“There’s a fun little back and forth going on between Apple and a group of programmers. Apple runs the iTunes music service, where you can download any of a gazillion songs for a buck or so,” Andrew Kantor writes for USA Today. “But those songs come with restrictions on where you can play them. So Jon Johansen, Cody Brocious, and crew (Johansen is the Norwegian who cracked the encryption on DVDs several years ago) created PyMusique — software that lets you access iTunes, pay for music, and download it without the built-in digital rights management (DRM) restrictions.”
Kantor writes, “Apple responded by closing the ‘hole’ PyMusique exploited, and requiring all iTunes users to upgrade to the latest version of the software. Johansen and the PyMusique folks responded by ‘reopening the door’ with a new version. (I am writing this on Wednesday. By the time you read this things may have changed.) To be fair, the PyMusique group said they weren’t interested in stripping the DRM, only in making iTunes available for Linux users. But the restrictions aren’t in the songs — they are added by Apple’s software. Johansen and crew simply decided not to add that feature.”
Kantor writes, “Who can blame them? By adding restrictions to music, Apple is going against decades of an understanding between music makers and music buyers. Imagine buying a music CD at the mall, bringing it home, and playing it on your stereo. Then you play it on your car’s CD player driving to work. But when you get there and pop it into the little player on your desk, you hear a voice say, ‘We’re sorry, but you are only authorized to play this disk on up to two CD players. You have now exceeded that. Thank you.’ That’s exactly how iTunes and most of the other legal online music service work. When you pay for and download a song, it comes with various built-in restrictions. Maybe you can only pay [sic] it while you’re subscribed to the service. Maybe you’re limited to playing it on certain machines. Maybe you can’t copy it to other media (say, a CD to play in your car). And people wonder why music piracy is so rampant.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Did Apple add restrictions to the music or did the record labels require Apple to do so before they would allow them to sell music online? And, by the way, Apple’s iTunes Music Store Terms of Service clearly states, “You will not access the Service by any means other than through software that is provided by Apple for accessing the Service.”
Now, we have never hit up against Apple’s iTunes DRM restrictions, because Apple’s usage rights are among the most liberal available anywhere. To introduce a touch of clarity, if you purchase songs from Apple’s iTunes Music Store: “You can burn individual songs onto an unlimited number of CDs for your personal use, listen to songs on an unlimited number of iPods and play songs on up to five Macintosh computers or Windows PCs.” – Apple.com
Apple’s iTunes Music Store’s DRM hardly seems restrictive enough to constitute the raison d’être for rampant piracy that Kantor tries to make it out to be, does it? In fact, it seems to us that, besides Kantor, only pirates, not average music lovers, would feel restricted by Apple’s iTunes Music Store’s DRM rules.
In his full article, Kantor waxes poetically about peer-to-peer (P2P) networks that feature software that’s “simple to install and easy to use” and have “a huge ‘library’ of downloadables.” The only problem is that beyond a single sentence, “you’d be a fool not to be sure your anti-virus software was up to date,” Kantor fails to mention some information that a normal person might find important (and even up-to-date anti-virus software is, at best, one-step behind the latest viruses):
“Think you’re downloading a new song or video? Watch out–that file may be stuffed with pop-ups and adware,” Andrew Brandt and Eric Dahl report for PCWorld. “PC World has learned that some Windows Media files on peer-to-peer networks such as Kazaa contain code that can spawn a string of pop-up ads and install adware. They look just like regular songs or short videos in Windows Media format, but launch ads instead of media clips.”
Brandt and Eric Dahl report, “When we ran the files, we noted over half a dozen pop-ups, some attempts to download adware onto our test PC, and an attempt to hijack our browser’s home page… Not only did we get bombarded with unwanted ads, but one of the ad windows in a video file tried to install adware onto our test PC surreptitiously, while another added items to our browser’s Favorites list and attempted to change our home page. And a window from the original music file asked to download a file called lyrics.zip, which contained the installer for 180search Assistant, commonly categorized as an adware program.”
And, besides, it’s stealing. Don’t steal music.
So, Apple’s iTunes Music Store’s DRM isn’t nearly as restrictive as Kantor would have his readers believe and certainly not valid reason for rampant piracy. And downloading files from P2P networks isn’t an idyllic panacea and might actually pollute your Windows-based personal computer with adware and, possibly, worse.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Resurrection Day comes quickly for PyMusique – March 22, 2005
The day the PyMusique died; Apple kills DVD Jon’s iTunes Music Store hack – March 21, 2005
‘PyMusique’ lets users buy songs without DRM from Apple’s iTunes Music Store– March 18, 2005
Windows Media songs and videos found to carry Windows malware payloads – December 30, 2004
IDIOT Alert!!
