Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

iTunes v6 FairPlay DRM Cracked

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the round-and-round-they-go dept.

421

luaine writes with an Engadget article claiming the cracking of iTunes v6 FairPlay DRM. From the article: "[A] new app called QTFairUse6 looks like it can now be used (with some amount of difficulty) to dump iTunes version 6.0.4 - 6.0.5 files of their chastely protection." At present this is a Windows-only tool for those who are "not afraid to get [their] hands dirty with a little python." Engadget does not provide a link to QTFairUse6, and neither will we. We've run several DRM stories recently, but it's been 19 months since Cracking iTunes' DRM with JHymn.

cancel ×

421 comments

Uh... (3)

Parker703 (767865) | more than 7 years ago | (#16008905)

Any why won't you provide a link to the software?

Re:Uh... (4, Insightful)

IflyRC (956454) | more than 7 years ago | (#16008922)

Maybe to keep from violating the DMCA?

Re:Uh... (5, Informative)

rob_squared (821479) | more than 7 years ago | (#16008947)

Any why won't you provide a link to the software?

They won't, but I will: http://hymn-project.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=155 3 [hymn-project.org]

Re: Haha (1)

in2mind (988476) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009112)

Engadget does not provide a link to QTFairUse6, and neither will we.

They wont give the link,but will give the software's name for everyone to find! Haha.

"We" ? (1)

alexhs (877055) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009132)

I wondered who was "we". The editors or the Slashdot community ? I guess you answered ;)

Re:Uh... (2)

voice_of_all_reason (926702) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009157)

...it's not censorship when we do it!

Re:Uh... (1)

fuzz6y (240555) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009192)

it is when we do it under duress, or out of fear of reprisal.

Re:Uh... (4, Funny)

voice_of_all_reason (926702) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009277)

I was actually referencing a popular, sarcastic photoshop (http://www.pensitoreview.com/images/art-gop-fasci sm-poster.jpg)

Psst... here ya go (2, Funny)

JazzLad (935151) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009170)

Don't tell anyone *looks over shoulder* I found this site... you can find darn near anything here... it's called Google.

Here's a link: www.google.com

-
ADA COMPLIANCE MESSAGE:
For the Humour-impaired:
This was a joke.

Another Stupid Headline (0)

devjj (956776) | more than 7 years ago | (#16008916)

iTunes wasn't cracked. Fairplay DRM was cracked.

Re:Another Stupid Headline (1, Insightful)

Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) | more than 7 years ago | (#16008977)

iTunes wasn't cracked. Fairplay DRM was cracked.

Or

iTunes wasn't cracked. The DRM shackling people to itunes was cracked.

Re:Another Stupid Headline (3, Insightful)

devjj (956776) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009038)

Complain to the executives that mandate DRM on all purchased media. Why do so many people act as though Apple invented DRM?

Re:Another Stupid Headline (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16009119)

Apple is the biggest vendor of DRM-laden music and video files today. It doesn't matter if they invented the technology; by foisting it upon its customers, Apple opens themselves to criticism.

Re:Another Stupid Headline (3, Insightful)

Alex P Keaton in da (882660) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009252)

I was always one of the people who never really cared that iTunes music was DRM'd. I figured that (shortsightedly) I would always use an iPod or burn CDs. I was wrong. When I go running, I like music so I take my iPod- but I dont like extra weight so I dont take my wireless phone. So, despite spending about $1000 at the ITMS, I am considering getting a Chocolate, so I can have my phone and MP3 player with me in one package. (I would have gotten a RokR, but seriously, why would I spend a ton of money for a phone that holds 100 songs?!?!) If I get a Chocolate, would it be wrong to convert my DRM'd iTunes music so I could use it with the Chocolate? Should I just eat the $1000 I spent at ITMS? (Please save the sarcastic comments about how I shouldn't have bought DRM'd music- I admit it, I was an idiot to do that...) And another point, I am not a marketing expert, but if they made a white iPod phone with at least a few gigs of memory, do they not realize that they would sell a ton ofthem? Why cant they just make an iPod phone? 90% of college kids would buy them.

