From: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org (ecto-digest) To: ecto-digest@smoe.org Subject: ecto-digest V13 #145 Reply-To: ecto@smoe.org Sender: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk ecto-digest Tuesday, June 5 2007 Volume 13 : Number 145 To unsubscribe: e-mail ecto-digest-request@smoe.org and put the word unsubscribe in the message body. Today's Subjects: ----------------- re: Suzanne Vega [Irvin Lin ] Re: Apple putting spyware into iTunes Plus files ["Jeffrey Burka" Subject: re: Suzanne Vega Actually the new SUZANNE VEGA album was leaked a couple of weeks ago. Being completely impatient, I snagged a copy and have been enjoying it immensely. It's nice to hear her voice again, it's been too long. The album starts off with a rather perky catchy number "Zephyr & I" and then switching to a more mellow song reminiscent of her earlier work in "Ludlow Street" and "New York Is a Woman". "Pornographer's Dream" is vaguely reminiscent of her song "Caramel" from _Nine Objects of Desire_ and "Frank & Ava" has a strange (for SUZANNE VEGA) background singer harmonization echo, think SUZANNE VEGA meets the RONETTES or some sort of 60's girl group. "Edith Wharton's Figurines" harkens back to her earlier work again, a little more stripped down and organic, telling a lovely story as only SUZANNE VEGA can, and then the dramatic "Bound" song which leads into a bit of an electronica experiment of "Unbound", nothing as harsh or experimental as the percussion on _99.0oF_ but still it was enough to make me do a double take. Basically it sounds like someone took a SUZANNE VEGA song and remixed it (no, it sounds nothing like the DNA remix of "Tom's Diner"). Somehow the song does sound rather sped up though. "As You Are Now" would fit in with on _Solitude Standing_, "Angel's Doorway" is standard SUZANNE VEGA though ever so slightly overproduced for my taste, and the closing song "Anniversary" is classic SUZANNE VEGA, a slow meandering song that ends the album in a leisurely way. All in all, it's a nice progression for SUZANNE VEGA. She's stated that she pushed herself on this album singing in different keys that she hadn't before and playing outside of her comfort zone to come up with a modern classic. I think she mostly succeeded. I'm pleased and can't wait to pick up the CD when it hits the stores Stateside in July. On a different note, does anyone have thoughts on the new DOLORES O'RIORDAN (The Cranberries) solo album _Are You Listening_? I've always thought her a bit of a poor man's SINEAD O'CONNOR, but I'm curious of her solo effort - especially as YOUTH produced it. Oh and speaking of SINEAD O'CONNOR, I hear she has a new one coming out as well. Mostly spiritual songs she has written. That sounds interesting, I'll have to check it out. Irvin > From: Nadyne Mielke > > I just noticed that Suzanne Vega has a new album coming out. Titled "Beauty > & Crime", it's due in America on 17 July. The rest of the world gets it > more than a month earlier on 05 June.. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 07:04:24 -0400 From: "Jeffrey Burka" Subject: Re: Apple putting spyware into iTunes Plus files dan sez: On 6/3/07, DanStark <2005.carnivore99@verizon.net> wrote: > Apparently Apple didn't learn anything from Sony's failed experiment > with spyware-infected CDs. Reports have surfaced that iTunes Plus > files are secretly tagged with personally identifying information > including names, E-mail addresses and other sensitive data. a) "spyware"? Could you please explain how tagging a file with metadata such as its owner's name qualifies as spyware? There's nothing inherent to the file that could, say, phone home and report you for...well...anything. b) If the point of having DRM-free music is to be able to play it on any device or OS, or in any location that you choose, why do you care if the file you own has your name buried in it? Want to share the file with a friend the way you might lend them a CD? Go ahead -- I would guess said friend already knows your name and has at least one of your e-mail addresses. To compare this to Sony's rootkit fiasco is, to be honest, ridiculous. Sony installed software on your machine without your knowledge or consent -- software that made your computer vulnerable to attacks from the outside. Tagging a file with metadata, even something as "personal" as your name or e-mail address, is hardly nefarious. The Ars contention that iTunes might compare the tag info to your own account info is fairly absurd; I don't think Apple is too stupid to know that multiple people in a household are likely to have multiple iTunes store accounts and that doing such comparisons would net them nothing. And really, if you're so desperate to share music you've just purchased on teh internets, just buy the CD, rip it, and share away! jeff ( who notes that Wil Shipley said much the same at http://wilshipley.com/blog/2007/06/news-flash-adobe-hides-customer.html ) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 08:34:48 -0400 (EDT) From: Bernie Mojzes Subject: Re: Apple putting spyware into iTunes Plus files We should try not to overreact to this. It is NOT spyware (i.e. a piece of software that hides in your computer and