It just seems like any actual end user is going to be dealing with more problems than they're worth, especially considering they can already buy from the iTMS for the same money and with no extra files and no compatibility workarounds. Just my first thoughts.
 
0 and A ai said:
Then i'm sure apple will seal this loophole.

Your probably right, but I don't understand why they would really want to do this. The iPod has become a cultural icon. Let's say that Real's music service somehow magically takes off and becomes super popular. Would Apple really want to piss off iPod customers by blocking the iPod's ability to play somebody else's music. It's none of Apple's business what I put on my iPod. But I also have less faith in Apple's ability to block any kind of loophole, they apparently can't get multiple on-the-go playlists and Audiobook speed adjustments to work on older iPods.
 
blackmail...

thats what this is.

for those newbies or just piss-and-moners about the attitude of apple "zealots":

for years apple users were forced to sit in a corner with no support because people were led like sheep to the windows world, and now that apple is finally regaining ground (in one area or another) these little pick-and peck companies are once again trying to capitalize on something that apple has done well. i think we apple users have every right to be upset about a company that we are very proud of and many of us use as a staple tools in our lives getting the screw-over blackmail treatment.

the point here is that real was not invited. that does not make apple bad or a monopoly. this market is fresh, and still very much on the rise. businesses have every chance to compete. as long as apple still stands to profit in a large way in a growing market, i fully believe they have the right to keep the iTunes store closed. they are not ready to open it yet, and ANYONE forcing them to do so with blackmail tactics should be repremanded. this IS like the kid who asked and didn't recieve and then just decided to blackmail to get it. Apple WILL eventually open fairplay to everyone, but they are still the leader in a fresh, highly competitive market, and they shouldn't be forced to open their system until it becomes necessary and good for THEM.

this crap about apple screwing the consumer with rights management is crap as well. the ONLY reason there is rights management on the iTunes music store in the first place is the labels and the RIAA. apple wanted to bring something cool to the market, but needed permission in order to get there. the only way they could get that permission was to encode the files with copyright protection. don't cry foul apple for bringing you a good product. they did what they had to, and i for one think what apple has done is very non-restrictive in comparison to some.

and finally, one of the main reasons that apple's software and hardware is so nice and easy, and flawless (mostly) in operation is because they have COMPLETE control over the user experience and integration, which makes for a much better and effecient user experience. "it just works" comes to mind from the many converted friends and co-workers that i have personally helped to the other side. Steve is ALL about the experience and that is why they SHOULD and CAN be pissed about pouty-ass sneaky Real doing what they are doing. period.

that all being said,

i would like to see higher encoded songs on iTunes, and when the market ripens and apple stands to profit from it (because i want apple to profit, since i rely on their products and enjoy them tremendously) i think they should license their drm. they should NOT be forced (it's like being forced to give up your virginity) by anyone. period.

all statements made herein are the sole opinion of one technocoy, and are not paid for or endorsed by any part of apple computer corp® or MacRumors Forums or their subsidary members :)

PEACE!!
 
0 and A ai said:
Pretty funny how those defending real are mostly macrumors newbies. damn trollers.

Pretty funny how those defending Apple are ignoring well-reasoned, well-written, fact-based posts showing Real is almost certainly not breaking the law.

One can hate Real and yet defend their right to use legal means to compete with ITMS.

Somehow, I think only debating whether or not Real "sucks" (as some posts have done) or whether or not "newbies" are allowed independent thought (which you seem to question :)), will go nowhere.
 
Apple want to control iTunes MS and iPod because it works. Let another outfit try to emulate the service and they dont get it quite right, and that impacts on the iPod. Real should just hand over everything to Apple and save themselves a humiliatingly slow bleed to death
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.