
Apple Deleted Rivals’ Songs from Users’ iPods - kenjackson
http://m.wsj.com/articles/BL-DGB-39221
======
shurcooL
Apple deleted all my songs that were _legally_ purchased from _iTunes_. What
did I do deserve that? I bought a new iPad.

So what happened is that I was living in Canada. I bought a bunch (maybe
30-50) songs directly from iTunes over the years. I had them on my iPad mini.

Later on, I was working and living in US, so I changed the country to US and
added a US credit card to my iTunes account. Everything was fine.

Then, the iPad mini with Retina display (aka iPad mini 2) came out and I
wanted to upgrade to it. Normally, I have nightly backups to iCloud, but since
they are (unfortunately) not as thorough, I made a full local backup to my
MacBook, and restored it on the new iPad mini with Retina. All the apps and
settings transferred fine, but all songs were missing. When I went to "iTunes
Song Purchases", it was empty, as it doesn't consider purchases I made in the
Canadian iTunes Store as purchases.

I know that if I remembered/knew which songs I bought, I could buy them again
and it might not charge me a 2nd time, but it's like playing russian roulette
- you have to confirm a purchase and if it matches, you don't pay, else you
do. Plus it's a lot of work to find/remember which songs I bought.

At first I was pretty unhappy about it and was gonna try to do something, but
then I just gave up on it and moved on. It's not completely Apple's fault,
because they have to deal with countries and having separate stores. I wish
there was one global store and 1 country and 1 currency and I wouldn't have to
deal with this just because I moved to new coordinates, but yeah.

~~~
reedlaw
It is Apple's fault because they could have easily defaulted to preserving all
songs rather than deleting them. It took extra work for Apple programmers to
add a function to iTunes that removes songs not purchased in the same region.
Were they really coerced into such behavior? It's more likely that this
"feature" was a selling point for record companies, not consumers. Moral of
the story: check who owns software before using it.

~~~
mcphage
> It's more likely that this "feature" was a selling point for record
> companies, not consumers.

From parent:

> I know that if I remembered/knew which songs I bought, I could buy them
> again and it might not charge me a 2nd time

So if they don't charge you again, then what's the selling point for record
companies?

~~~
reedlaw
Apple can say they don't automatically copy over songs purchased in another
region. Allowing you to "purchase" the songs again for free sounds like a
workaround that the parent found. However you look at it it's not for the good
of the customer.

~~~
mironathetin
Correct. The back door is already written in the terms and conditions. Have
fun reading them. Wasn't it Steve Jobs who said, he never signs a contract
that is longer than a page?

~~~
psykovsky
Steve Jobs could have said whatever he wanted without it being true. The
problem isn't in him saying it, the problem are certain persons who believe it
and repeat the nonsense.

~~~
mironathetin
Is your comment in any way related to my post?

Steve Jobs may not have signed complex contracts. This does not exclude, that
Apples layers make the customers sign complex contracts, does it?

Steve Jobs promoted the digital lifestyle, although he was a vinyl junkie and
owned high-end audio stuff. The point is, that the advice he gave about the
length of contracts is good, unimportant if he followed it or not. It is
useful for customers to follow and that does certainly not exclude apples
customers (although, nowadays, you may not be able to buy a slice of bread, if
you insist on short terms and conditions).

------
Yetanfou
Every time a story like this comes along, a whole host of commenters tries to
absolve Apple (or ${insert_other_company}, although the phenomenon seems to be
especially prevalent when Apple is mentioned) from any wrongdoings, whether
perceived or real. Why is this? It bears a remarkable parallel to the same
behaviour often seen in discussions involving religion. An honest question to
those of you who feel the urge to defend your favourite company from all
accusations, what makes you do so? It is not as if these commercial entities
have any loyalty to you, so why stand up for them?

~~~
Spearchucker
It's about consistency. Consistency is our nearly obsessive desire to be (and
appear to be) consistent with what we have already done (buying an iPhone, for
example). Once we've made that choice, we encounter personal and interpersonal
pressures to behave consistently with that commitment.

If you're interested in this sort of behaviour, you might try Robert
Cialdini's book, Influence, the Phychology of Persuasion
([http://www.amazon.com/dp/006124189X/](http://www.amazon.com/dp/006124189X/)).

[Edit] I'm an idiot. I forgot that I wrote a post about this a while ago -
here's a summary of Cialdini's (and related) stuff:
[https://www.wittenburg.co.uk/Entry.aspx?id=439dc4d5-33db-45a...](https://www.wittenburg.co.uk/Entry.aspx?id=439dc4d5-33db-45a3-9c32-176ad141b86f).
It's about influence, and to that end discusses some of our behavioural
traits.