reports back to the mothership what it is you are doing). Nor is it a rootkit such as what Sony installed (i.e. something that hijacks the OS so as to run it's own stuff and allow some third party access). There's nothing inherently wrong with tagging some file with the data "this song was sold to this person." That doesn't mean that this is not troubling. The fact that it has been done without any notification implies a certain dishonesty. And the fact that the personal information was encoded into the files rather than kept on a database somewhere and only a key encoded into the file shows a profound lack of respect for people's personal information. If they wanted to do this right, they'd encode they'd keep the data elsewhere and encode with multiple keys. The multiple keys would provide error correction to prevent someone from being prosecuted for spoofed data. That still doesn't protect someone against someone hax0ring their machine and "appropriating" the files, but that's a whole 'nuther topic. Now, I'm not saying I'm paranoid or anything, but I have yet to trust online music sales. But if I'm paying for something, I like having the physical media in my hand. Maybe that just means I'm old. brni > Apparently Apple didn't learn anything from Sony's failed experiment with > spyware-infected CDs. Reports have surfaced that iTunes Plus files are > secretly tagged with personally identifying information including names, > E-mail addresses and other sensitive data. > > This may not end well for Apple., we'll just see if it ends up blowing up on > them like it did for Sony. Meanwhile it looks like another nail in the > coffin for the music industry's reputation. > > http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/media/article1871173.ece > http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070530-apple-hides-account-info-in-drm-free-music-too.html > > Dan > - -- brni i don't want the world, i just want your half. http://brni.livejournal.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 10:05:28 -0400 (GMT-04:00) From: Greg Dunn Subject: Re: Apple putting spyware into iTunes Plus files Spot on. The real trick is managing that 3rd party database so it's not readily compromised. I don't like restricted downloads, either; the cost/benefit is high enough that I'm not ready to stop buying CDs. The media companies just can't seem to grasp that once you free the data from its physical media, it's far easier to propagate in spite of their attempts to restrict copying. Even CDs have a "copy-protect" flag which is supposed to prevent exact copies from being made, but that's never been a barrier to the users. Sadly, the real answer is "provide content that users are willing to pay for and not steal", and price it to minimize the loss due to inevitable theft. The media companies appeared to understand this at one time, but greed has pushed reason aside. >There's nothing inherently wrong with tagging some file with the data >"this song was sold to this person." > >That doesn't mean that this is not troubling. The fact that it has been >done without any notification implies a certain dishonesty. And the fact >that the personal information was encoded into the files rather than kept >on a database somewhere and only a key encoded into the file shows a >profound lack of respect for people's personal information. > >If they wanted to do this right, they'd encode they'd keep the data >elsewhere and encode with multiple keys. The multiple keys would provide >error correction to prevent someone from being prosecuted for spoofed >data. That still doesn't protect someone against someone hax0ring their >machine and "appropriating" the files, but that's a whole 'nuther topic. > >Now, I'm not saying I'm paranoid or anything, but I have yet to trust >online music sales. But if I'm paying for something, I like having the >physical media in my hand. > >Maybe that just means I'm old. > >brni > >> Apparently Apple didn't learn anything from Sony's failed experiment with >> spyware-infected CDs. Reports have surfaced that iTunes Plus files are >> secretly tagged with personally identifying information including names, >> E-mail addresses and other sensitive data. >> >> This may not end well for Apple., we'll just see if it ends up blowing up on >> them like it did for Sony. Meanwhile it looks like another nail in the >> coffin for the music industry's reputation. >> >> http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/media/article1871173.ece >> http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070530-apple-hides-account-info-in-drm-free-music-too.html >> >> Dan >> > >-- > >brni > >i don't want the world, >i just want your half. > >http://brni.livejournal.