Re:Another Stupid Headline (5, Insightful)

Kadin2048 (468275) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009325)

Is it wrong? No.
Is it illegal? Probably.
Was it really dumb to spend $1,000 on DRMed music? Yep.

Re:Another Stupid Headline (4, Interesting)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009334)

Why cant they just make an iPod phone? 90% of college kids would buy them.

Wired had a good print article on that a few months ago. Summary: you have to get a cell carrier to distribute the phones, and none of them want to let you upload music to your phone for free instead of making you pay to send it through their data network.

Re:Another Stupid Headline (2, Insightful)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009336)

Why cant they just make an iPod phone? 90% of college kids would buy them.

Blame the wireless providers that want their version of lock-in.

Seriously, why don't we have a phone market like Europe? I shouldn't buy my phone from Verizon Wireless -- I should buy my phone at Target and then pick a compatible provider for that phone. No contracts, no provider lock-in.

If we had that sort of market nothing would stop Apple from making a CDMA iPod phone for VZW/Sprint or a GSM iPod phone for T-Mobile/Cingular.

Fat chance in hell the cellular providers give up their device lock-in until regulation forces them to do so.

Re:Another Stupid Headline (2, Insightful)

Alex P Keaton in da (882660) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009417)

Landline phones in the US used to be rented from your telephone provider. If you wanted another phone, you had to call them and they would be out sometime "between 8am and 6pm." Most people under 30 don't believe this, and even to me, looking back, it seems ridiculous.
I hope that very soon kids will look at us the same way with the same disbelief and say "wait, you mean you had to get your cell phone directly from your wireless provider?!?!?"
Yes, you can get a cell phone and manipulate it in the same way that in the old days you could get an "illegal" extra landline phone, but this is rare.
Anyhow, you are right in your post. But keep in mind that songs for the Chocolate are $1.99 if you pull them right out of the air onto your phone, but 99cents if you buy the songs from your computer and wire them onto the Chocolate. So I am hoping we will see an iPod phone someday, i.e. and iPod with a phone, not a phone with sort-of-an-iPod-that-only-holds-100-songs like the rokr was (is? Are they still making that thing?)

Re:Another Stupid Headline (2, Insightful)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009455)

Landline phones in the US used to be rented from your telephone provider.

You are talking to somebody whose Grandmother and Father worked for Ma Bell. I know all about those days!

Yes, you can get a cell phone and manipulate it in the same way that in the old days you could get an "illegal" extra landline phone, but this is rare.

How? VZW won't even activate a phone for you nowadays unless you get it from them. Even a completely unlocked CDMA phone direct from Motorola. If you get the phone from them it's crippled to their network (even if you pay full price for it!).

Anyhow, you are right in your post. But keep in mind that songs for the Chocolate are $1.99 if you pull them right out of the air onto your phone, but 99cents if you buy the songs from your computer and wire them onto the Chocolate.

What if I already have the mp3s? Can I transfer them over for free? My experience with VZW tells me that I probably can't.... but I've been wrong before.

Re:Another Stupid Headline (4, Informative)

dschuetz (10924) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009027)

iTunes wasn't cracked. Fairplay DRM was cracked.

And it wasn't even that. According to this forum entry [hymn-project.org] , all the hack does is tie into the audio "output" side of iTunes and skim off the decoded AAC stream, writing it to a file. One step above grabbing it at the sound card, but certainly not a crack of the DRM itself.

What's astounding is how many people seem to consider this "a step in the right direction," when it's really a "step in a totally different direction that will do nothing for actually breaking the DRM itself." Then again, maybe I shouldn't be *too* surprised.... :(

Re:Another Stupid Headline (1)

tritonman (998572) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009041)

Yea that's not a crack at all, especially if it still takes the time of the length of the song to convert. Any newbie programmer could write something that plays a song in iTunes and records it with the soundcard in a batch process.

