iTunes: Don't Leave Home With Them 725
BadDoggie writes "Politech is reporting that your 'ownership' of music purchased from Apple's iTunes isn't what everyone considers ownership. According to the license, 'Apple may use technologies to verify' that you have not 'use[d] or attempt[d] to use the service from outside of the [United States]'. This includes Canada. Apple's 'technologies' delete the bought-and-paid-for files with no refund and no replacement when & if you leave the U.S." Update: 07/25 16:23 GMT by P : The post to Politech says the songs would "disappear," not be deleted; from the context, it seems they were merely unplayable, not deleted. Update: 07/25 21:34 GMT by M : Apple has contacted the guy, and is apparently making him happy. However, the question remains: Apple definitely doesn't want people buying new songs from outside the U.S., but do they intend to generally permit foreign users to reauthorize (in effect, retain access to) the songs they have already purchased? Apple's policy is very unclear on that point.
Sigh.... (Score:0, Insightful)
Not too interesting (Score:1, Insightful)
When reading the "Terms of Service", it says that purchases are not available outside of the US and the "service" is not used outside of the US. I'm guessing that iTunes must phone home or something to do with its DRM. If he were to move back to the US, I would guess that he could play his songs again, provided that they were not deleted.
As his letter ends with, maybe we should buy CDs, they are not that expensive when bought used, or download free music [archive.org], or "share" mp3s off of someone you don't know.
no friendly DRM (Score:3, Insightful)
C'mon guys (Score:5, Insightful)
Who would have thought... (Score:1, Insightful)
I don't know why the RIAA don't include a shrinkwrap license in every CD either.
In Apple's defence... (Score:5, Insightful)
...there's a chance that this was something that was mandated by their contractual obligations with the labels providing the music.
Hopefully Apple will be able to secure international licenses and make this a moot point.
Backups (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, here's a good reminder to read the license before paying good money for DRM'd "product".
Also, one could avoid this problem by burning the tracks to CD as back-up, which Apple can't really do much about no matter where you take them.
Re:C'mon guys (Score:2, Insightful)
If they distributed the stuff in the US first, they should NOT prevent you from exporting it wherever you want. They already distributed it in compliance with their agreement.
Sounds like talking to a human might be in order.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple is very upfront that the service isn't available outside the US (at least not yet) and they have apparently put in technical measures to enforce that. The key is if you can talk to a person on the phone or via email and get them to override a false positive. If you can, then this is a minor annoyance. If you can't, then Apple needs to rethink their system
Also, note that you can continue to play music you already purchased outside the US. It is only new purchases or reauthorizing music that you can't do outside the US
Umm... overreacting? This makes sense. (Score:5, Insightful)
IF you attempt to use the service from outside of where they can legally sell you the music, then they MIGHT be able to delete the files you obtained illegally after you download them. WHEN at some later date your country is serviced by iTMS then you can now use the service from that country.
ITunes keeps your authorization offline, and it's a seperate file that you can backup and keep (so you'll be able to play your music even if apple's serves go down). So listening to your music abroad definitely doesn't count as infringement, since no service interaction is required.
That seems pretty reasonable to me. These "tools to detect" are probably somehow worked into iTunes, so it's not like Apple somehow is sneaking spyware into your system. Relax folks. iTMS isn't suddenly evil or anything. I really doubt that even authorizing your laptop while abroad is illegal.
You can still burn the tracks. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:What if... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Sigh.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh please. It's just fine print to prevent export abuse. Remember, RIAA has lots of jurisdiction over ITMS and ultimately greenlighted it.
With that said, I've traveled to Ensenada, Baja, Mexico with my Powerbook which contained bunch of AAC tunes purchased from ITMS. Absolutely nothing happened, considering I've connected to the net from there under
This article is just nitpicking. Wait till we hear the full story from Apple and other respected news sources before jumping on the "Apple is just like Microsoft" bandwagon.
