Slashdot Mirror
iTunes: Don't Leave Home With Them
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.
You know, I never knew that before. Thanks, Slashdot!
WHY?!
Sigh. I think its time to give up on online music, and since i refuse to buy cds anymore, Im just gonna go buy a kazoo.
All Troll + "offtopic" mods are meta moderated as "Unfair", because you abused the system.
What about a country that's under US administration? does that count?
Apple's distribution rights are obviously limited to the US by the contracts they signed with the music companies. Or do you think Apple insisted on this themselves?
...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.
Chris -- http://www.bitter.net/
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.
According to the article, you either have to volunteer the change of address info to Apple, or change the address on your credit card.
So, don't tell Apple you moved and tell your credit card company that you lost your card and need a new one.
You won't be able to purchase new music, but at least you won't lose your existing songs.
"use[d] or attempt[d] to use the service from outside of the [United States]'. This includes Canada."
Whew, for a second there I was thinking that we'd annexed Canada. Eh? I think that to be more clear, they should also specifically state that Mexico is outside the US. And, for those who are still in denial, they should state that New Jersey IS part of the United States.
Before condemning iTMS as being the ill-begotten spawn of the RIAA, Satan and Bill Gates, maybe the ex-pat should have tried calling Apple and talking to a real live person.
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
"Using the service" means trying to use the iTunes store. It doesn't mean listening to your music outside of the US. Right now, Apple only has the legal end worked out while you're in the US. It makes sense that they don't want a repeat of the iTunes "sharing" fiasco. What they are saying here is:
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.
Slashdot. It's Not For Common Sense
All this is saying is that you may not use the iTunes service outside the US. This is likely not of their own choice, but because of agreements with the record labels that restrict them to distribution in the US.
Furthermore, it says nothing like, "Apple's 'technologies' delete the bought-and-paid-for files with no refund and no replacement when & if you leave the U.S." You're welcome to listen to your music anywhere you please. Read in the proper context, "Apple may use technologies to verify such compliance," obviously means that if Apple detects you using the iTunes service from outside the US, they'll stop you. Is that so harsh?
Karma: Terrifying (mostly affected by atrocities you've committed)
According to this article: "Canada will be added to the Apple system when the CRIA completes its negotiations in the fall"
CRIA = Canadian Recording Industry Association.
Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
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.
The author of the article claims he reinstalled his powerbook. And tried to redownload his purchased songs after changing his address permantly on both his credit card and iTunes to an outside US address.
Well that doesn't say apple will suddenly disable all your music files if you step out of US soil for say a week or a month.
Apple'sn policies clearly state that you may only purchase songs in the US.
Hardly the 'fine print'. It was the first item on the Terms of Use page.
Sorry, but this guy made his choice - tough for him if he didn't read the EULA before plonking down the cash.
The guy that complains about Apple's restrictice licenses not only USED TO WORK FOR MICROSOFT, he also developed MusicDirect.com, a direct competitor to the iTunes Store. (Read it yourself on his Home page.
As the french say: honi soit qui mal y pense. ("shamed be he who thinks evil of it")
um... iTunes allows you to burn your files to CD, all, even 'officially' downloaded ones. so jsut buy, burn and delete. if you want it back DRM free, rip it to MP3, you can do that through iTunes quite easily.
I want 2D games back.
DRM is always bad, especially if you notice it when it's too late.
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.
- tristan
Many unsigned musicians provide free downloads of their music on their websites as a way to attract more fans. Here's some from my friend Oliver Brown for example. Many such musicians, while relatively unknown, are as good as any major label band and certainly an improvement over the pablum they serve up on ClearChannel.
You can find many more examples in my new article:
- Links to Tens of Thousands of Legal Music Downloads
The article also explores some of the historical and legal issues behind copyright, and suggests steps the file traders can take to make file sharing legal.If you're a musician who offers downloads of your music, I can link to your band's website from the article if you give my article a reciprocal link. Please follow the instructions given here
Request your free CD of my piano music.
although i can't condone the fact that his songs no longer work, i feel i should point out two things.
