Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Apple To Play Fairer With FairPlay?

Posted by kdawson on Tue Jan 16, 2007 08:07 PM
from the all's-fair dept.
NewbieMonster writes "According to tech.co.uk, Apple is about to license its Fairplay DRM to Made for iPod accessory manufacturers. It's reported that Apple will also allow streaming of protected AAC content via USB. Could this signal a move to allowing other music players to access and play ITMS content?" From the article: "The expected announcements could signal a move on Apple's part to take some of the sting out of its Fairplay DRM which has come in for a great deal of criticism over recent months. It may also be a way of keeping Made For iPod makers onside, as the draw of the Microsoft Zune becomes stronger." Anyone noticed the draw of the Microsoft Zune becoming stronger?
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Norway Outlaws iTunes 930 comments
haddieman notes that while many people are getting more and more annoyed at DRM, Norway actually did something about it. The PC World article explains: "Good intentions, questionable execution. European legislators have been giving DRM considerable attention for a while, but Norway has actually gone so far as to declare that Apple's iTunes store is illegal under Norwegian law. The crux of the issue is that the Fairplay DRM that is at the heart of the iTunes/iPod universe doesn't work with anything else, meaning that if you want access to the cast iTunes library, you have to buy an iPod."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • hmm.... (Score:5, Funny)

    by ganjadude (952775) <pmalloy4391@@@aol...com> on Tuesday January 16 2007, @08:10PM (#17639450) Homepage
    Anyone noticed the draw of the Microsoft Zune becoming stronger?

    .......no
  • but seriously ... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ganjadude (952775) <pmalloy4391@@@aol...com> on Tuesday January 16 2007, @08:14PM (#17639510) Homepage
    why was the zune thrown in there???? to start a flame war of course, no other reason, i mean whats a /. article without some micro bashing
  • by QuantumG (50515) * <qg@biodome.org> on Tuesday January 16 2007, @08:14PM (#17639514) Homepage Journal
    Doesn't that mean that everyone has a license?

    • No (Score:5, Informative)

      by DreadSpoon (653424) on Tuesday January 16 2007, @08:19PM (#17639594) Homepage Journal
      No, it is not cracked.

      The iTMS (iTunes Music Store) was cracked, meaning that people were able to buy DRM-free songs from iTMS using custom software. iTMS 6.0 changed that, and to date, it is not possible to buy unencrypted music from an account registered with iTMS 6.0 or higher. It's possible to run older iTMS versions (for now) and buy music, but some of us had extensive music purchases before we got our heads out of our butts and realized we wanted to play the music on something other than an iPod.

      The DRM encryption itself is completely uncracked. IF you can get a hold of your decryption key, there is code to decrypt your music files. Apple has done a rather amazing job of keeping that key secured, though. It's pretty much impossible to pull it off of newer iPods, and I think it's not possible yet to extract it from a box with iTunes 6+.

      If I'm wrong about that, let me know... I've got 250+ encrypted songs I'd really like to play on my Linux box with its superior sound setup, instead of on my iBook.
      • Re:No (Score:4, Informative)

        by wealthychef (584778) on Tuesday January 16 2007, @08:39PM (#17639802)
        I've got 250+ encrypted songs I'd really like to play on my Linux box with its superior sound setup, instead of on my iBook.

        You may already know about this, but here is how to un-DRM your songs: simply burn them to an audio CD, then re-import them from the CD's. Sure, you theoretically lose sound quality this way, but I cannot tell the difference, and I'll bet if I blindfolded you, you couldn't either.

        This is a bit tedious when done by hand for a large number of songs. The only working Macintosh utility to automate this process that I know of is "DRM Dumpster," which uses a single CD-RW over and over to get the job done. Worked great for me. Other utilities seem to have bugs that prevented me from using them.

        • Re:No (Score:5, Insightful)

          by harlows_monkeys (106428) on Tuesday January 16 2007, @09:44PM (#17640602) Homepage
          You may already know about this, but here is how to un-DRM your songs: simply burn them to an audio CD, then re-import them from the CD's. Sure, you theoretically lose sound quality this way, but I cannot tell the difference, and I'll bet if I blindfolded you, you couldn't either.

          I'm surprised no one has made an AAC encoder specifically designed for this situation. Consider how lossy audio compression works. The 30000 ft overview would be that you simplify the input by throwing away some of it (hopefully, some of it that is inaudible), resulting in something that can be losslessly compressed.

          When you take a lossy compressed song and expand that (e.g., burn to an audio CD), and want to compress that again, you don't need to throw any of it away to get something that will compress well, if you are trying to compress using the same compression system that was originally used. (If you were expanding an AAC file, and then wanted to compress with, say MP3, that would have to have some degradation, because AAC and MP3 would have different ideas of what needs to be thrown away). What this means is that it should be possible to design an AAC encoder that can take advantage of the knowledge that the input is the result of expanding a 128 kbit/second stereo AAC file, and compress back to something that matches that original AAC file.

        • From http://www.rogueamoeba.com/ [rogueamoeba.com] to convert directly to MP-3 without using up one of my CD burns. Then I can load my iTunes into my Creative RAVE-MP. I just never saw the need to carry ALL of my music with me all the time. Just what I want for the drive I am about to take.
      • Re:No (Score:5, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 16 2007, @09:01PM (#17640102)
        You're wrong on several counts. It used to be the trick to removing DRM was finding the keys. There were several ways to do this, including grabbing them from an iPod, or using a program that pretended to be iTunes and having the iTMS send you the keys. There were also programs that let you purchase music and would store it unencrypted. All of these methods ceased functioning with version 6.0. Prior to 7.0, iTunes would allow the creation and use of iTunes 4.9 accounts, but after 7.0 was released, they began requiring at least version 6.0, so there is no way to get the keys to your music.

        At this point, if anybody knows how to get the keys for iTunes music, they're not talking. This doesn't mean DRM can't be removed. There is a program written in Python that latches onto iTunes like a debugger, has iTunes play DRMed songs, then grabs AAC frames after they've been decrypted but before they've been decoded. It then prevents iTunes from decoding and playing the audio, so a 5 minute song can be decrypted in less than 30 seconds, and it's a lossless transfer (as opposed to burning and ripping). Unfortunately, this program was written for Windows, and I don't believe anyone ever got it working on a Mac. If you can come up with a Windows box, one of the sibling posts has linked to it.

        My interest was the same as yours. I had about $300 invested in my iTunes library, but my media center (and now all my other boxes) runs Linux. I certainly don't want to promote piracy, but I think it's perfectly legitimate to want your music library on a Linux box.

        • Re:No (Score:5, Insightful)

          by QuantumG (50515) * <qg@biodome.org> on Wednesday January 17 2007, @12:46AM (#17642270) Homepage Journal
          please excuse me if I cause anyone offense in saying this, but maybe if Mac users didn't refer to crackers as "scum" and other names, they wouldn't ostracize the platform. I do appreciate that crackers are finally being recognized by others as the freedom fighters I've always considered them to be. It's about time.
          • the zealots only noticed something was amiss now that steve has 'em all by the balls.
          • I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Did grandparent call crackers scum? I didn't see that. Who called crackers scum? Some Mac users you know? And you don't think that there are Windows users calling crackers scum? I mean, this just smells of Artie McStrawman [crazyapplerumors.com]. Mac users aren't one person. There are many different Mac users. Some stupid, some not, just like with most other large groups of people.
      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        try myFairTunes6_v0.5.8 is unnoffical beta version works with itunes 7.0.2.16 (version 0.5.7b was the latest official version) be warned though its a stream capture hack, it plays back your music via the itunes scripting interface and captures to lossless then reconverts to .m4a and re adds it back to your itunes library.
        • Re:No (Score:5, Informative)

          by dr.badass (25287) on Tuesday January 16 2007, @08:51PM (#17639976) Homepage
          Wow... you sound really authoritative, but it seems like you really don't know what you're talking about.

          Nothing in these links contradicts what the parent said. You can't buy unencrypted music with PyMusique anymore, and the DRM encryption is still unbroken. QTFairUse extracts AAC frames from memory, it does not break the encryption.
          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            It is true, all these programs basically exploit an almost analog-hole type situation. And most of them dont even work anymore.

            None of them broke the encryption in the first place.
            • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

              Most people don't usually "break encryption" when they crack copy control mechanisms. Breaking encryption is something people write scientific papers about.

              To break copy control, you just re-implement the algorithm and find the keys. Or you let the original code run and grab the unencrypted output.. which is the simplest way.. and yeah, if I gave a shit about iTunes I'd give it a go, but yeah, I don't.
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            QTFairUse extracts AAC frames from memory, it does not break the encryption.

            Well, if that'll get you the original compressed AAC version with absolutely zero loss (not even transcoding loss, nevermind the D/A/D loss of the analog hole), what more exactly do you need? Even if you found the key, the encryption is no more or less broken than it was before, they can ship a new version with a new key and a new memory location and you're back to square one again.
          • Re:No (Score:4, Interesting)

            by cbrocious (764766) on Wednesday January 17 2007, @02:14AM (#17642820) Homepage
            All that needs to be done to make PyMusique again is to reverse-engineer the algorithm used to encrypt the store pages behind ssl, the algorithm that manipulates their keys, and the simple algorithm used to encrypt the files as they're transferred from the store (before per-user DRM is applied).