Re:Ah well... (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry, but this guy made his choice - tough for him if he didn't read the EULA before plonking down the cash.
Re:ummm (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:no friendly DRM (Score:5, Insightful)
This is what people many don't realize, unfortunatly. The words "Digital Rights Management" impose the wrong feeling on people in the first place. It sounds more like it's empowering the user, when instead it's empowering the media corporations.
I hope the users will learn from this and boycott the iTunes store unless they remove the DRM from their songs.
Unfortunatly, as many have already said, this is the RIAA's doing, not Apple. It's kind of like the region encoded DVD situation. there is no good reason for the consumer why DVD X should only work in country Y. But it's there due to international restrictions/licensing/laws etc.
It's early days yet... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:C'mon guys (Score:3, Insightful)
But there's one difference: the licensor has much more control over the songs in the former case.
And if you're not happy.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:no friendly DRM (Score:3, Insightful)
The technology behind DRM is very neutral, its encryption and access control which can be good or bad. All I'm saying is fight the uses but don't necessarily fight the technology because there might be good uses for it.
Is no one creative here? Workaround... (Score:5, Insightful)
That being said...
What's all this mindless chatter about how DRM is evil and how we should boycott companies that use it? DRM is necessary because people have shown the willingness (and in some cases zeal) for stealing material. Apple couldn't have left DRM out if they wanted to get even some indie labels to sign on. Don't blame apple, blame "the man" and the hordes of people who frequent sharing establishments. The fact that apple pushed real hard to allow a more lax DRM than given by other music services speaks volumes. Apple wants you to be able to burn mixes, play on iPods, and share the music between your home and work computers. Sure, its DRM'd and there are a few glitches (ie: out of country), but its the best "the man" will let us do. I'm happy with that for the moment.
Yes, BUT... (Score:5, Insightful)
For 99% of the people, this license will fulfill 99% of their needs while allowing them to avoid 85% of the cost they would otherwise have to pay to listen to a song they like. The benefit here is that mp3 naturally supports the sale of singles in a way that the cd format doesn't.
Make the pain stop!! (Score:2, Insightful)
Read the Article carefully (Score:5, Insightful)
So it is a major flaw, but one I suspect that is by accident rather than design. Apple has promised the music industry that it won't allow downloads of songs from outside the US, which this policy enforces. What I suspect that haven't done is work out a way to allow users to keep their existing account but not allow future downloads now they know you aren't in the right geography. They don't do intrusive testing, only when the user in this case informed them they were outside the US (and the service is VERY clear when you have to sign up that you have to be in the US, it's not really small print).
So Apple haven't been as comprehensive in their use case mapping as they should have been, and obviously didn't cover the 0.01% case of customers who move from the US but need to access their existing tunes, loses their key and has no backup. They have however, proved to the copyright owner that their regon specific policies are being enforced, which is the only thing which gives us access to this service at present. If you disagree with them, fine buy CDs, break the law or campaign for change but there are many of us happy with 99% of these terms of service who simply wish the service would be expanded to more geographies and platforms.
iTunes good transient entertainment; paranoid shit (Score:5, Insightful)
For permantent copies, burn an audio CD.
When I first heard of Napster, I quickly downloaded 7 or 8 songs that were old favorites - in all cases I had bought the LPs, but had lost the records or they were damaged. (fair use?) However, I was turned off by some aquaintences collecting thousands of songs that they did not buy.
Not to go off on too big of a rant, but it seems like too many people think that it is OK to break the law: steal music, steal cable TV, let dogs off of leashes where it is not permited and they become public nuisances, etc., etc.
If you think about it, people who steal stuff on the internet might end up contributing to loss of freedom on the internet - not worth it! As multi-national corporations take over media and general control of governments, I believe that keeping the internet free becomes a major concern and goal.
Sorry about being negative, but: isn't it a worry that when large numbers of people break laws, and this data is available to the government, that this is a form of 'crowd control'?
