- Related Stories
-
Motorola coy with iTunes phone
March 16, 2005 -
Hacker takes bite out of Apple's iTunes
August 12, 2004 -
Apple disables iTunes song-swapping tool
April 28, 2004 -
Program points way to iTunes DRM hack
November 24, 2003
Joined by Jon Johansen, the Norwegian programmer responsible for distributing DVD-cracking code in late 1999, the programmers say their "PyMusique" software is a "fair" interface for iTunes, primarily aimed at allowing people who use the Linux operating system to purchase music from Apple's store.

Jon Johansen
But with a Windows version of the software also available, it's likely to trigger a legal response from Apple, which has closely guarded access to its online music store and has depended on its copy-protection software to gain rights to sell music online.
In an interview late Friday, one of the program's creators, 17-year-old Pennsylvania high school student Cody Brocious, said the ability to save songs without copy protection was essentially an accident derived from the way Apple's system downloads songs. He said the software wasn't intended to harm Apple.
"The intent of the project was to be able to purchase files from the iTunes Music Store," Brocious said. "I believe very firmly that the project is ethical and does nothing but good for the community at large."
Apple representatives had no immediate comment on the software.
The PyMusique release is the latest and most ambitious skirmish in a long-running battle between Apple and hackers intent on removing digital-rights management from the company's songs. As the most popular online music store, Apple has helped prove that consumers will purchase copy-protected songs but also has been a test case for whether that copy-protection can sustain attacks.
The release draws from the work of a handful of scattered programmers over the past year who have successively identified how different pieces of the iTunes software works.
Brocious said he started his project after hearing of another programmer's work creating a Web-based interface to the iTunes store.
He and other programmers found that the iTunes store downloads songs wrapped in encryption, but that music purchasers are given the key to unlock that encryption when they buy a song. Ordinarily, the iTunes software would then rewrap the song in Apple's FairPlay digital rights management software, he says--but with their Linux version, that separate step didn't turn out to be necessary.
The result was a song that had been paid for and downloaded, but lacked the copy protections Apple's store ordinarily provides.
Brocious, who has left his most recent development on the software to another programmer, said he hasn't been contacted by Apple and
See more CNET content tagged:
PyMusique, copy protection, programmer, online music, song




The AAC format, at least according to some digital music store reviews and compatability charts, seems to be privvy to Apple for the moment.
ATRAC3 (the proprietary Sony format) seems to be in the same boat through the Sony Connect Music Store. The RAX format (used by Real Player) is also applicable here.
I think Apple is going to start crying about it and bring yet another needless injunction against DVD Jon.
If it's computer-driven, it can be hacked. Apple knew this going into the market so they can't really blame anybody but themselves for this problem. I'll stick with Sony and Real.
This is much faster than burn a CD. If you read the comments in some of Jon's code, he gives his reason for do it. The jist of it is he wants to show how flawed DRM is. There also seem to be some disappointment in Apple for caving the recording industries DRM demands, but that's my interpretation. I don't see what difference it makes in how your break DRM, by burning a CD or using this software. The end result is still the same, an unprotected copy.
"and it is one of the least restrictive forms of DRM."
The restriction on the DRM encumbered songs can be changed without notice and those restriction can be applied retroactively. They maybe the least restrictive now, but nothing is certain. I wouldn't under estimate the recording industries greed.
The restriction on the DRM encumbered songs can be changed
without notice and those restriction can be applied retroactively.
They maybe the least restrictive now, but nothing is certain. I
wouldn't under estimate the recording industries greed.""
so why is this loser targeting Apple? He should spend his useless
skills lobbying the recording industry if he feels this strongly
against DRM.
this only makes WMA's DRM seem more attractive. way to give
an even bigger/scarier -- and soon to have their hand in every
media DRM -- company more footing. this guy is a "real hero."
thanks to his tireless efforts, i'm not going to be able to buy a
DVD that will play on any future systems because they're going
to load DVDs, CDs and mp3 with more and more crap every time
he needs his little ego stroked. this guy is making my life and
future media purchases more difficult.
If the purpose is to show how flawed DRM is, then all that will be accomplished by this ******* is more restrictive DRM and aiding Microsoft with their DRM garbage.
I am even more inclined to think it could be done is the one lawyer mentioned in the article seemed to think it was something this kids lawyer should be worried about.
There is also extradition. I don't know if it has ever been used for something like this, but that is a possibility too.
Robert
a little DRM.
"Fair Use" does not explicitly give anyone the right to have a 'backup' copy of their music, movies, games, et cetera. Fair Use makes few explicit exceptions and everything else must be put to a four point test to determine if the case qualifies.
Feel free to have a look at it yourself:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/17/chapters/1/sections/section%5F107.html
There is no recent case law which sets a precedent under Fair Use stating end users have the right to make backup copies of media they paid for. In fact, under DMCA and subsequent revisions to copyright law, it's illegal to bypass ANY copyright protection (17 USC 1201) which means you can't claim Fair Use if another part of the process was deemed illegal.
No, I don't agree with copyright law as it stands but, frankly, I'm sick of this belief that people have these "rights" when, in fact, there is no legal precedent which sets such a right and the law plainly says otherwise.
IMO, to win the battle to get more consumer friendly copyright laws, we have to be knowledgable about how the law is currently set up.
- Avoid personal attacks
- by pencoyd March 21, 2005 9:20 AM PST
- Please keep your disagreements civil. Personal attacks are not permitted.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(36 Comments)Not coincidentally, they don't strengthen an argument.
Thanks for participating.
John Roberts
CNET News.com product development