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 10:34:59 -0400 (EDT) From: Bernie Mojzes Subject: Re: Apple putting spyware into iTunes Plus files > Sadly, the real answer is "provide content that users are willing to pay > for and not steal", and price it to minimize the loss due to inevitable > theft. The media companies appeared to understand this at one time, but > greed has pushed reason aside. I think that that ("content that users are willing to pay for and not steal") is really a matter of re-education. That's a "hearts and minds" issue, and requires a fundamental change in the Recording Industry, in the artists, and in the people. People will be far more likely to spend money knowing that the cash is going to support the people who make possible all the amazing music they love, than they are when they know that the bulk of it is going to execs with private jets, advertising firms, and lawyers. Which means that for the industry to remain viable, it needs to reimagine itself as something that is there to support the music and the artists, not the other way around. And for those artists who manage to break through and make obscene gobs of money, we'll be more likely to want to give you some of ours if we know you're going to spend it on helping out others, rather than bling and cocaine. And the people? The people need to start being able to identify with and empathize with the people whose music they love. Less hero worship and more understanding that these are people who need to make a living. - -- brni i don't want the world, i just want your half. http://brni.livejournal.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 08:58:36 -0400 From: "Jeffrey Burka" Subject: Re: Apple putting spyware into iTunes Plus files brni sez: > But if I'm paying for something, I like having the > physical media in my hand. I like to have the physical media too, but to some extent that's because I hate not having liner notes and I hate that oddities in tracking aren't maintained in a digital album (while I get more and more annoyed at "hidden" tracks placed after a long silence (YO! that stopped being fun back in the early 90s!), I still have a soft spot for tricks like Sarah Slean making "John the 23rd" track 23 on the _Universe_ ep). Many of those problems went away when iTunes started supporting gapless playback, and I've seen a few digital liner notes (my partner's purchase of _The Good, The Bad, and The Queen_ came with one) but those are few and far between. jeff n.p. _Seven_, Tony Banks ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 10:10:47 -0500 From: Doug Subject: Re: Apple putting spyware into iTunes Plus files > People will be far more likely to spend money knowing that the cash is > going to support the people who make possible all the amazing music > around. And for those artists who manage to break through and make > obscene gobs of money, we'll be more likely to want to give you some of > ours if we know you're going to spend it on helping out others, rather > than bling and cocaine. So they can have our money but only if they don't spend it on themselves? Why don't we just give our money directly to charity instead and skip the middleman? - --Doug ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 09:44:56 -0600 From: neal copperman Subject: Re: Apple putting spyware into iTunes Plus files Isn't this regularly done for many kinds of files? It's always been something of a source of frustration for me, but I know that Word Documents have the creator's information embedded in them, as well as a change log that includes who made the changes. (The info is based on however the copy of Office is registered.) I wouldn't be surprised if that is the case across the whole Office suite, as well as other editing tools like Adobe. neal . At 8:34 AM -0400 6/4/07, Bernie Mojzes wrote: >We should try not to overreact to this. It is NOT spyware (i.e. a >piece of software that hides in your computer and reports back to >the mothership what it is you are doing). Nor is it a rootkit such >as what Sony installed (i.e. something that hijacks the OS so as to >run it's own stuff and allow some third party access). > >There's nothing inherently wrong with tagging some file with the >data "this song was sold to this person." > >That doesn't mean that this is not troubling. The fact that it has >been done without any notification implies a certain dishonesty. >And the fact that the personal information was encoded into the >files rather than kept on a database somewhere and only a key >encoded into the file shows a profound lack of respect for people's >personal information. > >If they wanted to do this right, they'd encode they'd keep the data >elsewhere and encode with multiple keys. The multiple keys would >provide error correction to prevent someone from being prosecuted >for spoofed data. That still doesn't protect someone against someone >hax0ring their machine and "appropriating" the files, but that's a >whole 'nuther topic. > >Now, I'm not saying I'm paranoid or anything, but I have yet to >trust online music sales. But if I'm paying for something, I like >having the physical media in my hand. > >Maybe that just means I'm old. > >brni > >>Apparently Apple didn't learn anything from Sony's failed >>experiment with spyware-infected CDs. Reports have surfaced that >>iTunes Plus files are secretly tagged with personally identifying >>information including names, E-mail addresses and other sensitive >>data. >> >>This may not end well for Apple., we'll just see if it ends up >>blowing up on them like it did for Sony. Meanwhile it looks like >>another nail in the coffin for the music industry's reputation. >> >>http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/media/article1871173.ece >>http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070530-apple-hides-account-info-in-drm-free-music-too.html >> >>Dan >> > >-- > >brni > >i don't want the world, >i just want your half. > >http://brni.livejournal.