I love all you n00b's who write 700 word posts and argue non stop. It cracks me up... the only thing you need to say when you read a heading like this which is designed to target emotion is:

About Time

and if you are intelligent you already knew it was cracked, and if you are smarter than that you know its really only a matter of time for DRM to be cracked each time.

i have enjoyed posts from the following:
* SteveJohnSteele
* PC_Tool
* jobryan26
* ingram091

You guys all fighting is fantastic...
am I at 700 words yet... nope

Send me an email @ jobryan26@hotmail.com and I can tell you what I think of your post in less than 3 words. Would that be short enough for you?

My post was "not" directed at anyone nor was I "fighting" with anyone. However your post was directed at me and was uncalled for. Funny tho that you make a post 100 words long when all you had to say was "About Time" and you would have kept with the topic of the story, minded your own business, and not look like a hypocrite.

:=) ..........

What's funny is you coming on a forum (forums are places on the net where folks discuss things, btw), and find it funny that folks are, of all things, discussing things.

It's even more amusing that you imply intelligence=knowledge, but we'll just let that one slide, since you obviously have neither.

Congrats to Divine Tao!
If anything's illegal, it's the Drm. Imagine you bought a car, and that car came with an integrated time bomb, so after driving around for a certain amount of time, the time bomb would be triggered asnd the car would break down where it was, so you'd have to buy a new car.
Ludicrous, isn't it? But exactly that is Drm.

I'll let to see you get into a CD or DVD and drive to work. :D

Oh goody. Another car analogy. How cute.

ok PC_Tool you tell us ...

what is DRM ?
why do the companys need it ?
why do consumers need it ?
should consumers just put up with it ?
if not what should consumers do about it ?

well ?!

what is DRM ?

Digital Rights Management. It is an attempt to retain the rights of the copyright holder while allowing digital content to be sold.

why do the companys need it ?

Because many people seem to think that because they bought the CD or the song they have sole rights to its use and distribution. They do *not* understand copyright or intellectual property in the slightest.

why do consumers need it ?

Most don't. Most of us can, if we actually think about it for a second or two, understand that we don't own the content. If that were the case, we'd have paid millions for it instead of tens.

should consumers just put up with it ?

Yes. It's not your content. It's not your product. Don't like it? Don't buy it.

if not what should consumers do about it ?

See above. Don't like it, don't buy it. If no-one buys DRM content, they will have to change it in order to sell it.

well ?!

A deep hole. Usually containing water. (and/or scary ghost chicks)

Anything else?

I believe that if the prices were fair and people had the flexibility then people wouldn't try to circumvent the protection. Most people that is, some will always want to "beat the system".

This is great news to me. I have been using a subscription service (Rhapsody and now Urge) since they first came out. My biggest complaint is simply activating my computers and mp3 players which is a huge pain in backside. I have the all access monthly subscription which is just under $15.00 a month and at least once a month I have to call Urge to have them reauthorize my account because of something. If it be one of my computers needed reformatting or buying a new mp3 player. With Urge I can only have 3 computers and 2 mp3 players activated or authorized at 1 time and if you deactivate one of the items it will not let you re-activate anything else for 30 days for some crazy reason.

There is my wife's Sansa that she uses and I have a Zen Vision M that I use most places and then I also have my Nextel i930 which I use as an mp3 player for when I'm working in the yard or something and don't feel like carrying the much larger Zen around. So this is one reason where I'm in need of a fix for this problem.

The second reason being I have my personal computer that I'm on most of the time at home where I sync my mp3 players and then my work computer for those moments when I remember a song or something and add it to my mp3 player. My wife likes her own kind of music so she has her laptop activated also for syncing her Sansa. So as of now we cannot activate anymore computers and I cannot activate my Media Center in my Living Room or Bedroom which the one in the Living Room runs thru a Receiver which has Zones and is hooked up to the speakers on the Lanai by the pool which would be nice when we have pool parties with our friends. It's reasons like this is why I can't stand this DRM crap. It's just me and my wife we don't share our music with anyone else. As stated by SteveJohnSteele we just want our freedom to use it where we want and on what we want.

"If man can create it, man can crack it". And with the limitations like the ones I have, sure I will use the software. I will keep my service with Urge tho because I do believe in paying for what I use.

It'd probably be a hell of a lot easier to just buy the freaking CD, dude.

I agree it would be easier to by the CD. However, I just cannot justify buying a CD for $15.00 or so for 2-3 good songs. I also like the fact of not having a physical cd that will get lost, damaged, or etc.

I just cannot justify buying a CD for $15.00 or so for 2-3 good songs.

Use Amazon, buy used.

