EFF Powered BluWiki Sues Apple: Leave Our iTunes Database Hacks Alone!
Apple Insider reports that the Electronic Freedom Foundation (EFF) is helping OdioWorks LLC file suit in an attempt to get Apple to stop threatening to sue them. Complicated much?
OdioWorks, which runs the free and open wiki service BluWiki, wants to bar Apple from repeatedly threatening its own legal action simply for letting BluWiki users host a wiki for iTunesDB, a project to learn about iTunes' database file system and create third-party software that can replicate the sync functionality of iTunes for iPhones and iPods without forcing users to run Apple's own media software. Over the course of several months, Apple has claimed the very existence of iTunesDB violates the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)'s rules on circumventing copyright locks and, in November, successfully frightened OdioWorks into taking down the wiki entries.
EFF says it's legal to hack code to increase competition -- i.e. to allow an iPhone to work outside of iTunes. Is it also legal to hack bank accounts and transfer large sums of money so my net worth is more competitive with Bill Gates?
Not the same thing, of course, just pointing out that while I'd personally love Apple to open-source more of their code, the way they've done with OpenCL, CardDAV, CalDAV, etc. it's still their code. As much as I don't want to live in a corporate-controlled world where big business owns the rights to math, I also don't want to live in a world where the over-entitled populace thinks they can take whatever they want. Because, if either side gets too extreme, what's to stop them from targeting me next?
Other than the fact that I've never made or hacked any code worth stealing or knowing...
Editor-in-Chief of iMore, Executive Producer at Mobile Nations, co-host of Iterate and ZEN and TECH, cook, grappler, photon wrangler.
| Tweet |
|
|
← Previously
MobileMe Hackery: Salma Hayek EditionLeave a Reply
Note: Comments must be civil, respectful, and on-topic. If a comment does not add to the conversation, if it contains spam advertising, or inappropriate language or content, it will be removed. Insulting the topic, author, staff, site, network, or other commenters will result in the comment being marked as spam and potential prevent future comments from appearing on the site. Do not post as a business or your comment will likely be confused with spam. Comments containing links may be held for moderation. Relax, enjoy, and share in the discussion.
Come on. Really? You can't see how a giant, wealthy company having the power to stop people from talking about a subject is bad for democracy? The First Amendment exists for a reason. Apple is clearly in breach here. I hope they are put back in their box.
Reverse engineering is legal, talking about things is legal, fair use is legal. As hard as Apple has fought to stop DRM, you might've gotten the idea that they were on the side of fair use and the little guy - totally true, as long as its not them on the other end of the reverse engineering, I guess. Apple is totally in the wrong here.
These scumbags need to be stopped. Apple needs it's own military branch. Where do I sign up?
Hey man, just stick to posting the news and links. You don't have to add 2 paragraphs of irrelevant banter to every post, it just makes you look uninformed.
@Rene where do these people like Josh come from? I like your banter it is half the reason I read every post even if I have no interest in the topic. Sometimes your banter will peak my interest in a topic. Anyway I just want to say keep up the good work and don't let fools discourage you. This is a blog not the AP.
Josh gets his humor from The Weather Channel.
@Loramar... You don't understand the 1st Amendment. It only applies to government action to quiet "speech" or "expression". Private companies do not have to abide by it. Hence the reason employers can set dress codes, set rules like no visible tatoos, etc.
Hacking electronics is the way we make things better. We don't live in a world where technology is naturally evolving. It's "hackers" making the device do different things in different ways. Let them do what they want, it's not like they stole millions of iPhones. Let human knowledge grow without limits.
Freedom of speech is an interesting topic: you can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater, you can't force the NY Times to print your letter (that's called editorial control, not censorship), you can't post privacy-invading nudie picks of your neighbor.
I'm not sure if you should be able to copy-protect math, or if you should be allowed to circumvent encryption that seeks to protect math, or if you should be able to publish how to do that. But I am interested in the arguments surrounding all sides of the issue.
As others have pointed out, reverse engineering isn't stealing. It isn't "hacking" in the sense that someone broke into a computer system. "Hacking" in this case is used as it should be, in the sense that they are exploring and investigating, learning, testing, etc.
Rene's short-sighted approach would leave us with far, far, far fewer products (which would be FAR more expensive) and much less innovation.
I fully support the EFF's efforts in this and all such similar cases. The DMCA is a poorly-written law that was intended as a sort of shield for companies but has been used, aggressively, as a weapon. Apple is clearly going against the spirit of the law, of the US style of competitive capitalism and of evolution itself.
The arguments are quite simple:
Lazy, dishonest people who steal music, park illegally and throw their tickets away, and cut in front of others in line, think this is okay. While people who are creative, and work hard to make the world a better place don't think this is okay.
@Brad When did wanting a fair and equitably balanced approach become near-sighted? Dang legal entitlement genetics means if you're not an ultra-extremist on either end you need glasses now? Sigh. :-/
Uh, there's banter because it's a BLOG.
Haha, I scrolled to the bottom to post only to find that Tony said exactly what I was going to. Props to you Tony. Josh, here is a link for you: http://www.cnn.com it's all news and no banter.
@Rene Ritchie... As someone who deals with the hurdles and world of communication law, I can tell you all of your arguments are further proof of my statement. As the 1st Amendment starts off... "Congress shall make no law..." Subsequent rulings have interpreted Congress = all government. Hence shouting fire in a crowded theater... you can be charged with filing a false report and that speech is not protected. There are three ways speech is not protected... 1) indecency/pornography... the reach of this is still a hotly debated topic, but some porn is indecnt, some not. 2) Fighting Words... You can say "I'm gonna kill him" and it's protected. Add a time and/or place, ie "I'm gonna kill you tomorrow at the gym", and it is no longer protected. 3). Copyright Infringement. You can't steal someones creative content. The newest, and still debated since 9/11, is Terroristic Threats.
Your NY Times example doesn't work b/c they aren't government run. A private company can do anything they want to control your speech/expression. Hence why Apple can reject Apps for content. Contact an law firm and they'll tell you it's a waste of time.
Also, another type of speech not protected is libel/slander, but these are much more difficult to prove as intent/knowledge of falsity must be shown.
And you can still say all of this... the 1st Amendment just won't protect you from being prosecuted.
This lawsuit is coming from the same Linux using people who were sued by SCO because they stole huge swaths of source code from the official Unix way back. Apple needs to counter sue these hypocritical jokers and grind them into the dust where they belong.
@Steve - your "simple" arguments are utter nonsense; do some actual reading on fair use, reverse engineering, Creative Commons, the EFF, etc. Ask Janis Ian and Jonathan Coulton and Trent Reznor about what happens when people get your music for free. Seriously, I'll be here and I'll look forward to a reasoned and nuanced comment after you've done so. The DMCA is a draconian pile of bs cobbled together by folks lobbied to act in the interests of copyright holders and against the interests of Fair Use and normal citizens.
@Joste Vebs - really? You're going to bring up SCO? SCO LOST that lawsuit and many others and deservedly so.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO-Linux_controversies
Microsoft for a long time (and probably still does) exploited it position to crush rivals who dared to come up with better and different ways of helpibg us do our everyday tasks on pc's.
Apple has now grown to a point where it's is doing many of the restrictive and counter-productive things microsoft did/does.
Eventually I hope open-source software (such as firefox, wordpress) takes over, and shows large corporations the way forward.
@zeagus:
I've been a publisher over twenty years. I knew far more about Fair Use when you were riding around on a tricycle then you obviously know now. And I don't argue with people who support lazy, unimaginative losers and criminals. You're a waste of my time.
