Comments on: iTunes 4 + iLeech = Napster

iTunes 4 + iLeech = Napster

capndesign — Wed, 14 May 2003 10:16:19 -0800

iTunes 4 + iLeech = Napster. iTunes can stream songs over the internet right now. With iLeech or iTunesDL (direct download link, no info available) you can download files from other iTunes 4 users. With ShareiTunes and Spymac Music you can search for available iTunes libraries. Now you have access to hundreds of thousands of songs. Will this mean big trouble for Apple or were they planning for this?

By: msacheson

msacheson — Wed, 14 May 2003 10:27:01 -0800

Jason Kottke has a good take and discussion on this today. My wife is much more experienced with music downloads (and has an iPod), but my opinion is that Apple is safe from the RIAA. Napster was tiny and easy to attack. Apple is established, smart and has many supporters.

By: stevenf

stevenf — Wed, 14 May 2003 10:51:25 -0800

A couple of notes: If I'm not mistaken, when playing shared libraries, iTunes skips over music purchased from the Music Store. If you double-click on a purchased track specifically, you will be asked to authorize your computer, as if you had copied the track to your computer directly and tried to play it. I've also heard that iTunes kills any process that tries to "pause" its process (presumably to insert foreign code) -- which supposedly defeats applications like Audio Hijack. But, all that aside, non-DRM'ed files are still ripe for iLeeching.

By: machaus

machaus — Wed, 14 May 2003 11:15:50 -0800

a third tool, islurp.

By: mcwetboy

mcwetboy — Wed, 14 May 2003 11:16:28 -0800

I use a Taurus as a getaway car after robbing a bank. Will this mean big trouble for Ford, or were they planning for this?

By: bravada

bravada — Wed, 14 May 2003 11:28:24 -0800

I don't see where the increased liablity for Apple is. OS X was capable of sharing the iTunes library before iTunes 4 came along. The built-in web sever can do it with a small addition to the configuration. File sharing can also be used. The user must take action to share files with all of these mechanisms including iTunes 4.

By: ehintz

ehintz — Wed, 14 May 2003 11:58:42 -0800

It's still early adopter phase, the numbers probably aren't big enough for the RIAA to care yet. An added advantage is the relatively small number of mac users vs pcs, even large percentages of the mac market won't hold a candle to napster in its heyday. As long as it stays low key, the RIAA will probably leave it alone, especially with the music store thing doing quite well. But if it ever reaches the adoption level of napster I expect Software Update will pop up with a new version that closes the hole(and we'll be right back to the same old DRM vs Creative Determined Developers gig)...

By: pascal

pascal — Wed, 14 May 2003 12:42:01 -0800

stevenf - Audio Hijack works just fine with iTunes4. I just tried it myself to verify this. My understanding is that Audio Hijack does not need to "insert foreign code" into applications that it wants to record from - it relies on the standard capabilities of OS X's audio APIs to do it's job - which is why it works with just about everything.

By: aladfar

aladfar — Wed, 14 May 2003 13:26:58 -0800

As Kottke suggests, Apple developers are not at all stupid. I cannot believe that this easily exploited loophole was some sort of oversight. But I also don't believe that it's a calculated effort to stump for file sharing in general. Instead, it's an effort to corner the market (so to speak) on an emerging digital music format. It's all very Machiavellian. The ultimate solution for music companies? Stop publishing music on antiquated discs, and start pushing your tunes exclusively through Apple's iTunes music store - the DRM features of Apple AAC files are extremely offputting to potential pirates. That people are trading MP3 files via iTunes itself - something which had to be forseen by Jobs and Apple programmers - only makes AAC files all the more desirable.

By: alms

alms — Wed, 14 May 2003 14:09:49 -0800

Shouldn't this be called iSuck?

By: alms

alms — Wed, 14 May 2003 19:13:48 -0800

It is with regret that I am shutting down my site... I cannot, in good conscience, continue to provide a service which will facilitate the theft of copyrighted material.

By: Steve_at_Linnwood

Steve_at_Linnwood — Wed, 14 May 2003 21:39:27 -0800

"It sounds as if it is a hole in the security that needs to be closed, I don't know what Apple can do to achieve that, but I would certainly hope that they would take steps immediately to address this issue." - Cary Ramos, an attorney for the National Music Publishers Assn., in referance to simply shareing (or streaming) music via iTunes 4. As well as iTunesDataBase, as alms points out, SpyMac has also closed it's music site.

By: ejunek

ejunek — Wed, 14 May 2003 22:20:50 -0800

I always thought the idea was that having a service such as Apple has provided was to provide people with an affordable way to support the artists. (Although I know most of the money is still going to the record companies) By leeching you're not only stealing from the record companies/artists, you're stealing from people who paid hard-earned money for that music. Is a buck really too much to ask?

By: fnord_prefect

fnord_prefect — Thu, 15 May 2003 02:05:53 -0800

The ultimate solution for music companies? Stop publishing music on antiquated discs, and start pushing your tunes exclusively through Apple's iTunes music store - the DRM features of Apple AAC files are extremely offputting to potential pirates. Yeah sure. Because more people own macs than own cheap portable CD players. /sarcasm

By: mathowie

mathowie — Tue, 27 May 2003 15:06:42 -0800

...and the hole has been closed.