Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ITunes “album only” tracks are now DRM-protected

livven.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 52 posts

Re: ITunes “album only” tracks are now DRM-protected

#41

Post by fijal »

pretoriusB wrote: post #39
aes256 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I want a copy of an album, I can go to iTunes/Amazon/etc. and download the copy they offer, in a format I don't really want, encoded at 256kbps or similar. I have no idea what happened behind the scenes; which version of the album I'm downloading, what the source material was, how it was transferred from the source to their systems, so on and so forth. Alternatively, I can go to a not-so-legitimate website, and be…

> Alternatively, I can go to a not-so-legitimate website, and be presented with 10+ different versions of the same album (originals, remastered editions, reissues, international releases, vinyl rips, etc.), each of which is typically available in all the popular formats (FLAC, MP3 320kbps, V0, V2, etc.) I can plump for the FLAC, along with which I will often get high resolution scans of the source material, as well a…

have you ever tried living outside of the united states of america or europe? most content owners or distributors (music, books, movies) will tell you "fuck you, you're too far and too small for us to bother". Anything but blockbusters that I don't watch (pirated or not) is not even in theaters. Presented with the alternative pirate-or-don't-watch, I for one choose to pirate.

Re: ITunes “album only” tracks are now DRM-protected

#42

Post by meaty »

entropy_ wrote: post #32
meaty wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just pirate it then. To be honest, I download the track elsewhere always and pay for it if I think it's worth it and delete it if it's not. You can't tell much from a 30 second clip most of the time, especially when the motivation is still to produce albums filled with padding (shit). They need to just release singles and do away with the whole album principle. As for quality - if you want that, you need to buy the d…

I honestly like the album format. But then, that's because most artists I really like tend to have coherent albums that are best listened to as a whole(eg, Pink Floyd or Dream Theater). I agree that for most music the album format doesn't make sense. But for some, a set of 5 minute singles just doesn't do it for me, I like longer pieces that all tie in together.

I'll give you that for pink Floyd :)

Perhaps they should ship as one mp3 with a cue file?

Re: ITunes “album only” tracks are now DRM-protected

#43

Post by aes256 »

pretoriusB wrote: post #39
aes256 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I want a copy of an album, I can go to iTunes/Amazon/etc. and download the copy they offer, in a format I don't really want, encoded at 256kbps or similar. I have no idea what happened behind the scenes; which version of the album I'm downloading, what the source material was, how it was transferred from the source to their systems, so on and so forth. Alternatively, I can go to a not-so-legitimate website, and be…

> Alternatively, I can go to a not-so-legitimate website, and be presented with 10+ different versions of the same album (originals, remastered editions, reissues, international releases, vinyl rips, etc.), each of which is typically available in all the popular formats (FLAC, MP3 320kbps, V0, V2, etc.) I can plump for the FLAC, along with which I will often get high resolution scans of the source material, as well a…

> Yeah man. That's the spirit. I propose everybody does that to the digital things you sell too, if they don't find the format, the price or any service detail conventient.

I'm not foolish enough to be in the IP business.

Re: ITunes “album only” tracks are now DRM-protected

#44

Post by meaty »

Kudos wrote: post #21
meaty wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just pirate it then. To be honest, I download the track elsewhere always and pay for it if I think it's worth it and delete it if it's not. You can't tell much from a 30 second clip most of the time, especially when the motivation is still to produce albums filled with padding (shit). They need to just release singles and do away with the whole album principle. As for quality - if you want that, you need to buy the d…

The clips have been 90 seconds for a long time.

Usually the worst 90 second example which is my point.

Re: ITunes “album only” tracks are now DRM-protected

#45

Post by Livven »

ubernostrum wrote: post #24
meaty wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes I was there then - in fact I had a load of DRM'ed tracks from iTunes back when I owned an iPod. Why would you trust Apple not to do it though? They haven't exactly been trustworthy on any front over the years.

Two odd things: 1. The report is only that the files have the 'm4p' extension. There seems to be no-one confirming that the files actually have DRM, just that they have the extension the old DRM'd files used to have. 2. Reports of people being able to convert to m4a from within iTunes. A DRM system that has a "remove the DRM from this file" option... isn't DRM. Which makes me wonder whether they're just the same norm…

Indeed, see the update. It's just a fle extension mistake.

Re: ITunes “album only” tracks are now DRM-protected

#46

Post by akandiah »

No, it's not DRM protected!

There is an update to the article:

Update 26 December, 12:12 UTC: You can simply rename the extension from .m4p to .m4a and the file will play fine. There appears to be no DRM at all. I have no idea why Apple would do this since many apps and devices don’t recognize the .m4p extension, which only leads to unnecessary confusion (and posts like this), but whatever.

Re: ITunes “album only” tracks are now DRM-protected

#48

Post by jrockway »

aes256 wrote: post #37
brador wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Illegal activity is okay if it's convenient? come on. In the end, they created the product. Under US law, they have the right to sell it any way they like. They could charge $10000 per digital download and load it with DRM. If you don't like the rules, don't buy the product, that's the choice. But please don't play the victim and justify what you're doing with a "it's their fault for dressing too damn sexy".

This is a discussion about service issues in the legal music download sector. I'm only referring to 'alternative' means of acquiring music as a benchmark to elucidate these service issues. I'm not interested in justifying copyright infringement, and I have better things to do than get dragged into that tired old debate.

Whenever a comment compares copyright infringement to rape, it's probably best to not respond to it. Nobody takes the argument seriously and it's only there to make you mad.

Re: ITunes “album only” tracks are now DRM-protected

#49

Post by Samuel_Michon »

Livven wrote: post #45
ubernostrum wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two odd things: 1. The report is only that the files have the 'm4p' extension. There seems to be no-one confirming that the files actually have DRM, just that they have the extension the old DRM'd files used to have. 2. Reports of people being able to convert to m4a from within iTunes. A DRM system that has a "remove the DRM from this file" option... isn't DRM. Which makes me wonder whether they're just the same norm…

Indeed, see the update. It's just a fle extension mistake.

That makes absolutely no sense. Apple wants us to buy music, it's not going to deliberately serve us the worst parts of a song so that we can't judge whether to buy it.

Re: ITunes “album only” tracks are now DRM-protected

#50

Post by FuzzyDunlop »

brador wrote: post #34
aes256 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I want a copy of an album, I can go to iTunes/Amazon/etc. and download the copy they offer, in a format I don't really want, encoded at 256kbps or similar. I have no idea what happened behind the scenes; which version of the album I'm downloading, what the source material was, how it was transferred from the source to their systems, so on and so forth. Alternatively, I can go to a not-so-legitimate website, and be…

Illegal activity is okay if it's convenient? come on. In the end, they created the product. Under US law, they have the right to sell it any way they like. They could charge $10000 per digital download and load it with DRM. If you don't like the rules, don't buy the product, that's the choice. But please don't play the victim and justify what you're doing with a "it's their fault for dressing too damn sexy".

The point I take from it is that there's a clear demand for something that isn't being met. This is presumably because the industry prefers to focus on lobbying and litigation, and, to paraphrase, won't negotiate with pirates.

I also disagree with your point about playing the victim, because with the current state of affairs, legitimate consumers are the victim. They're the victim of criminalisation by private companies, who choose to employ all sorts of tactics to stop piracy, all of which affect the legitimate customer more than the pirate.

Post reply on HN