I really wish I could of brought my iPhone just as hardware and payed to have a operating system on there. I don't like being told what I have to do with my own property! They haven't given us a choice. Either you jailbreak or you stay standard. I don't believe in stealing anything including software but if apple puts up the barriers to stop people doing what they want with sumthing they "own", stopping all chance of any competion with sumthing I "own". Are they not stealing sumthing from me! Think about it
@Steve - you know nothing about me, and obviously very little about fair use or copyright. Please, grow a clue; your ignorance is making pandas cry.
@Steve Do you honestly think that reverse engineering for interop is illegal? Oh, now the unicorns are crying, too! Must mean new MacBooks.
"I’m not sure if you should be able to copy-protect math, or if you should be allowed to circumvent encryption that seeks to protect math, or if you should be able to publish how to do that. But I am interested in the arguments surrounding all sides of the issue."
No, you should not be able to copy-protect math, or any other fundamental concept. Nothing would retard the progress of technology more; not even the DMCA goes that far. Long-standing law says you can protect your implementation of a particular algorithm, yes, but clean-room reimplementations have always been legal, and encouraged.
The DMCA tries to fudge this distinction not by making reimplementation illegal, but by making the examination process itself illegal. Such a distinction is a waste of time and resources, and it is especially disappointing to see Apple take such a hard line when Mac OSX itself relies heavily on clean-room reimplemntation for crucial features.
Everyone citing the DMCA need to read Title 17, Chapter 12, Section 1201, Subsection (f).
Wow...the ****** part above was supposed to say "nothing would r e t a r d the process of technology more, but apparently that word, even when used as a verb meaning "to slow artificially," is forbidden here.
now now children chill out! I think a question every1 shud answer is- are you a mac or are u a pc? In the sense of - do u like doing what your told to do? Or do u want a life without limits? Is that not the bigger question?
@Fassy:
I think you have that exactly backward.
@icebike
Nope, the DMCA exclusively deals with anti-circumvention measures -- attempting to break the protection on content or on a device, or on devices that themselves primarily deal with circumvention of protection measures. It makes zero attempt to criminalize reimplementation. The DMCA explicitly grants exceptions to certain types of reverse engineering efforts, and in certain circumstances, but the burden of proof is on the re-implentor to show these circumstnaces apply, and outside of those contexts, the DMCA holds the circumvention process as a violation.
http://www.copyright.gov/legislation/dmca.pdf (bottom of page 5)
So are the majority of people here Windows users? If people have such issue with the iPhone only being able to sync with iTunes why did you even buy it? If you HAVE to jailbreak your iPhone and such do you jailbreak your Mac?
I'm confused at all this, everyone knows if you get a Mac that's what your getting. The "Mac" experience as it is out of the box, all the software, the ecosystem, etc. So shouldn't everyone be used to the total control that comes with a Mac? Everyone seems so shocked that the iPhone is the same way.
@Sting7k:
NEWS FLASH: The majority of the world is windows users.
SECOND FLASH: People want to use THEIR POSSESSIONS the way THEY want.
If you find either of the above hard to understand I suggest you are a PERFECT Apple customer.
@Fassy:
Go read section (f) Reverse Engineering. Its much broader than you suggest.
It essentially says that if you put a protocol on a public wire anyone can try to reverse engineer it with merely the vague thought of perhaps someday creating an interoperable alternative.
I've posted the link twice, an somehow the blog blocks posts containing links to the U.S. Copyright Office. Must be some Canadian nationalism thingie.
http://www.copyright.gov slash title17 slash 92chap12.html#1201
@icebike
I wish section 1201(f) was that broad. If I reimplement your protocol, simply by looking at traffic and never at your code or the innards of your product, the DMCA should have nothing to do with it, IMHO. The DMCA, however, makes no mention of such a situation, either as prohibited or as an exception. What section 1201(f) allows me, in specific circumstances and for the purpose of interoperability, to circumvent your protection. If I venture outside of those circumstances, while I think most cases should be allowed, the case law is unsettled, at best.
That said, without knowing much about BluWiki, it would seem from Rene's description that they are doing precisely what 1201(f) paragraph was written to allow.
