Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Music Businesses Media Apple

iTunes 4.6, DRM, and Hymn 114

Posted by pudge from the here-we-go-again dept.
fluffy writes "Although the recent iTunes 4.6 upgrade refuses to play music decrypted with Hymn, there's already a trivially-simple workaround, demonstrated within hours of the iTunes release, which still preserves the 'fair use' intent of the tool. What move will Apple take against Hymn next?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

iTunes 4.6, DRM, and Hymn More

iTunes 4.6, DRM, and Hymn

Comments Filter:

  • Don't like cat & mouse games... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by NatasRevol ( 731260 ) on Monday June 14, 2004 @12:44PM (#9421709) Journal
    And what happens at the next update? And the one after that?

    If you don't like the DRM, buy a version without it. Or whine about the cat & mouse game you're going to keep playing.

    • Re:Don't like cat & mouse games... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Chief Typist ( 110285 ) on Monday June 14, 2004 @02:43PM (#9422958) Homepage
      This is so true -- it's like the two kids saying "did too", "did not!".

      Except in this case, I doubt that either kid will quit playing the game (Apple can't because of the RIAA, Hymn developers won't because they're fighting for "a cause".)

      The best we can hope for is that Slashdot and other tech news sources will get to the point where this ceases to be news...

      -ch

    • Re:Don't like cat & mouse games... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Silverhammer ( 13644 ) on Monday June 14, 2004 @02:54PM (#9423044)

      Blockquoth the poster:

      And what happens at the next update? And the one after that?

      This is a straw man argument. The only people caught in this "game" are those who use Hymn to break the DRM, in willful violation of the iTMS license. For everyone else, these updates are seamless and troublefree.

      • I see your point, but I -- sorta -- disagree. At any rate, NatasRevol's point certainly isn't a straw man [nizkor.org] argument.

        I agree that, for now, "the only people caught in this "game" are those who use Hymn to break the DRM, in willful violation of the iTMS license." But it does matter to the rest of us. See, if this shit keeps up, Apple may need to develop a much more restrictive DRM, just to appease the RIAA.

        There's that old SNL sketch called something like "They Ruined it for Everyone" (I think), where t

        • Blockquoth the parent:

          At any rate, NatasRevol's point certainly isn't a straw man argument.

          Yes, it is. In fact, I checked that same page [nizkor.org] before posting, just to make sure I remembered the term correctly.

          NatasRevol's original post [slashdot.org] was a straw man argument because it distorted the reality of Apple's periodic iTunes updates in order to argue that they're implementing ever more restrictive DRM. That's just not true. They're updating iTunes in order to reinforce the existing DRM, which is being willfull

          • Yes, it is. In fact, I checked that same page before posting, just to make sure I remembered the term correctly.

            NatasRevol's original post was a straw man argument because it distorted the reality of Apple's periodic iTunes updates in order to argue that they're implementing ever more restrictive DRM.

            Oh, I see where you're coming from. I didn't read it that way at all. NatasRevol's post was:

            And what happens at the next update? And the one after that?

            If you don't like the DRM, buy a version

            • Blockquoth the parent:

              I took that as more a comment that this "update war" will just keep going -- Apple updates, Hymn updates, etc., etc. I don't see a point in there about the DRM getting more restrictive. Just a comment on the annoyance factor in the whole deal for everyone else.

              I'm not annoyed by the updates, because I don't try to crack the DRM. The frustration expressed in the original post is only felt by the users of Hymn.

              NatasRevol [1] is right when he says "if you don't like the DRM, buy a

              • No, I'm slamming people who can't live with reasonable DRM and just HAVE to strip it out. When that product is already available through a different outlet.

                If you can't live with the DRM, don't buy it with the DRM. I think it's reasonable AND acceptable that Apple tries to enforce the DRM that they've already agreed to. If you break it, they will fix it so you can't.

                And NatasRevol is just an old college roommate's joke. Don't read into it any further than that.

                • Blockquoth the parent:

                  No, I'm slamming people who can't live with reasonable DRM and just HAVE to strip it out. When that product is already available through a different outlet. If you can't live with the DRM, don't buy it with the DRM. I think it's reasonable AND acceptable that Apple tries to enforce the DRM that they've already agreed to. If you break it, they will fix it so you can't.

                  Ah, then we're agreed. Sorry for misinterpreting you. It's just so rare for someone on Slashdot to hold that posit

    • Re:Don't like cat & mouse games... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by mithras the prophet ( 579978 ) on Monday June 14, 2004 @04:39PM (#9423889) Homepage Journal

      If anything this incident is a further argument for using tools like hymn to strip DRM.

      A Hymned music file complies perfectly with the AAC spec. Quicktime, VLC, WinAmp, etc. play them just fine, yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Once an iTMS file is stripped of its DRM by Hymn, it is future-proofed: any AAC-capable player, under any OS, will be able to play the file.

      As a 'goodwill gesture', the Hymn developers chose specifically to leave the Account ID field in Hymned music files. This was to leave an identifying mark of the owner in the file, so as to underline the fact that Hymn is intended for personal use, not to make files available for sharing.

      However, some bright bulb at Apple decided to add code to iTunes 4.6 specifically designed to recognize these files, the ones with the Account ID field, but no DRM, and refuse to play them. Again, you could play them in Quicktime, VLC, on your Palm Pilot, etc. just fine -- only iTunes had this crippling feature added. So what is the solution? To remove the Account ID field, of course, which makes Hymned files indistinguishable from AAC files you have ripped yourself.

      Apple really shot itself in the foot on this one.

      • Apple really shot itself in the foot on this one.

        or did they? perhaps they were merely trying to force pirates to take their names off of their files so that they could distribute them and run them on iPods, while taking money away from the RIAA!

        Since apple has "teamed up" with the RIAA, it must mean that they plan to get in bed with them and then pull a Bobbitt! YAY APPLE! YOU GO GIRL!
    • " And what happens at the next update? And the one after that?"

      Personally I would get around it all by just burning the files to an AudioCD and then re-ripping, which is perfectly legitimate under the iTunes license. Poof, all DRM is gone! (That is, if iTMS was available in my country.)

      Sure, the quality is reduced a little but you are not in violation of the license, and you'll never have to worry about iTMS DRM again.

  • From a DRM ignoramus: (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I don't know that much about DRM, but from what I gather, it's intended to restrict playback and copying of music to work for the purchaser only, right?

    So why would one need specialized tools to "break" the encryption?

    Or is there some compatibility issue I'm not understanding?

    • Re:From a DRM ignoramus: (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 14, 2004 @01:10PM (#9422005)
      Downloaded tracks from iTunes are DRM'ed so that only the user who bought them can play them. Hymn is designed to get rid of the DRM, so that (for example) you can play your files on a Linux machine. However, it leaves in your user ID so to prevent piracy by making files easily traced.

      The latest version of iTunes refuses to play files that contain a user ID but no DRM - even if the user ID is your own. Hence, a fix is needed.

  • How about applying it to whole library? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by gsfprez ( 27403 ) * on Monday June 14, 2004 @01:27PM (#9422207)
    It would be cool if there was a way to send this script off to crunch the iTunes library, searching thru all the subfolders, so that it will fix all the files there... even if that means it would modify non-DRMd AAC files (such as those created by ripping CD's you own).

    The reason for this is - i have 300+ songs that i have Hymned.... i found them by searching in iTnues for "Protected AAC files" - dropping those into a folder, unprotecting them, burning the purchased tracks to a DVD-R for safe keeping, deleting all protected files from iTunes, then dropping in all the unprotected files.

    So now, i have no simple way of going thru my whole library picking out the previously protected now unprotected file.

    Any ideas (pudge) on how to modify this script such that it would work in this fashion?

    plus - what happened to that 1 line perl (you guys just fscking revel in that type of thing, don't you?) script that did the same thing? Could that be hacked to do a search and repair of the iTunes Music Library.

    after looking at that script - it appears that it would be easy to make the modification - because it appears that it simply says "not broken" if the files was ... not broken.

    I'd code it - but i'm not a coder...

  • iTunes "hacks" (Score:4, Insightful)

    by shrapnull ( 780217 ) on Monday June 14, 2004 @01:38PM (#9422319)
    Give props to Apple for applying the minimum amount of security necessary to do the business they do.

    The people at Hymn would make it seem as though their application is rocket-science or something when really it's a tinker tool.