1st, no company has yet gotten authorization to distribute musical content outside the US. i'm guessing this is a record label issue.
2nd, in his case he had to reinstall everything. it asked to reverify his address, but he'd changed his address on his credit card. it was Canada now, not the US. not sure what else they could have done. if they sell songs outside of the US, they get in big trouble.
if he hadn't wiped everything, his songs would still be working today.
the "technology" they used to verify he was a US customer was his credit card billing address.
(which makes me think that someone could try a PO box in the US and then get their mail forwarded to Canada and get around the US restriciton)
If you're not happy with their terms, you don't have to purchase from their business. But you won't find friendlier terms anywhere for the quality copyright protected content they're legally providing online. The commercial success of iTunes is an incentive to the record companies to pay attention to online distribution. I'm sure Apple sees it as a step along a path, not the end goal. They're trying to get the ball moving at all, and you're upset that it's not speeding along at 100 mph.
He tried to reauthorize the songs after his billing address has changed to outside the US. If you have a US address, you're fine, no matter where your computer sits. How do I know? I studied in Ireland during the last school year, and I downloaded a number of songs from iTMS, using my US-based credit card with my US-based address.
The moral? The license agreement says you aren't to export the songs. This has nothing to do with DRM - it would still be a breach of contract (thus revoking your license to use the songs) to export the songs even if iTMS was giving you straight MP3s.
This stupid law (DVD region) is actually not enforceable in Europe. More and more DVD players out there are multi-zone by default, in the store.
Write boring code, not shiny code!
iTMS music can be authorized on 3 computers. If you move to an area of the globe not serviced by the iTunes validation servers, just find a friend you trust and ftp/scp/carrier-pigeon your purchased songs over to him. Then get him to authorize his computer on your account (as I said, friend you trust as you are giving them your password). He/She can reencode your songs as mp3s and transfer them back. So now you can play your music. Was that so hard?
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.
BUT you only have to pay for the one song you want, not the 10 crappy filler songs you don't give a shit about.
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.
A number of people seem to be commenting on this article as if the songs stop working as soon as a user leaves the US. However, in this case the guy is saying he had to completly reinstall his powerbook and wanted to retrieve his DRM certificate to allow him to use the songs he had purchased, and Apple's policies wouldn't allow this.
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.
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'?
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
The idea that Apple somehow remotely deleted his songs is utter bullshit. Read the article. He reinstalled his system, thus erasing at the very least Apple's authorization token. He attempted to re-authorize his computer using a Canadian credit card, which Apple does not permit and has been very open about not permitting. This is like moving to the UK, breaking your old R1 DVD player, buying a new one at the store down the block, and complaining that its PAL signal won't work with the rest of your legacy equipment.
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.)
Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
First of all, read the damn article.
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.
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.
Transistors and Beer!!
Everyone talks about how the Music Industry's business model is outdated and needs to be changed to reflect the modern technology which exists around us. I think most slashdot readers would agree that classic music licensing schemes and sales models are rapidly becoming outdated.
By the same token, then, don't we need to update our expectations and buying models, as consumers? We can't insist on totally new business models without being willing to adapt to them ourselves.
It seems strange to me that everyone is so rabidly against DRM, when quite frankly anyone thinking about it comes to the conclusion that without it, some pretty ridiculous situations can result. Just because people do not, right now, ruin a band by trading its songs on services does not mean at some future point a service will become so ubiquitous and easy that it couldn't happen. Everyone forgets that the band AND the distributor need to make money.
Not to say I agree with all DRM. Oftentimes it seems like people go too far to the restrictive edge, "You can only use your music with headphones while a RIAA exec standing over you with a shotgun wards people off." I find Apple's DRM to be very reasonable, and it's also the kind of DRM that, should Apple finally kick the bucket, could be extended by another solution, even if the authorization service changes.
