1984...meet DRM. Source: jbonnain on Flickr. License: CC BY 2.0.

The New York Times reports that Amazon is offering free-of-charge replacement copies of the deleted George Orwell e-books Animal Farm and 1984. Those who do not wish to replace their e-books may get $30 or an Amazon gift certificate instead.

Jeffrey P. Bezos, Amazon’s chief executive, apologized to customers for the deletions in July. And late Thursday, the company tried to put the incident behind it, offering to deliver new copies of “1984” and “Animal Farm” at no charge to affected customers.

Amazon said in an e-mail message to those customers that if they chose to have their digital copies restored, they would be able to see any digital annotations they had made. Those who do not want the books are eligible for an Amazon gift certificate or a check for $30, the company said.

The message included Mr. Bezos’s mea culpa from July. “This is an apology for the way we previously handled illegally sold copies of ‘1984’ and other novels on Kindle,” Mr. Bezos said. He went on to describe Amazon’s actions as “stupid, thoughtless and painfully out of line with our principles.”

It’s good to see Amazon admitting that they made a huge mistake here, and I applaud them for not making up excuses instead. Still, this highlights a huge problem with DRM’d e-books and e-book readers like the Kindle. Whether Amazon will pull a similar stunt in the future is uncertain, although the backlash from this makes it unlikely. However, it is important to remember that this could still be used for more nefarious purposes, such as oppressive governments coaxing Amazon into removing e-books that the government considers a threat to their well-being.

• The New York Times (cookies required)
• Slashdot

"205/365" by _rockinfree on Flickr (CC-BY)

On July 30th, a rather curious posting was made on United TI, a forum devoted to discussing Texas Instruments graphing calculators. The post, made by Benjamin Moody — known as “FloppusMaximus” on the site — gave the factors of a very large number. It was quickly deduced to be the RSA modulus of a key — particularly, one needed to sign the OS on a TI calculator — which Moody confirmed:

This one is for the TI-83+.

The TI-83+, like all modern TI calculators, has its OS cryptographically signed by TI for validation purposes; if someone tries to upload an unsigned OS — like, say, an open-source OS — into the calculator, it is rejected. Thus, the discovery of the signing key is a major breakthrough, which ticalc.org, a popular TI calculator site, makes clear:

With this achievement, any operating system can be cryptographically signed in a manner identical to that of the original TI-OS. Third party operating systems can thus be loaded on any 83+ calculators without the use of any extra software…Complete programming freedom has finally been achieved on the TI-83 Plus!

A few days ago, however, the original post was removed and replaced with this:

Dear community,

I have been politely asked to remove the former contents of this post.

No further explanation was given by Moody as to who asked him to remove the key or why it had to be removed. However, Brandon Wilson, a developer who reposted the key on his website, explained:

Ben was hit by TI with a DMCA notice as was I. We of course must comply with whatever is specifically requested, but you can’t stop a group of people from factoring large integers. I will not be silenced.

Wilson has posted the DMCA notice and his reply on his website. Meanwhile, a distributed computing project has been set up to use Moody’s brute-force methods to obtain the keys for all other TI calculators.

It seems pretty clear to me that TI is abusing the DMCA to maintain a stranglehold on their hardware. The key in question does not encrypt the OS, so it’s unclear how the key counts as a device to circumvent access controls on copyrighted works. You don’t need it to obtain a copy of the OS, as copies of the latest OS are freely downloadable on TI’s website. The only thing the keys are useful for is to be able to upload another OS onto the calculator such that it can be installed. One poster on the United TI forum drew parallels between this situation and the situation with iTunesDB, and I think that’s a valid point to make.

TI is not trying to protect their copyright, but merely trying to protect their lockdown on their hardware. If TI is really interested in promoting the education of young people, they should stop trying to harrass others whose only crime was to explore what they could do with the hardware they legally purchased.

• “Fun Number Theory Facts” thread on United TI Forums
• “TI-83 Plus OS Signing Key Cracked” — ticalc.org
• Brandon Wilson’s website containing the DMCA notices

Wired.com reports that RealDVD, the DVD ripping software that launched a few months ago, lost its case against the Hollywood studios. The judge ruled that RealNetworks violated the DMCA by distributing the software, regardless of its intended use.

