Useless News Thread v1

[swampsucka247]

DRM-free iTunes Tracks Still Have a Cost
Looks like there's a side effect to EMI and Apple's attempt to popularize the notion of DRM-free music downloads. It's been discovered that the iTunes music tracks lacking digital rights management (DRM) have something no one expected: the name and e-mail address of the purchases, embedded in each file. Speculation has been flying back and forth as to why Apple encodes this information into purchased music, including the theory that it makes it easy to trace the origin of a pirate file found on a file-sharing network. (This is unlikely, as it was also revealed that the same information is found in DRM-encoded iTunes tracks.)

Whatever the reason, the Electronic Frontier Foundation's Fred von Lohmann hits the nail on the head: Apple should at least have encrypted this information, and they should have made it clear to customers that this information was there. (Mind you, there are other file formats out there that embed indentifying information, unencrypted. A Word doc may not have your e-mail address, but sometimes having your name attached to what you thought was an anonymous document can be a problem...)

Comments

This is just a contiuation of a previous Apple policy. If you keep your tracks to yourself what's the problem? Also since the info isn't embedded it's easy to get rid of using an editor. It's really a non-issue glommed onto by the paranoids. If your iPod gets stolen you have the added benefit of being able to identify it by having your name all over the tunes. Makes it tough to deny it wasn't yours in the first place.



June 09, 2007
7:57 AM PT

http://blogs.pcworld.com/digitalworld/archives/2007/06/drmfree_itunes.html

:?:

[swampsucka247]

but then again......


Apple is now heftily promoting DRM-free that lets you play your music anywhere, and then prevents you from removing DRM protection.
Apple's latest trick to enforce digital rights

By Scott Shuey, Chief Reporter


One day. That's how long it took iTunes users to dismantle Apple's latest attempt to enforce Digital Rights Management (DRM) software.

DRM limits where and how your music can be played and has recently been under fire from consumers. Most iPod users have long known how to break Apple's DRM software. The process is known as download-burn-rip.

The name gets no points for creativity, but it's apt enough. Download a DRM-protected song, burn it to CD, and rip that CD to your computer. You now have an unprotected MP3 file, ready to be uploaded to the player (or file-sharing network) of your choice.

Technically, it's not even hacking. No law has been broken and no illegal process used. Apple could cry foul that the end user license agreement (EULA) - it's that box you mindlessly click without reading - has been violated, but so far Apple hasn't seemed inclined to engage its customers in lawsuits. Most music companies seem to have realised that suing your customers doesn't do much to increase sales.

But Apple tried to circumvent this well-established procedure with version 7.2, the same version that Apple released to play newly offered and much-hyped DRM-free songs.

With this version of iTunes, users were finding that music subjected to the old download-burn-rip would no longer load onto their iPods.

Ironically, Apple is now heftily promoting DRM-free that lets you play your music anywhere, and then prevents you from removing DRM protection. I didn't realise that it was possible to talk out of both sides of your mouth simultaneously.

iTunes users refused to take the "bug", as Apple labelled it, laying down. Within 24 hours, websites that gave full instructions on how to "fix" the problem on OSX, XP, and Vista began to appear. It's hard to find that kind of technical support from anyone today, let along pirates.

User information

Within days of this blunder, Apple was again called out for monkeying with the music.

Turns out that Apple has been embedding its files with user information. iTunes customers have been downloading files that contain both their names and their email address.

How long this has been going on and just why Apple has felt compelled to do so is still a mystery - the company so far has refused to comment - but the reason seems obvious.

The embedded data won't prevent anyone from listening to their music files, but it might deter them from uploading them to a file-sharing server.

The data is unencrypted, so uploading a file to LimeWire will be like writing your name and number on a bathroom wall. Who would do something so stupid? No one, that's the point.

But the message is clear: take our songs public, and we'll take you public.

This tactic will probably not help Apple in the long run. Defenders of the data claim there are legitimate uses for the data "water mark".

Certain iTunes features use the data to promote other music on the site. OK, fine, but then encrypt the data. Things happen. iPods get stolen, and once personal information is released on a file-sharing server, there's no getting it back.

No one so far has figured out how to remove or alter the embedded data in the tracks, yet, but the stopwatch is running. Give it a day. 8)

http://archive.gulfnews.com/articles/07/06/09/10131156.html

[Dmatthew]

Woah interesting read... but it makes me not want to buy any apple product anytime soon... :P

[swampsucka247]

you got that right

[Dmatthew]

On a related note.. I don't know why they keep on releasing new iTunes versions, even more buggier and slower. That's retarded at best

[dragnandy]

i use to have itunes also on my computer. but i decided to get windows media 11 (i think its 11, newest version). it looks a lot nicer and i dont have an ipod so i dont need itunes. and i think it runs the same speed as itunes too so it doesnt slow down the computer much. but windows media also has those darn pop ups that ask if you want to install new windows version.

[Archer]

I prefer Winamp & Media Player Classic.

[swampsucka247]

I think that i've used iTunes only once or twice on a friends PC, didn't really get what all the fuss was about

[Dmatthew]

The reason is that you can find any song you want in matter of seconds, at least is what I like .. also the fused reproduction is kinda neat . Bummer that it takes up so much space.