Re:Another Stupid Headline (1)

dirty (13560) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009151)

Except that's not what this does. It grabs the decrypted, but still encoded file from iTunes' memory. You get an exact copy of the file without the encryption (or any of the meta data, but that's probably just a matter of time).

Re:Another Stupid Headline (1)

tritonman (998572) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009469)

oh ok, sort of like the old cracks that would sniff the file contents while being downloaded before the DRM was placed on the streams. Thanks for clearing that up.

Re:Another Stupid Headline (0, Troll)

ericdano (113424) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009043)

Yeah. And JHymn hasn't worked since, like, 18 months ago. Certainly hasn't worked in iTunes 6 nor do I think iTunes 5 either......

Re:Another Stupid Headline (4, Informative)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009150)

all the hack does is tie into the audio "output" side of iTunes and skim off the decoded AAC stream,

Not quite. It grabs the audio when it is decrypted, but not yet decoded. I.e. it grabs the raw AAC frames. These can then be inserted into a proper container file and tagged with metadata. This process needs to be automated, but it should be soon.

The good thing about this approach is that, unlike capturing the audio, it accesses it before the AAC stream has been decompressed, meaning that you don't have to recompress it, adding artefacts.

Re:Another Stupid Headline (1)

kdawson (3715) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009059)

Correct, thanks for noticing.

Re:Another Stupid Headline (2, Funny)

Mister Whirly (964219) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009454)

and the headline never stated this. It says "iTunes v6 FairPlay DRM Cracked". Jeez, most people don't read TFA but come on, at least read TFH.

Re:Another Stupid Headline (1)

devjj (956776) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009492)

It originally said iTunes v6 Cracked. See the author's acknowledgement below.

Re:Another Stupid Headline (1)

devjj (956776) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009512)

Whoops.. it's above, now. ;)

Re:Another Stupid Headline (1)

Mister Whirly (964219) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009521)

Ok, that makes a little more sense then. Bad headline authors!

So what (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16008923)

yeah, i broke it too - burn to cd, rip to MP3. Done and done

Re:So what (1)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 7 years ago | (#16008942)

You lose quality by re-encoding it using a different lossy algorithm.

Re:So what (1)

Kadin2048 (468275) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009391)

Only if you re-encode it to another lossy algorithm. Every platform has a lossless compressed codec available at this stage (although sadly there's not really a clear standard across platforms). Just recompress to Apple Lossless or FLAC and you've got a DRM-free file that's the same quality as the original DRMed one.

Given the way that hard disk space is increasing, I think the reasons for using lossy compressions are less compelling every day. I've said elsewhere that the killer feature of the next jukebox program I use (i.e., this is what would get me to switch from iTunes) would be the ability to seamlessly transcode songs on-the-fly, only when it's necessary because you're putting them onto a capacity-restricted portable device.

Re:So what (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009504)

Given the way that hard disk space is increasing, I think the reasons for using lossy compressions are less compelling every day.
Not really. Even if you were able to sell a 80GB iPod nano, people would still use lossy CODECs. Taking the default AAC@128kbps as an example, you get 11 times more storage by using AAC vs Apple Lossless.

Of course, there will be a point where everyone will own enough storage capacity to store every song/tune ever made, but we'll also have other things to store, and compressing that music library to 1/11th of its size is still a good thing.

Lossy audio is crap, you say? Well, if most people were able to listen to 128kbps MP3s, then they should be ok with 128kbps AACs.

Re:So what (2, Insightful)

doxology (636469) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009280)

I wonder if it's possible to create a sort of virtual CD-writer that'll trick iTunes into thinking it's burning to a CD but it's really just writing it somewhere on your HD.

Behold... (2, Interesting)

crazyjeremy (857410) | more than 7 years ago | (#16008934)

...the power of Python.