~~~
netcan
I agree, but I think it runs in other directions as well.

People rush to attack companies and find unlikely conspiratorial and malicious
motivations for companies' actions too. I think the reality is that we're not
all that logical. We're logical too, but logic is only part of how we form
opinions. A lot of it is some sort of habit. If you see bourgeoisie conspiracy
and class conflict as a driving force in the world, your version of events is
likely to be whatever supports that. If you see corporate conspiracy
everywhere… If you see governments accumulating power everywhere.. If you see
a Google conspiracy everywhere..

But I tend to side with you. There's something offensive about the loyalty
consumers have to big brands. The relationship just isn't mutual, which gives
it an unsavory slavish flavor.

~~~
colomon
For my taste, brand loyalty is drastically less harmful and unsavory than the
equally troublesome loyalty to political parties. (At least in the US, can't
say about elsewhere.)

~~~
Yetanfou
Brand loyalty does more personal harm as it turns individuals into milch cows.
As to whether loyalty to a political party or orientation is harmful depends
on whether that loyalty is balanced - will the party stand up for issues you
care about? The bigger the party, the smaller the chance they will. It does
not get much bigger than the D/R split in the US while still maintaining the
semblance of choice.

~~~
rconti
Unfortunately, political loyalty lasts far longer than brand loyalty.

------
beefsack
The past couple of years I've gone back to buying physical CDs and ripping
them myself (abcde is fantastic) in the quality and format I like.

My music collection is synced to Dropbox and automatically syncs across all my
PCs and to my phone.

I've also come to enjoy walking into music stores and browsing the music
looking for something that I'll enjoy coding to, and a lot of the time here in
Australia it ends up being cheaper buying physical CDs nowadays, especially if
you're not buying the latest stuff.

There's more than just convenience.

~~~
Spearchucker
I do the same thing. I bought music from Amazon for a while. Every now and
again I bought some German music from Amazon.de. The purchase works well
enough but after that none of my non-German music works in the Amazon player.
The Xbox One will simply not let me purchase anything that's not from my
region.

The CD or DVD just takes all that pain away.

~~~
mandalar12
Why not just use Amazon or Google music and download everything ? Google Music
is especially good because it lets you download a .zip with complete album
compared to Amazon that only lets you download one song at a time.

I used to buy and rip CDs but it takes time and space and feels really
backward.

~~~
Spearchucker
I have a wall bookshelf which has a corner-to-corner shelf in it for CDs, and
another for DVDs. That makes the bookshelf more interesting and gives an
otherwise really cold-looking room warmth, without taking up space. As
mentioned, Amazon makes it frustrating to buy digital content from another
region (although it does work). Google is not an option because I'm one of
those people that avoids anything Google, no matter how convenient their
products may be.

All of this is very subjective. Your points are well made, nonetheless.

------
72deluxe
CDs do not have this problem. That's why I still buy them, despite the "pain"
of ripping a CD (it'll be a problem if I ever move to a skinny MacBook and
have no CD drive anymore - how will I share CDs of music I have recorded with
the drummer...?)

Plus, to take the songs from you, they'd have to break into my house and walk
away with all my CDs.

I also have interesting sleeve notes and details on who mixed the album and
the equipment they endorse, as well as photos and beautiful smelling paper in
the sleeves.

Great!

~~~
Cthulhu_
> how will I share CDs of music I have recorded with the drummer...?

External / USB DVD drive, or an USB stick, or Dropbox, or Mega, or some other
service like that.

~~~
72deluxe
Sadly my drummer isn't as technical-savvy as us on here. He lives out in the
country and has a poor Internet connection, plus downloading file and writing
an MP3 to disc as audio would probably be beyond him - he is in his mid-50s.

The external DVD drive offered by Apple seems prohibitively expensive for what
it is; also, carrying an external drive around to save just a few millimetres
on MacBook height seems stupid to me.

------
na85
>Augustin Farrugia testified that Apple did not offer a more detailed
explanation because, “We don’t need to give users too much information,” and
“We don’t want to confuse users.”

A very revealing statement about the way Apple perceives its users. Shut up,
pay, and don't ask questions.

~~~
brandonbloom
A very revealing statement about your biases.

As somebody who has had to do tech support, I fully understand the desire to
provide the users with less information. Believe me, most of them confuse
easily.

~~~
anigbrowl
As someone who has also had to do tech support, I have hated Apple for this
ever since, because it limits the user's ability to provide me with any
information. 'An error has occurred.' Thanks Apple, real informative.

I always admired the technology and integration in Apple gear, but since the
days of MacOS system software I have always hated the dumbed-down, hard-to-
customize operating system, and have never purchased an Apple product. I'm
going to have to pick up an iPad at some point because there are so many good
apps aimed at Musicians, and I respect the fact that OS X is basically BSD in
gift wrap so I can get to a command line if I really want to know what's going
on. But I don't feel that enthusiastic about it, because I think there's
something fundamentally user-hostile about obfuscating what's going on behind
the curtain.

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
Apple's error messages are often no better than what UNIX system utilities
give you, to be fair.

~~~
spacemanmatt
...both of which I feed directly to Google to gain enlightenment. It's almost
like no one needs to bother catching an exception ever again!

------
arca_vorago
It's part of the move away from ownership and towards leasing and licensing of
_everything_. _Because there is much more profit there._

I started out as a BSD guy, who transitioned as the *nix desktop got better to
gnu/linux. The more I learned about the differences between gpl/bsd and the
more I thought about the philosophical underpinnings, the more I am convinced
that Richard Stallman, while eccentric and sometimes hard to bear for some,
was and is a man ahead of his time, and that he is absolutely right when he
talks about the four freedoms.

Despite this, at my recent new position, I gave in and decided to dive into
the apple ecosystem because "spend less time fixing your system and more time
working!" was what I kept getting told. I also have apple users so the ability
to support them is important.

That being said, I have been increasingly dissatisfied with the whole system,
both in it's functionality and its philosophy. (which is a whole post within
itself)

I'm about ready to scrap it all and return to something I have more control
over.

The bottom line is this: If you don't have root on your device, you don't own
it. (iPhone, iPod, iPad, Android phone, Windows phone, Smart TV's, gaming
consoles, we are increasingly surrounded by devices we don't have control
over. I was listening to a talk about why bsd is a better ecosystem, and it
is, in many ways, and the presenter said something that really struck me. He
said, paraphrasing, "...and we recently found out [whichever]bsd is in the
playstation 4." He said it in a way that was supposed to be impressive, as in
"hey look, our shit is so awesome and business friendly that it got put on the
new playstation!" An audience member then said something along the lines of,
"is the source code released?" And of course the speaker had to mumble "no"
and move on quickly.

It's the epitome of the problem. BSD licensing enables companies to restrict
the freedom of the user, full stop.

I truly believe GPL is just getting started in the future of science,
technology, and communication.

------
aikah
hmm, I dont understand.Afaik Ipods were synced with Itunes,seems to me that
one could put anything on Itunes,no matter where it came from.So if I synced
my Ipod against my Itunes database,all songs should have been on the Ipod.

Did Itunes used to work differently?

~~~
MBCook
No, you're correct.

I believe this refers to the case going on right now [1] where RealPlayer
Music that was sold in '05 or so as 'iPod Compatible' was locked out more than
once by iTunes updates.

The thing is it worked (like PlayFair before it [2]) by circumventing/faking
FairPlay, which was/is quite likely a violation of the DMCA. Apple patched the
bugs and thus "excluded competitors".

So because Apple "excluded competitors" (who where breaking their encryption)
they artificially keep the price of music high by stifling competition
(ignoring record company contracts and the fact that Real had a 3% market
share at the time).

You're right thought. Throughout the _entire life_ of the iPod you've been
able to play DRM free MP3s that you got through any method, legal or
otherwise.

Don't forget, Real didn't have a good reputation. And they were breaking
Apple's DRM so you could play files that had _their_ DRM so it's the "they
were fighting for people's freedom" card isn't very strong.

I see this as the same as when Palm faked USB IDs so the Pre would sync with
iTunes. Someone else hacked their way into taking advantage of Apple's
software and then got mad when the hack was removed and claimed "unfair
competition". Sour grapes.

[1] [http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/12/03/steve-jobs-
video-t...](http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/12/03/steve-jobs-video-
testimony-and-emails-revealed-in-ipod-itunes-antitrust-lawsuit)

[2]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairPlay](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairPlay)

~~~
lmm
It's no different from Microsoft changing DOS until Lotus wouldn't run on it.
I'm amazed at how many people will defend everything Apple does.

~~~
chockablock
It's different in that DOS was an operating system for a general purpose
computer, whereas the iPod was sold as a closed, non-interoperable consumer
device. I'm not defending Apple's actions in the case (I'm not familiar enough
with the details) but I don't think your analogy is sound.

------
oofabz
>Updates that deleted non-Apple music files were intended to protect consumers
from those system break-ins.

How convenient that Apple chose a security solution that just happened to give
them an unfair advantage over their competition. Quite the happy coincidence
there.

~~~
intopieces
If their intention was to stifle the competition, it seems logical that they
would have prevented the device from accepting music ripped from CDs or music
downloaded illegally. Alas, they did not do this, because the success of the
ipod was predicated on widespread copyright infringement. Who would pay 350$+
for a music player if they had to pay for all the music too? No, this was a
simple case of keeping the record companies happy with the DRM scheme.
Remember, when the iPod and other players hit the market, the record companies
wanted to sue them for facilitating music theft. Same thing happened with
writable CDs. The consumer was not harmed.

~~~
lmm
The intention was to stifle the competition in the moneymaking part of the
business. IIRC at one point Real were like "name your price" for a license for
the DRM technology, and were told it was not for sale.

------
kijin
Whenever I buy a song on iTunes (or any other online store), I immediately
convert it to mp3, and move the mp3 to another folder that iTunes doesn't know
about. Then I shut down that proprietary pile of cow dung and play, sync, etc.
the song in any way I like, using any program I like, on any device I like.
It's a bit of hassle, but in exchange, I actually get to feel like I own those
files.

I think I started doing this shortly after Amazon got into a minor shitstorm
for remotely deleting copies of _1984_ (of all books!) from Kindle devices.
News like this makes me happy that I've been doing what I've been doing.

~~~
mmastrac
If you're getting lossless files, you should probably be converting them to
FLAC. You might (read: will) take a small hit on quality going from AAC to
MP3.

~~~
kijin
I still have some stone-age devices that can't handle FLAC, and my mediocre
ears can't hear the difference anyway.

------
acomjean
So I've bought music from itunes and amazon. The amazon program, downloads the
music, opens itunes and through some scripting magic (applescript) adds those
songs to itunes which then auto sync to my ipod. Amazingly seamless.

Requiem was a drm stripper for itunes music and videos. It was a clear that
apple figured out what was going on and made software updates to break it.
Once apple beat it for good I stopped buying videos (and pretty much stopped
watching tv).

Now music is DRM free. Video, saddly is not.

~~~
josefresco
I too started by purchasing MP3's from Amazon because f*ck DRM. However once
Apple ditched the DRM, I started buying from iTunes, and rather like it's
ability to "sync" music purchased on another iOS device to the device I'm
currently using (I have a family with 5 iOS devices).

I tend to purchase most songs while in my car (after hearing it on
Pandora/Sirius) and don't know if it would even be possible to purchase and
play immediately a track purchased from Amazon on an iOS device (without a
computer).

~~~
leviathant
I switched to Amazon once they started doing digital music sales. You can
purchase and immediately play music from Amazon on iOS devices, without a
computer, using the Amazon Music app. By default, the music streams from
Amazon, but you can also download it to your device.

In fact, I can stream/download music from CDs and vinyl I bought years ago
through Amazon.

------
fit2rule
I've stopped buying music from musicians I can't contact directly and
communicate with, without having a middleman/record-company in the mix. Its
not hard to find great, quality music, made by real people out there in the
music world. So much great stuff goes unnoticed because people are distracted
by the majors, but I think the industry has changed. There's nothing quite so
rewarding as listening to a great album, then mailing the artist and paying
them directly, and getting a response from them personally.. The record
companies don't offer anything near this level of personal contact and I think
its changing everything.

~~~
goblin89
> There's nothing quite so rewarding as listening to a great album, then
> mailing the artist and paying them directly, and getting a response from
> them personally.

Bandcamp seems to be doing about the right thing, actually. It allows to keep
the interaction between artist and listener reasonably personal, while at the
same time offering options to make the process easier and more streamlined
from artist’s perspective. It also is very transparent about their fees—you
know your money will go directly to the artist (though I’m not totally sure
how it works with labels, for them Bandcamp seems to offer a separate kind of
account).

------
josefresco
I'm curious to hear more about the meaning of "The system was totally hacked".

"Farrugia told the court that hackers with names like “DVD Jon” and “Requiem”
made Apple “very paranoid” about protecting iTunes. Updates that deleted non-
Apple music files were intended to protect consumers from those system break-
ins. “The system was totally hacked,” he said."

Is he stating that the iPhone OS (was it called iOS back then?) was completely
hacked, or that the work-around to get music onto an iPod outside of iTunes
was "hacked"? I'm assuming the former, just curious on the background there.

------
fixermark
It's interesting that I don't hear these stories from the Android or Windows
Phone ecosystems.

I think this might be a situation where Apple being first-mover has been a
disadvantage to them; they started with a "sync to one single computer"
design, and have been patching on that over and over to move into the new
ecosystems. The other options in the market started with a "sync to cloud"
design, so they had to solve issues of merging and collating data from
multiple devices out of the starting gate.

~~~
mcphage
> I think this might be a situation where Apple being first-mover has been a
> disadvantage to them

Also, when Android started, music was only sold without DRM. And incompatible
flavors of DRM is what this whole thing is about. Windows Phone was around
then, but I don't know much about music on it.

------
jchimney
Not cool. I love my apple products and ecosystem; but an effort should be made
to identify and reimburse.

------
pervycreeper
>Farrugia told the court that hackers with names like “DVD Jon” and “Requiem”
made Apple “very paranoid” about protecting iTunes. Updates that deleted non-
Apple music files were intended to protect consumers from those system break-
ins.

Deleting DRMed media files and system software somehow solves system
intrusions? That's rich. Pretty clear who the bad guys are here.

~~~
jpttsn
You're assuming that when two companies have a fight, one of them is a good
and the other is a bad guy? They can't both be bad?

~~~
pervycreeper
I was thinking more about the consumer who might wish to use the files he/she
purchased.

------
kefka
Your first problem: You bought Apple.

Your second problem: you expected a bad actor to suddenly be good.

Your third problem. You kept buying Apple because it's 'shiny'.

Guess you should have listened to Stallman. He may be a nut, but he does call
it right.

~~~
spacemanmatt
He's nutty, not a nut. Subtle but important difference.

His calls are amazingly far-reaching. But yes, he can call 'em. The trouble
is, his Al Gore beats his delivery. They both gotta up their PR game.

~~~
kefka
Good point. He is nutty, but still is right on.

I work in Emergent technology/ R&D at a university, and we get questions like
"what can I buy that will just work"? I look towards Free Software, and what
is published. If there's a free software solution for it, it'll never go away.
However, if there's a loose corporate control, then it probably will fade. But
if there's iron-grip control, the device will go away as soon as something
shiner comes out to take its place.

That last one is Apple.

------
Htsthbjig
How is that a problem?

The official way to upload Songs in the Ipod-Iphone is using Itunes. I have
uploaded myself lots of music purchased on other services or my own into
Itunes without a problem.

It will be a problem if Itunes restricted the music it loads in the devices,
like the misleading tittle implies, and like other devices did(and are History
now),it does not.

I have also uploaded music from Linux programs, caring not to update the
firmware of the device over the supported ones, but I would not have made a
drama if it were not to work.

------
rnovak
They still do the same type of thing. Glad I paid 930 dollars for a device I
can _only_ use with music from their store from _one_ computer.

edit: Those downvoting seem to be seriously hostile towards consumers. If
people are giving you 700 dollar profits per sale, I think you should be a lot
more upfront about your limitations. Hiding a disclaimer in fine print on a
support page is just plain wrong.

~~~
SG-
Ok, but you're completely wrong. It can play any mp3 or aac that doesn't have
any DRM weather it's from Amazon, some other store or pirated.

~~~
rnovak
Well, firstly, I believe Amazon music is DRM locked, the only way you can
_download_ it on an iPhone/iTouch is through their 'app', and you cant export
it.

Secondly, yah, that's true, if you only use one computer. If you're like any
one of the millions of people who use more than one computer, the second you
plug your iPhone/iTouch into a different computer, the only options you're
given are to 1) Eject or 2) Erase.

Considering what I spent on the iPhone, I _should_ be able to do whatever I
please, but that's clearly not the case.

~~~
veidr
Amazon music isn't broken/DRMed, and hasn't ever been. It is just standard
MP3s, and I play them in iTunes all the time.

It is (very marginally) more hassle to buy them from Amazon and then drag them
into iTunes, but hey, it feels good to fight The Man. (Plus, albums are often
$2 or $3 cheaper on Amazon than in the Apple music store.)

EDIT: history of the DRM-free Amazon Music store:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Music](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Music)

~~~
acomjean
I buy from itunes and Amazon (plain mp3s). The music downloader auto imports
songs into itunes if you tell it too.