[Judge] Patel said the RealDVD software violates the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 that prohibits the circumvention of encryption technology. DVDs are encrypted with what is known as the Content Scramble System, and DVD players must secure a license to play discs. RealDVD, she ruled, circumvents technology designed to prevent copying.

But the decision, although mixed, left open the door that copying DVD’s for personal use “may well be” lawful under the fair use doctrine of the Copyright Act, although trafficking in such goods was illegal.

“Because RealDVD makes a permanent copy of copyrighted DVD content, there is no exemption from DMCA liability, statutory or otherwise, that applies here. Whatever application the fair use doctrine may have for individual consumers making backup copies of their own DVDs, it does not portend to save Real from liability under the DMCA in this action,” Patel wrote (.pdf) in a lawsuit brought by Hollywood.

Glickman praises this decision in the article, as if RealDVD would be of any use to those who wish to violate copyright on DVDs by making copies for others to use, or its prohibition will stop others from ripping movies with other software instead, without seeming to consider that such actions may be causing the very infringement the MPAA claims to be fighting against. No doubt many people get their DVD-purchased films from sources unsanctioned by Hollywood because they are unaware of or don’t know how to use DVD ripping software with their own discs (or because they might consider a $150,000 civil fine a lighter sentence than 5 years in prison). The long-established process of CD ripping gives them the belief that their acts are not in violation of copyright (or that their violation is justified) due to their purchase of the DVD. Removing the DRM on DVDs could very well reduce this behavior, as the awareness of rippers would increase and the lack of legal concern could lead to easier and more efficient ripping technologies. It could also make Hollywood stop looking like they believe we are still in a world where CSS is a barrier to DVD access.

• Wired.com
• Slashdot

"Big Brother....is Watching YOU!" by Chaotic Good01 on Flickr (CC-BY)

David Pogue reports on his blog that Amazon has secretly pulled electronic copies of 1984 and Animal Farm purchased on its Kindle service:

This morning, hundreds of Amazon Kindle owners awoke to discover that books by a certain famous author had mysteriously disappeared from their e-book readers. These were books that they had bought and paid for—thought they owned.

But no, apparently the publisher changed its mind about offering an electronic edition, and apparently Amazon, whose business lives and dies by publisher happiness, caved. It electronically deleted all books by this author from people’s Kindles and credited their accounts for the price.

According to Amazon, the person who let Amazon sell the copies of the books in question didn’t have the rights to them:

“These books were added to our catalog using our self-service platform by a third-party who did not have the rights to the books,” Amazon spokesman Drew Herdener said in an e-mail. “When we were notified of this by the rights holder, we removed the illegal copies from our systems and from customers’ devices, and refunded customers.”

Herdener said Amazon won’t handle things the same way in the future. “We are changing our systems so that in the future we will not remove books from customers’ devices in these circumstances.”

It’s understandable for Amazon to be confused as to who holds what rights on these books; most of Orwell’s books are in the public domain in some countries — Australia is one example — but not, for instance, in the US or the UK. Even so, this incident only makes plain, for those who didn’t already know, the pitfalls of investing in closed systems like the Kindle Store and iTunes; there, not only do you have no rights to what you have purchased, but you may have no choice to unpurchase something, should they deem it necessary or desirable.

• New York Times blog entry
• CNet reporting on statement from Amazon

Electronic Arts will release The Sims 3 with CD keys, forgoing SecuROM and online authentication.

The game will have disc-based copy protection – there is a Serial Code just like The Sims 2. To play the game there will not be any online authentication needed.

We feel like this is a good, time-proven solution that makes it easy for you to play the game without DRM methods that feel overly invasive or leave you concerned about authorization server access in the distant future.

I can’t say I’m not surprised at this move. What did surprise me is that they would do it so quickly after what happened with Spore.

• Electronic Arts
• Eurogamer
• Slashdot

Ars Technica reports that the FTC DRM discussion mentioned in January has been held. Although it was merely to discuss the topic, the opening statements were quite strong about disclosure being needed.

Mary Engle, an FTC Acting Deputy Director, began her remarks by warning that those who use DRM had better get serious about disclosing it and the limits that it places on products. She referenced the Sony BMG rootkit debacle, saying that “sellers who use DRM technology to enforce the terms of bargains with consumers need to be particularly careful to disclose in advance” what those bargains are.

And just stuffing the disclosure into the fine print of an End User License Agreement (EULA) isn’t good enough. “If your advertising giveth and your EULA taketh away,” she said, “don’t be surprised if the FTC comes calling.”

