How To Play Your iTunes Music On Other Systems

ptorrone writes "Engadget has a step-by-step for the non-uber geek on how to play your purchased music from iTunes on other systems. To be clear, this isn't a way to take music you bought and give it to someone else, this is so you can listen to your own purchased music on other systems or devices. In fact, your personal info is still in the file."

Comments

Sweet!

[djhankb]

I've purchased a bunch of em.
My previous solution was to burn then to CD, then rip them using something else, like Grip under linux.

my 2

-H

Re:I have a way to do that too.....

[euphonaesthesia]

Same way. From the article:

hymm started out as "Playfair" which was on Sourceforge, where you could grab the source / program. Then, Apple had requested for it to be removed, so PlayFair outsourced itself to India, where it was later removed, again. Now the application is called "hymn", or "hear your music anywhere". [...]

Re:I have a way to do that too.....

[Luscious868]

hymn (the tool talked about in this walk through) is PlayFair. It's been renamed and a new author is working on it. Also, the latest release keeps your Apple ID in the file so if you have it on a P2P network your asking for trouble.

strange name, eh?

[maxbang]

From the article:

Now the application is called "hymn", or "hear your music anywhere"...

I would have called it "hyman" because it makes more sense. Then again, if the program crashed on you, I guess you'd have a busted hyman, so I see where they're coming from on that.

Cool... But...

[thedogcow]

This is a great way to do this legally... but... there is always someone that will circumvent the issue and find a loop hole to share music within iTunes.

I really don't see illegal mp3/acc file sharing to be stopped. Ever.

Re:Cool... But...

[DaHat]

This is NOT a legal method!

By purchasing songs from the iTMS you have contractually agreed NOT to bypass their DRM system in anyway other than those provided (ie burning to cd and re-ripping). Any other means, such as this is a violation of said contract and you are liable for any and all damages, regardless of if they are actual (ie 10,000 people didn't buy a CD because they got the song from you instead) or imaginary (ie they think 10,000 didn't buy a CD because they had the remote ability to get the song from you).

Re:Cool... But...

[arkhan_jg]

a) Terms Of Service are not a contract. They are terms which if you do not obey, they are grounds for terminating your business relationship. I.e. if apple catch you removing DRM from itunes tracks, they can refuse to sell you any more tracks. However, once they've (Apple) sold you something, first sale doctrine dictates that they cannot use copyright law to impose further restrictions. Specifically, use restrictions (i.e. you cannot do this with our product) are simply not enforceable post purchase. The music is not licenced, it is sold, and the only restrictions are those of copyright itself, i.e. you cannot distribute your copies to other people.

b) even if by some legal juggling*, these TOS could be treated like a contract, i.e. you were considered to be licensing the music, not buying it, you cannot give up your legal rights by contract. No more than you can sign into slavery, or sign away your first amendment rights in the US. Such a clause would be, and has been judged to be an illegal clause, and thus stricken from the contract. Since fair use rights are not constitutionally granted rights, it would be less clear cut; but there is a strong precedent for fair use rights not being revocable by contract terms. But in this case it's a moot point, as there's emphatically not a contract post sale.

c) There are in fact two offences you could be taken to court over. The first is copyright infringement. Your fair use rights are a defence to this charge, as long as you do not distribute copies to anyone else. Potentential to distribute has nothing to do with it, you have to actually be spreading those tracks on a p2p network. Therefore, making copies to play on another device would be legal.
The second charge would be with the DMCA. However, it's not illegal to use a DRM-removal tool under the DMCA, only to write or distribute one. Therefore, stripping music you own of drm to use on another device is also fully legal.

Ergo, despite what Apple and it's fans tell you, removing DRM from music you own is 100% legal. Distributing it to others without permission is 100% illegal. Since the article contains instructions on how to play your legally purchased music on other devices you legally own, that is a 100% legal action.

* Note, in order for it be a valid contract, the seller has to have to have an ongoing relationship with you regarding the product post sale. If, on the other hand, they give you something, and you give them money, and you get nothing more from them after that other than their legal obligations like warranties (and you pay them nothing more for that particular product) it is a sale, and the contract is finished regarding that item, regardless of what the vendor would have you believe by tacking on EULA's, use clauses, licences or anything else. The only things that apply from that point on are the relevent laws of the land, and the vendor *cannot* restrict you any further than the law allows. And I will keep saying this till people stop spreading false information to the contrary.

Why buy anyway?

[Anonymous Coward]

What is the need to buy music when we can all sing to ourselves and save money instead?

la de la de la..
*cat suffers heart attack*
oh...thats why we buy.

4 cents

[Bon bons]

"hymm decodes the songs you have purchased using the key from your iPod and/or your operating system and make a new file which is not protected, it keeps the cover art and song data as part of the file. Since this is using your key, you can only do this for your songs, which I personally think is fair- they're the songs you bought, you should be able to put them on your other computers or devices."

I don't know, even if that doesn't technically violate fair use, it comes really close. He [the author] is right though: they're the songs you bought, you should be able to put them on your other computers.

Re:4 cents

[DaHat]

WRAAAAAG! At times it feels like I'm the only one who recognizes that fair use does not apply when you have contractually agreed not to bypass the DRM... for further info, see some of my other posts in this thread.

Re:4 cents

[harlows_monkeys]

You did not buy them outright. You bought them with conditions attached. You licensed them for use with iTunes and iPod

Then how come iTunes supports CD burning? Are you only supposed to use iTunes to play those CDs?

Re:4 cents

[TwinkieStix]

WRAAAAAG! At times it feels like I'm the only one who recognizes that fair use does not apply when you have contractually agreed not to bypass the DRM... for further info, see some of my other posts in this thread.

Contractually? I believe that it's a "license agreement" not a contract. That's a big difference. And these licenses haven't yet been tried by a court. License are intended for copyright - how I can distribute the program. If I pay for something, I own it, and nobody but the government can legally tell me what I can and can't do with it.

Some of those things I can do:

• destroy it
• dispose of it in an environmentally friendly way
• drive over it with my car
• yell at it
• take it apart and look at it
• tell my friends that I have it
• make backup copies of it
  

Some of the things I can't do:

• use it to kill people or physically harm them
  
• copy it and distribute it without permission
• use it to hurt the environment or some endangered specie

Easier with VLC

[Anonymous Coward]

13 steps to play your songs?

I prefer this 3 step procedure instead:

1. Install VLC.
2. Open your M4P file in VLC.
3. Click play.

That's it!

It just works?

[Bifurcati]

I find it ironic (though perhaps humorous!) that this hack is most simply implemented on a Windows platform. Note that on Mac et al., you have to have an iPod, and have it plugged in, because that's where the decrypted keys come from. On Windows, however, the key encryption has been reverse engineered somehow (I don't really understand this bit) and they're able to get the key directly from your computer. This hasn't been done on the mac, so you have to wait for the iPod to decrypt it for you.

I just find it interesting that the DRM was most easily compromised by allowing iTunes for Windows! Is this just because of the sheer user base, meaning things get hacked together faster, or is it more profound, i.e., Windows is more easily hacked. Food for thought :)

PS - I've just ordered by G4 Powerbook laptop (drool, drool), doing the switch from Windows. Faintly nervous, but all my friends (both of them...) are getting the Powerbooks and loving them!

Re:It just works?

[scorpioX]

On OS X, Apple added a special flag to the kernel execve() call that will not allow a debugger (gdb) to attach to a process that sets this flag. They did this specifically for DVD Player (at the behest of the MPAA) and for iTunes (maybe a condition of their contract with the RIAA?) so that people could not attach and get the decrypted key (or trace the encryption method). I suspect (but don't know for sure) that iTunes on windows does not have this "protection" and someone attached to it with SoftIce and got the key or RE'd the encryption method.

The same "protection" was used in the OS 9 DVD player so that MacsBug could not attach to the player. But with that, DVD player just refused to run if it detected MacsBug was loaded.

Re:It just works?

[Dahan]

That's pretty interesting... Your earlier message says Apple added a flag to execve(), but Darwin's execve() looks standard to me:
int execve(const char *path, char *const argv[], char *const envp[]);

Having execve() do the protection wouldn't work anyways, seeing that gdb wouldn't call execve() with that flag set. I ktraced iTunes, and it's just calling ptrace(PT_DENY_ATTACH, ...) on itself, rather than having its parent do it. You could probably run iTunes under a debugger and set a breakpoint on ptrace() and skip over the offending call.

On the other hand, while recompiling Darwin may not be "something a user would be able to do" (I've never tried), I'm sure someone who is knowledgable enough to reverse engineer iTunes' key generation scheme is also capable of compiling their kernel.