Ignorance is bliss I guess? I just want more so stink7k b happy with with watever u get given and neva want more
OK @zeagus, if its on Wikipedia then it MUST be true! Not. The Linux programmers in question have been caught time and time again stealing the valuable intellectual property of other companies. Microsoft found something like 300 patents that they have willfully violated. Who knows how many Apple patents these hypocrites and lets face it, bad programmers, have stolen. If the open sores community have demonstrated anything in the last 10 years, it is that they are more than willing to game the system and outright steal to get their way. Thank god for the Apple's and the Microsoft's of the world who are more interested in helping their customers with great products than they are for destroying the industry like these open sores morons.
If you copyright every idea how could humans evolve to what they are now? No seriously think if the wheel had been copyrighted by apple would no one be drivin round in cars now? There has to be some give and take. At the end of the day the law should protect consumers- without us these companys would be nothing
@icebike, I am aware >80% of the world uses Windows. However, being this is an iPhone centric website/blog I would imagine there is probably a larger proportion of Mac users here than else where. As Mac users they should be used to this kind of thing.
I want to drive my car on the sidewalk because the road is too crowded. I want to sync my Tmobile Dash with iTunes. I want to install Windows Media player on my MacBook Pro. I paid for all of those things, I own them so why can't I connect my Dash to iTunes, drive on the sidewalk, or install WMP on a MBP? Because I can't, but if I want to use iTunes there is a phone that works with it. If I want to drive on the sidewalk I'm sure there is some country out there that has looser laws than the US in this area. If I want to use Windows Media Player you can buy a Windows computer. There are other products and options out there that don't involve hacking copyrighted material.
If you don't want to use the iPhone with iTunes then get a phone that syncs with your preferred media player. I'm sure some where in all the ToS agreements and contracts that everyone signs to use the iPhone it says that you must use iTunes.
So back my original confusion. Everyone knows how Apple is what your getting when you buy Mac. The iPhone then by reason would be no different. If you the kind of person who likes to "do your own thing" or do what you want with products you buy then why did you buy the iPhone when there are plenty of other products that are much more open to that sort of thing?
@Joste Vebs - its a wiki article describing COURT CASES with citations. Just because its on Wikipedia doesn't mean that its incorrect. Do some googling. The rest of your post is utter bs just like Steve's. Willful ignorance is so irritating.
@Steve I'm with you. I'm sick of tired of the MP3 ripoff's crowd who never pay for the music they have etc etc etc.
@Zeagus this isn't willful ignorance. It's morals you idiot.
I suppose you think whomever sent out the new Wolverine origins movie and spread it around all over the internet was an OK thing to do? it was Cool right? you've probably already seen it.
I won't even look at it when a co worker tries to show me it. I will see it when it hits the movies this friday and pay for my ticket.
@Sting7K:
Mr. BadAnalogyGuy, is that you?
@Steve As someone who has studied IT security and who is a programmer, your rants make me feel sad.
@iphonemilk - it has nothing to do with morals or ripping off mp3s or movies. Please stop talking out of your ass, it makes it hard to hear what you are saying. We are talking about reverse engineering for compatibility, not de-DRMing copy protected files. This is the sort of thing you guys would be jumping all over Microsoft for. It is willful ignorance and now its name calling as well. Grow up; what are you, twelve? And @Steve, its not publishing if you are writing slashfic abotu Jobs/Woz.
Sting7k ok good points- at the end of the day mayb I'm bring selfish. I do see it from your point of view I really do.but I have such a great gadget in my hand and I'd love to use it in new ways. maybe not what our apple forefathers had wanted but at the end of the day- if it makes my iPhone better, if it upgrades what I payed for, heck why shudnt I? If I get tomm tomm on my mobile or my iPhone makes me a cup of tea and apple didn't want it to I don't care! Sorry! Sting7k - have you jailbroken your iPhone? If you have your no worse than us, if you haven't then you don't know what your missing. Maybe you work for apple or have me brainwashed not to think for yourself?