Re:Sigh.... (Score:5, Insightful)
From Apple's Help Menu on iTunes Music Store: This does not even include the "analog hole" people keep referring to of outputting your sound out to stereo and recording through tape, VCR, DAT, whatever.
In a article on the front page of the Wall Street Journal article (can't remember the date), Steve Jobs said that Apple's licensing scheme was there to be easy to use and keep honest people honest. More importantly, it was NOT meant to keep a dedicated "pirate" from copying the music. SteveJ basically said that such a software DRM was impossible - someone would always crack it.
Moral of the story, your MP3's and AAC files are imminently corruptible data on a disk. Treat them as such and back them up
BS (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple apologists come out of the woodwork! (Score:2, Insightful)
If this story had run in relation to BuyMusic.Com, there would be an army of raging Slashdotters cutting Buy.Com into tiny bits and incinerating them, but when it's Apple/Mac/iTunes, there's this chorus of Apple defenders that comes out of the woodwork.
The only way I can explain this is that the Mac users aren't the ones griping in regard to most DRM issues, they're actually supportive of "soft" DRM. Although whenever there's a negative story about Windows DRM, we hear a lot of people chanting "iTunes, Mix, Rip Burn" in the background, so maybe that's not true.
But it is kind of ironic.
Re:What's the problem? (Score:1, Insightful)
I'm one of those people who has spent a lot of time traveling from one country to another. I know many who have lived abroad all their life. And this whole DRM thing and related technologies is really starting to screw us in now. Take DVD regional encoding.
My parents, not aware of the different region codings have bought movies here in the States, as well as in other parts of Asia. And now their modest collection of movies from the US cannot be played on their dvd player because of these restrictions. Friends that have purchased computers here and then moved abroad can't watch locally purchased dvd's on their computers. Fortunately for them these people haven't jumped on the Apple Music Store.
As more people move about the world, this whole regional coding thing and licensed ownership according to country is just going to hinder the technology. Not help it.
This isn't news (Score:3, Insightful)
If you live outside the USA, you'll already be well aware of this. The bulk of online music and movie providers are only licensed for US distribution, and everyone else is told to get stuffed.
This is no different from the US getting movies and Region 1 DVDs first, and those who live outside the USA are well used to working around these restrictions. My primary consideration when buying a DVD player was "Is it region free/easy to switch to region 1?", and I regularly buy region 1 DVDs, usually well before and for less money than the region 2 release.
Similarly, I'd have no qualms about using a US based HTTP proxy to obtain music or movies from US licensed sites,then I'd make damn sure to convert it to a non-crippled format before considering the transaction complete.
But given that I don't even have the option to pay for it, and that I'd have to "scam" them to get it, that's not very likely, is it? So, what's my incentive to stop sharing?
Sorry, US buddies, but this is just a case of getting a taste of what it's like for the rest of us. Sucks, doesn't it?
Re:Not too interesting (Score:5, Insightful)
You didn't read past the first paragraph. He says he had to do a re-install, and upon restoring his set-up, itunes asked him to reauthorise his music files, and was met with a refusal.
"When reading the "Terms of Service", it says that purchases are not available outside of the US and the "service" is not used outside of the US. I'm guessing that iTunes must phone home or something to do with its DRM. If he were to move back to the US, I would guess that he could play his songs again, provided that they were not deleted."
(How this got modded up to 5, Insightful I don't know...) He initially used the service in the US, to buy the music files he had. Upon trying to reauthorise the files after the reinstall (if you remember) from Canada, he was refused. No phoning home... he logged on and tried to reauthorise. Do you see? He couldn't play the songs because itunes insisted he reauthorise after the reinstall! (Is friday free crack for moderators day, or something?)
"As his letter ends with, maybe we should buy CDs, they are not that expensive when bought used, or download free music, or "share" mp3s off of someone you don't know."
Or maybe, online music services shouldn't have stupid rules, that shoot themselves in the foot, and screw their PAYING customers, if they want to make online music file purchasing an appealing alternative to Kazaa, et al.
