Slashdot Mirror
FairPlay v2 Reversed, Playfair Back Online
An anonymous reader writes "Two weeks ago Apple released iTunes 4.5. The minor changes Apple made to their Music Sharing Protocol (daap) were reverse engineered after just one day. According to a post in the Doom9 forums FairPlay version 2 has also been reverse engineered. playfair has
already been patched with the new code and is back online with FSF India providing legal support. How will Apple respond?"
No, stick it to apple, MSFT, RealOne, and every other competing service.
A few years ago I could go buy my music in a industry-wide supported format (CD, or before that tape, or before that LP) and play it in any device from a wide variety of manufacturers.
Apple, MS, et al seek to splinter that up. Apple wants its music downloads to be incompatible with Sonys and MSFTs.
Fuck them. I'm not going to pay a buck to listen at home, another buck to listen while jogging, another buck to listen in the car.
Hint, offer (non-drmed) mp3s. I'll pay a buck. Once. The next best solution is to strip the bogus crap out, as all it serves to do is to create a lock-in market out of thin air.
Yeah, Apple looks reall "fair" to slashbots right now. But they're slowly but surely tightening the noose. More and more files will be flagged as not-burnable to CD, more and more restrictions will be placed.
It doesn't make the community look bad. It makes Apple look bad.
When I invest in a service (by say, buying an iPod or paying a subscription) and then apple changes the terms of that service by altering the DRM, is that not a textbook bait-n-switch?
Apple can bite me. And all the slashbots lining up to apologize and defend them can bite me too.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
I will actually respond, even though I have mod points at the moment. I was tempted to just mod you down and I'll explain why:
- Your post doesn't actually say anything but an opion that you don't support with anything.
- One can't really argue with a statement that contains nothing to dispute. That's why it's so tempting just to mod it down.
- I'll try to argue this time. Next time I'll just mod rubbish posts down when I can, it's the moderators job.
I guess you're trying to imply that Apple is evil because they're trying to make as much money as they possibly can. What _exactly_ is wrong with that? In fact they're obliged to try to make money by their shareholders. They're not killing childern / whales / trees in the process as far as I know. In fact the least ethical thing they're doing, as far as I'm aware is playing along with RIAA in helping to protect their copyrighted material. I don't think there's anything wrong with trying lo limit the number of devices a music file can be played on. It may not be convenient, but it's not exactly the same ballpark as RIAA trying to stop me playing DVDs I own on a Linux computer.
Have you noticed how every high street shop actually cooperates with RIAA as well by selling their CDs?
FSF India providing legal support.
Hmmm. I wonder if businesses might start picking up on the idea that outsourcing their software to india might not be a great idea.
...to never give the FSF a penny. Or a rupee, in this particular case.
Remind me again how Apple (or anybody) is forcing you to buy music with DRM included?
Reminder: Apple (and other sources) of legal, paid for, downloadable music only offer it in DRM.
Therefore, they are forcing you to either...
1. buy music with DRM
or
2. pirate music without DRM
Maybe you should explain to me how Apple (or anybody) allows me to buy music without DRM included? Perhaps I (and others) are unaware of other reasonably priced, legal, downloadable music that allows fair use, and that have a catalog comparable to Apple (and others)?
One would think that these people would be happy that people are wanting to give them money, and expect to make fair use of the music they buy.
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.