Apple uses DMCA as a weapon against an open source iTunes hack

[I-75]

( I think this should be OK to post, it doesn't endorse or explain the hack...but a news story about it and its effect on Linux and open source in general...If this isn't appropriate then please delete this post...thanks)


Apple uses DMCA as a weapon against an open source iTunes hack

http://www.betanews.com/article/Apple_uses_DMCA_as_a_weapon_against_an_open_source _iTunes_hack/1227737005



Apple uses DMCA as a weapon against an open source iTunes hack
By Scott M. Fulton, III, BetaNews
November 26, 2008, 5:15 PM

A simple effort by an open source developer to make his iPod's data legible by a Linux-based program, could balloon into a test of copyright so important that the fate of global trade agreements could hang in the balance.

[Mr. Picklesworth]

Not surprising to me. Apple is basically intent on making iTunes useless to everyone except them. They think like Microsoft, selling licences to use things only on their terms, except where it doesn't suit them. (iPods still have 1 year warranties even though you are at Apple's mercy for eternity).
Unlike Microsoft, though, Apple sells hardware, not software. Their product is something that centuries of history tells us should be owned and controlled by the person who buys and uses it. It is an abomination that the US laws have been deformed to the point where Apple can get away with what is, in essence, selling a product with deformed standards so that absolutely everything must be done through them for extra. Tech companies get away with that crap on a daily basis, but imagine if that happened with a house, or a toaster oven? They would be mobbed by lawyers within a week.

They are one of the most prickly, nasty tech corporations out there. The only thing going for them is that their vomit is shiny and expensive.

For example, check out the sad saga of El Tunes. You'll have to do a web search for it though. (Does anyone know what happened to el-tunes.com (http://www.el-tunes.com/)?).

[unknown03]

Not surprising to me. Apple is basically intent on making iTunes useless to everyone except them. They think like Microsoft, selling licences to use things only on their terms, except where it doesn't suit them. (iPods still have 1 year warranties even though you are at Apple's mercy for eternity).
Unlike Microsoft, though, Apple sells hardware, not software. Their product is something that centuries of history tells us should be owned and controlled by the person who buys and uses it. It is an abomination that the US laws have been deformed to the point where Apple can get away with what is, in essence, selling a product with deformed standards so that absolutely everything must be done through them for extra. Tech companies get away with that crap on a daily basis, but imagine if that happened with a house, or a toaster oven? They would be mobbed by lawyers within a week.

They are one of the most prickly, nasty tech corporations out there. The only thing going for them is that their vomit is shiny and expensive.

For example, check out the sad saga of El Tunes. You'll have to do a web search for it though. (Does anyone know what happened to el-tunes.com (http://www.el-tunes.com/)?).

Agreed 100%. Soon we wont own our photos and videos because they were taken by our cellphones and digital cameras that are "proprietary"

[handy]

& by extension, many people think cloud computing is a good thing.

More & more power/control keeps on moving to less & less people.

There will eventually be a revolution due to this mentality.

[Skripka]

& by extension, many people think cloud computing is a good thing.

More & more power/control keeps on moving to less & less people.

There will eventually be a revolution due to this mentality.

The only thing that ticks me off more that DMCA, is when news orgs start going on about the joys of "cloud computing". Grrrrrr.

[Mr. Picklesworth]

You know, in this end of the field I have to admit I am expecting great things from Microsoft. I don't want them to get on top either, but it's only a matter of time before their marketing department gets their act together and releases a ferocious advertising campaign bringing light to this type of thing from their competitors. I hope.
(Microsoft, while not very supportive of standards other than their own, is definitely a lot more open than others as far as letting people tinker with their stuff and in supporting their products. At least by contrast. And they always make the claim anyway).

Then free software can annihilate them both unhindered while they tear each other down to the levels they deserve :)

[zmjjmz]

There will eventually be a revolution due to this mentality.

I wouldn't count on it. This is the exact mentality that prevents people from starting revolutions.

[handy]

I wouldn't count on it. This is the exact mentality that prevents people from starting revolutions.

I don't expect it will happen soon, but eventually people will want their freedom back.

[zmjjmz]

I don't expect it will happen soon, but eventually people will want their freedom back.