I have an easier method:

[Polarism]

Step 1: Use iTunes to burn a CD with whatever songs you bought and want to burn.

Step 2: Use winamp to rip the CD to your computer.

Step 3: Enjoy restriction-less CDs and MP3s.

Then again, I stopped using iTunes now too..

Re:I have an easier method:

[real_smiff]

This method (the one discussed in the article) is superior* because it doesn't involve transcoding.

*from an audiophile (i.e. not legal) perspective

Not necissarily

[d34thm0nk3y]

Breaking a contract is not necissarily illegal (lets not even debate whether an EULA actually counts as a contract)

The S in TOS stands for service. The contract stiplulates the penalty for breaking the contract: refusal of service. Basically they say we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone who breaks our terms. The only thing Apple could do to you for breaking this "contract" is ban you. (of course the DMCA could possibly come into play somehow, but it is relatively untested)

Re:Not necissarily

[Twirlip of the Mists]

Breaking a contract is not necissarily illegal

Yes, it is. We even have a term for it: "breach of contract."

The contract stiplulates the penalty for breaking the contract: refusal of service.

Right. Which means if you run PlayFair or Hymn or I'mABigScriptKiddieLookAtMeWoo or whatever on one of your iTunes songs, you are no longer legally authorized to listen to any of your iTunes songs. You are, at that point, engaging in copyright violation, which if you do it enough is a felony!

Re:Not necissarily

[d34thm0nk3y]

Except that at this point you are no longer copying them since they are already on your computer. Copyright only deals with distribution.

Re:Not necissarily

[damiam]

Playing a CD over the radio is distribution.

Re:Not necissarily

[DaHat]

The ultimate question is regarding distribution.

This evening while looking for something completely unrelated I found an interesting page providing some case law regarding emulation at: http://www.worldofspectrum.org/EmuFAQ2000/Appendix B.htm

Quoting from it:

Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. George Frena. 839 F.Supp. 1552 (M.D. Fla., 1993).
George Frena, the sysop of the Techs Warehouse BBS, had 170 digitized images from both Playboy and Playgirl magazine posted to his computerized bulletin board system. The two magazines were commercial adult publications protected under copyright law. Playboy Enterprises, owner and publisher of both magazines, sued Frena for copyright infringement. The Federal District Court acknowledged Frena's claims that the uploading had been done by his users without his approval; however, it still found him liable for intellectual property violation. It ruled that Frena's users had illegaly copied the pictures by digitizing them; furthermore, Frena had infringed on exclusive vendor distribution rights by making the pictures available for download by his users. It also found Frena in violation of trademark law, since the infringing material contained registered trademarks belonging to Playboy Enterprises (the Playboy and Playgirl logos).

This case established two things. First, courts can find against a defendant in an intellectual property dispute whether or not the defendant is aware of such activity. Second, intellectual property protection extends to all copies of a given work regardless of how they are made or the media on which they are presented.

It would not be hard for a plaintiff to argue that in bypassing a DRM system, the resulting file could very easily end up being copied by potentially thousands and thousands of users, with or with out the knowledge of the original copier of the file give how most P2P apps work.

There does exist the principal of "substantial non infringing use", however when a system exists to prevent rampant copying and is bypassed, it is not unheard of (and some would say not unreasonable) for a content owner/licensee owner (ie Apple) to fear unauthorized distribution and sue preemptively.

Re:Not necissarily

[arkhan_jg]

Oops, hit enter too quickly. The DMCA does not prevent you using a DRM-circumvention tool, but it does prevent you writing one in the US, or distributing it in the US.

If it's hosted offshore from the US, then it's not illegal under the DMCA to download and use it on something you legally own.

Re:Not necissarily

[Chester K]

Yes, it is. We even have a term for it: "breach of contract."

A contract can never strip you of certain rights guaranteed to you, even if it specifically outlines you as giving them up. Fair use is one of those rights as recognized by the courts.

Re:Not necissarily

[k8to]

Private replay of works is not an action which is controlled by copyright. Full stop.

You're referring to public performance, which it does cover. It also covers distribution.

In the iTunes case, distribution was done with respect to the copyright and the license. If you later breach the copyright, it says you lose your rights as granted by the copyright. Sadly I'm not lawyerly enough to know what that means your legal status as to the files and private use of them is. However, you aren't either.