I also like the fact of not having a physical cd that will get lost, damaged, or etc.

Rip it as soon as you get it.

Problem solved.

Maybe these hackers should find something better to do than inconvenience customers by forcing them to constantly download new software just to enjoy their music they purchased.

If you don't like DRM, then go to your local music store and buy the DRM-free CD. Then you can rip it to your hard disk or MP3 player without causing major headaches for others.

Ha, so now the hackers are guilty for Micro$oft to force their users to download "new software" to hear music that they already paid for?
I agree with you about buying the DRM free media, but MS and the discographic industry are to blame about DRM infection, not hackers about breaking the dumb-ridiculous scheme.
As they continue to push DRM garbage there will be some good people working to break it. Please do not confuse the "enemy", they are much closer than you may think...

*laughs*

Yeah. Freedom Fighters, the lot of 'em.

Gotta love that argument. They know they're breaking laws, taking away the rights of copyright holders, and creating need for stronger DRM. But calling themselves "Freedom Fighters" makes them feel *so* much better about it...

Actually they are fighting to take back rights people already are supposed to have...it is called Fair Use.

So "Freedom Fighters" would be a proper term to use

*laughs*

Do you know what Fair Use is?

Ever read it?

AS for their rights, they purchased a track with a limited license. If they didn't want to be held to that license, they should not have purchased the track with those terms. They should have bought the CD or gone to a service with terms they could agree to.

They are not freedom fighters. They are either too lazy to read the terms and understand them, to stupid to understand them, or entitled pricks who think they have the right to stomp on the rights of others just because it gets them what they want.

sweet. now i can offload all my awesome zune music on the web or something. cept no.

DRM is a complete joke

Consumers do not want it. They want freedom.

If I went into a book shop picked up a book and found a long list of 'conditions' covering when I can read the book, for how long, how often, where ... and further more I had to return to the shop to have my 'license' renewed ... I'd simply tell them to stuff it! and I'd walk away

And they loose the sale

DRM was (afaik) invented to protect income ... yet so many potential consumers simply wont buy anything that has DRM

So ... listen up companies, you are losing out, your 'protection' will be your undoing

"And they loose the sale"

Surely you mean 'lose', not loose.
Amazing how many people make this mistake.

"listen up companies, you are loosing out"

So you now know that its 'losing', right ? :)

If I went into a book shop picked up a book and found a long list of 'conditions' covering when I can read the book, for how long, how often, where ... and further more I had to return to the shop to have my 'license' renewed ... I'd simply tell them to stuff it! and I'd walk away

Ever been to a library? Apparently not, because that is almost exactly what you just described.

When you bu the book itself (or the CD), you are free to do what you want with it (barring copying for distribution). Obtaining it by some other means, either the library or via an online download service, you *agree* to the terms and conditions in exchange for the convenience.

You talk about rental.

Im talking about buying something AND then having conditions on how I can use that item.

So... are you saying that DRM is like rental ???

Still the often overly restrictive conditions are driving away customers.

Still the often overly restrictive conditions are driving away customers.

Online sales continue to grow dramatically.

CD sales are still raking in the cash.

Exactly how is this driving away customers?

If you want it without conditions, buy the CD. If you want it cheaper, or want to pick and choose tracks, agree to the conditions. It's s simple decision really. If it is untenable, which to some it is, and sometimes for good reason, simply do without.

And in the case of exclusive tracks, or where the album hasn't been released yet, or the band is not at a point where they can afford to release a CD yet?

Personally, I refuse to purchase online music because I like to control the quality of my music (as much as possible, at least). However, I've been waiting months sometimes past when an album initially is available, just because it isn't physical media yet, only available in digital form.

However, even when I do eventually give in to the urge to listen to my odd, non-commonly-available music, and purchase music online, I look at the restrictions placed on my purchase... If I can't play my music on my iRiver, why would I purchase it? Very useless to have music that's unplayable in the device you're purchasing it for.

Now when it comes down to it, it gets depressing to go through the "That's available?! Great! Oh, wait... I can't actually listen to it..." over and over and over. So then it goes to, why even check? Just buy the CD and you know it'll work...

So chalk me up to one customer that's been driven away from digital purchases due in part to DRM. :)

Your rebuttal to their 'driving away' comment is actually mostly irrelevant, as who knows how much they might be growing without the people who are violently anti-DRM? Just because person A buys an online track doesn't mean that person B can't, unlike with CDs. And even your final comment suggests that while it might be driving them away, you could care less. Not exactly what you call a compelling argument towards DRM not driving customers away.