But people won't realize they had freedoms, and when they hear about them they'll think it's too much of a hassle/not worth it because everything is compatible and fine in their locked up DRM-laden worlds.

[pt123]

If you are a Linux user and you still buy an Ipod I have very little sympathy for you.

[billgoldberg]

If you are a Linux user and you still buy an Ipod I have very little sympathy for you.

Same here.

--

I never had a problem with MS, but don't get me started on Apple Inc.

[tsali]

If you are a Linux user and you still buy an Ipod I have very little sympathy for you.

Good point. These kinds of gyrations are nutty. If you don't like the whole iPod-iTunes system then...

STOP BITCHING AND JUST DON'T USE IT!!!

There are plenty of alternatives.

If they lose enough business, Apple will change their "iTune"

As far as owning data management mechanisms, the case is straightforward. The person authoring the data itself is the owner of the data (copyright) while the vendor can retain ownership of the data management mechanisms. There is typically a EULA that requires the user to agree not to reverse engineer the product (data management mechanisms) in order to use it.

The pictures you take with a camera will always be yours...but you enter into an agreement with the vendors that you will use their data storage device as they intended. Don't like it? Then don't use that camera. Store your data elsewhere.

Software anarchists who click "agree" when they have no intention to comply reduce themselves to common liars and cheats when they do.

I say either comply...or don't use it.

Apple may eventually find that "having" isn't nearly as much fun as "wanting" full compliance.

[geoken]

If you are a Linux user and you still buy an Ipod I have very little sympathy for you.

Agreed. Buying the product is merely empowering and encouraging their behavior.

[geoken]

As far as owning data management mechanisms, the case is straightforward. The person authoring the data itself is the owner of the data (copyright) while the vendor can retain ownership of the data management mechanisms. There is typically a EULA that requires the user to agree not to reverse engineer the product (data management mechanisms) in order to use it.


Actually, in America (and other countries that adopted DMCA style laws) there is no necessity to enter in to an agreement that prohibits you from reverse engineering the DRM mechanisms. If a DRM mechanism exists, reverse engineering it becomes instantly illegal (with a few exceptions i.e. reverse engineering for research purposes). No EULA needs to be signed and you never have to agree to refrain from reverse engineering, it's simply part of the law.

[tsali]

Actually, in America (and other countries that adopted DMCA style laws) there is no necessity to enter in to an agreement that prohibits you from reverse engineering the DRM mechanisms. If a DRM mechanism exists, reverse engineering it becomes instantly illegal (with a few exceptions i.e. reverse engineering for research purposes). No EULA needs to be signed and you never have to agree to refrain from reverse engineering, it's simply part of the law.

In the case I was referring to, we aren't talking about DRM. It's more basic than that...MY data versus the use of the data management tool.

In the case of DRM, it's not even your data. The vendor owns both the data and datamangement tool and they allow you access to the data on their terms.

There is a vast difference between these two cases. It can get blurry when you are entering copyrighted data that you don't own to begin with into a database ...for example, ripping CDs. Currently we can rip any CD or DVD into non-DRM formats for our own fair use.

I don't think the argument that combining records from the Music store in a unique combination is going to fly as "authorship constituting ownership". IMH layman's opinion, Apple will be able to make its case that it is owner of both the data and data storage mechanism.

[sydbat]

http://www.freewebs.com/vforvendettagallery/index-center.jpg

[zmjjmz]

A lot of these people complaining had been using iTunes/iPods when they had Windows/OS X, so it's not entirely their fault.
That said, it should be noted that for all future purposes you shouldn't buy an iPod that you can't put Rockbox on, or that you can't jailbreak.

[PhoenixMaster00]

I don't expect it will happen soon, but eventually people will want their freedom back.

Ah but people dont realise they are in a prison with no walls. They dont think there is any freedom to fight for until they are taken out of their comfort zone.

I used to like Apple cool looking products software/hardware that works fine. Then i realised they were worse than MS. So now my Mac Mini runs Ubuntu (which im using right now) and my Ipod Touch is soon to be Jailbroke...

[mihai.ile]

... and my Ipod Touch is soon to be Jailbroke...

is this legal? ;)

[Skripka]

Curiosity question--why are they targeting this software specifically? Because they admit what they are doig?

Does not GTKPod (in the repos) do something similar to read the itunesDB file off the device, and make it syncable with Linux? I don't know hence the question.

[I-75]

The solution is to sell the I-Pod and buy a MP3 player that you can use without having to hack anything. Besides I see tons of MP3 players in the $9 to $39 range for Black Friday. I picked up a Curtis 2 GB MP3 player for $15 last year for Black Friday, just plug it in and load up the tunes.

[PhoenixMaster00]

is this legal? ;)

If James Bond can walk the line then so can I!

But on a more serious note it is a grey area. Ive read some articles that say that it doesnt even void your warranty and im not sure if Apple have even attempted to stop it through the same means there doing with this? All i no is there sneakily trying to stop it (like with the new Macbook range)

[zmjjmz]

If James Bond can walk the line then so can I!

But on a more serious note it is a grey area. Ive read some articles that say that it doesnt even void your warranty and im not sure if Apple have even attempted to stop it through the same means there doing with this? All i no is there sneakily trying to stop it (like with the new Macbook range)

All it does is void your warranty. Even if Apple declared it illegal, it would not hold up in court.
And Apple has tried to stop it many times, and have so far found themselves unsuccessful.

[collinp]

Apple wants to control everything. Plain and simple. They want to control what you do and how you do it, and maybe even when you do it. They are basically trying to make their products incompatible with anything except OS X.

[geoken]

In the case of DRM, it's not even your data. The vendor owns both the data and datamangement tool and they allow you access to the data on their terms.

It is my data. If I take an Mp3 of music I created and upload it to an iPod, I have by no means given ownership of that data to Apple.

I think the problem is that you're only thinking of DRM as the content. The term DRM concerns itself with both the content and device. DRM is simply a method, it can be embeded in the content, the device, the software interface, or anything else. For example, you can have a device that contains completely DRM free content (ie Mp3's) and relies solely on the hardware to provide the DRM mechanism. The hardware my refuse to connect to anything other than it's native client. This would still be considered a DRM mechanism and trying to break it would still be considered a DMCA violation.

[mihai.ile]

Apple wants to control everything. Plain and simple. They want to control what you do and how you do it, and maybe even when you do it. They are basically trying to make their products incompatible with anything except OS X.

I also see it like this...
I actually like very much their hardware designs (ipods, laptops), they all have some very intelligent ideas in there and look very good. Even the OS is so well integrated that is a joy to work with if using their software.

But then it comes the problem of the freedom. What if I want my music in FLAC? Itunes won't let me, what if I want to do this and that with my system? eula and licenses and so could get me in court like the guy trying to make his ipod work on linux.

[Skripka]

It is my data. If I take an Mp3 of music I created and upload it to an iPod, I have by no means given ownership of that data to Apple.

I think the problem is that you're only thinking of DRM as the content. The term DRM concerns itself with both the content and device. DRM is simply a method, it can be embeded in the content, the device, the software interface, or anything else. For example, you can have a device that contains completely DRM free content (ie Mp3's) and relies solely on the hardware to provide the DRM mechanism. The hardware my refuse to connect to anything other than it's native client. This would still be considered a DRM mechanism and trying to break it would still be considered a DMCA violation.

Why are they going after these people though?


There are LOTS of utilities in the *buntu repos that seem to read the itunesDB, or at least-make an iPod sync with Linux. Why these devs?

[tsali]

It is my data. If I take an Mp3 of music I created and upload it to an iPod, I have by no means given ownership of that data to Apple.

I think the problem is that you're only thinking of DRM as the content. The term DRM concerns itself with both the content and device. DRM is simply a method, it can be embeded in the content, the device, the software interface, or anything else. For example, you can have a device that contains completely DRM free content (ie Mp3's) and relies solely on the hardware to provide the DRM mechanism. The hardware my refuse to connect to anything other than it's native client. This would still be considered a DRM mechanism and trying to break it would still be considered a DMCA violation.

First, unless you own the copyright to the data you have encoded in the mp3, it is not really yours.

DRM most certainly is concerned with the content. It just so happens that Apples DRM control mechanism is involved in managing both DRM and non-DRM content. I expect that they will argue that defeating the device database security will allow defeating DRM on protected content, and, by extension, result in widespread violation of copyright. But they are not arguing a case where the DRM on particular content was actually defeated.

