Slashdot Mirror
DVD-Jon Breaks iTunes Encryption For Linux Users
McGruff writes "The Register has a story regarding DVD-Jon's new hobby, iTunes DRM. According to the story DRMed iTunes AAC files can now be played under Linux via VidioLAN Client thanks to some handywork by Jon.
'"When you run the VideoLAN Client under Windows it will write the user key to a file. The user key is system independent and can thus be used by the GNU/Linux version of VLC," he explains.' Personally, this just means I will buy even more iTunes." (We mentioned in November Johansen's efforts to negate the iTunes restrictions on Windows.)
Does anybody else see something wrong with Apple having a program that only works on Windows and Macs? You would think they would be a little bit more understanding of those of us running "alternative" OSes.
Chaos will always win out over order because chaos is more organized
Seems like this crack can be patched.
I doubt Apple will call DVDJohn but I bet the RIAA will.
This hack is, OTOH, useful for 'fair use' - for people who dual-boot Windows and Linux. As well as dedicated music pirates who would re-share the unlocked files as plain AAC.
Michel
Fedora Project Contribut
That would be the way for apple to go if they were in it to make everyone feel good. But actually, they are in it to make money. And as you may have noticed, a lot of linux users don't like to pay for stuff. This is smart for Linux users, not so good for people trying to make money off of Linux users.
And of course, it could never be enough. port itunes to linux? Where is the Ogg Vorbis support? Got Ogg? Why doesn't it work with *insert random peice of sourceforge developed software here*
I know, nobody wants to hear that they are the prima donnas of the IT world. But I've got Karma to burn.
At least Apple's version of DRM would go virtually unnoticed by casual listeners of music. iTunes DRM was designed to deter heavy pirates, but in all fairness, their DRM scheme is the best of the bunch. There are several ways to circumvent iTunes DRM, but at least DVD Jon's implementation just means it's less of a hassle for the said casual user.
On one side of the coin, this is definately great news for everyone not running Windows or OS X who still want to listen to their DRM'd AAC files. Now, there is some portability to these files, and the ability to cue them up in VLC.
On the flipside, when some music industry execs look at this and wonder why they can't control their content, there are a number fingers going to be point at the OSS community because of it.
Where do we draw the line at control? The **AA industries wants to control their content, and we (I use "we" very loosely) want to have control over that which we've purchased. But who truly owns the bits? A series of 1s and 0s? Who's allowed to make the rules?
I know who I WANT to make the rules, me, of course. But I also know who legally gets to make the rules at this point. Them. I don't want the music industry to get pissed off and take my iTunes away. I've found a legal, beneficial means to aquire my music. I want MORE options, not less because of wary industry execs who don't want to have their content cracked.
And let's not even bring the DMCA into the picture here...
Can you ping me now? Gooood! | Manhappenin.Net - Things to do
He's trying to play media that he legally purchased on Linux. This is exactly the argument that he used in his DeCSS defense. Until Norway passes a law making that illegal, he's perfectly safe.
>Kid, seriously, grow up.
What is wrong with him doing this and staying like this forever?
I mean, he should stop doing something just because "other people who know better" say that he should stop?
Should he stop becuase he could get into civil legal problems? That doesn't stop lots of "adults".
Should he stop because its "wrong"? Maybe some one could tell me where this is ethically wrong becuase I don't see it.
I say that he should keep doing what he likes to do and accept the consequences until he feels he shoudn't anymore and not what other people say.
Because in the end its his life.
The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
No, there needs to be a compromise. Apple doesn't give a rats ass about a secure trusted client, iTunes and iPods supported and still support mp3 way before iTunes and copy protection was around. What they do care about is being able to legally sell songs online. To get the labels on board they have to make an honest attempt at copy protection, which they did. They also have to try and balance consumer rights, which they also did.
Of course depending on your point of view it might not seem like it. The record companies probably feel that there should be no way to rip the secure content to MP3 or burn it to CD. Some consumers probably feel that only making 10 CD copies (or whatever it is) of a purchased playlist is a huge burden.
So it's a technical contest. Apple secures things, hackers unsecure things. Eventually if the RIAA companies see the light they'll realize that the money spent on securing things is really just being pissed away and things will change.
Chris Kuivenhoven is a thief, beware
Troll or clueless, I can't tell because as AC there's no post history.
Consumers, at least in Norway, do have more rights. They have the right to use DeCSS to decrypt DVD video to video on the player of their choice. They also, presumably, have the right to publish and obtain the DeCSS program.
Now, back in the land of the free, we have no such rights...why? Because we pussed out. We decided not to pursue our DeCSS case and let stand a lower court ruling that banned it. Oh yeah, this was much better than what Jon did, namely stand up for himself in court.
I'm not so naive to believe that Jon was selfless in his act (he was part of or closely associated with warez groups who were keen on cracking DVD encryption to allow for perfect all-digital rips rather than having to use analog loopback to capture card). But even if DeCSS has a seedy or sordid history no one wants to talk about, the point stands that DeCSS does have legitamate uses and that is where Jon's defense was founded.