The poor fellow who's message is the subject of this article changed his home address to a foreign address. iTunes has no other way to tell if you're in a foreign country. I'm surprised it didn't let him authorize, but I am not surprised that it used that data to exclude him from using the iTMS. I'm sure that the situation will be rectified shortly. Apple can't afford to rampantly piss people off, and if you look at their decisions over the last 3 years you'll see in general their model has been consistant with that.
So please, Anonymous friend, instead of ceaslessly complaining about the end of an era, why not try and help shape the face of these new business models. We're at an amazing point as our society slowly beings to adopt digital media and computing on a mass scale. We've got a responsibility to make sure things turn out in a way that's equitable to everyone.
Slashdot. It's Not For Common Sense
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.
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.
if you want to blame somebody blame david geffen, or cbs, or sony, or capitol. not apple.
2 1337 4 u!
nobody even so much as raised an eyeball if you recorded to tape from the radio
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.
Burninating the villagers, burninating the country side. TROGDOR!
Music is overpriced: $17 - $20 for a CD is outrageous. DVDs cost much more to produce and have higher quality content...yet only cost $5 to $10 more than an audio CD.
Bad music is bundled with good music: Anyone who has bought a CD with one or two good songs knows he/she was forced into buying all the crap to have that one good song.
There is no legal way to buy unrestricted music: Music consumers want to play their purchased music on any device they see fit. They purchased the music, why shouldn't it be playable on any device they own? - not just a limited number of devices.
Piracy is not the problem: Piracy is a symptom of a market need that is unmet. Much like the speakeasys of the prohibition, when consumers want something, there will ALWAYS be someone to fill that demand. Right now, the only way to get reasonably priced, unrestricted music is to download it or copy it from someone else.
Until these problems are fixed, the music industry will always be fighting an uphill battle.
-ted
In the short term, expect more silliness. However in the long run, I think things will work out for the best.
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.
Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
Actually I've heard that foreign students choose Canada over the US because it's supposed to be the easiest and most useful dialect of English to learn. There is significantly less variation in accent throughout Canada than any other major English country (eg: Texas vs. the Bronx, Cornwall vs. Scotland) and Canadian English is supposedly easier to understand by people with other English accents and even easier to learn for non-English speakers. I have no idea if there's truth to any of this, but I've heard it more than once...
I think this guy read the ToU as I did, and probably as Apple's marketing people intended it to be read and not as Apple's lawyers intended it to mean.
Shame on you Apple.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Get a "disposable" MasterCard from webcertificate.com. You can use any other current credit card to purchase the card. (There is, of course, a service fee associated with it.) But the card can be associated with any address you wish, including a US address (just make sure the city/state/zip association is a valid one; other information can be bogus).
This was originally billed as a way for any international user with a credit card to purchase music from the iTunes Music Store. However, it appears that this method could be used to just get yourself a credit card number that's associated with a US billing address for the purposes of associating it with your AppleID. See webcertificate.com's faq for more info.
In sum:
iTunes Music Store does not "check" to see where you are via IP address, or any other network method.
Music you own is never "deleted".
The only reason this user encountered the issue is because he had to reinstall his entire OS, and reauthorize the computer with a credit card whose billing address had since been changed to a non-US address - this didn't specifically disallow him from playing his purchased music; rather, it didn't allow him to REauthorize the computer in order to play the purchased music. As others have said, this seems to be more of a unique situation/accident than intentional on Apple's part (notwithstanding the valid legal considerations Apple has).
Music you burn to CD from iTunes Music Store is yours to keep - FOREVER. No matter where you move. You DO own the music you buy from iTunes Music Store. (Unlike other sites).
As soon as international licensing arrangements are worked out, more and more countries will have iTunes Music Store available.
Apple did much better than anyone else with keeping broad rights with the user/customer, where they belong.
And, finally, a letter from the Canadian equivalent of the RIAA:
I just love the way that one say, Slashdotters are saying that 'everyone should be buying Indie music, and not supporting the RIAA' and the next they are saying that 'eMusic has nothing that I want, no big names'. Why are big names big names? Because the RIAA promote them. So who do you support? Make your mind up.
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.