Apple won't need to work hard to prove that the hack is a violation of EULA. What will be harder to prove is that it is a violation of DRM law.

[geoken]

First, unless you own the copyright to the data you have encoded in the mp3, it is not really yours.

DRM most certainly is concerned with the content. It just so happens that Apples DRM control mechanism is involved in managing both DRM and non-DRM content. I expect that they will argue that defeating the device database security will allow defeating DRM on protected content, and, by extension, result in widespread violation of copyright. But they are not arguing a case where the DRM on particular content was actually defeated.

Apple won't need to work hard to prove that the hack is a violation of EULA. What will be harder to prove is that it is a violation of DRM law.

Re-read my post. I said "music I created" as in music I produced using my DAW software.

Again, they don't need to prove anything. If they categorize the the iPod DB security as a layer of DRM than the DMCA automatically makes it illegal to circumvent it. With the DMCA, as long as you claim something is DRM then breaking it is a violation of the DMCA. If I made an optical disc format and my method of DRM was a black line on the bottom of the disc written in magic marker, than erasing that mark would be a violation of the DMCA.

[Mr. Picklesworth]

It's turning into that discussion again, and there are some folks who understand the thing today! So here's the part of the DMCA which confuses me:

My house is a restricted area. The door acts as restrictions management -- in a sense, DRM, since I have a digital device attached to it thus rendering my door high tech enough to scare the heck out of braindead law-makers.
If someone bypasses the door to gain access to my house, they are bypassing the DRM without my permission!

A few times a week, the mail carrier and the paper carrier Pushes Stuff Through My Mail Slot without asking me first. Particularly problematic is the junk mail. They are circumventing my DRM on a daily basis to enter content into my house. I should sue them for everything they have, no?

[buntunub]

If you are a Linux user and you still buy an Ipod I have very little sympathy for you.

Completely agree! Same can be said about any Apple product. Since Open Source now has equivalents for pretty much every proprietary system out there, and there certainly is hardware solutions that exist as well. Simply a matter of doing a little of the legwork yourself and there is nothing that cant be done to keep both your hardware and software DRM free and completely non proprietary except for services like internet, phone, etc.

[cdwillis]

:popcorn:

I bought an iPod a months ago and I've been using gtkpod to transfer files onto it with no problem. How is this guy all of a sudden being targeted?

[geoken]

They are circumventing my DRM on a daily basis to enter content into my house. I should sue them for everything they have, no?

The only problem is that the 'D' in both DMCA and DRM stand for digital.

Although it seems pretty likely that there is some law being violated when someone puts things in your house.

[Skripka]

:popcorn:

I bought an iPod a months ago and I've been using gtkpod to transfer files onto it with no problem. How is this guy all of a sudden being targeted?

That is what I have been asking.... :confused:

[AlphaMack]

For example, check out the sad saga of El Tunes. You'll have to do a web search for it though. (Does anyone know what happened to el-tunes.com (http://www.el-tunes.com/)?).

I know that the dev posted here. I had a problem in trying to get the plugin to play nice in Rhythmbox and he was more than helpful in trying to get me to resolve it...

Once I used a certain utility to strip off the DRM from my remaining shackled purchases, I no longer had a need for El Tunes and unfortunately I never heard from the dev again after I had offered to help continue testing and sending back logs.

In fact, after unshackling all of my music after finally transitioning full time to Ubuntu from OS X, I have avoided the iTMS ever since. I will not support a company that is hell bent on locking you into their ecosystem. I left Apple after getting tired of being screwed over by their lock-ins and antics. The only thing now standing in the way between me and completely being Apple-free (and being able to get rid of the WinXP partition) is my AirPort Express...because Apple will not release a port of their utility to Linux or have some kind of web-based administration.

But back to iPod/iTunes...

iTunes 8 intentionally broke the said utility I used. In the past Apple screwed over users of Hymn through an iTunes update that caused their unshackled tracks to no longer play in iTunes. Now with every incremental update, Apple makes sure that those guys behind the utility are playing catch up.

They can keep their DRM and lock-ins for all I care.