My MW: ‘bad’
Don’t steal music! You’ll pay for it later.
Rampant piracy preceeded iTMS and other legal services by HOW many years?
That Norwegian is looking for a job at Cupertino’s Apple HQ’s !
Andy, Andy, Andyyyy . . . what happened today? Did you get up and drink from de wrong bottle this morning? I mean, come onnnn . . . how much was de check from Microsoft this time, ehh? Ohhh, it’s okay, Andy, don’t worry. I mean, I used to work with another Andy that wasn’t the brightest bulb on the tree, either. Richter always seemed to need to have a pop or two in the morning to get going, too — just like you! And Paula Abdul. Know what I mean? Nooo, of course you don’t, Andrew — ’cause you’re not bright enough to get it!
Seriously, Andy, here’s a thought: Why not go back down to the Unemployment Office in your city and tell them that the whole newspaper thing just isn’t working out? Yeh-heh-hessss. Don’t worry, they’ll send you on a few other interviews. Hey, maybe a nice position at a drive-thru will open up, you never know. You can say “Would you like fries with that?”, can’t you?
Ohh, Andy — I’ll say it slowly so you’ll understand:
I P-O-O-P O-N Y-O-U-!
Triumph — he did more than drink from the wrong bottle. I think he actually drank from the “lazy” bottle. What a sad excuse for journalism. USA Today: Embarassing America in the eyes of the world.
Andrew Kantor is a major tool. His hits must have been flagging so he decided to bait the Mac Community again. What a troll. He knows he will get flamed and I think he words the articles specifically to have that effect.
you got that right tclash.
It would seem that 300,000,000 songs purchased in conjunction with Apples DRM make this obviously FUD as far as Apple goes.
What an asinine article.
It’s funny reading things like this…
It’s obviously Apples fault people are raised to take advantage of situations i.e. steal music.
Apple must ba a bad role model…
I can’t wait to for all the asinine responses heading back towards Kantor’s InBox (like they did about the Virginia Tech super-computer).
Frankly, MDN’s abstract of the article (if that’s what you call it and the only thing you read) misses vital parts that knit his gripe together. In fact, the point is best made this quote Kantor attribute to DRMBlog:
“But, well, the folks at DRM Blog put it best: “I can basically do whatever I want with a CD. When I am done with said CD, I can give it to a friend and he can do with it as he pleases. This is the way it has been for 80 years. Phonographs, 8-tracks, cassettes and compact discs have all worked this way. You went to a store, you bought a piece of plastic, and you took it home.”
That’s pretty much the point.
Even in the old days when people made copies of their 8-tracks onto cassettes and gave to their friends, it was illegal. Just not enforceable, so no one yelled about it very loudly, so not many people even understood that they were in fact LICENSING music, NOT OWNING it to do with what they pleased.
The rules have not changed.
Here’s the email I sent him. I hope he enjoys it:
I know it’s tough, Kantor: you go to journalism school, with hopes of working for the Washington Post or the New York Times or some other paper of record where the average reading level is above the eigth grade. But the job market is tight when you graduate, and you’re stuck either writing an obituary column for some backwater rag in North Carolina or writing a tech column for USA Today.
You chose wrong, Kantor. By selling your soul to Gannett, you made sure that your audience will only read at a fourth grade level, and you will never get a job with a reputable paper. With that in mind, I understand your frustration; since people who use Macs are generally better educated and wealthier than your typical McPaper reader, it’s certainly tempting to go after the easy target (after all, you can’t go after Wal-Mart or NASCAR, McPaper’s readers would burn you in effigy). But before you pull out your poison pen and ‘enlighten’ the world with another splenetic screed against Apple, think hard about your history of making bad choices and reconsider.
And hey, maybe if you left that block of time working for Gannett as blank on your resume (perhaps you can tell potential employers that you were in prison for buggery, or you were Osama Bin Laden’s personal assistant, or something else that’s not as repugnant or embarrassing as admitting you wrote a regular column for USA Today), you might be able to get a better job down the road. That, along with electroconvulsive therapy, may make you more pleasant to hang around with and easier to read…
History Lesson:
You beat me to it; you’re right on the money.
I almost could believe how lenient the terms of use were when Apple announced them.