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 11:51:26 -0400 (EDT) From: Bernie Mojzes Subject: Re: Apple putting spyware into iTunes Plus files > So they can have our money but only if they don't spend it on > themselves? Why don't we just give our money directly to charity > instead and skip the middleman? Lets put it this way. Brittney Spears does not need my money more than I do. Sheryl Crow does not need my money more than I do, but she's gonna use some of it to promote sound energy policy, so that's a good thing. Peter Gabriel does not need my money more than I do, but he's gonna use some of it to promote world music and multi-cultural cooperation, so that's a good thing. Kristen Hirsh probably does need my money more than I do, and without money from me and people like me, will have difficulty continuing to make music. Pretending that I like all these folk's music equally, where am I more likely to spend money, and where am I more likely to be ok with pirated copies? - -- brni i don't want the world, i just want your half. http://brni.livejournal.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 12:12:13 -0400 (EDT) From: Greg Dunn Subject: Re: Apple putting spyware into iTunes Plus files Yup. The media companies re-imagining themselves is a colossal task by itself, but we have to think pretty hard about where the money goes. If at all possible, I buy music from the artist directly (but what do we do when the artist belongs to a label - direct sales don't necessarily track and contribute to their account, or do they?) and have been known to buy extras to hand out to friends. Heck, I still scrounge for (and distribute) out of print discs from some beloved artists in the vain hope that demand for reprints will increase as the user base grows. :-| - -----Original Message----- >From: Bernie Mojzes >Sent: Jun 4, 2007 11:51 AM >To: Doug >Cc: "ecto@smoe.org" >Subject: Re: Apple putting spyware into iTunes Plus files > >> So they can have our money but only if they don't spend it on >> themselves? Why don't we just give our money directly to charity >> instead and skip the middleman? > >Lets put it this way. > >Brittney Spears does not need my money more than I do. > >Sheryl Crow does not need my money more than I do, but she's gonna use >some of it to promote sound energy policy, so that's a good thing. Peter >Gabriel does not need my money more than I do, but he's gonna use some of >it to promote world music and multi-cultural cooperation, so that's a good >thing. > >Kristen Hirsh probably does need my money more than I do, and without >money from me and people like me, will have difficulty continuing to make >music. > >Pretending that I like all these folk's music equally, where am I more >likely to spend money, and where am I more likely to be ok with pirated >copies? > >-- > >brni > >i don't want the world, >i just want your half. > >http://brni.livejournal.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 13:10:21 -0400 From: DanStark <2005.carnivore99@verizon.net> Subject: Re: Apple putting spyware into iTunes Plus files Jeffrey Burka wrote: >a) "spyware"? Could you please explain how tagging a file with >metadata such as its owner's name qualifies as spyware? There's >nothing inherent to the file that could, say, phone home and report >you for...well...anything. iTunes gathers information about the user and embeds that information into its files for tracking purposes without adequate user notice, consent or control. I don't believe the files need to "phone home" to qualify as spyware. The fact is that Apple is doing this without disclosure, and it's hard to argue that it is not done for tracking purposes, ergo, spying. >b) If the point of having DRM-free music is to be able to play it on >any device or OS, or in any location that you choose, why do you care >if the file you own has your name buried in it? The most irksome part about it is the lack of disclosure, especially since it's being done by Apple which is a company that so many people seem to have such blind faith in. Why should I care? Well we all know the music industry has a reputation for using copyright lawsuits as a bullying tactic. If they'll go after people for file sharing based solely on an IP address, imagine the empowerment they'll feel when they have files with names and other personal information attached to them. So what happens when your laptop full of tagged music gets stolen, or your little sister decides to copy some files without your knowledge and they subsequently get compromised? I could go on, but the fact is that there are any number of scenarios that are not in the best interest of the user. Even if you're innocent, the prospect of defending yourself against the affluent RIAA or anyone else who may wish to take advantage of this is a costly prospect. >To compare this to Sony's rootkit fiasco is, to be honest, ridiculous. It's not ridiculous. Sony's scheme may have been