(Patiently waits while moderated Offtopic.)
i thought slashdotters were smart people..? (Score:5, Insightful)
Most of you haven't even read the article and already condemning the ITMS. Like some have said, the guy deleted his songs, changed his address to a non US address, and tried to download the songs again!
Second, that whole "iTMS songs won't play outside the US" is BULLSHIT. I've been outside the US many times and my songs play on my powerbook just fine... nothing deleted... no errors.. even when i'm hooked up to the internet!
I thought slashdotters were smart people.. always skeptical about new news. I guess you guys just believe everything you see, just like every other lemming out there.
Re:no friendly DRM (Score:4, Insightful)
I think the Apple Music Store's DRM is the only reasonable implementation I've seen.
Bottom line is that you have to read the EULA or TOS (or whatever) before you buy. Crying after the fact is just crying.
Re:Based on information you volunteer (Score:4, Insightful)
They don't delete your songs. This guy LOST his songs in a reinstall, and was trying to buy em back."
See, here's another thing, RTFA by all means, but do ITFAC (Interpret the flipping article correctly.)
He wasn't trying the repurchase the tracks, merely re-authorise them after his reinstall.
The letter is incredibly poorly written.
do we know for sure who's behind the clause? (Score:3, Insightful)
is there any way we can tell if this was something apple wanted to restrict their users from doing, or is it something the RIAA made them do?
the music store does not only carry independent music. i don't believe the RIAA had no say in the terms by which the the service is provided. i am typing this on a windows machine and not a mac, but i still think apple is "innocent" of this
Re:do we know for sure who's behind the clause? (Score:2, Insightful)
"Politech is reporting that your 'ownership' of music purchased from Apple's iTunes isn't what everyone considers ownership
Actually, the RIAA's concept of "ownership" isn't what "everyone considers ownership" either.
come to think of it, software too. how many people "on the street" really understand that that nice box of MS Office they just shelled out hundreds for isn't actually something they own?
Re:too bad (Score:1, Insightful)
wma - Windows Media Format - isn't proprietary? News to me
Re:Apple apologists come out of the woodwork! (Score:5, Insightful)
If anything, what this story illustrates is that when you "buy" a tune from iTunes, you haven't really bought a thing, in spite of what Steve has said in the past.
It's a simple thing to fix, too: start authorizing people who bought their music in the U.S. but moved overseas solely to play the music they have bought, and not to buy more. This keeps everyone happy, and we get back the comfortable illusion that we actually own the data on our hard drive.
Re:Not too interesting (Score:3, Insightful)
Basically, its a situation that you should be aware of and live with. Its not a great situation for those who plan on moving out of the US any time in the future, but for those who that is not an issue, the iTunes service still remains a fairly cheap and convenient service.
Errr....am I missing the delete part? (Score:3, Insightful)
This basically seems to say, 'to connect to iTunes you need to be situated in the US." Which probably makes sense when you talk about legal jurisdictions.
But, like I said, I only scanned through things real quicklike.
Re:Apple apologists come out of the woodwork! (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, the files are not deleted by Apple and I saw nothing in the article or in Apple's license to indicate they would be. However, if the user deletes the files and/or deauthorizes his computer, reauthorizing it with a non-US credit card will not work.
In short, this is just yet another sensationalist story posted by michael who apparently cannot be bothered to even check the facts in the stories he's posting. He could have simply added a comment like "Despite what the submitter said, I found no evidence or information indicating that the files would actually be deleted by Apple."
Yes, I am supportive of "soft" DRM. Throw the media companies a bone at least once in a while. So long as I can burn it to a CD at least once, what's the difference? If I felt like it I'd make MP3s off of that and do whatever the hell I want with it just like I can with any other normal CD I buy in the store. That unprotected safety valve is what makes iTMS work.
Essentially, your post amounts to the classic Slashdot karma whore troll. "I'm sure I'll get moderated into oblivion..." Moderators: Please do so.