            Not very difficult at all, just a bit time consuming.

            (From the original author of PyTunes, which PyMusique is a GUI frontend to :P )
  • again.... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by User 956 (568564) on Tuesday January 16 2007, @08:18PM (#17639584) Homepage
    According to tech.co.uk, Apple is about to license its Fairplay DRM to Made for iPod accessory manufacturers. It's reported that Apple will also allow streaming of protected AAC content via USB. Could this signal a move to allowing other music players to access and play ITMS content?

    Again, reinforcing the point that DRM isn't about preventing piracy, it's about maintaining control over other things. Like competitors in the marketplace.
    • Re:again.... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by falcon5768 (629591) <Falcon5768@NosPAm.comcast.net> on Tuesday January 16 2007, @08:36PM (#17639776) Journal
      Again, reinforcing the point that DRM isn't about preventing piracy, it's about maintaining control over other things. Like competitors in the marketplace.
      ummmm NO SHIT? Steve Job himself said this to EVERYONE when they started the iTunes Music Store. The labels require it though (also to maintain control over your music unless you are living under a rock somewhere and wonder why about that too) so the honest question is, why not use it to your company's advantage when the people your licensing from require it anyway.

      Only a business moron or naive fool would not.

      • The labels require it though (also to maintain control over your music unless you are living under a rock somewhere and wonder why about that too)... why not use it to your company's advantage when the people your licensing from require it anyway.

        That's false, and Apple loves that you believe it. The license holders don't "require it". Case-in-point, eMusic, which sells DRM-free MP3's [boingboing.net]. A ton of them. Johnny Cash, Dashboard Confessional, Credence Clearwater, Moby, the list goes on for miles.

        Those song
        • by Blondie-Wan (559212) on Tuesday January 16 2007, @10:05PM (#17640842) Homepage
          Those songs are sold with DRM on iTunes because other songs from the major labels are sold that way, and iTunes doesn't discriminate by label to know whether to apply DRM or not. It's simply universally applied to everything sold there, in accordance with the wishes of the majors who sell there (and whose music, I'm sure, overwhelmingly dominates sales there as elsewhere).

          eMusic doesn't have major label stuff precisely because it doesn't do DRM (well, that, plus it's not as lucrative). That's not necessarily a bad thing, of course; as an eMusic user myself for a fair while, I've come to realize one of the many benefits of the service is how it fosters discovering new/obscure music, and that's frankly easier without the same major label stuff one can get elsewhere anyway dominating the site and distracting one from the hidden real treasures. However, it does mean there's an additional factor that has to be taken into account when comparing DRMed iTunes to DRMless eMusic.

          There are in fact a bunch of download services, both with DRM and without (iTunes, eMusic, Audio Lunchbox, Napster, etc.), and the line dividing the ones with major label material from ones without is the same line dividing the ones with DRM from ones without. There's a reason for that, and it's a lot bigger than Apple, since only one of the download services is theirs.


      • Then how do you explain that *all* the labels on iTunes sell *all* that music in a higher quality (ie. not lossily compressed) unprotected form? It's called a CD.

        DRM is pushed by tech companies like a narcotic and some music labels are stupid enough to buy into it.

        It will *always* be possible for content to end up on the P2P networks in a "good enough" (for 95% of the audience) form anyway, and as soon as one person does it that nixes the value of the DRM to the label anyway.

        Some labels might "want" DRM, bu
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          Then how do you explain that *all* the labels on iTunes sell *all* that music in a higher quality (ie. not lossily compressed) unprotected form? It's called a CD.

          Easy, they havent found a DRM that works well on a CD without breaking things all over the place and making them look bad.

          Sony, Universal, Warner and EMI have all used copy protection on their CDs recently to mixed results. So your idea that the labels are not pushing it is completely and totally false.

              • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

                The sheer amount of articles out there talking about how only now within the last 4 months labels are beginning to decide that DRM on CDs is costing them sales.

                Of course, indie labels for years have known DRM is stupid, but the big 5 swore by it up till now despite you accusations of the contrary, or would you like me to google up 5 years of articles that prove you a liar?

                "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."


