iTunes - Playback Restrictions Cracked?

[mmhmm.]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/ptech/10/24/ipod.code.ap/index.html?eref=rss_tech

Apparently the "hacker known for cracking the copy-protection technology in DVDs claims to have unlocked the playback restrictions of Apple Computer Inc.'s iPod and iTunes music products and plans to license his code to others."

The Bottom Line:
1.) If successful, you don't have to rely on iTunes, you can buy your music from other sources that Apple doesn't support and put it on your iPod
2.) Unlike Johansen's (the hacker) previous work, the technology probably will not be posted for free, you have to pay for it
3.) This guy could be in for a major lawsuit by Apple, so he is taking advice from attorneys who seem to have given them the "green light"

Hm, what do you think about this?

[Neurotic2]

he must of been bored.

[N!ck]

I seriously doubt that you will have to pay for the software that he created. Also he "claims" to have unlocked the playback restrictions. I believe that he has, since from the age of 15 he has been doing that sort of stuff. He thought that the software for his dad's digital camera (at age 15) was a load of rubbish, and was extremely flawed, so he created his own program for his dad to use, which was much better than what came with the camera.

This software that he has created will work both ways, letting music purchased via iTunes play on other portable devices, and also letting you put music unsuported by Apple onto your iPod. He did this by using "reverse engineering" to crack Apple's encriptions, similar to what he did to DVD encriptions, which made him known as "DVD Jon".

[summer]

I don't see what the big deal is.

[mmhmm.]

I don't see what the big deal is.
iunno, personally i dont have an iPod, but i thought it was pretty interestin

i guess the big deal would be that Apple would no longer get all the money from downloads for the iPod.

[Kymux]

I think in the long term if this goes through this could be a BIG buster for Apple. It's one thing to just download movies etc but to rip them from a site and host them in other businesses is just plain tight. Apple put the security there for a reason. They should stay there and that man should go out and buy a life..

[Blue]

I think in the long term if this goes through this could be a BIG buster for Apple. It's one thing to just download movies etc but to rip them from a site and host them in other businesses is just plain tight. Apple put the security there for a reason. They should stay there and that man should go out and buy a life..

hear hear i totaly agree

[Mentor]

All hes doing is giveing consumers there rights. When you buy somthing, you exspect to have control over it. If you buy a mircowave and then find out you can only cook one brand of food with it, youd think its a rip of, thats all DRM is "/ If you buy music, you exspect to be able to play it where ever you like, what ever mp3 player, on your computer, on a CD. not just on Apples products.
DRM is an afront to consumer rights, which is probably why his layer gave him a green light "/

[N!ck]

Apple put the security there for a reason. They should stay there and that man should go out and buy a life..

I reckon they put it there to try and monopolise the legal music download industy, since they made a poduct thet they knew would probably be popular and then made it so people could only use them in the future. Apple would have been thinking "If people buy all their music thrugh iTunes, then we will make even more money since they will then have to keep buying iPods to make use of it $$$"

Also who's to say that man has no life?

[alexxxxx]

What angers me about DRM is that people who PAY for music get LESS rights, while people who STEAL music get MORE.

Oh and getting Napster next week! =] =] =]

[G-Unot]

What angers me about DRM is that people who PAY for music get LESS rights, while people who STEAL music get MORE.

Oh and getting Napster next week! =] =] =]

People who steal records have no rights at all. But I know what you mean.

And for those of you who obviously don't know, you can easily transfer music obtained from another source onto iTunes, thus being able to put it on your iPod.

[laurenx]

I bought some songs from itunes today, ahh well.

[alexxxxx]

I reckon they put it there to try and monopolise the legal music download industy, since they made a poduct thet they knew would probably be popular and then made it so people could only use them in the future. Apple would have been thinking "If people buy all their music thrugh iTunes, then we will make even more money since they will then have to keep buying iPods to make use of it $$$"

Also who's to say that man has no life?

Don't blame it on Apple though, other music stores do the same, so music bought from there doesnt work on iPods.

[Mentor]

Don't blame it on Apple though, other music stores do the same, so music bought from there doesn't work on iPods.

how does that mean you shouldn't blame apple? apple is still just as much to blame for limiting consumer rights with DRM. The fact there not the only one to blame, doesnt lesson the blame on them "/

Its the same thing as the TV's that wont let you change channel or fast forward dureing adverts, or the DVD's that dont play on computers "/

[mmhmm.]

Don't blame it on Apple though, other music stores do the same, so music bought from there doesnt work on iPods.

i disagree..

apple came up with their own format to work on the iPod right? they made the iPod so that only that format would work. so how is it other company's fault? mp3 and wma format are widely used, and if Apple doesnt allow it to work, its Apple's fault.