Re:Behold... (0, Offtopic)

growse (928427) | more than 7 years ago | (#16008946)

It'd crack it 10 times quicker if they'd done it in perl :p

Re:Behold... (1)

'nother poster (700681) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009033)

Ruby, you fool. Yes, Ruby... On Rails. Yessss. ;)

That, or... (1)

patio11 (857072) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009143)

... print "Just another Perl hacker" and run a web server. Remember to carefully check that you typed &$'$_ and not &$"$_ . Perl syntax gets me every time.

Re:Behold... (5, Funny)

doxology (636469) | more than 7 years ago | (#16008957)

Steve Jobs: Get these mother$@%@#$@ snakes off my mother%@$@#@@# OS!

 

Re:Behold... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16009241)

Motherfucking, motherfucking, motherfucking!

If you don't want to use the word, don't use it. Censoring yourself is stupid.

Re:Behold... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16009350)

f#%# you!

Re:Behold... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16008982)

Yeah, because there is no other way to do this... [rolling of eyes]... moron...

Re:Behold... (1)

crazyjeremy (857410) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009045)

I was actually being a big sarcastic. Python is great and all, but I think this could have been done in many other ways that would be faster or more efficient.

Re:Behold... (4, Funny)

legoburner (702695) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009018)

Programming language handles file input, processing and output. News at 11.00.

Re:Behold... (1)

cptgrudge (177113) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009128)

Programming language handles file input, processing and output. News at 11.00.

Sounds like a bizarro world Ric Romero [slashdot.org] headline.

I wonder.... (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16008935)

I wonder how many of the itunes fanboys (who crowed in the story about playsforsure being cracked) are going to be here hanging their heads in shame?

Macs have this ability - via iMovie (4, Interesting)

cultrhetor (961872) | more than 7 years ago | (#16008941)

You don't need a special software tool if you own a Mac. This is a fairly old trick - and time consuming - but it works pretty well. If you have the license for the piece of music (if you're on one of the five computers licensed to listen to the track), you can open it without problems in iMovie, save it as an AIFF file (uncompressed audio), and then import it into iTunes as an mp3 or whatever you choose. It works pretty well - and it's a bit of a lifesaver if your wife happens to crash her Windows box on a regular basis, forcing a reformat and reinstall about once every six months.

Re:Macs have this ability - via iMovie (1)

crazyjeremy (857410) | more than 7 years ago | (#16008972)

Seems like a lot of hassle, but effective. Is this workaround something Apple could/would disable in the future?

No, they don't. (5, Informative)

mrchaotica (681592) | more than 7 years ago | (#16008993)

iMovie works by decompressing and recompressing the music, resulting in a loss of quality. Apparently, this new software works by extracting the compressed stream after it has been decrypted, giving it the distinct advantage of being lossless.

Of course, it doesn't do me any good, since it only works in Windows...

Re:No, they don't. (1)

Takeel (155086) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009326)

iMovie works by decompressing and recompressing the music, resulting in a loss of quality. Apparently, this new software works by extracting the compressed stream after it has been decrypted, giving it the distinct advantage of being lossless.

AIFF uses uncompressed PCM. You can choose to apply lossy compression after converting to AIFF if you want to, but nobody's got a gun to your head.

Re:Macs have this ability - via iMovie (4, Insightful)

joe 155 (937621) | more than 7 years ago | (#16008995)

I hate to sound like a troll but why do you use iTunes when you have these problems and say yourself that the fix is time consuming?

I want a legal system, so I use allofmp3 (because it is legal in my country (the UK)), but isn't there any alternatives for you to iTunes without DRM at all?

Re:Macs have this ability - via iMovie (1)

generic-man (33649) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009144)

Sure. Buy a used CD and rip to whatever format you want. Much cheaper than iTunes though you have to wait for the CD to be delivered.

Or buy songs from Allofmp3.com. Either way, you get all the music without giving a penny to those selfish artists who have the audacity to record music you like to listen to.