    The iTunes DRM is easily bypassed: just open the file in a compatible editor (Bias Peak is nice) -> Save As MP3 / Ogg or whatever your flavor of the month happens to be.

    While iTunes doesn't "natively" support OGG out of the box, it's a simple update [vs19.net], and they even throw in a free icon for you already in the iTunes package.

    In my opinion they couldn't be more free and liberal with their version of DRM.

    • Re:iTunes "hacks" (Score:4, Informative)

      by base3 ( 539820 ) on Monday June 14, 2004 @01:40PM (#9422345)
      What you're describing is transcoding via recompression, and causes more loss. Hymn strips the DRM while leaving an unencrypted AAC without loss of (any more) audio information.

      • Re:iTunes "hacks" (Score:3, Insightful)

        by shrapnull ( 780217 )
        Certainly lossy if you go to an inferior codec, but if you can rip at an equal or greater rate, where's the harm?

        • Re:iTunes "hacks" (Score:4, Interesting)

          by base3 ( 539820 ) on Monday June 14, 2004 @01:51PM (#9422479)
          One possibility that comes to mind is that the codec might use a different psychoacoustic model that would filter out more than the first compression did. Whether it would or wouldn't take a golden ear to notice this, I don't know, but there is a wide perception that a degredation in quality would occur.

          • Re:iTunes "hacks" (Score:2, Insightful)

            by Anonymous Coward
            While a degrading would certainly occur, I think the wide perception that it "sounds like ass" (to quote many a slashdot poster) is complete hogwash. I've done my own tests, transcoding 128-kbit AAC from iTMS to MP3 at the highest VBR quality using LAME. I'm a musician and believe I have pretty good ears (not golden, but darn good) and I can't reliably tell the difference in a double blind test. That's certainly good enough to me. And when most people have no problem with a shitty 128-kbit Bladeenc or s
        • Compressing lossily and then decompressing doesn't give you back what you started with. Worse: for most types of lossless compression, compressing, uncompressing and then recompressing (at the same rate, sometimes even with the same codec) doesn't always reproduce the first compressed file. So transcoding typically does irreversible damage to the original data.

          Not that I care, I think the people who claim they can reliably tell the differences between codecs at reasonable bit rates are delusional.

  • How 'bout cat foo.m4p | sed 's/geID/xxID/g' > foo.m4a

  • DRM, the RIAA and the Artists... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by midifarm ( 666278 ) on Monday June 14, 2004 @02:25PM (#9422796) Homepage
    I have no problem with DRM for purchased files. I can share them across my network so they can be played on another computer etc. and I can burn them to CD if I wish. I believe the artist needs to get paid for their work and the RIAA needs to be dissolved. I'm not in favour of the whole illegal downloading thing, my current collection is all taken from my CD collection or iTMS purchases, but I think the RIAA is motivated by greed for themselves and the record companies that they represent. The artist is left out of the loop, because they traditionally get very little for their efforts. I'm in favour of dropping the record company altogether and have the artists release their music themselves. Whether that's via the old method of self promotion to radio stations or by getting in with iTMS or a similar venue. I know these guys work hard for their "art" and should be duely compensated. It's like going to see a show and the band not getting paid. There needs to be a way to rectify this so that those that work get their due, not just a distibuting middle man making 50% of the profit.

    Peace

    • Re:DRM, the RIAA and the Artists... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by harkabeeparolyn ( 711320 ) on Monday June 14, 2004 @03:48PM (#9423479)
      I do have a problem with the DRM and it's that the terms of use are not fixed. Apple can change their minds (or have their minds changed for them by the record companies) and place onerous conditions on the use of the music after I've given them my money. And there is nothing I can do about it.

      With the DRM in place it's like Apple has a hand loosely gripping my nuts. That hand might give me great pleasure or it might suddenly squeeze so long and so hard that I beg for the surcease from pain that only death can bring. Anyone sane would get out this situation if they could. H-Y-M-N spells freedom for my nuts.

      • But here's a question for you... Do you think that by purchasing a song whether via iTMS or on CD that you OWN the song and have legal right to do with it what you choose?

