FairGame, a new(ish) way to unDRM iTunes tracks on your Mac
By Cyrus Farivar 
posted October 30th 2006 9:23PM
posted October 30th 2006 9:23PM
While we'd love an easy (and legal) way to strip DRM from our iTunes-purchased songs on our Macs, that probably won't happen anytime soon, so we'll just have to settle for the next-best thing: re-encoding those protected AAC files using Apple's own iMovie software. While we first heard about this hack in the summer of 2004, it was a bit too labor-intensive on a per-file basis to be troubled over. However, we just caught wind of a new program called FairGame that serves as an automated interface to re-encode your audio files using that technique, and converts a protected iTunes track into an unprotected AAC file; it's not quite DRM-stripping in it's purest form, but for many a Mac user it's going to have to do.[Via iPodNN]
awww no pc? ahah
OK.. maybe someone can answer me this... why can't someone just burn it to CD and reimport. Might take 5-10 minutes out of someone's life and now it's DRM free. Besides, you now have a backup CD. All this fuss it seems for nothing really. (I can't believe I said "fuss".. I'm young still.. I am.. believe me.)
I've never actually used this method, but I would think it would cause more loss of audio than would be desired. It's compressing an already compressed file.
Bosco714, Yes you can do that. I have burned it to a cd, and reimported it several times to listen to mp3's on my Palm ever since my 2nd gen iPod fried.
Burning the media to a CD only to rip it anew (and therefore re-encode it) at a later point would decrease the quality of the recording, though how much this bothers one is certainly relative. I'm sure a few people have said that in the time its taken me to type this ha.
I've actually never touched iTunes to make a purchase, (nor do I have an iPod) so I guess that I can't really voice an opinion on this issue. Ah well.
Well I think you can A) only burn the cd 5 times I think B) you can only open the music on 5 computers that are authorized.. I think that's how it is...
ipodrulz.. I think that method is only if you're burning from the ORIGINAL source material (ie; iTunes purchase).. but doesn't apply if you're ripping from an reimported CD.
Loss quality is debatable. I mean, it's not like we're going from CD to cassette tape back to CD.
It's crashing on me when it goes to do the last export using "expert settings"
Cool idea, but needs some work?
damn, why dosnt anyone make apps for 10.3.9 anymore? oh well, nice app tho
I think the whole DRM-Stripping business is the wrong thing to do in this age of technology. We've got music industry sales at record lows, mostly because of peer-to-peer file sharing, and iTunes is the #1 legal music download service which prevents this stuff and people want to strip it of its file protections so they can put it wherever they want? If this is the case, buy your MP3s from another site or simply buy an iPod.
'simply buy an ipod'. pathetic.
Your ignorance is amazing. Let me ask you this - 7 years ago, who would you have said would control the music world today? Sony and the Walk/Discman, right? Hmm, but for some reason they aren't leading anymore... nowhere close.
Apple will not lead forever. They have a lot of momentum going with the 'Pod, but it cannot last indefinitely. Consider this: when Apple is no longer market leader and you buy a DAP from another manufacturer you will suddenly find out that NONE of the music you paid for through iTunes is usable anymore.
This is new and unique to online distribution; with CDs you can re-rip or re-encode to any desired format so as to never have this issue. A LARGE number of people share your ignorance and think DRM is fine. It's not. It takes your fair use rights and throws them down the toilet.
DRM is paying for a limited license to something that somebody else tells you how many times you can use, how often you can use it, what you can do with it, and most importantly, what you CAN'T. Since it's proprietary, if a company changes their technology they don't have to make the old stuff compatible and can force you to buy it all again (see PlaysForSure and Zune). It doesn't stop piracy - CDs are trivial to rip (even copy protected ones) and very few, if any, songs are unavailable on CD. DRM's only purpose is brand lock-in.
Don't believe the BS the xxAA send your way, and get educated on this. Hopefully this post was informative for some people.
Record sales are at an all time low because music sucks. Don't blame it on the fans of music. People don't buy music because they don't want to pay $15 for music that is absolute garbage. Albums are only produced for the singles, making it worthless after you realize that the rest of the music on the album is just sub-par. Maybe you should think next time before you argue against a failed system.
Burning and re-ripping just one CD might be no problem, but who would want to do that for any music library larger than a few hundred MB?