When you have precedent set, you don't hide it in your desk and call it a day. You use that precedent to try and set new precedent that is even broader in scope. Jon has stood up to the might of Norway's MPAA/Attorney General equivalents, who now have major egg on their face. How likely do you think they will be to pursue another half-baked case against Jon? Jon is probably bulletproof against anything but real criminal behavior. As soon as the words "fair use" are uttered, I can't imagine there would be a government attorney crazy enough to get struck by lightning twice.
Releasing it anonymously would have only started a witchhunt that could have harmed a lot of other people, people who shouldn't have to be lightning rods for this same kind of treatment. But putting his name on it, yes, he is risked another trial but as I said, it is rather unlikely.
In this world full of people who puss out and settle for lesser charges (cough)Mitnick(cough) I think it's incredible that someone has the guts to put himself at risk to stand up for something. I only wish someone were that brave here in US courts.
-JoeShmoe
.
-- I wonder which will go down in history as the bigger failure: the War on Drugs or the War on Filesharing
Is this guy an idiot?
Jon is a noble-hearted man who is standing up to tremedous odds and tremendous risk to fight for somthing that is good.
'round here, we call people like that heros
Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.
On the other hand, a frail man deliberately picked up a handful of salt, which was at the time a monopoly product of the British Empire. He was arrested for it, but this and other actions that fly in the face of "common sense" eventually freed India from British colonization.
How about that woman who was arrested for sitting in the front of the bus, when everybody knows that black people need to sit in the back?
I'm not saying DVD-Jon is anybody resembling Gandhi or Parks, or that his cause is nearly as important. What I'm saying is that many changes come from a small number of people noisily breaking unjust laws, rather than a thousand people quietly breaking it.
Even if the price is the exact same, being able to purchase by tune is still a major win for the consumer. Even my favorite artists have tunes that I don't particularly care for. They're not necessarily "just filler," or bad songs but they don't appeal to me. There are other artists that I'm not really a fan of but I like one or two songs. The bottom line is that this puts choice in the hands of the consumer, and consumer choice is a good thing.
"The legitimate powers of government extend only to such acts as are injurious to others." Thomas Jefferson.
Maybe I'm behind the times. I thought iTunes was still a U.S.-only service?
So how is Jon trying to play media on Linux that he's legally purchased when it can't be purchased in Norway? I'm just wondering.
The claim is because Apple doesn't make money off of iTuness it won't hurt... but it will.
Steve Jobs clearly stated on more than one occasion that iTunes has done wonders for moving iPods (a big business, and growing).
iTunes got the Music industries backing because it was secure... if that trust is lost, after the contracts end, iTunes has no more content.
That means no more iTunes, and that lowers the sale of iPods.
All that can be good, can be used for evil.
Radiation can kill, and it can save lives. Without water we die. With to much, we drown.
iTunes is the same way.
You know you can choke to death on an Apple? If that NT computer that controls the Machines in the hospital goes down... you could die too.
It's all subject to success, and failure. Perhaps that's life.
My only beef is that DVDJohn is intentionally ruining the first digital success of legal Music, what could have been quite an industry. Apple already went to Windows... I would have bet, Linux was in the works. Apple needs the Open Source community, and knows that.
He is? The iTunes Music Store is available only in the United States, and I believe he's in Norway.
(Apple uses the credit card mailing address to ensure you are in the US, but don't confuse your ability to get a US credit card with Apple having a legal right to sell you that song if you really aren't a US resident.)
sorry, I didn't exactly read your entire post. I stopped at "dedicated music pirates" the saw the rest of that sentence later.
I think you should consider that there are MANY practical reasons why a legitimate owner (licensee?) of iTMS music might want to strip the DRM from their files.
I do sympathize, but I have to disagree with your logic.
It's a Slashdot axiom, but I'll repeat it here: If your business plan relies upon unbreakable encryption, it's a bad business plan.
That being said, I don't see how this is going to destroy iTunes. Yes, copyright violations are possible using these ideas. But I think you'll find that anyone who is using iTunes in the first place (rather than just nabbing whatever they want from P2P) is going to be the kind of person who wouldn't commit a copyright violation through iTunes, either.
Weaselmancer
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
Why do people insist on things like this... I would really like to find the person who could honestly tell me that they enjoy a 192+ kbps encoded (mp3pro, aac, wma) any less than the cd. Can anyone really hear any loss during regular use? People just like to _know_ that they are listening to a completely, totally, 100% original even though they would probably never know. And like the others who responded to this comment, what's the point when these files are generally being encoded directly from masters which yields _better_ results than what you want (a 100% copy of the cd)
Depends on how he actually did it.
If all he did was point his browser at itunes.com and buy the song using his own credit card, then the norwegian courts would not give a rat's ass about Apple really not wanting to sell it to him.
Same thing goes if he bought it while actually beeing in USA (vacation or something).
"Why would you want to re-encode an AAC to an MP3?"
So I can put it on my mp3 player that doesn't and never will know how to decode AAC. As of right now, I have to burn the music to cd, then rip it to mp3. It would be nice to skip a step.
You might hear a single 100% silent frame between songs as a "click" (maybe, if you listen carefully) but in reality there would never be a 100% silent frame inserted, and most decoders are pretty good at covering up inter-frame glitches.