She stressed that it was not permissible for companies to play Lucy to consumers’ Charlie Brown, holding the football and promising that this time she won’t yank it away at the last minute. Promising “if you buy our DRM downloads, we won’t shut down the authentication serves this time,” she said, wasn’t enough.

Seems like the “Surgeon General’s warning” Conley wanted might come about after all.

• Ars Technica
• Digg

DailyTech reports that US President Obama gave UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown a DVD as a gift. However, Brown was unable to play it due to region lockout.

Gordon Brown, British Prime Minister, paid President Obama a visit, and as a gracious gesture, President Obama gave him a gift set of 25 classic American movies, including the timeless thriller “Psycho.”

Arriving back home, PM Brown settled in to watch “Psycho” only to receive a far greater horror than the movie itself could bring — none of his DVDs would play, due to zone restrictions. While saddened and shocked, the PM maintains that American and Britain still have a “special partnership”.

Here’s hoping a new law gets passed allowing region-free DVD players to be marketed and sold in the US. I’m pretty sure it’s illegal to market a player as region-free at the moment, although I can’t find any sources to back that up.

• DailyTech
• Digg

iPod Shuffle 3G. Source: bfishadow on Flickr. License: CC-BY 2.0

Boing Boing’s article on the supposed DRM in Apple’s new iPod Shuffle has been updated, reporting that Apple has stated that the chip does not use encryption or authentication, and is thus not subject to the DMCA’s prohibitions on circumvention.

Update 2: Just spoke with Apple. There is no encryption or authentication on the chip, so clones could conceivably be made, just not with “Made for iPod” official certification. And now we know!

While the move to remove controls from the unit itself still makes the new Shuffle incompatible with just about every set of headphones and anything with a TRS audio cable, at least we can expect a workaround in due time, since third parties do not have to go through Apple first unless they want to bear the “Made for iPod” mark. Hopefully an adapter will be made by someone that contains the controls and allows the customer to use his or her existing headphones or audio cables.

• Boing Boing Gadgets
• Slashdot

A blogger known only by the name “i♥cabbages” has successfully cracked Adobe’s ADEPT DRM for EPUB and PDF files. The post about EPUB is still up, but the PDF post has been taken down after Adobe filed a DMCA notice.

By way of a concrete reverse-engineering contribution, I have successfully circumvented Adobe’s ADEPT DRM scheme for EPUB files. The same circumvention probably also allows decryption of ADEPT-encrypted PDF files, although I haven’t looked into it yet.

I have never heard of ADEPT, but like i♥cabbages I find it interesting that Adobe specifically targeted the PDF post and not both posts. Hopefully i♥cabbages isn’t planning on visiting DEFCON anytime soon, or things could get much worse.

• i♥cabbages – Circumventing Adobe ADEPT DRM for EPUB
• i♥cabbages – No Free Speech For You
• Slashdot

"Money Clip Shuffle" by re-ality on Flickr (CC-BY)

Apple’s third iteration of the iPod Shuffle contains a nasty surprise for consumers — headphones with DRM:

[...]the new shuffle doesn’t fully work with any headphones except Apple’s. Because of what Apple has done here—something sneaky and arguably terrible for consumers, especially if it continues with other iPod and iPhone products in 2009—if you plug your old third-party headphones of any sort into the new shuffle, you’ll find that you can’t do anything with the device other than have it continuously play music, without volume controls or interruption, unless of course of you turn it off. Surprise: the only third-party headphones that will work are ones that haven’t even entered manufacturing yet, because they’ll need to contain yet another new Apple authentication chip, which will add to their price.

The EFF remarked on how little this had been covered by other reviewers:

One final thought: why have so many of the reviews of iPods failed to notice the proliferation of these Apple “authentication chips”? If it were Microsoft demanding that computer peripherals all include Microsoft “authentication chips” in order to work with Windows (or Toyota or Ford doing the same for replacement parts), I’d think reviewers would be screaming about it.

Yes, and rightfully so. Granted, Apple’s pulled shenanigans like this before, but having one pair of headphones just for your iPod Shuffle and one pair for everything else is ridiculous. Maybe people are becoming accustomed to being treated like crap by Apple. That’s a dangerous thought in and of itself.

• iLounge review pointing out the DRM (first paragraph after the second picture)
• EFF Commentary on the DRM