To be fair to Kantor, I do agree with his take about the RIAA (and the MPAA, by extension) being jerks in the whole P2P battle. But this guy has a history of sticking it to Apple when it’s not even a story about Apple (like he did in this story, not bothering to mention that DVD Jon’s use of the iTMS runs counter to the EULA). If he wants to write an article about piracy, fine; My big worry is that music industry executives aren’t that bright, and perhaps USA Today is the paper they have their assistants read to them. If they think that iTMS=piracy, they could kill the goose that is laying the golden eggs, and it would be Kantor’s fault…
once again mdn is right on. the record companies have pooped on music not apple
man, all this negative press (mostly FUD, damnable FUD and outright lies) in the past month can’t be a coincidence. I’m not normally one to subscribe to conspiracy theories, but this is pushing it. Could MS be behind a lot of these “news stories” AND Creative’s “declaration of war” in trying to undermine iTunes/iPod/iTMS triumvirate?
The Creative CEO’s “declaration of war” was almost a flat-out statement “MS is bankrolling us to ensure the PlayForSure is the DRM of the future.”
Has anyone bothered to go to Kantor’s website? Sticking it to Apple or sucking up to Microsoft is about the last thing you get. Sure he was an editor of PC Magazine – back in 1994 at the latest.
I don’t agree with everything Kantor has to say, but I doubt he’s aligned against Apple or a tool for Microsoft. Hey, the iPod and iTMS is the acknowledged industry giant in its market. So, just like Microsoft in OSes, Apple gets associated indirectly sometimes because it happens to be in the middle of things on occasion.
Gee, if we were talking about PlayFurSure and Napster and/or Real, you folks would be slamming them all and cheering on Kantor.
What a moron. Nuff said.
Attention History Lesson,
You say the rules have not changed. Yes they have. No, you still cannot legally copy music to give to your friends. That hasn’t changed. But what has changed is now, you can’t sell your music that you purchase online or move it from device to device. You COULD do that before. So, yes the rules have changed.
Another idiot who doesn’t know the facts before writing an article online.
An interesting tidbit on Creative – they own Cambridge Soundworks (which pushes the Zen line). I’ve enjoyed the speakers that Henry Kloss and company designed. My wife and I loved the sound of their clock radio and the fact that you can program two different times (with independent radio/CD source, channel, and volume settings). We bought it.
It has most convoluted interface ever. Pretty much like the Zen MP3 players. We hate changing anything on it (we should have insisted on programming an example in the store, but who thought you’d need degree to operate a clock radio?). I then found out that Creative essentially provides the electronics to audio guys.
Figures!
To be fair, I don’t think the MDN headline is fair. Kantor does unfairly imply that Apple is to blame.
However, the rest of his reasoning I agree with. Music downloads should be the equivalent of buying a CD – instead they’re going the other way, trying to make CDs with DRM. While I am familiar with how to burn CDs from iTMS purchased songs, it’s still needless to have that. While, yes, moving a file from device to device is different, under the law, than moving a CD from player to player, the point that they SHOULD be the same, the consumers WANT them to be the same (not for piracy, but for ease of use) is a point I agree with. The laws were not written to account for the current technology and should be altered , not in their spirit, but in the wording. His overall point that if you give consumers what they want, then piracy will decrease is one with which I agree. Yes, given P2P, it is easier to pirate now and that may facilitate more piracy. However, given the current bandwidth and storage capability of the average consumer, I suspect that people interested in serious piracy are going to want higher quality files, ie CD, than those from music stores. Regardless, no matter what DRM you stick on whatever format, the only thing actually accomplished is pissing off the consumer, who can eventually get around it several ways with the purchased file or by piracy.
The RIAA would be better served to keep the PR blitz on about the cost to piracy to artists and production people than fight a losing battle with crappy DRM schemes that only alienate consumers.
Its about time there was some competition in the music business – not a bunch of farts sitting in a board room fixing prices.
Jeff,
I think the idea of being able to transfer ownership of purchased music is actually a GREAT one, although I believe it’s prone to be misused.. but, I am all for legitimate transfer. I think you should write a suggestion to Apple and propose your idea.
I have paid for many songs and albums that I have grown tired of. It would be a nice thing to sell them back at a reduced price…. thinking about if more though, I’m not sure how the license could be technically terminated and transferred from my account. I for one would guarantee that I would remove them from my library or any other backup media, but as we’ve seen relying on honesty doesn’t seem to go very far when dealing with digital music versus physical media.
If Apple could pull this off in a technical manner I would be ALL for it.