Exclusive Deal While supplies last, save 40% off over 40 iPhone 5 and iPhone 4/4S cases and chargers as well as Samsung S III cases at Kensington.com. Use coupon code 'SAVE40%' at checkout to receive this exclusive discount.      
toggle

AAPL Stock: 445.15 ( + 3.01 )

http://www.macnn.com/articles/03/05/23/legal.issues/

Legal issues with iTunes streaming, sharing

updated 01:45 am EDT, Fri May 23, 2003

 
", 0, 0);


The Baltimore Sun discusses the iTunes songs over the Internet and the various methods hackers devised to use the sharing function to download songs from one another's drives: "the Advanced Audio Coding file-compression format that Apple uses in its music store prevents large-scale streaming or downloading, as AAC-coded songs can only be played on three Macs authorized by the same user account. Streaming and downloading AAC-coded songs to strangers doesn't work."


by MacNN Staff

Post tools:

TAGS :

 industry
toggle

Comments

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0

    fine but

    if apple has made every effort to only stream via local network, there are no legal issues. the labels signed off on this one...making mountains from mole-hills here. sure all of this could be done before itunes 4 so whats the problem now exactly?

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0

    Simple

    Stream = good. Steal = bad. Following these simple rules are good for your karma and Apple. - KL

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0

    This is new?

    I don't see what the issue about streaming/sharing libraries is (music or otherwise). People have always been able to share files via file sharing. iTunes does this with music and makes it easy. While the sites that present one's iTunes shared music to some central server that many people access should be called into question, I see no problem with the music file-sharing feature itself.

    Also, the author's possibilities to fix (in his inappropriate words) the security hole, are flawed.
    1. I don't see how eliminating sharing would fix anything. People can still use filesharing without iTunes
    2. AAC only? You've got to be kidding me. That would be like MS pushing everyone to use WMA-only for Windows Media Player. Oh wait...
    3. This ties into the first. The sharing feature on the software isn't the problem. It's the sites that publically broadcast the libraries.
    4. I would trust software that can hijack programs and quit them. Where would it draw the line? I think it would be a serious liability to have something like that in the program.

    His idea about the full song streaming wouldn't work, because all that would be is a subscription streaming service. In that case, I assume people would subscribe to the service just to stream the audio and not buy it. (I mean, they could listen to the same song whenever they wanted to listen to it.)

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0

    re:This is new?

    >>I don't see what the issue about streaming/sharing libraries is (music or otherwise).


    You very obviously don not have any copywritten intellectual material published. You would feel different if your living relied on such revenues.

    -GB

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0

    FREE MUSIC

    If anybody wants free music - write your own!

    Please don't steal intellectual material.

    -GB

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0

    Copywritten?

    It's copyright and as such also copyrighted, not copywritten.

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0

    Not AAC. Protected AAC.


    I wish people would figure out that distinction.

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0

    AAC

    huh ? I thought there was a work around this AAC protection . Am i wrong ?

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0

    If you're not using...

    ...headphones, you are illegally sharing music with anyone who can hear it.


    " You very obviously don not have any copywritten intellectual material published. You would feel different if your living relied on such revenues."

    You are obviously missing the point. He is basically saying that there was filesharing before iTunes and if they disable it, there will be still be filesharing. He does say that lists allowing many people to have access to your collection is questionable, so its not like he is endorsing mass music distribution for free.

    Bottom line, if you don't have platinum discs on your wall, then you only BENEFIT if people "steal" your music. Most music careers die from UNDEREXPOSURE. And if you do have platinum discs on your walls, then you can afford to have some people get your music for free. Is it really gonna hurt you to not have enough money for that 4th Bentley? Besides, your label is taking a lot more profit on your music than you are and if you can actually PERFORM LIVE then you can wheel yourself a sweet concert deal and add another zero to your income next year. Think about that for a second. People are willing to spend up to $100 and sometimes more to go to a concert of an artist they stole music from. Maybe if they had never stolen music, they would never have gone to the concert. s***, is this so hard to figure out?

    Anway, back on topic. The idea of trything to hijack the rogue software wouldn't work unless it was built into the MacOS itself. I mean how long would you take to figure out that iTunes was making your pirating software crash? Then you just don't run iTunes while you use it.

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0

    on streaming

    >>You very obviously don not have any copywritten intellectual material published. You would feel different if your living relied on such revenues.

    I do have copyrighted material. I have no problem streaming it over any local networks I may come by. While iTunes may be able to stream music, the maximum amount of connections can be made is 5 (search, Apple's Knowlege Base, it's there). That's no more than, like the guy said above, the amount of people who would hear it if I was playing it out loud on a speaker system.

    Now true, you may feel a little different, primarily because your income relies on your music, mine doesn't.

    Another question is, why does it seem like this is all of the sudden a new issue? There are hundreds of college students across America who set up shoutcast and other such streaming servers on their wintel boxes and broadcast all sorts of copyrighted material over their local networks in the form of "Radio Shows."

    These are just some things to ponder, i'm not trying to attack anyone. All i'm saying is that if we are going to have to deal with streaming music issues, then we have to deal with speaker systems too, because God forbid that someone hears your music who doesn't own it. If your really that worried, why not go after those freaks who put $5000 stereos in their $1000 car and crank it up all the way, they are the real reason that people can hear music they did not pay for. (rolls eyes, ;-))

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.

 
close
Photo
toggle

Network Headlines

toggle

Most Popular

MacNN Sponsor

Recent Reviews

MaxUpgrades MaxConnect for 2006-2008 Mac Pro

Nobody outside of Cupertino's privileged bunch knows the future of the Mac Pro line for sure. Despite Apple's reluctance to tell us wh ...

Brother HL-3170CDW LED Printer

We've mentioned before that we are far from a paperless society. For now, at least, there are tasks that require a piece of paper for ...

HTC One

It is hard to overstate just how critically important the HTC One is to the Taiwanese company’s fortunes. Despite its alarming decline ...

toggle

Most Commented