Re:Macs have this ability - via iMovie (2, Interesting)

joe 155 (937621) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009240)

come now, this has nothing to do with "stealing" from artists, this has everything to do with people wanting to be able to use what they have bought in what they consider to be a fair way (which I would say is me being able to put it onto every computer/player I own so that I can listen to it where ever I decide). It also has a lot to do with me wanting to be able to buy music in a format which suits me best and in a quality which I choose.

I would also disagree with the tone of your post which seems to suggest that you think that the artists get the lions share, or even a reasonable amount of the money which is paid for a song/album - which simply isn't true.

Finally I would say that as far as I am aware artists can get money from allofmp3 is they register with ROMS (although this might be wrong... someone will have to say either way...)

Re:Macs have this ability - via iMovie (1)

kannibal_klown (531544) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009145)

Well, here in the US as much as we'd like to think allofmp3 is legal, it either isn't or at the very least there's the chance that eventually the RIAA will manage to intimidate them somehow and seize their records. Personally I don't want to bother with the RIAA ever getting ahold of their records and serving me; even if I have a better chance of winning the lottery, running outside, and getting struck by lightning while I cheered being a millionaire.

Personally, I don't care that much about the iTunes DRM in its present state. I'm not big on portable mp3 players anymore so it doesn't affect me there, and my car (while new) doesn't have an mp3 player (just an indash 6CD changer) so if I really need to I burn some mix CDs. And I don't have enough PCs to use up my activations (and if I did I'd just deactivate the least-used-one). And I like the UI well enough, so in all I don't have any reason to take these annoying steps.

Sure, to some people the iTunes DRM is probably quite annoying. And if I had a portal mp3 player or one built into my car I'd probably start doing something. But in its current state it's not even a nuisance to me.

Re:Macs have this ability - via iMovie (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16009513)

I agree with you about iTunes. My daughter got an ipod for Christmas last year. I also let her buy about $15 worth of music from iTunes to go with it. At the time I did not realize that the music I "bought" would be limited to only playing on a couple of computers. What a crock of s###!!! I paid for the music, I want it in a format that allows me to play it in my car or on my home stereo or wherever I want. Steve Jobs will NEVER get another penny of my money for ANYTHING.

Re:Macs have this ability - via iMovie (1)

localman (111171) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009075)

Yeah, but that's not what people are talking about. You can do it with a CD as well, but in either case you lose some quality. True that most folks won't notice the difference between a re-encoded mp3 and a decrypted AAC, but some will. So for those folks this is pretty useful.

Cheers.

Re:Macs have this ability - via iMovie (1)

Dr_LHA (30754) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009195)

That "hole" in iMovie was closed a long time ago, so that only works if you have an old copy of iMovie from before the fix.

However what you're talking about is no different from burning to a CD, just without producing the coaster. Its far from removing the DRM from a AAC file.

Re:Macs have this ability - via iMovie (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16009452)

That's the same as burning to CD and re-ripping.
Going from AAC to AIFF then back to MP3 degrades the audio substantially.

Re:Macs have this ability - via iMovie (2, Funny)

Mister Whirly (964219) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009490)

Maybe it would just be easier to get another wife...

wonder if works for itunes video (2, Insightful)

schnikies79 (788746) | more than 7 years ago | (#16008966)

burning to a cd and ripping dosen't quite for that..

Why not Napster? (0, Offtopic)

robpoe (578975) | more than 7 years ago | (#16008969)

14.99 / month for Napster 2 Go.

$15.00 one time charge for WMAConvert software..

All the unprotected MP3 files I could ever need.

Yeah, ok, so I'm listening to sound quality that's less because I went from one lossy to another. BFD - I can't hear the difference anyway.

As long as I have my Napster subscription -- I can download all the stuff I want, and I'll rely on Fair Use Copyright Law to rest my conscience. No, I don't upload or share.

I just can't stand slow assed .WMV files...

Re:Why not Napster? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16009165)

how is that guy offtopic? were talking about drm ...

Re:Why not Napster? (1)

2nd Post! (213333) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009264)

If everyone did this, as you suggest, Napster would go out of business.

Better for you NOT to advertise this solution and instead take advantage of the fact that not everyone does this.

They won't, but I will... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16008975)

Google is your friend [rapidshare.de] .

Rhythmic Harmony

Oh, NOW you won't link to it? (4, Interesting)

Wesley Felter (138342) | more than 7 years ago | (#16008994)

Sure, everybody will link to the tool that cracks Windows Media DRM, but when it's time to crack FairPlay people start getting self-righteous.

Re:Oh, NOW you won't link to it? (2, Insightful)

3mpire (953036) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009025)

Seriously, I thought the same thing. Situational ethics RULE.

Re:Oh, NOW you won't link to it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16009098)

Probably because they know that Steve Jobs is strives to be most lawsuit-happy executive on this planet. They just don't want to get sued.

DRM (4, Insightful)

daeg (828071) | more than 7 years ago | (#16008996)

As much as I hate DRM, by buying the music from iTunes in the first place you are clearly stating your position that you will tolerate DRM. It's like buying a Ford and ripping the Ford emblem off the car and thinking that you're "sticking it to Ford." I have news for you: Ford (Apple) is laughing all the way to the bank.

Re:DRM (2, Insightful)

mrchaotica (681592) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009058)

If every iTMS track you have has either been from a Pepsi cap or the weekly free download (as mine is), you can still make use of the software without having compromised your ethics.

(On another note, isn't it a nice coincidence that I'm wearing my EFF t-shirt today? I had just chosen it randomly, but now I can say I'm wearing it in celebration!)

Re:DRM (1)

spud603 (832173) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009097)

Except that you've given your money to PepsiCo, which in my book is ten times worse than FairPlay.

Re:DRM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16009371)

better then the alternative. . . . Coke

Re:DRM (1)

mrchaotica (681592) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009477)

How so?

Re:DRM (1)

TheGreek (2403) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009506)

If every iTMS track you have has either been from a Pepsi cap or the weekly free download (as mine is), you can still make use of the software without having compromised your ethics.
As long as you didn't pay them for it, you didn't compromise your ethics?

That says more about how committed you are to your ethics than it does about anything else, frankly.

Re:DRM (1)

Flooded77 (730881) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009296)

Not to nitpick or anything, but the record companies are actually the ones laughing all the way to the bank (and are ultimately convinced that people will buy DRM-encumbered media). Apple doesn't make any money from ITunes [theregister.co.uk] , rather they use it to sell IPods.

Re:DRM (4, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009297)

It's like buying a Ford and ripping the Ford emblem off the car and thinking that you're "sticking it to Ford." I have news for you: Ford (Apple) is laughing all the way to the bank.

Actually, it's not like that. It's like... the opposite of that. Or not really, but it's just not like that.

There are a bunch of differences here, the first being that I don't know how a Ford logo is anything like DRM. You might not like the Ford logo, and ripping it off might be a cosmetic improvement (or not, depending on your opinion), but it doesn't inhibit your use of the car. Second, I can't think of a reason why Ford's suppliers would stop selling to Ford if their cars didn't have a Ford logo. It's generally believed, on the other hand, that Apple fought with the record companies because Apple didn't want to use DRM, but for the RIAA, it was a deal-breaker. No DRM, no music, hence no music store.

In any event, I don't think people want to remove the DRM so they can "stick it to Apple". They buy from Apple because they like the service Apple is providing, and they strip the DRM because they don't like the DRM.

Google: QTFairUse6 (no results?) (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16009002)

Yahoo and MSN show results. Google does not. Good to see they're doing no evil.

Re:Google: QTFairUse6 (no results?) (4, Funny)

Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009078)

Yahoo and MSN show results. Google does not. Good to see they're doing no evil.

Haven't you heard? Google CEO joins Apple Board [slashdot.org] .

Google have given up on 'do no evil' in favour of joining Apple ;-)

Here's the deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16009003)

Sort of a port of the original QTFairUse to iTunes 6 using the excellent pydbg package by Pedram Amini.