        Peace

      • why not use allofmp3.com?

        no nut-gripping involved (except for what they charge, which is peanuts)

  • Easy to see why Apple would do this (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Llywelyn ( 531070 ) on Monday June 14, 2004 @02:58PM (#9423076) Homepage
    First, it makes it look like they are combating piracy. It looks good on paper when they go to tell the RIAA how they have been fighting piracy "we disabled the latest version of Hymn, but a workaround was found quickly." So long as they are doing what they can, the RIAA won't complain.

    Second, it prevents someone from the RIAA ascertaining what percentage of tracks shared are the iTunes version nearly as easily.

    Think about it. If you leave the ID tag in there, the RIAA can download a bunch of files from P2P networks and very quickly and easily determine what percentage of them were purchased from the iTMS. Apple doesn't want this at all--if that number ever does become significant, they don't want the RIAA coming to them and saying "20% of all songs being shared over P2P networks were originally purchased on the iTMS..."

    Unlikely? Sure, especially since m4a files are still relatively rare on p2p networks (though the number of them is growing), but Apple doesn't want it to ever be an issue.

    If there is an ID tag that is unique to decrypted files and can be quickly scanned for, they can ascertain this percentage without any difficulty in a selection of downloaded music. Otherwise they have to compare the decrypted stream to the decrypted stream of the original for each individual song, which requires identifying each individual song and then matching it with the original--a much more drawn out process than scanning for the presence of a tag.

  • Hymn vs iTunes is a problem only for pirates (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Smurf ( 7981 ) on Monday June 14, 2004 @07:27PM (#9425409)
    Hymn was written to extend fair use of the iTMS, by allowing you to play the files that YOU bought in the iTMS in devices that DON'T support Apples DRM.

    Ok so let's suppose you have a Mac, an iPod, a Windows PC, a Linux box, and another AAC-capable player.

    You buy a file from the iTMS. It plays in your Mac, your iPod, and the Windows machine using iTunes. But you want to play it in your Linux box and in the other AAC player. And maybe in WinAmp, since I've heard that iTunes for Windows is a resource hog (I'm very glad I use a Mac).

    So, you use Hymn to de-DRM-ize your files. The new files work in the non-Apple players, but not in iTunes.

    Well... who gives a f**k if iTunes refuses to play the new files? You already have the original files, which play nicely in iTunes! So you don't want to have duplicate files in your computer(s)? Well, leave only the copy that works in each machine! Duh!

    I see this as an issue if you want to play the files in iTunes in more than five machines all in different places. (If they are in the same network, you can use the iTunes sharing feature). But quite frankly that is far from typical for a normal user. Very, very far.

    What I see is a bunch of pirates who want to share the Hymn-ized files illegally, and don't want to leave evidence to trace them back in the files. Users who really want to enforce their fair use rights should have no problems since they still can play their iTMS songs in all their AAC-capable players.
    • So you don't want to have duplicate files in your computer(s)? Well, leave only the copy that works in each machine! Duh!

      Er... as you pointed out yourself, the issue is that as of 4.6, iTunes won't play the Hymn'd files, and other devices (my SliMP3 for instance) will only play the Hymn'd files. So there is no such thing as one single "copy that works in each machine." For this reason, Hymn vs. iTunes is not just a problem for pirates, but for anyone who wants to drive both iTunes and (other player) fro
  • You still cannot transfer those files to your iPod -- even if you can get them to play in iTunes.
  • I have purchased about 20 CDs from itunes music store, but was always concerned about what might happen with the tracks if apple were to get out of the music biz, my worry increased with the changes to the iTunes license in 4.5 & 4.6. I was happy to see fairplay and hymn come along. I used it to clean my tracks. I have not shared or copied anyone else's purchased music.

    I thought it was an interesting decision on the hymn programmers part to keep the apple id tag in the cleaned tracks. I find it curious
  • I love Apple, although our relationship is a little rocky right now. Apple is a beautiful girlfriend, and she does her housework really fast and efficient, but there are problems. Namely, she won't let me listen to her sing. I mean, I bring home the bacon daily, but if I want to hear her sing I have to go in a specific room of the house. Pretty lame if you ask me. If I try to listen to her in a room of my choice instead of hers, she kicks me in the nads.
    Ouch.

    The girl I dated a few years ago - Napster -

Slashdot Top Deals

Know Thy User.

Close