^to the above^
When you buy a cd, there is no encryption barring you from making a goven number of copies and is a much higher quality. Songs purchased over the internet should not be any different. As for lagging sales, I would attribute this to increasing cd prices (compared to falling dvd prices) and the popularity of online stores. Finally, what if I want to play iTunes files on my rock-boxed iPod (something I have done). Removing the DRM is the only way to do this. You say that DRM-stripping is not the way to go, but if you legaly acquire a digital music file, you should be able to use it on all the devices you own. Steve Jobs, the #1 source of drm'd music files, has been quoted as saying so. If people want to bypass DRM, for legal or illegal reasons, they easily can. My challenge for the music industry would be to make it so that people have no desire to remove the drm or remove it all together, as cds already are.
"Songs purchased over the internet should not be any different"
I don't necessarily disagree with you, but I'm having a hard time answering this question for my self:
Why?
its froze too for me- but its pretty cool to watch it work.... at least now i can figure it out howt ot do it myslef but i think i just enjoyed watching it go through the steps on its own...
And not as pathetic as getting albums for free? :P As a musician, I find DRM stripping to be highly disrespectful to the musicians who make a living with music, and spend lots of time planning an album and getting it out on the market, only to have it made as a torrent. Tell me if its more pathetic to buy an iPod or to illegally share people's music.
I personally buy CDs mostly as I like to have tangible stuff, but I then rip it to my computer for easy listening. If iTunes let me play music that i PAY FOR from their store on my generic MP3 player, then sure. But until that gaping hole in their system is fixed - they're not getting my money, and I'm certainly not buying into the iFad.
could you not just set up Automator to so sumthing like this?
Motoi,
record low?
In Canada, music sales just climed 25%. Downloading music is legal there.
http://www.slyck.com/news.php?story=1303
Do you have to have iMovie HD? (is iMovie ok?) Judging from my results I believe the answer is yes, but I'd appreciate confirmation.
Motoi, I agree piracy is (somewhat) to blame for low record sales (Although, I believe it is only a small percentage). Yet, stripping DRM out of purchased MP3s (Not subscription services) is not only justified, but should be an option. Simply buying an iPod is exactly what Apple wants you to do; they want you to have no choice but to buy their product. Buying from another store doesn't help either; all that accomplishes is being stuck with another player that is only supported by that music store.
It's all about market share to these companies; they don't give a damn whether their product is the best, just as long as it has the most users.
The only problem with stripping out the DRM is distributing these songs to other people.
The point is you bought the music, just because it isn't tangible and you can't hold it in your hands does not give them the right to say where and what you play it on.
This is the kind of debate that gets raised between the acceptability of DRM and how far it violates our rights as we pay for music. However, if iTunes didn't use DRM, how much music would even be bought from it? Sure, we can't use it on other MP3 players or whatever, so why not use another online service which doesn't use DRM? You know the consequences of using iTunes and that should be accepted. The only reason people make such a big deal out of this whole thing is because its the number one online music sales provider, and most of us have bought music from it. Buy a CD if you're so inclined to do so and support the artists.
some people just don't understand why DRM-Stripping is useful (at least why I do/justify it). I do it becuase I need to play my iTunes purchased songs on several devices that otherwise cant, such as my Xbox360 (its a bitch to burn a CD rip it to my xbox and then walla 30 min I have less than 20 songs!), my motorola non-iTunes cell phone, and my Sony Mylo. Now I do have backups of every song and both seasons of LOST on CDs and DVDs but I cant rip them to my xbox or rerip them into iTunes unprotected, so those are almost useless. Now tell me DRM-Stripping is wrong, I want to do that right thing and buy the songs, but I also want to play them on any device I want, this is the basis for DRM-Stripping, I believe so anyways.
P.S. I actually can't get it to work, I did everything it says enable assisted devices ect, the thing in iMovie and I choose some songs, procces songs, ok its does all this stuff by itself, then it imports the song and an error message pops up in iMovie saying "you have titles or transactions currently rendering. please wait until they are completed rendering." and then farigame says how something has happened in iMovie and it just stops.
i have an i pod and i buy music from the itunes store i also buy cds from a real store, however if i just like one song i just buy that one song, my phone (sprint a920) plays mp3 and whole nine yards, so since i bought the song and paid for it i should be able to make it play on my cell phone's mem card with headphones for personal use.not just on my ipod - there is nothing wrong with that besides being illegal... sorta... :-)
Yeah, I'm getting:
Finder got an error: Can't get item "02 The Ocean.wav" of desktop. (-1728)
...when it tries to save the file to be exported. D'oh
Motoi, that's the problem. No online music store sells music without DRM, legally.
