Hackers build backdoor into iTunes

(continued from previous page)

hasn't talked to a lawyer. Because PyMusique doesn't actually break through Apple's copy protection, the programmers have predicted in previous blog postings that the software is legal.

Apple's iTunes terms of service do seem to disallow any unauthorized access, however.

"You will not access the service by any means other than through software that is provided by Apple for accessing the service," the iTunes terms of service says.

Annette Hurst, a San Francisco copyright attorney, said the software appeared to cross legal lines. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act, or DMCA, bars software that "avoids" or "bypasses" antipiracy mechanisms, she said.

"Those are pretty broad words," she said. "I would be very concerned about this if I were their lawyer.

A test of the PyMusique software showed that it did allow the purchase of songs from iTunes, and that the songs were saved in the unprotected AAC digital music format rather than in Apple's protected Fairplay format. Songs could not be downloaded without establishing an iTunes account and paying the ordinary price for the music.

Apple's rights-management software already allows iTunes customers to burn the songs they buy to CDs, which can themselves be ripped into unprotected MP3 files.

Johansen said the work is specific to Apple's store, and would not be easily applied to other download stores such as those operated by Napster and Microsoft.

"I can't say whether it's possible without looking into it first," Johansen said in an e-mail. "The iTunes Music Store sells files in a open format--AAC--which is what makes it attractive."

Johansen said that two other programmers, Travis Watkins and Brocious, had done much of the work on the Linux software, while he had developed the Windows version.

The Norwegian programmer has been a constant thorn in the side of the entertainment industry for more than half a decade, as the most public face among programmers testing the power of rights-management protections.

As a teenager in 1999, he worked with other still-anonymous programmers to create and release software called DeCSS, which allowed Linux-based computers to play DVDs, but that could also be used to copy the movies. That action led to years of legal battles in which Hollywood studios and their allies sued Web sites and software makers trying to keep the DeCSS code offline and off store shelves.

That legal strategy was successful; judges in the United States ruled that the code was illegal to distribute or sell. Nevertheless, DVD-ripping programs remain widely available online.

Johansen himself was prosecuted in Norway as a result of his work on DeCSS, but was ultimately acquitted.

The programmer has since turned his attention to Apple's iTunes store, studying the interior workings of the software and coming up with tools that can help strip the copy protection off purchased songs. The PyMusique release is related, but not directly dependent on his earlier work, Johansen said.

Why?

What I don't understand is why? iTunes downloads can be burned onto CD's, and it is one of the least restrictive forms of DRM. So as far as Fair Use is concerned, I have more of an issue with copy protected CD's that can't be uploaded into iTunes to begin with.

[WarpKat]

Agreed

The DRM is defeated by burning the protected music to CD and the back into MP3 format.

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.

[lingsun]

Because burning & reripping degrades the music quality

Because burning & reripping degrades the music quality. Because I want to be able to sell one computer and transfer my purchased music to another without going through all the hassles that Apple wants to put you through. That's why I buy songs on Rhapsody when I can. Music is burned to CD as a CD audio track when it's purchased.

I will tell you why

You can download nicely using a Windows and Apple computer but what about us Linux users? DVD Jon did this for the same reason as he did DECSS to watch DVD's on Linux. Notice he released the source code and not a Linux version, won't take long for one of us to come up with a linux version, especially since it is written in Python :)

[bobby_brady]

I thought of that myself

What is the point when you can save it to CDR which rips out the infested DRM crap.

[unknown unknown]

Reply

"What I don't understand is why? iTunes downloads can be burned onto CD's"

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.

[muntz]

no better than a bulk spammer

" "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.""

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.

Why Not Attack WMA Then?

"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."

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.

[tocam27]

DMCA?

Why should a guy in Norway give a (insert explitive here) about the DMCA? As long as he stays out of the US that law has absolutely no teeth abroad. He may have violated a software agreement and, I suppose, he could be sued but not under US law, they'd have to make sure he broke a norwegian law.

Actually...

Actually you maybe not quite correct. It would all depend on treaties the US has with the country in question. I know our government has worked to hard to enforce our copyright laws in other countries and their may very well be treaties that would allow such a law suite. It might not be easy or cheap but it could be possible.

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

[cwxpffkd]

Fair use

DVD Jon cited fair use when he helped crack the DVD to play DVDs on Linux. And he again cites it when he helped crack AAC. He is right too. Even if this nations lobbied government, the record or movie industry does not agree, so be it. We want to watch DVD movies we rent or purchase on the platform of our choice. I would like to make a personal copy as well. And we do not want limits on music we purchase.

[muntz]

dude

don't lump everyone in with your views. not all users care about
a little DRM.

[unknown unknown]

Reply

I have to agree with J Muntz (at least in part), you should really avoid using "we" because as J Muntz pointed there are those don't agree.

"Fair Use!" - The battlecry for the misinformed.

All due respect, Heath, but "Fair Use" is the battlecry for the misinformed.

"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.

[Jeff Putz]

I don't get it

First off I can't say that the iTunes DRM has ever got in the way of anything for me. Second, I get the impression from this article that the actual assignment of the file to the user takes place on the client. That seems kind of stupid to me.

[David Arbogast]

Interface will be Killed. Possible law suit.

My prediction is that Apple will shut this down fairly quickly. The question remaining, is whether they will prosecute this guy for some type of criminal action. They absolutely have the legal right to shut down his interface, and if they can show that the release of unprotected files stressed their relationship with content providers, they may be able to sue for damages as well. This was not a very smart move without the blessing of Apple. Whether you like DRM or not, this guy is getting himself in some hot water.

[pencoyd]

Avoid personal attacks

Please keep your disagreements civil. Personal attacks are not permitted.

Not coincidentally, they don't strengthen an argument.

Thanks for participating.

John Roberts
CNET News.com product development