Requirements: Python 2.4 pydbg and ctypes packages (included)

Supported iTunes versions: 6.0.4-6.0.5

Usage: 1) Start iTunes 2) Start QTFairUse6.py. 4) Play your protected track(s) in iTunes. Each track will be written into a separate dump_NN.aac file. 5) To make them playable in winamp, convert the raw streams to ADTS using FAAD: faad.exe -a output.aac dump_NN.aac

Download: http://rapidshare.de/files/31103061/QTFairUse6-1.0 .zip.html [rapidshare.de]

been there, done that (5, Insightful)

jltnol (827919) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009004)

I think this was tried before.... and the response from Apple was that if the file was downloaded, it was paid for. So, deleting the DRM, while not in Apple's best interest, isn't exactly the same as the WMA subscription problem, where songs that are "rented" could be owned. Let's face it, if you really want something for free, there are lots of places to get it... I just don't see the point of removing the DRM from a paid for iTunes file, because FairPlay does seem pretty generous with what you are allowed to do with it.

Re:been there, done that (1)

ericdano (113424) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009079)

Indeed. All the work required to strip the DRM off iTunes files, one could go to a myriad of P2P programs and find what they are looking for, at a higher bitrate as well.

Re:been there, done that (5, Informative)

mrchaotica (681592) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009080)

I just don't see the point of removing the DRM from a paid for iTunes file

Two reasons:

  1. Sooner or later you will either lose your decryption key or want to use the file on an unsupported platform.
  2. It's the principle of the thing!

Re:been there, done that (1)

Kamots (321174) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009083)

Because you want to be able to execute your fair-use rights without having to resort to obtaining an illegal copy?

It's the same reason that I download no-CD cracks or (rarely) an entire copy of a game that I've already purchased. I don't like having to hunt up the play CD every time I want to play a certain game. I like being able to space-shift the game from the CD onto my harddrive. It's convinient.

Re:been there, done that (2, Insightful)

TClevenger (252206) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009094)

I want to put it on my Creative Muvo. Fairplay isn't THAT generous.

Re:been there, done that (1)

MORTAR_COMBAT! (589963) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009458)

That doesn't change the fact that you SIGNED AWAY your fair use rights when you LICENSED the file you downloaded. You didn't BUY anything upon which to excercise your fair use. It sucks, but that is what you agreed to when you signed up for iTunes and clicked the "Accept" button on the license agreement.

If you don't like it, you don't have to use it.

I just don't understand people saying: "Gee, I don't like the terms to which I freely agreed. I will now proceed to break them."

It doesn't make sense. It just doesn't make sense.

Re:been there, done that (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009349)

I just don't see the point of removing the DRM from a paid for iTunes file, because FairPlay does seem pretty generous with what you are allowed to do with it.

I agree that the fairplay restrictions aren't very restrictive relative to other DRM that's out there. However, it's the nature of DRM that it doesn't feel restrictive so long as you're doing things that the DRM allows, but it's very restrictive to those who want to do anything the DRM doesn't allow.

If there were an easy way to strip the DRM without any negative side-effects, I'd do it to my iTMS-purchased music. Just because. I haven't run into a problem yet where the DRM stopped me from doing something, but all things being equal I'd rather have the piece of mind that I won't run into any in the future, either.

nothing was cracked (5, Informative)

vafada (782986) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009055)

FairPlay wasn't cracked.. this python script attaches to iTunes.exe..... reads the memory when you play a track and creates a dump for the AAC file... its a very nice scripts... but again... nothing was cracked

Bollocks. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16009213)

Sure it was, it's a perfectly valid protocol implementation attack.

"Oh, sure. So you disolved the epoxy, drilled through the chip and attached a probe on the bus to read out the memory, so nothing was cracked". WTF.

With some amount of difficulty? (4, Informative)

MDMurphy (208495) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009120)

That's the part that makes it worthless.