And why should we have to buy the entire CD? What if I just want one song off an album?
There are a number of stores that sell legal and un-DRMed music - I personally am a fan of eMusic and Audio Lunchbox. Sure, it's not Top 40, but the selections are great (especially if your tastes tend towards indie, jazz, blues, or classical), the prices are low, and the music is yours to do with what you please.
interesting,will try this later indeed.
Is there something like this for video files that are purchased from the iTunes store?
Justin @ Oct 30th 2006 11:02PM "No online music store sells music without DRM, legally."
eMusic sells music online without DRM. its the only place essentially i can get music legally online for my ipod in NZ
"what if I only want to buy one song"
"I have a right to use it on any device I want"
blah blah blah. Man, people will never get it. Here's how a contract works (which is what you are agreeing to when you buy from the iTunes Music Store): in exchange for X dollars, you will give me Y. Apple is saying "for $0.99, we will let you download this one song with these restrictions."
By stripping DRM, you are breaching your contract with Apple. I realize that probably means nothing to most people here, but you are. And don't give me the "well Apple shouldn't force me to use an iPod," or "Apple should let me play it on my XBox 360." Well guess what: THEY AREN'T. DEAL WITH IT.
If you don't like the terms of the ITMS, don't F'ING USE IT. It's not like you are buying food here. Music is not a necessity! You don't buy CDs because the music sucks? Well don't buy from iTune s because the DRM sucks! Which is a bigger protest? Buying something according to an agreement, breaching the agreement, yet economically telling Apple their system is fine? OR, alternatively, not buying from the iTMS at all.
Christ you people bug the crap out of me with your "I should be able to..." No, you shouldn't. They provide you with X for Y. This is not the same deal you get by buying the CD, so don't apply that model. Apple is providing you convenience (download instead of going to the store), portability (file instead of disc) and selection (1 song vs. whole album). In exchange, they are providing restrictions (devices, sound quality, etc). If that doesn't sit well with you, DON'T FREAKING BUY IT!
You're not counter-culture, you're not within your fair use rights (remember, different contract than what you're getting with the RIAA), and you're not sticking it to the man. You're simply acting like a DB.
I buy CDs because 90% of the time I don't want to have to deal with the restrictions. But the other 10% I can live with the DRM for a song or two and I acknowlegde the terms I am agreeing to when I buy from the iTMS.
f'ing whiners.
-p-
Great post.
At last somebody else gets it! I was going to have to write this all out myself but thankfully you saved me the hassle ;)
People have rights. When you buy something you have certain rights. "Guarantee" for instance. "Fair use" in case of music. No contract can take away those rights. That's the law.
But apparently if you have enough money and/or have the right connections you don't have to take the law too serious. Well, except when it's in your favor of course.
Almost no one seems to get that it is not Apple who puts DRM restrictions on the music but the record labels. It was Apple who was the only one able to get a deal with them to put music legally online - and apparently the iTunes DRM restrictions are some of the most user friendly.
I can only agree with p-diddy - if you don't like it, just don't use iTunes. Although why anyone actually would not want to use an iPod is beyond me. It simply is the best personalized music player out there - anyone who says otherwise hasn't used the iPod + iTunes system.
If people want to complain they should do it to the record labels who have made it highly unlikely that I will buy another CD in my life - since with some of my most recent purchases I could not even make a cd copy (on a Mac). Of course it was BMG...
@p-diddy
that's exactly right. I would be fine w/ iTunes restriction if they just gave us a higher quality rip. I'd ask for lossless, but I know that won't ever happen.
I'm not too worried about apple tanking, mainly because someone out there will find a way to strip the DRM... so I won't be left out in the dark (ok, that's hopeful thinking, but I'm sure it's possible).
>>"Fair use" in case of music. No contract can
>> take away those rights. That's the law.
Wrong. People are free to contract away their legal rights. Ask any first year law student that has suffered through contracts class. In fact the law enforces people making dumb choices. It gives them a break when they are duped or relying on misrepresentations, but a bad choice is still a binding one.
"Fair use" does not mean "alter what you agreed to to suit your wants." Fair use means you can make a backup of the data file as you purchased it. It doesn't mean agree to A then change it to B because you decide you don't like A.
Fair use copying is based on the premise that cassette tapes degrade with each subsequent copy. They had ARM (analog rights management) built in. By the 5th copy, it sounded like garbage, so the courts weren't worried about littly johnny making wholesale copies. Additionally, copying cassettes was a time intensive, expensive, and voluminous task. The same does not apply to digital copies where the 1,000,000th copy sounds as good as the first, 1,000,000 copies can be stored on a hard drive, and putting it up on a filesharing network allows 1,000,000 people all over the world to access it instantly.
I don't like DRM any more than anyone else, which is why I still buy most of my music in CD form and don't buy CDs that prevent copying. But I also acknowledge that there is a trade-off and for the benefits provided, I am willing to make those compromises for certain select purchases.
Remember: You have no RIGHT to be entertained.
-p-
I knwo this has been said more than once and there's a couple of good posts in here already that state this case, but not everyone that wants to strip DRM from music is uploading their library to the web.
It's all about fair use and liberating the music we purchase and making it easy to backup and reuse.
I wish more people understood this instead of assuming everyone is involved in piracy.
Doesn't work
When it gets to import the .wav to iTunes, it gives some random error, and stops working.
(Tested on a Mac Pro)
And will everyone stop bickering about DRM?
I legally buy my music so that artists can get whatever pay will come from it.
I own an iPod tp listen to my music, now, if I want to be legal with my music, I am now restricted to the iTMS. But wait, I also have a Sony W800i walkman phone, I want to be able to listen to my music with that too. Now, Apple's restrictions won't let me, but I legally paid and downloaded the file, why shouldn't I be able to use it as I wish. My friends, the just open up Limewire and get their dose of music, no fuss with devices. Now I don't give what the hell the law is, but are you telling me I should be punished, in a sense, for paying for my music? No I shouldn't. But I am.
I feel it is totally alright for me to unDRM my music. I'm not going to put it in a torrent, or Kazza, just my cellphone.
This doesn't work, I get errors every time. I'll try submitting a bug report to Apple. (ha-ha)
> Wrong. People are free to contract away their legal rights. Ask any first year law student that has
> suffered through contracts class. In fact the law enforces people making dumb choices. It gives
> them a break when they are duped or relying on misrepresentations, but a bad choice is still
> a binding one.
Actually, you're wrong (in most countries).
Almost every country has some kind of buyers rights association (in Australia it's the ACCC). This means that a monitor with a dead pixel is faulty. Period. It doesn't matter if the manufacturer states otherwise. The laws are there to protect consumers and we desperately need them.
Norway also has strong laws to protect consumers (been reading the fairly recent iTunes Store battle there?).
France as well. CDs with crippling copy protection are deemed faulty (ie. can be returned with no questions asked). While we're on it, pretty much all CD copy protection breaks the Red Book standard, meaning they're not really "Compact Audio Discs", they're just data CDs that sometimes work like audio CDs if you're lucky.
Law and fair use should be determined by governments, not multi-national companies with other agendas. That's a serious conflict of interest that will always be a recipe for disaster.
Also... to those saying that the DRM protects the artists and stops people from spreading the files over the net... surely you're not that naive? I can download ANYTHING I want on the net, but I actually choose to purchase from iTunes (400 songs so far and rising fast!). I like it. I think Apple have actually done a great job in creating something that's a very fair middle ground.
Josh summed it up perfectly.
> DRM is paying for a limited license to something that somebody else tells you how many times you
> can use, how often you can use it, what you can do with it, and most importantly, what you CAN'T.
> Since it's proprietary, if a company changes their technology they don't have to make the old stuff
> compatible and can force you to buy it all again (see PlaysForSure and Zune)... ...DRM's only
> purpose is brand lock-in.
And finally, don't blame Apple, blame almost everyone involved. The content owners, the online stores and the government bodies that let them get away with it.