more invasive but this is still a violation of privacy, disclosure and trust. >And really, if you're so desperate to share music you've just >purchased on teh internets, just buy the CD, rip it, and share away! That's not the point. If Apple wants to track its users there should be adequate disclosure, but I suspect they don't want to publicize this because it will impact their sales. There are many reasons to oppose this type of behavior, but since it's Apple I suppose a lot of people will jump to their defense instead. Dan ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 15:03:49 -0400 (EDT) From: Bernie Mojzes Subject: Re: Apple putting spyware into iTunes Plus files > iTunes gathers information about the user and embeds that information into > its files for tracking purposes without adequate user notice, consent or > control. I don't believe the files need to "phone home" to qualify as > spyware. The fact is that Apple is doing this without disclosure, and it's > hard to argue that it is not done for tracking purposes, ergo, spying. I think we're in agreement about the implications of this, and of the whole "betrayal of trust" issue (but those of us who have kept one eye on such things as this know that Apple is no more to be trusted than any other large corp with teams of lawyers, marketteers and accountants - Microsoft set up a blog-like environment that had squirreled away in their EULA that anything and everything you posted became property of Microsoft, even things that had existing copyright and/or patents by third parties. They were a year or so behind Apple on that front...). But for the point of clarity and not muddling further concepts that are already not well grasped by the masses, spyware is software that COLLECTS data. iTunes is embedding data in the files (opposite process). This may be so that if these files show up on P2P sharing services they can be used to track down the leak, but that doesn't constitute spyware. This may also be so that they can be more easily tracked by some other piece of software that IS spyware. It would certainly be easy enough to have iTunes, Windows Media Player, Winamp or any other music player software also collect such data and report it back. But without a report-back feature, it isn't spyware. - -- brni i don't want the world, i just want your half. http://brni.livejournal.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 15:48:55 -0400 From: "F.J.Fornorn" Subject: Re: Apple putting spyware into iTunes Plus files How long do you think it will take before someone provides a script to overwrite iTunes embedded info with Steve Jobs' name and email address? My bet is its already done. ------------------------------ Date: 04 Jun 2007 16:11:09 -0400 From: Dan Riley Subject: Re: Apple putting spyware into iTunes Plus files Bernie Mojzes writes: > We should try not to overreact to this. It is NOT spyware (i.e. a > piece of software that hides in your computer and reports back to the > mothership what it is you are doing). Nor is it a rootkit such as > what Sony installed (i.e. something that hijacks the OS so as to run > it's own stuff and allow some third party access). Agreed. Calling this spyware is ridiculous--it's a piece of data, not an exectuable. It's also questionable to call it secret or hidden--it's plain unicode text in an MPEG text field, and iTunes will *show* it to you if you do "Get Info" on a track--there's a screen shot (with spoofed data) at http://www.emergentchaos.com/archives/2007/05/lrn_2_uz_sed_n00bz.html It's trivial to find, so no one competent could believe it would go unnoticed. It's also completely trivial to spoof--it takes a few seconds in any text editor that can handle binary files--so it has limited evidentiary value. > That doesn't mean that this is not troubling. The fact that it has > been done without any notification implies a certain dishonesty. I agree the lack of disclosure is troubling (I haven't looked at the ITMS privacy policy to see what it says). > And the fact that the personal information was encoded into the > files rather than kept on a database somewhere and only a key > encoded into the file shows a profound lack of respect for people's > personal information. Many businesses reveal my personal account info to me on a regular basis! The problems here are expectations and lack of disclosure. > If they wanted to do this right, they'd encode they'd keep the data > elsewhere and encode with multiple keys. The multiple keys would > provide error correction to prevent someone from being prosecuted for > spoofed data. That still doesn't protect someone against someone > hax0ring their machine and "appropriating" the files, but that's a > whole 'nuther topic. You're assuming a particular set of goals in formulating your "right" way. Here's an alternative--suppose the primary purpose is to display the information to end users for collection management purposes (as iTunes already does). If it were stored centrally, making it queriable from iTunes creates a host of additional security issues, requires the user be online to find the info, and makes ITMS an oracle for spoofing attacks. Storing it in the file avoids those issues, and making it trivially spoofable means it has very limited evidentiary value. I'm not saying those are Apple's goals, but I think they match the observed implementation better than the "spyware" theory... - -dan ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 14:45:39 -0700 From: "Bill Mazur" Subject: RE: Apple putting spyware into iTunes Plus files Of all of the outstanding points being made in this thread, this comment by Bernie is the one that rings the truest for me: "And the people? The people need to start being able to identify with and empathize with the people whose music they love. Less hero worship and more understanding that these are people who need to make a living." This may open up a whole new thread but you may find this link to the MySpace blog of the band Pendragon to be interesting. It has some bearing on this discussion: http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=67902429&blo gID=264777462&MyToken=85c58e64-e750-48a8-9aea-783d50bebcd6 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 15:08:07 -0700 From: "Bill Mazur" Subject: Sorry a little off the main thread: Not a blind faith Apple fan (RE: Apple putting spyware into iTunes Plus files) Dan Stark wrote: The most irksome part about it is the lack of disclosure, especially since it's being done by Apple which is a company that so many people seem to have such blind faith in. That's not the point. If Apple wants to track its users there should be adequate disclosure, but I suspect they don't want to publicize this because it will impact their sales. There are many reasons to oppose this type of behavior, but since it's Apple I suppose a lot of people will jump to their defense instead. _______________________________________________________________________ I am not personally not a big Apple "blind faith, they can do no wrong" kinda guy. I am personally pretty sick and tired of those Apple versus PC marketing fluff ads. You know the "Macs are so cool and PCs are boring and stuffy" commercials. I have a number of PCs and one Mac in my collection of computers. They are all marvelous when they are working and not giving you problems and are all pieces of garbage when they are crashing and otherwise making your life miserable (I know, long run on sentence). When the Mac crashes for no reason it doesn't give me any cryptic error messages like the PC does. I don't know if the cryptic error messages can help a technician fix my PC or not. The Mac doesn't disclose anything (sort of the complaint about Apple not being forthcoming with information) at all when the system crashes or locks up. So in either case both systems crash and lock up for whatever reason and I have no clue why. I use my Mac for the traditional "this is what Mac does best" reasons such as running Protools, Reason and their associated plug-ins for creating and editing music. The Mac dies and gives me problems just as much if not more so than the PCs ever do. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 02:17:47 +0200 From: Kjetil Torgrim Homme Subject: Re: Apple putting spyware into iTunes Plus files [Jeffrey Burka]: > > (while I get more and more annoyed at "hidden" tracks placed after > a long silence (YO! that stopped being fun back in the early > 90s!), I run all the CDs I rip through a simple filter which shortens these silences to the square of their length. a single second is left intact, but 5 minutes becomes 17 seconds. IMHO this maintains the feel imbued by the pause without being too annoying. http://kjetilho.at.ifi.uio.no/hacks/#stripnuls - -- Kjetil T. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 21:30:18 -0400 From: "Paul Blair" Subject: Re: Apple putting spyware into iTunes Plus files Just curious -- do we know whether iTunes embedded the information about the user in the previous DRM-restricted files? Is this something that Apple has just added, or something that Apple has failed to remove? On 6/4/07, DanStark <2005.carnivore99@verizon.net> wrote: > Jeffrey Burka wrote: > > >a) "spyware"? Could you please explain how tagging a file with > >metadata such as its owner's name qualifies as spyware? There's > >nothing inherent to the file that could, say, phone home and report > >you for...well...anything. > > iTunes gathers information about the user and embeds that information > into its files for tracking purposes without adequate user notice, > consent or control. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 20:53:17 -0500 From: "Ken Blake" Subject: Re: Apple putting spyware into iTunes Plus files On 6/4/07, Paul Blair wrote: > > Just curious -- do we know whether iTunes embedded the information > about the user in the previous DRM-restricted files? Is this something > that Apple has just added, or something that Apple has failed to > remove? > I was wondering the same thing so I just checked. The first song I got from iTunes was 32 flavors by Ani Difranco. It has my name, email address, and the purchase date of 8/5/06. It seems a bit strange for this to be such a big deal now. I don't see how people can say it is hidden when all you have to do is bring up the song info and there it is. Ken ------------------------------ End of ecto-digest V13 #145 ***************************