Suffice it to say, to be legally sure, you'd probably have to consult a lawyer, and maybe a bunch of dissenting lawyers and the agencies they represent would have to consult each other and a judge and over a lawsuit.

In practical terms, of course, I really doubt anyone will ever care about your private reproduction and media shifting, so it doesn't really matter.

I beat all the DRM for everything

[hartba]

I just plug the headphone out into the line in of my computer and encode the songs to MP3 myself while I'm asleep. As long as you can get an audio output from a device, music DRM will never work. So what if it takes as long to record as my tape deck used to. I'm asleep, so I don't know the difference. Encoding music is easy, filling your iPOD full of illegal substances and getting it across the border is hard. Those dogs can smell anything. That's why you have to kick them in the throat. I'm not saying I'd do anything illegal... but I'd kill somebody, in front of their own mama to listen to itunes in my car and if anybody tried to tell on me, I'd gouge their eyes out.

Hey William Hung!

[AtariAmarok]

"What is the need to buy music when we can all sing to ourselves and save money instead?"

William Hung? Is that you?

itunes is awesome, but...

[chaos421]

i really like itunes. the layout is great, and the integration of itunes music store is fantastic because of the ease of use, speed of download, etc. it is slightly annoying that the songs are encrypted. if my other mp3 player could read these files, i wouldn't have any complaints. perhaps the solution is to send e-mail/letters to your favorite mp3 player company and request they release firmware upgrades for your players so that the itunes format is supported.

Re:Title 17 Chapter 1 Sec 107 of the US Code

[EvanED]

That's all well and good. I'm not saying that the TOS wouldn't be struck down in court. I'm just saying that, in the present discussion, your post is a red herring. Read what you quoted sec. 107 in response to:

By purchasing songs from the iTMS you have contractually agreed NOT to bypass their DRM system in anyway other than those provided (ie burning to cd and re-ripping). Any other means, such as this is a violation of said contract and you are liable for any and all damages, regardless of if they are actual (ie 10,000 people didn't buy a CD because they got the song from you instead) or imaginary (ie they think 10,000 didn't buy a CD because they had the remote ability to get the song from you).

Where does the above say anything about copyright law? Your response to me would have been an appropriate reply, but fair use, as I said, doesn't belong in the discussion, at least until you've dispensed with the TOS discussion. (And quoting the law would probably still be overkill at that point.)

Re:I have a way to do that too.....

[real_smiff]

> hymn (the tool talked about in this walk through) is PlayFair. It's been renamed and a new author is working on it. Also, the latest release keeps your Apple ID in the file so if you have it on a P2P network your asking for trouble.

It seems like only a small step to remove the Apple ID from the decrypted file, hmm? I'm not advocating piracy but.. someone has to say this, 'cos it's what's going through plenty of people's minds.

Re:PFT.

[TheGavster]

Is it no less a waste of time to burn iTunes songs to CDs and rip them? If anything, decoding this way is more in the spirit of Fairplay than burn and rip, as it maintains the ownership info.

Re:I have a way to do that too.....

[1u3hr]

Since it's just PlayFair, does this mean we can count this as a duplicate against the editors?

It's a "howto". It explains that you 1) install the app 2) drag and drop protected iTunes files into it. It's newsworthy, in spite of this being the third or fourth time this app has been mentioned, because now it's got a new name (hymn). If you recall the earth-shaking story a few weeks ago that Darth Vader was going to have a new costume in the next SW pre/se/quel, though we didn't actually have an image or description, you know how low the bar is.

GUI

[ahoehn]

If you hate the command line, like I do, you can download a GUI wrapper for the Windows version of HYMN at http://stilleye.com/hymn.net/

Re:PFT.

[Just Some Guy]

make it illegal

Who said anything about making it illegal? If I buy a hard-to-find song on my wife's iMac, and I want to hear it on my Linux box, I'll happily do what it takes to make that happen. I keep hearing the tired suggestion to "just burn it to a CD, then rip it into an MP3. Get this: I can get music for free from the radio. I pay for it so that I can get good sound quality. Transcoding from one lossy algorithm to another does not fall within my definition of acceptable quality.

Some people will use these tools to share music without authorization. Some of us will use them to listen to the music that we paid for when and where we want to listen to it.

I'm not out to rip anybody off. I just want to hear some tunes. Understand?