And in the case of exclusive tracks

Agree and pay, or do without. If the market for it collapses, they'll do something else.

or where the album hasn't been released yet

You wait. All products have time to market issues. If you don't like it, too bad. You can choose not to buy and let them know why. If the market demands it faster, they will supply it.

or the band is not at a point where they can afford to release a CD yet?

Then they can choose to release it for free online, you can choose to abide by whatever restrictions they are releasing it under, or you can wait. Seriously, this is the band's choice. Not yours. It's their material, FFS.

However, I've been waiting months sometimes past when an album initially is available, just because it isn't physical media yet, only available in digital form.

Impatience on your part does not equate to an emergency on theirs. It is their product. Their timetable. Not yours.

Just buy the CD and you know it'll work

Excellent idea. I wonder why so many people have an issue with it.

who knows how much they might be growing without the people who are violently anti-DRM?
...
you could care less.

I couldn't care less, really. It's their product and this is how they've chosen to market it. That's their right. I can choose to buy it or not. That's mine.

"I couldn't care less, really. It's their product and this is how they've chosen to market it. That's their right. I can choose to buy it or not. That's mine"

That is the smartest thing i have ever heard you say ;) People seem to forget that no one is forcing you to buy the music.

You want to end DRM, don't buy anything that has DRM.

Now if only you could apply that same laizzes faire attitude towards other areas of business...

Nice.

The name change tickled me too.

What is just as good is the artwork for the mirakagi.exe file. You can seriously analyze that in your 101 art appreciation class.

Anybody care to translate the Chinese text?

What I don't understand is, why whould you legally download a music file and then try to make it illegal? If you don't want DRM, you would download the file illegally in the first place right?

I think it is more that you *PAY* for a legal file and you want to be able to use that file that you *PAID* for without the DRM restrictions.

You are right about the other part, for those that want to download files illegally, they aren't going to *PAY* for it, they will just download it somewhere else without going through all of the trouble.

Thus, DRM only inhibits the *PAYING* customer.

what makes you think a file without drm is illegal? you think all of the drm-free songs being sold on itunes at a premium right now are illegal or are you under the impression that being able to use the content you purchased on more than one medium is illegal? striping drm from a file is not illegal at all and is why microsoft dropped the lawsuit to begin with, the only that could have been considered illegal is that if 'stolen source code' had been used to create the program.
maybe people don't mind paying a low price to support the artist but they want to be able to use the file as they wish.. there is a reason why mp3sparks.com makes money

This has always been the point Atrius. If you are a paying customer you should not be treated as a criminal. so in order to enact your fair use consumer rights you have no choice but to become a criminal and remove DRM from what you paid for. There is nothing that can not be obtained illegally. There is no reason whatsoever to not obtain it illegally. But a normal consumer WILL buy the thing if they have a value to it. But as a reward for being this honest person the manufacture makes it so you can only use it for a set period of time, or if their company continues to exist forever, or if you use their music player alone. ect, ect, ect...

This is not fair use of merchandise, its plain and simple extortion. as such If I do purchase something from a DRM system I always (ALWAYS) make sure I have an illegal backup of that merchandise so that when the DRM fails to function, (WHICH HAS HAPPENED ON EVERY OCCUANCE, either from service shut down, or DRM systems malfunctioning) I will still have what I paid for. The Vendor of course wants you to be forced into buying it again. But this is not necessary if you have a illegal backup. THIS is what the industry does not want you to be able to do. Secure your purchases so there is no need to RE purchase your rights again. No No No. They want you to have to pay and pay and pay some more, and just when you think your done with paying, guess what? They will change the system 100% forcing you to rebuy your entire collection again, and start the cycle over once more. A consumer will only take so much. and THAT is the point of consumers having so much backlash against the industry with DRM.

It has NOTHING to do with Piracy IE: people selling pirated product on the street for $2 in Taiwan or where ever. That has always been illegal since long before DMCA came to be, and always will be. It has to do with Consumers, not being victimized any longer. That is why DRM must go.

There is no reason whatsoever to not obtain it illegally.

Pure comedy.

Well, if you're going to be considered a criminal either way, you really do have no reason to support the company/organization that's going to try to put you in jail.

That being said, some of us do care about stuff like laziness (Finding the whole CD usually takes all of, oh, a minute. That's a minute I could be doing absolutely nothing with.), inconsistent quality of music rips (Stupid when you hear doors slamming during a track.), and other such problems. So yes, there are a few reasons not to obtain it illegally.

Let's see.

I can buy a CD, I can buy a track from a CD with certain provisions.

I fail to see how this makes me a criminal.

If I bought the CD, I can pretty much do as I please with it. Rip it, burn it, whatever. So long as I don't distribute copies.