Re:Ah well... (Score:5, Insightful)
if you want to blame somebody blame david geffen, or cbs, or sony, or capitol. not apple.
Re:Make the pain stop!! (Score:4, Insightful)
Perhaps the reason no one raised an eyeball is because it is not illegal to record from a radio broadcast, assuming that the recording is not sold. After a broadcast, the item is open for usage, radio stations have to liscense the music to play it. The same is true with t.v., that's why you can record your favorite t.v. shows and movies. It is also the same reason why the telecommunications industry did not outright stop devices like TiVo -- or for that matter my VCR that still takes the videos in through the top.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Sticking up for Apple (Score:2, Insightful)
I hate to break it you people but the RIAA had nothing to do with the iTunes music store... Apple came up with the DRM in house, and Apple worked directly with specific publishers.
I know you cannot believe that Apple actually came up with DRM... but lest we forget, Apple was the original computer monopoly.
So you can blame the RIAA all you want, but ultimately it was Apple's doing-- as hard as it may be for you to swallow.
Re:Make the pain stop!! (Score:5, Insightful)
Firstly: It's alot easier (and cheaper) to blame people pirating music for diminishing record sales then face the fact that people have had their fill of printing press created music.
Producing music is expensive. Scouting talent, culitvating it, helping artists see their vision of what they want their sound to sound like and then getting that all onto a little plastic disk is expensive, complicated and time consuming. Record companies would rather find a working formula and stick with it. Bimbo's sell records? Roll in the bimbos!
Secondly: The whole music industry has invested alot of time and effort into building a highly controlled distribution system. They're just not ready to let go of that. Any technology that disrupts the flow is precieved as a hostile threat.
So, how it this going to work out for the best? Eventally the record companies are going to run out of money and/or fight. They'll realize that playing wack-o-mole with millions of people is just fools folly and does nothing but alienate the people they want buying their product.
This combined with the crumbling of huge radio station conglomerates (because less and less people are listening because their content sucks = less commerial revenue) + billions in debt load means lots of radio stations to be found for cheap money (couple million for a station probably).
With radio stations out of the hands of 10 people means that you'll see lots more variety and radio will actually be cool again.
Also, artists will have control over the use of their content, so I suspect that this combined with better audio tools that'll reduce the cost of album production, means that bands will either give away their music or charge a nomial fee for the phyiscal media and do what they've always done (which is make all their money on the tours).
So, in a nutshell the best thing that could happen to music would be to have all the production companies and radio stations go out of business.
Re:iTunes good transient entertainment; paranoid s (Score:2, Insightful)
Case in Point: I lost my Half-Life cd and key about two years ago. Does that give me the right to download Half-Life from Kazaa?
Also, if I lose my precious kazoo, does that give me the right to get one for three cents on the black market? I don't think so. And I'm pretty sure it's almost the same thing as what you describe.
If you want to get really picky, the fact that you own the source material does not justify downloading it in another form. The lp mp3's you got were likely from cd reproductions. Cd reproductions which you did not purchase, I might ad. So in reality, you are just stealing lots of stuff that you legally should be paying for.
To me, the whole 'sharing' music thing really only applies if what YOU're sharing is a physical, purchased legal copy, as in giving someone your BOUGHT cd to make a copy for personal use. That person has little right to share his newfound copy of your music.
Itunes looks to change this and make dl'd artist music legal, so I think it's not a bad thing that they are getting legalistic about it, they are the only ones who seem to stand a chance.
(sorry for being offtopic, but it had to be said, it really did.)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wow! Canada is *outside* the US! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:prescription drug research: There's a lot of that going on up here because of our more generous tax credits for drug R&D, as well as lower costs, which translates into more bang for every research dollar. Remember, applied drug research is conducted by private enterprise, not government.
I'm not saying we're better or worse, just that we're different. And that's the way it should be. If everyone was the same the world would be a much more boring place (because we'd have nuked ourselves out of existence by now, probably).
