Announcement

**Jessterw** · 17 May 2007, 08:52

If this doesn't help further prod the other labels towards similar agreements, I'm not sure what will.

Hopefully Amazon executes this better than their abysmal movie service.

**ND66** · 7 June 2007, 06:48

Sounds too good to be true? Could there be a catch?

'DRM-free' iTunes songs raise concerns

SAN JOSE, California (AP) -- Apple Inc.'s recent rollout of songs without copy protection software at its iTunes Store has given consumers new flexibility, but questions have emerged over the company's inclusion of personal data in purchased music tracks.

Are the songs that are being billed as free of so-called digital rights management technology really "DRM-free" or are there still strings attached?

The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a consumer watchdog group, said the embedded user information in the purchased track raises privacy issues.

Apple declined to comment.

The trendsetting Cupertino-based company has always embedded user information -- a user name and e-mail -- into its copy-protected tracks. But until the market-leading iTunes Store began offering DRM-free music last week, no one raised much of a ruckus.

DRM technology puts a sort of software lock on digital songs or movies, dictating where and how the content can be played and distributed. With DRM-free content, some songs purchased from iTunes now work directly on portable players other than Apple's iPod, including Microsoft Corp.'s Zune.

Though piracy of digital music over the Internet remains unabated even with the growth of legitimate online retailers like iTunes, Apple's debut of DRM-free songs could tempt some of its users to share their purchased tracks with others online.

Technology blogs Ars Technica and The Unofficial Apple Weblog were among the first to reveal that personal data remained in the unrestricted iTunes tracks. Their reports last week prompted speculation that the data could be used to trace copies uploaded to online file-sharing networks back to the people who originally purchased the tracks, opening those users to music industry copyright lawsuits.

The Recording Industry Association of America, whose piracy lawsuits have ensnared organized outfits as well as individual grandmothers and youths, declined to comment. EMI Group PLC, the major record label behind Apple's inaugural batch of DRM-free songs, also declined to comment.

"DRM prevented us from playing the music we have purchased on all of our devices. We asked that this be removed and we got what we were looking for," said Erica Sadun, a prolific technology blogger on TUAW.com and author who conducted her own tests of Apple's embedded identification tags.

"But I'm on the fence in terms of the privacy issues," she said in an interview. "Consumers should always know what they're getting into."

The Electronic Frontier Foundation, which also analyzed the DRM-free song files on iTunes, said it did not want to jump to any conclusions on Apple's reasons for embedding the personal data.

Besides, users can remove their identifying data from the files simply by burning the tracks to a CD and then ripping the songs back to their computer in the MP3 format, said Fred Von Lohmann, an attorney with the San Francisco-based group.

Still, the group takes issue with the fact that the personal information stored in these type of song files is not encrypted. If someone were to lose their iPod or have their laptop stolen, for example, anyone using simple software tools could access the personal data in the songs, von Lohmann suggested.

"It just seems careless and unwise for somebody like Apple to start planting this kind of personal information without protection in the files," von Lohmann said. "It's not as bad as leaking your credit card number or your Social Security number, but it's still a pretty careless security leak."

Michael Gartenberg, an analyst at JupiterResearch, said he does not think Apple planned to use the personal data as a secretive tracking tool.

"I think it's more of a way of retaining a proof of purchase," he said, adding how the identifying tags on copy-protected tracks likely facilitated Apple's ability to approve user upgrades to previous song purchases.

"'DRM-free' means I'm not restricted from putting the songs on other devices anymore, but it doesn't give users a license for piracy," he said.

Ultimately, whether it's intentional or just an inadvertent deterrent for the illegal sharing of digital tunes, Gartenberg predicts other major online music retailers will similarly embed user tags once they, too, start to introduce DRM-free songs.

"I think everyone is going to have to do this as some way for tracking purchases," he said.

Sadun agreed.

"It's a brilliant compromise," she said, "between the forces of the music industry which have been too heavy handed and the forces of consumers who perhaps have pulled too far toward information freedom."

Online music retailer eMusic.com, which sells songs in the unrestricted MP3 format mostly from independent labels, says it keeps of a record of user purchases on its own computer servers but doesn't place any kind of user data in any of its tracks sold.

Apple should be more upfront about its purpose for the embedded information, said David Pakman, eMusic's chief executive. "You should tell customers what you're doing with it before they spend money with you," he said.

Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Find this article at:

Error

http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/internet/06/05/apple.itunes.plus.ap/index.html

Error

**Jessterw** · 7 June 2007, 07:57

Except that very same information is present in the DRM files as well. It's just part of the iTunes Store's delivery system and, I have no doubt, to keep would be casual file traders honest.

This is almost as bad as those griping that the higher quality DRM-free files don't sound that much better than the 128 kbps DRM-laden files. As if all the comparisons of the various encodings at various bit rates over the years never happened.

**Paulr** · 20 June 2007, 03:31

Give people an inch and they will take a mile.
This is the whole reason behind DRM in the first place.
When I was at school many years ago everyone swapped music on tapes.
When I eventually moved into computers and we saw the birth of CD's and eventually CD writers for home etc people swapped - no media circus.

Even when the Internet became popular there was no media circus about illegal file sharing.
So connections were slow, but it was still possible to do.
Then along came Napster and their "Yer, swap your music large scale" and everything kicked off.
And so it's been a fight ever since.
If people hadn't taken the pi** I'm sure we wouldn't have the hassle we have now.

I for one fully support the embedding of information into a file if it is going to be DRM free.
To me a DRM file is a slight inconvenience.
However with DRM free I can have it on my machine, my wife can listen to it, we can have it on a home server.
Burn a copy onto CD for the car, the wife and me can have it on our iPods etc.
If the copy of the track we bought leaks out then it can only have been my fault and I deserve to be found and charged with illegally sharing the track.
The anti-DRM brigade have been moaning because they claim that DRM files restrict their legal use of the file.
Now that hurdle is being removed there are still complaints - makes me wonder just how many of those people were using the "Restricts my legal use of the file" as an excuse and are now looking for something else.
If you aren't illegally sharing the files then the fact the file contains your identity so to speak shouldn't be an issue to you as you'll be the only one using it...

Announcement

DRM free @ Amazon

DRM free @ Amazon

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment