Apple has filed United States Patent Application (#20070288886). The application was made on April 27, 2007 and published on December 13, 2007 by the US Patent and Trademark Office.
Apple’s Abstract: A digital rights management system permits an application owner to cause code to be injected into the application’s run-time instruction stream so as to restrict execution of that application to specific hardware platforms. In a first phase, an authorizing entity (e.g., an application owner or platform manufacturer) authorizes one or more applications to execute on a given hardware platform. Later, during application run-time, code is injected that performs periodic checks are made to determine if the application continues to run on the previously authorized hardware platform. If a periodic check fails, at least part of the application’s execution string is terminated–effectively rendering the application non-usable. The periodic check is transparent to the user and difficult to circumvent.
Apple’s description, in part: The invention relates generally to digital rights management and more particularly, by way of example, to performing a check at run-time to determine if a software application is authorized to execute on a specific hardware platform.
More info: United States Patent Application #20070288886
[Attribution: MacNN, MacObserver. Thanks to MacDailyNews Readers “Fred Mertz” and “MT” for the heads up.]
MacDailyNews Take: Apple could use this for applications, application suites (for example, iWork), and/or for Mac OS X (to permit its use only on Apple-labeled hardware as stipulated in the Mac OS X Software License Agreement). It could also be intended to permit Mac OS X on Apple-approved hardware (ominous chords: Return of the Clones!) Or it could simply be a patent application that remains unused (Apple certainly has plenty of those) or is not planned for use until some future date.
Good, I don’t want to see OS X running on a DELL or any unauthorized Apple software on those POS.
Bad Apple… if they actually use this. Don’t go to the dark side like the evil MS.
You mean nobody has been checking how many systems I’ve been populating with my Family Packs to date? That I’ve been needlessly fussing over using just 5, no more and certainly no less, installations from each?
Oh … BOTHER!
MPC Guy … your name, and the fact you are not registered each proclaim you to be a troll. MS was SO behind the curve with that “MPC” thing. Already done by Apple, already done better by both Amiga and Atari.
Dave
“Open your eyes blind sheep.”
Is that physically possible? Want to reconsider your metaphors?
BTW, I don’t own an iPod. But I bought my music legally through the iTS and it plays on my car stereo on CDs. Baaaaaa.
Dumbass.
It’s a EFI based DRM scheme
Basically you will need to be hooked up to the internet in order to run third party apps.
Little Snitch or firewall blocking will not work as this DRM scheme happens in EFI firmware.
All part of Trusted Computing, minus the TPM chip. Thanks to Intel and Microsoft for this wonderful new technology.
Not to allow people to steal, but rather the large intrusion into our privacy.
More and more, our computers are not our own.
Begin hacking EFI at rEFIt.com.
Face it you’re Sjs bitch. Go out and buy another white plastic gadget. The new ones are “incredible” !!!!!!
>Ampar wrote: But I bought my music legally through the iTS and it plays on my car stereo on CDs. Baaaaaa. Dumbass.
How many CDs did you have to burn to jailbreak it? 1? 5? 100? Good luck with that. If you don’t mind losing your fair usage rights, good for you.
Apparently, those standing up for fair usage rights are dumbasses in the eyes of sheep.
—-
>MPC Guy … your name, and the fact you are not registered each proclaim you to be a troll.
Your act of nothing but name-calling proclaims you to be juvenile and unimportant. At least try and argue within reason. It’s strange you call me a troll, yet I’ve raised reasonable concerns while you merely name-call.
Try again Dave, childishness aside next time.
– MPC Guy
(Mac & PC Guy… I use both)
“How many CDs did you have to burn to jailbreak it?”
One per playlist and it’s not jailbreaking. It’s allowed by the terms of use of the iTS.
“iTunes lets you organize and play your music in a whole new way. Take playlists, for example. Create a new one and drag and drop songs into it, ready to play or burn to a CD.”
http://www.apple.com/itunes/godigital/
Again, dumbass.
” Go out and buy another white plastic gadget.”
I don’t own any white plastic gadgets unless you mean the power brick from my MBP.
MPC “Guy”: Read the following slowly and to yourself. Out loud if that helps.
“v) You shall be authorized to burn an audio playlist up to seven times.
(vii) You shall be entitled to export, burn (if applicable) or copy Products solely for personal, noncommercial use.”
http://www.apple.com/legal/itunes/us/service.html
>Ampar wrote: “iTunes lets you organize and play your music in a whole new way. Take playlists, for example. Create a new one and drag and drop songs into it, ready to play or burn to a CD.”…Again, dumbass.
How old are you? We can tell from your posts your maturity level, but how old in years.
Do you not understand the concept that as music libraries grow burning to CD, which takes time and money, becomes an enormous hassle?
Wondering if you’ll be a jackass in your next post, yet again. People tend to do that when they cannot piece together any compelling counter-arguments.
Do you keep the terms and conditions of the iTS in a little red book under your pillow?
“Do you not understand the concept that as music libraries grow burning to CD, which takes time and money, becomes an enormous hassle?”
That wasn’t the point. I agree that burning could become a hassle. But you said the iTS was locked to the iPod. You’re wrong about that but you won’t admit it.
It’s not a counter-argument. It’s in the legal agreement.
“How old are you? We can tell from your posts your maturity level, but how old in years.”
Yeah, that’s relevant.
To @Ampar:
Stop looking in people’s windows.