What kind of DRM loophole am I going through here? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: technix
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2019, 07:56:13 am
content: We all understand the analog loophole as a fallacy of DRM. Now what kind of hole am I going through here in the following use cases? There is no analog connection used. In both cases I remove FairPlay from my Apple Music songs.1. Compile a version of Shairport-sync with support for audio output over UNIX pipe and metadata over UNIX socket. Create a software that parses the metadata and passes it to ffmpeg that encodes the audio samples from the pipe and saves the resulting file on disk. Now play a song over AirPlay. Shairport-sync is an open source implementation of AirPlay protocol.2. Find a machine that has SPDIF out and runs iTunes, and a second machine that has SPDIF in. Record from SPDIF on machine 2 while playing the music on machine 1. The recording machine need to be as basic as possible, for example Raspberry Pi with Cirrus Logic Audio Card.

author: Rerouter
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2019, 08:14:28 am
content: The spdif has a copy protected bit in its standard. So if the device your using discards this. Then it definatly falls under copyright infringementNormally your spdif in will see this bit and record silenceAs the stream is a slow digital stream. Its probably easier to just have a microcontroller play man in the middle, fixing thst bit in realtime. Then you can record without issue.

author: technix
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2019, 08:36:51 am
content: Quote from: Rerouter on February 13, 2019, 08:14:28 amSome cheap USB sound cards with SPDIF ignores that bit.What about that software-only Shairport-sync method?

author: JVR
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2019, 12:38:54 pm
content: Streaming audio was never designed to stop piracy, it was designed to make it not worth the effort. And IMO they have suceeded. I cant remember the last time I had to go outside the loop to look for music. The few $ they want for a subscription I pay gladly.

author: tsman
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2019, 01:07:08 pm
content: They no longer care about this loophole due to effort needed to do it, streaming services cover most users anyway and the cat is already out of the bag as there have been multiple tools designed to circumvent the iTunes DRM directly. You can remove the DRM wrapper and you end up with an unprotected file. It is fast and there is zero quality loss.If you did want to do your two methods then you'll need to use FLAC or another lossless codec to reencode.

author: ejeffrey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2019, 05:14:57 pm
content: Quote from: JVR on February 13, 2019, 12:38:54 pmWell, I would argue it wasn't really ever intended to stop "piracy" -- in the sense of people seeding torrents or using file sharing. The goal was to restrict how legitimate customers used things so they can sell them the same thing twice because copying a movie off of your DVD is more trouble than just buying it again.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2019, 07:49:45 pm
content: They have always tried to stop piracy, but "they" may be starting to realize how futile it is. The only way to stop someone from copying something is to not let them see or listen to it. Any type of encryption can be bypassed in some way because all content has to be decrypted near the end of the chain in order for it to be used. A better way to stop piracy is to make the legitimate route more convenient than the piracy route, which some of the music streaming services have managed to do.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 13, 2019, 08:45:38 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on February 13, 2019, 07:49:45 pmAbsolutely! Spotify have nailed this. I can stream everything I've every wanted to listen to, and more, for $10/month. I am more than happy to pay this.The video content providers/producers/distributors need to follow suit and take note. Netflix and other's haven't stopped piracy. They are driving consumers away. Why should my geographical location matter when it comes to what I want to watch? I signed up for a free trial of Netflix a while ago and almost everything I wanted to watch (mostly American content which is available on free-to-air TV) wasn't available on Netflix Australia.Thankfully, downloading infringing copies of material isn't illegal in Australia (yet).

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2019, 10:07:24 pm
content: Netflix certainly drove me away, they were great but then the good content started dropping like flies while they instead started investing billions in producing their own garbage that is of zero interest to me. It's not entirely their fault though, I fear that fragmentation will kill legitimate video streaming. The thing that was great about Netflix was that it was a one stop shop for a reasonable monthly rate. Then every content producer out there got the bright idea that they can have their own streaming service and make all that profit themselves. The problem is that I'm not gonna subscribe to half a dozen different video streaming services. Most people will pick one, maybe two and if the selection on each of them gets too poor, they'll go back to piracy or what I do is buy used discs.

author: tsman
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2019, 11:01:52 pm
content: Netflix and the other services have said they would prefer no geographical restrictions but the content distributors have sliced up the streaming rights depending on region so they just can't offer the same content everywhere.The fragmented streaming services have turned into the old cable/satellite TV packages. A single package/service won't cover everything you want and you're forced into paying for content you don't want just to get the 1 thing in there you do.I wouldn't hold Spotify as the ideal streaming model though as it isn't sustainable and they're making huge losses even though total revenue is very high. They're paying nearly 3/4th of their revenue to the rights holders who then pass on peanuts to the actual artists. Expect the service to change for the worse at some point.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2019, 11:40:03 pm
content: Quote from: tsman on February 13, 2019, 11:01:52 pmWhat's stopping them from becoming rights holders the way Netflix has done and offering better rates to the artists? Or indeed, for the artists to use Patreon or Subscribestar or whatever and then get a majority of the subscription costs?

author: tsman
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2019, 12:02:06 am
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on February 13, 2019, 11:40:03 pmSpotify did start offering that last year with independent artists. The major artists won't/can't do it because most of them have signed draconian contracts with the major music labels. Those contracts will prohibit the artist from dealing with anybody else.Quote from: NiHaoMike on February 13, 2019, 11:40:03 pmYou can do that but you won't have the backing of a major label and their PR department. The tricky part is becoming famous enough to get a reliable income from this without signing away all your rights to get there in the first place.

author: rdl
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2019, 12:46:59 am
content: I guess I'm lucky that just about everything I'd ever want to listen to can be found cheaply on used CDs. The only drawbacks are waiting for delivery and the 10 minutes or so it takes for EAC to rip them to FLAC files so I can put them on my NAS.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2019, 05:02:13 am
content: Quote from: rdl on February 14, 2019, 12:46:59 amI've occasionally bought an album and then downloaded a copy of it from a torrent. Faster than ripping it myself and I already paid for the content so what?