Apple's iTunes DRM Dilemma

An anonymous reader writes "Understanding how Apple's FairPlay DRM works helps to answer a lot of questions: why it hasn't been replaced with an open, interoperable DRM that anyone can use, why Apple isn't broadly licensing FairPlay, and why the company hasn't jumped to add DRM-free content from indie artists to iTunes."

Comments

Cracked?

[JimXugle]

Hasen't FairPlay been cracked yet?

Re:Cracked?

[bri2000]

Or have entirely filled all their CD storage units, have literally no room for any more and have reached the conclussion that the production values of 99% of the popular music recorded today are so low that the compression doesn't make much difference (the only album I've downloaded from iTMS in the last year that I felt was recorded well enough for me to go buy the CD as well is Ys by Joanna Newsom). I am not very satisfied by this compromise, however, and agree that, given the the prices iTMS charges, all songs should be available as lossless (and be easily convertable to lower bit rates for transfer to your iPod). It's very irritating when an album (and this is especially true for old albums, at least in the UK) is actually cheaper on CD then from iTMS.

Open DRM?

[Watson Ladd]

How can you have open DRM? Doesn't that mean that anyone can make a program use it and then not put restrictions on the user? And isn't the point of DRM to be obscure and inscrutable by all but the most dedicated?

Re:Open DRM?

[Anonymous Coward]

Open DRM is really easy.

You have a pool of hardware serial numbers. the song DRM is tied to that hardware's serial number.
Really easy and easy to have somewhat open. how abotu a partner program like the "plays for sure" garbage that MSFT did? that was somewhat open as far as mp3 players went.

Will someone crack it? yup, but ALL drm is currently cracked. The strongest DRM out there is Audible's books. and that is not only cracked but the tools out there also strip your identifiable watermark out of the audio as well. Apple's DRM is cracked every time they change it to fix the "hole" (Yes the current is cracked, it's not idiot-easy yet though like jhymn was.)

Lock it to the hardware, makes the user happy, make the idiots that are executives at companies that tink DRM=profit happy and that iTunes copy of "I like big butts" you bought will play on all mp3 players except the Zune.

Yes that last is a shot at the zune because it's a great piece of hardware crippled by a executive idiot's decision.

I know why Apple hasn't licensed FairPlay

[Lallander]

but it does still puzzle me why they don't allow artists to opt out of having DRM applied to their work. Hopefully we will see that change in the near future.

Re:obvious

[Anonymous Coward]

"Because the DRM locks people into iTunes + ipod..."

If you believe Steve Jobs, he says:

Through the end of 2006, customers purchased a total of 90 million iPods and 2 billion songs from the iTunes store. On average, that's 22 songs purchased from the iTunes store for each iPod ever sold.

Today's most popular iPod holds 1000 songs, and research tells us that the average iPod is nearly full. This means that only 22 out of 1000 songs, or under 3% of the music on the average iPod, is purchased from the iTunes store and protected with a DRM.

If that is mostly true, I'd have to agree that people are not locked-in too bad today.

A reason to strip DRM

[JakiChan]

I think he's a bit biased...calling DVDJohn a profiteer and such.

As for stripping the DRM having little use since you can burn a CD and re-rip...converting AAC to AIFF and then reconverting causes a huge quality loss. I used QTFairUse to strip my AAC encrypted files so I could play them on my Squeezebox. I did it only to play MY music, not to steal any music. But not being able to play my own music on my Squeezebox also made me realize I didn't want to buy iTMS music any more....

Re:obvious

[dr.badass]

There is at least some content on the iTunes store that need not have the DRM (ie various independent label works), yet it all does

There is at least some content on the iTunes store that need not be in 128kbps AAC and cost $0.99 per track, yet it all does. It all stems from the fact that Apple gives one deal to all the independent labels, no negotiation.

Also consider that any label that doesn't want to use DRM can either stop selling at iTunes (an often ignored option) or sell DRM-free elsewhere.

Re:obvious

[Dhalka226]

And as we all know, public statements are legally binding oral--

--wait, no they're not.

Maybe he's serious and hated DRM all along; maybe he's serious and just thinks iTunes is big enough that they don't need it anymore. Maybe he's not serious at all, and is just try to score PR points by espousing a position he either doesn't care about or doesn't think will ever come about. Or maybe he's saying one thing in public and another in private in an attempt to ensure that no matter which way things ultimately break, Apple is positioned on the winning side.