I love mac hardware , I hate mac rules and limits- democracy or communism?
@Doodleman - actually sting7ks arguments are backwards and don't make the point s/he thinks they do. And that's before you get to the bogus charge of hacking copyrighted material.
You all are my bathroom entertainment.
Flame on!
I just wanted to point out that there are hundreds of iPhone clones in oriental countries. Ever since the original iPhone debuted, everyone and their mother are trying their hardest to copy and clone the "magic" of the iPhone. These hackers want to tap into the source of the iPhone because it is THE PHONE TO BEAT! Let's face it, folks, Apple came up with a brilliant invention and now everyone wants one! But most people don't want to play by the rules, they want to find some way to circumvent them. This lets you know that Apple has created the "Holy Grail of Phones" and everyone wants a piece! The JesusPhone definitely has imitatio christi phones and these anti-christiPhones are definitely rampant! (Do you see what I did there?) LOL!
I just wanted to point out that there are hundreds of Windows clones in oriental countries. Ever since the original Windows 95, everyone and their mother are trying their hardest to copy and clone the “magic” of Windows. These hackers want to be able to mount Windows file shares because it is THE OPERATING SYSTEM TO BEAT! Let’s face it, folks, Microsoft came up with a brilliant invention and now everyone wants one! But most people don’t want to play by the rules, they want to find some way to circumvent them. This lets you know that Microsoft has created the “Holy Grail of Operating Systems” and everyone wants a piece! The JesusOS definitely has imitatio christi os'es and these anti-christiOS'es are definitely rampant! (Do you see what I did there?) LOL!
if there were a large group of people that could post black listed sites for a day and then pass it on to the next person. The threatened legal action would be thwarted, or?
You people at the iPhone are doing a wonderful job, meeting all the expectations and winning all the challenges. BRAVO 2 all of you.
You people at the iPhone are doing a wonderful job, meeting all the expectations and winning all the challenges. BRAVO 2 all of you. http://mobilenewz.net/
MACS SUCK!!!
@Rene ``EFF says it’s legal to hack code to increase competition — i.e. to allow an iPhone to work outside of iTunes. Is it also legal to hack bank accounts and transfer large sums of money so my net worth is more competitive with Bill Gates?'' FALACY!!! The point is: Apple has made abusive usage of hashes, just to force iPod users to run Microsoft of Apple operative systems and the proprietary, secret (and thus suspect) iTunes software. As far as I've read, there is no DRM obfuscation of the DB format (which is user data, not Apple copyrighted work), anyway iPod just refuses to work if there is no the corresponding hash file. There is no ```copyright violation'' in developing a software to make some hardware WORK PROPERLY (when the factory does not do that). Quite less in just talking about that.
Bottom line: Don't buy iPods, iPhones or other Defective By Design (DRM) products.
Great information and usefull too. I need a grant and I need all the help I can get. I will be back soon as I have bookmarked your blog.
@Joste Vebs: Cite your source re: 300 patents. Also, note that MS has had its fair share of IP violation recently as well; they just GPLed a bunch of Hyper-V code for the Linux kernel because they were blatantly stealing code from it!
@Steve: Drink a bit much of the Apple kool-aid there eh? So basically the songs I bought legitimately from Amazon MP3 I should not be able to put onto my iPhone because I use Linux. Yeah, that sounds real reasonable.
So it's totally not okay for me to use the OS I want with the product I buy because the company making the product I buy say so. Because the producing company should have any say at all in how I use my stuff and because they should have total control even though I paid them to give myself that kind of control.
You're either a moron or a troll.
The author spoke about many engaging things in this article. I found it by using Google and I've got to confess that I already subscribed for your site, it is quite fine (;
You could certainly see your enthusiasm in the work you write. The sector hopes for even more passionate writers such as you who aren't afraid to say how they believe. Always follow your heart.