                OK. You clearly have some kind of personal demons about the whol
                • Wow... where to begin? I think at the beginning is probably the best. When CDs were first created long long ago, the format itself was considered a DRM measure, because computers at the time were hopelessly incapable of copying them. They didn't have enough capacity, there was no "internet" to speak of... Hell, most computers at the time didn't even have CDROM drives, let alone CD Burners. No one could forsee the world we have now. CDs have been around for a LONG time now. So your assertion that the
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        There was a time when Apple claimed that they'd rather not have DRM at all, that it's forced on them by the labels. Their actions and statements in the past two or three years now say that they really do like DRM.
  • by larry bagina (561269) on Tuesday January 16 2007, @08:20PM (#17639600) Journal

    Outside of slashdot (an alternate reality where grandmothers use lunix and ogg vorbis is popular), who is criticizing fairplay? Is there anybody that doesn't think Zune is a turd?

    Please, enlighten me.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      Outside of slashdot (an alternate reality where grandmothers use lunix and ogg vorbis is popular), who is criticizing fairplay?

      People who want to transfer files that they've bought to others without handing over the keys to their account. Like, for example, a father on Christmas morning who gives his son an iPod with Pirates of the Carribean loaded - but then he realizes he bought it with his own account, and the son will lose that file as soon as he syncs it with his own computer, unless he also gives his son one of his 5 "authorization" slots.

      Is there anybody that doesn't think Zune is a turd?

      I played with one for a few minutes in the store the other day, and the interface is a

      • Now a question for you: is there anybody who actually likes the iPod's click wheel? At first, it seems like a cool gizmo, but then you realize how hard it is to move just one click at a time.
        It is not a problem for those of us who do not have cerebral palsy.
        • Well then, I guess I and everyone I know who owns an iPod must have CP. Thanks for the diagnosis, Dr. Frist.
        • Worse, is that if the son has his own account already, I don't believe that he can use both authorizations simultaneously.

          Wrong - I use two iTunes accounts under one user on my computer (different countries), no problems with authorisations.

          However, I don't believe we can mix libraries, even on the same machine.

          You have heaps of options -
          use the inbuilt "Sharing" feature of iTunes;
          point both your iTunes libraries to the same directory (change permissions on the dir so you can both rw);
          copy the songs into bo
        • I'd like to do this; my wife has music on an account on an iMac, and I have music of my own under my account on the same machine. However, I don't believe we can mix libraries, even on the same machine.
          That's funny - my daughter and I do this all the time.
    • Outside of slashdot (an alternate reality where grandmothers use lunix and ogg vorbis is popular), who is criticizing fairplay? Is there anybody that doesn't think Zune is a turd?

      Not too many people.

      In truth its not very restrictive, as far as the current policies go. And apple has defended the users against abuses from the RIAA (esp with increases in pricing).

      In particular, the fact that you can authorise 5 machines and an unlimited number of ipods is good.

      More importantly, you can reset the list of 5 machines once per year even if you have lost all your old machines. Which means that having your music work on a new machine isn't likely to be a problem, even if your old machines get stolen or reformatted before you could deauthorise them out of your list of 5 computers.

      Not to mention that you can burn the music and rip it again anyway. Sure it loses quality, but if you are buying for quality alone, you wouldn't be using either iTunes or an iPod for that matter.

      I'm not surprised that iTunes isn't yet hacked. Mostly because there aren't many reasons yet why a legit user would get pissed off.

      The biggest thing they should offer (in my opinion) is the ability to redownload your music that you have purchased. In this situation you would be getting defacto off-site storage of your music, which would be a huge plus for the service that you wouldn't get with mp3's. Unless you consider bittorrent as your off site backup.

      Anyway, DRM has worked against the RIAA. They thought it would give them control over the users. Instead it has given apple control of the RIAA.

      Michael
          • What mythical world do you live in? iTunes doesn't have every major label - last I checked, some of them refuse to sign up because "the DRM is too lax". How is Apple in control again?

            Because those labels haven't been anywhere near to disrupt Apple's success and continued growth? Eventually Apple will be such a large sales channel, they have no choice but to fall in line.

            I have to agree with Kjella.

            Look at Apple Corp (the Beatles). I'm willing to wager money that they are about to start releasing music using iTunes. Certainly you have to wonder why else Steve Jobs had their albums splashed everywhere in his keynote speech.

            The label's have two real choices: Fairplay for the iPod, or no DRM. The fact that they are starting to sell songs without DRM says how scared they are of apple.

            The trouble is that if they use any other DRM, the percentage of the market that they get is so small it isn't worth having. Not to mention the debacle that microsoft produced when it abandoned its "plays for sure" platform for the Zune. I wouldn't want to be selling music to any of those WMA players - the users there might forget to blame microsoft and blame the label when the music they bought 6 months ago now can't be played on a Zune, or pretty much any new hardware that's coming out.

            I'm not trying to defend apple for its DRM, but if you look at what happened with iTunes when the music store was cracked - basically they moved to a new version of iTunes but kept the old version still working, even though people were downloading music and bypassing the DRM. To my knowledge, you can still do this with the old version of iTunes if you really want to, but certainly nobody suffered from the DRM being bypassed.

            The net effect of this is that the RIAA, if it wants DRM, has to use Apple. Anything else is probably worse than pointless the way microsoft is playing with WMA.

            And if they have to use fairplay, they do so on apple's terms. A point which they are just starting to realise.

            Michael

  • Apple is about to license its Fairplay DRM to Made for iPod accessory manufacturers [C. It's reported that Apple will also allow streaming of protected AAC content via USB.

    That should be interesting considering there are USB to Optical adapters.

    Could this signal a move to allowing other music players to access and play ITMS content?"

    Only if these other players have the ability to record the content. When I tried to record a song from a DVD (music video playing) to my Minidisc via optical, all I got was "NO


    • Only if these other players have the ability to record the content. When I tried to record a song from a DVD (music video playing) to my Minidisc via optical, all I got was "NO COPY" flashing on my player's display.

      That's SCMS (serial copy management system). It allows the source device to indicate whether the target device should permit recording. The idea is to prevent you copying a copy: you can space-shift your CDs onto MD, but you can't then space-shift that MD onto another without going analogue. The
      • btw. I bought minidisc equipment shortly before the MP3 revolution and have always regretted my short-sightedness.

        I still occasionally think of buying one of the last generation Hi-MD recorders. I'd like to have one for taping. They can play MP3 natively and you can export recordings to your PC (and to unprotected WAV, too). And they can record at quality as high as full PCM.

        I actually used my Minidisc for covert recording for a school project recently. I couldn't use my mini cassette recorder as it had no

    • When I tried to record a song from a DVD (music video playing) to my Minidisc via optical, all I got was "NO COPY" flashing on my player's display.

      You're seeing SCMS. Does line-in misbehave the same way?

      • No, it doesn't happen on the plain line out. Thanks for the heads up. I'm sure the fact both the minidisc player and the DVD player were Sony didn't make this any better.

        It isn't a problem any longer as that DVD is no longer working. The model is actually part of a class action lawsuit against Sony, but I wont be able to get in on the settlement since I have little proof of purchase (it's was bought 5 years ago after all).
  • iPod != Fair Play (Score:5, Informative)

    by LKM (227954) on Wednesday January 17 2007, @05:31AM (#17643792) Homepage
    Anyone noticed the draw of the Microsoft Zune becoming stronger?

    Anyone notice there are still people who don't realize that you can use plain MP3/AAC files with the iPod?

    The Zune has a proprietary DRM system, just like the iPod. It even (illegally, in some cases) ads DRM to your non-DRM'd files if you "squirt" them. Or maybe I'm just not getting something here.

    • Re:iPod != Fair Play (Score:4, Interesting)

      by DrXym (126579) on Wednesday January 17 2007, @06:05AM (#17643950)
      And the Zune, PS3 and PSP will play unencrypted MP3 and AAC too. Still doesn't help if you bought something from iTMS and now discover that it's bound to Apple-only devices and you can NEVER play it on anything else except by circumventing the DRM.

      The moral here is that stores that encrypt music or tie them to a device suck. I really don't understand why music publishers want DRM at all. All that happens with lock-in is that somebody like Apple dominates the market and then the music industry is compelled to dance to their tune. If you level the playing field by publishing music without restrictions, then you can set your own price, since if Apple won't meet your price, then somebody else sure as hell will. Consumers win out too since they can get their music from dozens of sites and use them on dozens of their own devices. I doubt the amount of piracy would change significantly either since albums can be had right now on P2P, so what difference does it make if there is DRM or not?

    • Re:No (Score:4, Funny)

      by Quiscalus (974387) on Tuesday January 16 2007, @11:41PM (#17641744)
      "Maybe I missed something. Why is the Zune becoming more attractive?"

      My guess is these people [zunescene.com] can't get enough punishment to satisfy their 'masochistic tendencies||hatred of all things Apple||love for all things Microsoft||pseudo-metalhead-gamer-wannabe fantasies'.
      • You forgot the magnificient brown colored zune, which, I may say, I was almost happy to see was changed to a pink one... nah just kidding, I'm happy with m'iPod.
    • Why is the Zune becoming more attractive?

      Obviously, it's because the Zune is unencumbered by a proprietary, consumer-hating DRM scheme unlike the iPod, and you can access music stores that offer a better and cheaper experience than the iTunes store.

      ... ... What? Why are you looking at me like that?