Frankly, it matters very little right now. I want to see action. Then not only will we be able to take a guess on which of those possibilities is the truth (except for the latter I guess), but we'll see if the position made a difference at all.

Re:How about the very simplest explanation?

[samkass]

The "license FairPlay" crowd often overlook this point. Right now it's Apple's DRM monopoly against the labels' music monopoly. They battle it out and prices remain reasonable. If Apple loses, it's just the labels against the consumers directly. No more 99c songs... now you'll pay &4.99 for any reasonably popular song (hey it'll still be cheaper than the CD that has the one song you like and 12 you don't).

In any case, be careful what you wish for. If Apple's forced to open FairPlay expect to pay a lot more for online music.

Re:obvious

[Anonymous Coward]

"Translation #1: Now that iPod monopolizes the digital music player market we no longer need the "loss leader" iTMS sales. iTMS has accomplished its mission of pumping up iPod sales. Now it can transition to a new role, perhaps even become a profit center.

Exactly how does iTMS drive iPod sales?

We are talking only about 20 songs sold for every iPod sold so far to date. If you say that some folks have purchased multiple iPods or replaced iPods over time ... lets say 5 iPods per person for the fun of it... you still are only talking on average 100 songs per iPod owner. With numbers like that it is hard to state that iTMS sales have driven iPod sales in any radical fashion (not much of an investment lock in)... sure it helps but it would be hard to state it helps in any signification amount compared to the other factors involved (xplat device, iTunes software integration, etc.).

Also the iPod was rapidly ramping up in unit volumes before the iTMS ever came on the scene.

I have no problem with iTunes Store or DRM.

[MacOSXHead]

I am sick of carrying around the 700+ CD's I own everytime I move. I can take all of my CD's music and iTunes Music Store purchases with me wherever I go; either on my iPod or my laptop. My CD's weigh about 100 lbs. My iPod, much less. Also, most of my old CD's are badly scratched.

Apple is successful for a reason. They get it.

Apple's iTunes DRM Dilemma?

[JimDaGeek]

Huh? Apple has everything right where they want it.

Spare me the Apple fan-boys...

In the past 4 months, I bought a nice 17" Intel iMac and a nice Intel Macbook. With upgrades the two have cost me more than $3,200 USD. So any Mac-Boy that complains about what I am about to say should stand out to the intelligent amoung us :-)

Apple DRM... Where to begin? It sucks. Jobs makes statements about how the "music" industry should change from DRM. Well, I haven't had many problems with Apple's DRM when it comes to music. Yeah, Apple DRM on music sucks. However, you can at least burn an audio CD and grab ogg/mp3/aac files from your music CD.

However, I have gotten burned big-time from Apple this past year from buying TV shows. I have paid Apple way too much money to get several seasons of my favorite shows. Now when I try to convert those shows to watch on my 50" HDTV instead of my little 17" iMac, well, Stevie Jobs will not "let" me. What kind of crap is that?

I paid for this stuff! It is not like I am trying to convert some p2p avi to DVD. I just want to be able to watch the 3 seasons of "The Office" and the other show I have bought off of iTMS on my HDTV!!!

I will never buy anything from Apple again. Period. No hardware, no software and especially no content.

Don't lock down the content I buy from you and expect me to be happy.

I would not have cared if Apple locked down _all_ the TV shows I bought from them... if I could burn a DVD/VCD to watch on my TV.

However, as it is, the DRM on the content from iTMS is way out of line.

As I stated above, I have spent close to $4,000 USD in 4 month on Apple stuff. So please, spare me all the Apple zealots who just want to shill for Apple.

I liked Apple before I actually had to deal with their limitations.

Right now, my Intel iMac it triple booted with OS X, Ubuntu and WinXP. I spend all of my time on the iMac in Ubuntu and boot to WinXP for some fun games. I haven't booted to OS X for a while now.

If there is anyone out there thinking about getting a Mac. Well, I would say to hold off on that. Just build-your-own, save a boat load of money and dual-boot with Linux and WinXP. You will have the best of the geek-world and the gaming-world.

Peace :-)

young industrg

[fermion]

I am going to defend the music industry here, not that I think they are right, not that I think Apple is right, but simply that I do agree that the people who make the music, or their agents, do have broad power to do with the music as they please. If we, as the music fan, don't like what they do with the music, or how they use the money, then don't buy the music. No one is forcing anyone to buy this music, in any particular form. There is a lot of good music out there, and each one of us does have a choice.