Re:no friendly DRM (Score:2, Insightful)
You own what you bought.
You just cant buy if you not an US resident.
This is stated in agreement.
What's exactly is so wrong with this to boycott iTunes store?
Do you really think that Apple involved that on their will?
Cutting his own buyers base? C'mon!
To moderation: where insightfull +3 exactly is?
Burn a CD (Score:3, Insightful)
What he did is the equivalent of losing the CDs, that's all. You bought them, you didn't protect them, you lose them...
Re:Heres a question. (Score:3, Insightful)
The obvious conclusion.... (Score:2, Insightful)
I actually bought a couple songs from the Apple site before I decided I didn't want to support a service that provides:
When I made that decision, a number of people thought I was basically impossible to please -- after all, the AAC files were "all but" free of DRM.
Now we see that DRM ultimately means the distributor owns you. If they can delete the files for "good" reasons, they can delete the file for any reason. You are totally dependent on their good faith. And as we can see, their idea of fair use may not mesh with yours.
I thought of downloading the song from P2P but then buying it from the iTunes store, but that amounts to giving our mortal enemies, the music industry, a lot of money to attack us with. (Note that I have no such concerns about certain indie labels that are not attacking P2P users. It is unfortunate that they tend to get grouped in with the far more evil big-5.)
Nevertheless, let me emphasize that this does not negate the need to pay the artist. In fact, we absolutely must get "paying the artist" off the table to win the intellectual debate. P2P is not about paying the artist, it is about who is in control of distribution -- the comsumer or the record company. We as P2P users, IMO, must make it a cultural reality that we always pay for MP3s we keep. It's easy to do this: go to MusicLink [musiclink.com]. You can pay any artist (or almost any artist) with a Paypal account or a credit card.
Once paying the artist is the P2P way of life, it will be very hard indeed to trot out words like "stealing" and "theft". Then it will become clear that the complainers are not really complaining about money, but about loss of control of distribution. When the debate is reduced to that, the other side will have already lost.
In the end, I say: insist on DRM-free files. Insist on high quality, at least as high as you want. And ALWAYS pay for the MP3s you keep. Use your money to support those who create great music, not those who attack you politically and legally.
This is not responsible reporting (Score:3, Insightful)
The story is based on an email (not an article) by Shawn Yeager, a guy who has worked for Microsoft and has developed a competitive product named MusicDirect. So either this guy was very confused or he was deliberately trying to hurt his competitor.
If it was the latter, he succeeded beyond his wildest dreams, thanks to Slashdot running this on the main page. It seems that the best thing to do is:
1. Write inflamatory email
2. Alert SlashDot to the existance of said email
3. Wait until SlashDot posts it on front page
4. Profit!!!
This was not responsible reporting by SlashDot. Mud sticks, regardless of whether it should have been thrown, and by its irresponsible reporting SlashDot was being used to throw FUD around. This is the sort of thing I expect from SCO, not from SlashDot.
Re:Updating along with companies (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:He's full of it. (Score:2, Insightful)
Apple notes the IP address of the connection you are using during a transaction. They also note billing addresses, including the information you provide with your credit card. Any of this information could trip you up when you're overseas. This isn't caprice, but Apple protecting itself until licensing agreements abroad have been made.
Re:Make the pain stop!! (Score:3, Insightful)
helping artists see their vision of what they want their sound to sound like
you are so far off the mark, i can't believe i'm gonna bother... BUT a couple thousand could produce plenty of cds for sale (from say a show, or website)... now all the other bs about scouting talent, and what not is also crap. there's plenty of "talent" out there. the only difficult part is finding an "artist" willing to sell their soul and create what the labels tell them to... or that the labels give them to perform from some other poor soulless basterd.
i'd go into more detail, but whose got that kind of time, i've got souls to harvest...
Re:Sigh.... (Score:1, Insightful)
Sounds like an illegal export to me. RIAA calls the shots here, not Apple.
Re:Really really (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:C'mon guys (Score:2, Insightful)