This is why I purchase my online tunes from Amazon.com's store. No DRM, and twice the bitrate of standard itunes.
Apple Threatens To Shut Down iTunes Store?
- Thread starter Mr. Laser Beam
- Start date
Opps sorry, I should have typed better. I just downloaded a pirate video file from apple. It was a digital file not a hard copy. ANd I have no idea how the guy did it, the first few times it didn't work (as it did tyr and confirm withitunes, but it finally did work. Frankly it was more trouble then it was worth.
At least with the audio you can (again its not as easy as just dragging the files to the cd image and ripping your copy, but it isn't hard. But once you do it, DM free.
I don't understand how they could keep just the DRM server running if the whole rest of the store shut down.
What if I back-up my library to DVDs? I have A LOT of iTunes tunes on my computer. Burning them to a CD will be extremely tedious.
Can you burn music as tracks to a DVD?
AFAIK, no, you can't.
Why can't you. Once you do the process to get rid of the DRM why wouldn't you beable to make a DVD after that?
Well, they could. It's two separate functions. Well, more than two. They could probably selectively turn on and off every function of the iTMS. Video, Music, HD, Podcast, and, yes, DRM verification.
What I was suggesting was not copying the .mp3s to a DVD, but actually writing audio tracks. Basically, making a normal audio CD but on a DVD instead. The obvious advantage would be that you could have a disc with hundreds of songs instead of just the 70 minute limit.
You can using easily obtained software. It copies it from your ipod, strips the DRM and then supes it back as an MP4 file. I have it on my home Mac but never used it because I just buy DVD's then run tem through handbrake to get digital versions.
Regardless - I applaud Apple for being honest about making a profit. Just because something is successful is no reason to gut it tagalongs. I think folks in Norway ay find that out when Apple locks the out. The Norwegian government (along with other EU states) wants to force Apple to open iTunes to all MP3 players.
Excuse me but iTunes is Apple support software for an Apple made product - the iPod. Each part reinforces the other. Apple should not have to deal woth other products from companies that could have just as easily opened a music store. Consumers chose Apple knowing the limitation, that was their choice.
Indeed. This is a lot of hysteria over a simple negotiating tactic.
Rii
Rear Admiral
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that your statement reflects a general aversion to antitrust legislation rather than blind Apple fanboyism. Apple's integration of iTMS and the iPod comes straight out of Monopolistic Practices 101.
First.
Second, if Apple wanted to they could have crippled the iPod and iTunes so you could only buy music from them - no MP3s, no CD ripping, no non-DRMed music at all.
Apple sell DRM-free music on their store when the music labels they work with allow it. Apple can't make Universal, for instance, sell DRM-free music if they don't want to. Universal want to change Apple's fixed price policy and add even more restrictive DRM - a move Apple has blocked at the risk of losing their music from the store.
Third, as I've said, the very notion that Apple is going to shut down the iTunes Store is ridiculous.
Rii
Rear Admiral
That wouldn't have been very smart, it would've prevented them from establishing their current preeminent position in the market in the first place. iPod was already the dominant player (in North America) when iTMS was introduced.
The damning thing here is Apple's refusal to license their FairPlay DRM to other hardware manufacturers and service vendors, all of whom would jump at the chance to give Apple money in exchange for the ability to offer iTMS and iPod-compatible products respectively. Apple could crush Microsoft and Sony's DRM ambitions in a heartbeat, unfortunately they know there's more money to be made in ensuring consumer lock-in than from technology licensing.
I'm inclined to believe that's because the record labels' contracts hold Apple responsible for any breach of FairPlay, even if Apple fixes it and one of their licensees is unwilling or unable to update their player. The reason I believe that is the Amazon MP3 store, where labels that won't allow Apple to sell their music DRM-free will, curiously, allow their music to be sold as unprotected MP3s.
The labels are not above restricting Apple just to restrict them. Especially if they think it will weaken Apple's position among music vendors and, thus, their negotiating position.
Rii
Rear Admiral
Someone should tell Steve Jobs that iTunes itself allows users to bypass FairPlay DRM. If FairPlay was about protecting music then iTunes wouldn't allow users to burn their songs to CD. FairPlay doesn't prevent leaks, it merely inconveniences users who have the temerity to consider something other than an iPod as their next DAP. Even the MPAA doesn't buy the argument that technology licensing increases the risk of compromise to unacceptable levels. See: Blu-Ray.
I will never pay for music that I can't do whatever I please with. (Well, unless of course it's on vinyl, in which case my options are limited) They can take their drm and shove it up their asses. And anyway, itunes songs have a bitrate of what, 128? I'm not paying for that.
The idea that Apple is forced by the labels to sell everything with DRM, as opposed to it being their own decision, is not one I can swallow. The fact that the same labels allow their music to be sold naked doesn't show evidence of a contract forcing Apple to do it; it shows that it's likely to be of their own volition. There have also been reports (which I can't find at the moment) of independent labels trying to go through iTMS DRM free and not being allowed to by Apple.
So I'm with Rii on this one. It looks pretty clear to me that Apple's goal here is less music protection and more keeping people locked to their hardware. Jobs has talked about how he apparently doesn't like DRM but the fact that his store is thick with it shows to me that he's talking the talk but not walking the walk.
The thinking is that the labels are forcing Apple to sell their music with DRM in order to get outlets like Amazon and Walmart a chance to catch up with non-DRM music. It's an artificial way to destroy the monopoly and create competition.
That said, Apple isn't exactly innocent here. It's clear that they are preventing apps for the iPhone/iTouch that allow people to download songs from Amazon directly to the phone. Because, why would you bother with the lame iTunes store when you can get cheaper, DRM free tracks from Amazon?
That said, Apple isn't exactly innocent here. It's clear that they are preventing apps for the iPhone/iTouch that allow people to download songs from Amazon directly to the phone. Because, why would you bother with the lame iTunes store when you can get cheaper, DRM free tracks from Amazon?