Music from iTunes is already compressed a fair bit. Yes, you'll lose some fidelity, but the copy to CD and re-rip has always been there if you're not too picky but seriously DRM-phobic.

But other than single-track purchasing, the whole point of the ITMS is convenience. If you want music a single click away it's there. If you want it a click away, but are willing to go through hoops to remove the DRM you kinda lost the convenience part, so what's the point?

If you wanted cheap music, at least an ablbum at a time, borrowing or buying used CDs, ripping them yourself then returning ( or re-selling ) them is an option. If you look at the price of a used CD, minus the price you get selling it back the next day, it's going to be cost competitive with ITMS purchase. Heck, splitting the price of a new album with 2 friends and you all rip it before selling it is going to be a better price. Illegal, yes, but no more so than de-DRMing

So if that's an option, why would you buy from ITMS in the first place if you're going to go through pains to de-DRM it? Poor impulse control? If you can get it for the same price ( or cheaper ) by getting the CD and ripping yourself AND less hassle than removing DRM, why not do just that?

Which is why I think any DRM removal that is more than a single click just silly.

AllofMP3 - fantastic music in ANY format (1)

Z-MaxX (712880) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009292)

If you wanted cheap music, at least an ablbum at a time, borrowing or buying used CDs, ripping them yourself then returning ( or re-selling ) them is an option.
That's an option. Also, I'd suggest looking at AllOfMP3 [allofmp3.com] , a Russia-based company where you can buy tracks, pay a VERY reasonable fee per megabyte, and have them custom encoded on-the-fly. You can choose Ogg Vorbis, MP3, FLAC, or WAV (why anyone would use WAV when FLAC is in the list is beyond me...). It's really awesome.

Re:With some amount of difficulty? (5, Insightful)

sobachatina (635055) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009348)

Illegal, yes, but no more so than de-DRMing

I disagree. I personally feel that copyright infringement is dishonest. I don't feel that breaking the DMCA and circumventing DRM for fair use reasons is dishonest. I want to be able to honestly pay for the music that I want for a reasonable price. iTunes is one way of doing that. I also want to be able to play that music on whatever player I want. This requires the DRM to go away.

the whole point of the ITMS is convenience.

I agree that convenience is a big selling point but for a lot of people it is not more convenient than finding the torrent file. It is much more honest. The best solution would be a convenient service through which I could buy the music I want unencumbered by DRM. I don't know of one.

Who cares? (-1, Flamebait)

moracity (925736) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009127)

Here's a revelation:

If you don't want DRM, STOP USING ITUNES, a**hole!

Nobody is forcing you to use iTunes. Get a life.

Re:Who cares? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16009148)

Here's a revelation:

If you don't like reading this sort of story, DON'T GO TO SLASHDOT, ASSHOLE!

Nobody's forcing you to post here. Get a life.

Oh, and you don't have to censor yourself here. If you don't feel like typing the word "asshole," don't do it. Find another word. Needlessly censoring yourself only makes you look like a moron.

DRM v GPL (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16009172)

so, it's cool and fun and rebellious to stick it to the man by cracking all of the various DRM methods. but when someone breaks the GPL, it's time to grab the pitchforks and storm his house ?

Re:DRM v GPL (3, Insightful)

MattW (97290) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009328)

The GPL exists to protect rights; DRM exists to take them away. Duh.

Re:DRM v GPL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16009377)

Are you kidding? This isn't even comparing apples and oranges.... More like apples and starfish.

Engadget double-standards?? (1, Interesting)

I'm Don Giovanni (598558) | more than 7 years ago | (#16009363)

Engadget had no problem posting links to the WM-DRM crack, in multiple articles, including advocating its use, showing how to use it, and urging MS to not patch the hole. Yet, now they refuse to post a link to the FairPlay crack? What's the deal?

Link vs. Google (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16009401)

You can find the link in the comments above, but Google isn't intent on giving it out. Try searching for "QTFairUse6". Thankfully there are other search engines...
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...