That said music has always had a inherently time and space limited factor, although that factor has grown less important, and clearly certain people have learned to capitalize on that change, and others have clearly suffered. At a live performance, the music lasted as long as the performance, and only so far as the sound and view would carry. This meant many people were performers, and many people benefited. Concert promoters did well, and so did performers. With the advent of recordings, the wax cylinder was still a rather time limited, expensive to record, low quality medium. People still wanted to hear live music, and people still had to replaced the cylinders. Even with the advent of vinyl, these would only last a generation. The record broke the time and space barriers, but still held the same hope of the live perfomance, that people would pay again and again for the same, or at least similar, music. Compilations, box sets, reissue, all to get back to the good old days of selling the same music.

Now a single download could be all that might be recovered from recoding a song. DRM is nasty, but it does impose the time and space that is even present on a CD. It can be argued that DRM free music might make more than the would make otherwise, but certainly less than had been expected in the past. For instance, even if I buy every song I own, I have no reason to buy a greatest hit. Ever.

So, what does this mean. That EMI will sell it's library to anyone willing to buy it lock stock and barrel. EMI is not in the business of giving away music, but if anyone else wishes to, they may. EMI likely believes that the days of mega bands and mega hits are numbered. These are mostly for kids anyway, and kids now figure out what is cool on myspace, not MTV, if MTV was ever a place to be cool.The business model of brainwashing kids to believe an album will make then a better person is over, because the acquisition of the album no longer involves money to the label. It is like porn. None of the magazines are making as much money because people are given the hardcore stuff away for free. No magazine had to pay Britney to flash, and no magazine got the full benefit of the exclusive.

So Apple, and everyone else, has a DRM to give the music some time limited quality. Apple got lucky and this worked to it's advantage. Some of this si just elements of a yound industry, i.e. digital music distribution. I suspect much of this will go the way of wax cylinders and 8-tracks, and we will be looked down on for wasting money on such things.

OTOH, I have no faith that the music industry will come up with the solution. I believe it is the industry greed that got it into this position, and greed that will keep it running in circles. The LP was a special delivery system. The record that would scratch, and the album art that was often more valuable than the record. With the CD, the labels just saw a cheaper product that would have a higher markup. The continuously cut costs, until the CD was nothing more than a way to listen to store bought music, with no compelling value added. It is any wonder that everyone jumped to the cheaper alternative? For most music, the MP3 is not noticeably inferior, without the inconvince of a CD. Sure some still try to add to the experience, but really, who is going to trust non music content from a CD?

So how do you load unprotected content into iPod?

[Ungrounded Lightning]

The article talks at length about issues with making it possible for other vendors to sell PROTECTED content that can be loaded PROTECTED onto an iPod. OK, fine.

But what about loading UNprotected content onto an iPod?

If I read this correctly:
  - iTunes can't sell UNprotected content and
  - Other tools can't load UNprotected content into iPods
because:
  - the iPod's onboard software is designed to only be loaded by iTunes software,
  - the iTunes store is not designed to serve unprotected content and the iTunes application is not designed to download unprotected content from the store (although it will load unprotected content from the user's machine)
  - both are designed to be automatically updated when used if Apple believes it desirable (whether because the protection is cracked or because people are using it in unapproved ways), and
  - Apple won't publish an API for loading UNprotected content or commit to stabilizing it.

This means third-party tools, even if trying to load unprotected content, are trying to hit a moving target.

But Apple only makes the iTunes client available for Mac and Windows (linux, non-Mac unix, etc. users need not apply), and only in association with a user account registration.

Which brings me to my situation:

  - I have a video iPod (given me as a gift).
  - I have only Linux machines, so can't run the Apple iTunes clients.
  - I would like to load unprotected content onto the iPod.
  - I have no desire to ever buy anything DRM encumbered, which means I will not be buying anything DRM-infested from iTunes, ever (even if I COULD load it under Linux).
  - Thus I don't need an iTunes account, which means:
  - for me the iPod software will NOT be updating intermittently, but forms a fixed target.

So how can I (and others in a similar situation) load unprotected content onto the iPod?

I had hoped TFA, self-billed as "(Understanding) How Apple's FairPlay DRM works" might give me some insight. But it says nothing about the guts. It just meanders around the high-level design issues of key management.

Does anyone know a solution - or where to look for one?

Re:So how do you load unprotected content into iPo

[Ash-Fox]

Does anyone know a solution - or where to look for one?

• Install ipodslave package
• connect the iPod
• open 'ipod:/' in Konqueror.
• ...
• Profit!