If I bought the track, I stick to the terms of the agreement I accepted when I bought the track.

Sure, I could *act* like a criminal and expect more rights than the agreement provided. Of course, then, I would deserve such treatment, eh?

So yes, there are a few reasons not to obtain it illegally.

Yes, I suppose those will do in a pinch when such things as responsibility and respect are beyond one's capabilities.

CD - "do what I want with it (except distribute it)"
download track - restrictive DRM, often only play on companys media player

WHY ??? Why the difference?

CD >>> CD ripper software >>> MP3 (or other format)
(and CD ripping software is often bundled with MP3 players)

Only recently are companys excepting that consumers do not want download tracks with DRM
What took them so long?
Arent companys suppost to listen to consumer trends and wishes ... being a way for the company to evolve and grow ?!

CD - "do what I want with it (except distribute it)"
download track - restrictive DRM, often only play on companys media player

WHY ??? Why the difference?

Just a guess....

Because of the increased risk entailed in putting such content online?

Only recently are companys excepting that consumers do not want download tracks with DRM
What took them so long?
Arent companys suppost to listen to consumer trends and wishes ... being a way for the company to evolve and grow ?!

You have answered you own question. The market is correcting. It took longer because outside forces changed the market in ways that subverted the supply-demand chain (aka Piracy).

I think it is more that you *PAY* for a legal file and you want to be able to use that file that you *PAID* for without the DRM restrictions.

You paid for a legal file that came with restrictions and expect those restrictions to change because, well, you want them to. If you don't like the restrictions *gasp*, don't buy 'em.

Durr....

Thus, DRM only inhibits the *PAYING* customer.

Yes, they paying customer who cannot read or be bothered to understand that what they are purchasing is not an unlimited license. They could think, but I suppose sometimes that's just too much to ask.

Haha services Microsoft right. Crappy DRM messes up your computer.

Thats my boy!

See? Betanews isn't just biased against sony--they are biased about whomever they are writing the article about :)

Wrong, betanews will never bias any companies as long as the company's name are either Apple or Google.

Download this update at http://fileforum.betanew...FairUse4WM/1156529648/1

I love how the hacker changed his nick. That perhaps is the most clever thing about all this.

why does this get top page status while the Iphone glitch is buried? I'm sure more people will care about their 600$ phones having glitches then they will with DRM from microsoft.

I love how this "posts a major problem for microsoft"

While, the Iphone charging issue is among "minor" variety ... fair reporting there guys.

is not that the devices aren't charging its that the battery is not relfecting the full charge, it is a minor issue

The news that Apple says that the glitch isn't really mis-charging, and is just an interface issue is more important than an actual security issue?

Silly me... I missed the part where news that something is a non-issue became more important than an actual security flaw. The BN staff must have missed that note too. How utterly flawed.

Security flaw? Its DRM on some music. People should be celebrating, at least they wont need to pay a premium now, unlike Apple

Which is just so far superior that they can never get hacked /scarcasm

sometimes i wonder why hackers only target Windows. You'd think they'd target the Itunes drm instead ... it'd make alot more people happy.

AWWW, does the poor baby hate Apple so much? Too bad, whine some more b****! HAHAHAHA

Sure, and bypassing it makes it a flaw in the MS encryption security. If it were perfect, or unflawed, then it would be uncrackable.

And who said that we weren't happy about it? For some, this is interesting news not because we're horrified at this development, but interested in whatever new version is available now.

Anyways, your last statement is unclear tending towards invalid. You were probably wondering why the Doom9 forums only target the Windows Media DRM format, rather than the AAC DRM. However, as stated, your comment was wrong, as
a) Apple's OSes and players have all sorts of interesting things available if you look in the right spots,
b) hackers do target things besides operating systems,
c) people have specialties, software and code they're more familiar with; just because one person hacks MS doesn't mean every hacker will,
d) in general, people hack what's common, and Windows is still the general OS out there, and its users in general are the least computer literate.

Lol, apple? lol...DRM is a bigger issue than "iPay4crap" products.

why does this get top page status while the Iphone glitch is buried?

Come real close to the monitor.

Turn down anything that might distract you.

Ready?

THIS IS NOT DIGG!!!!1111oneone

Thank you.

^_^ Nicely put.

Not enough exclamation points. He might have not gotten the hint.

Because no one cares about the iPhone.

Fixed. ;)

the best part of the news is the anagram. Absolutely marvelous. hehe!

i enjoyed that little tidbit of info as well. clever.

Run the original name through a anagram machine (site), some interesting alternatives like Anti Video, Deviation and Vane Idiot come up. :-)