Apple Patents WGA-styled Anti-Piracy System

[REVENGE]

"Patent application 20070288886: a 'digital rights management system' that would 'restrict execution of that application to specific hardware platforms.'" Sound familiar? Well, if Windows Genuine Advantage means anything to you, this could be Apple's counterpart to Microsoft's two year long attempt at disabling pirated software. Citing the inadequacies of software encryption or key based activation in preventing piracy, Apple believes that "Thus, it would be beneficial to provide a mechanism to restrict the execution of one or more applications to a specific hardware platform that is transparent to the user."

 

As explained by Computerworld:

"The scheme Apple outlined in the patent application would rely on a cryptographic key generated prior to the hardware reaching the user. As an application launches, the technology would inject code into the app's executing code stream, generate data that's sent to a digital rights management module, then compare that signed data with the key. If they match, the application continues to open. If not, it's stopped in its tracks."

In addition, Apple states that the authentication process would be performed on a time period "small enough to prevent significant use of an unauthorized application or system, yet long enough so as not to degrade system performance," but their examples indicate such a check could occur every 5 to 10 minutes. Seriously Apple? Is it really time to follow The Path of Microsoft? Just make sure you preserve some honesty in your naming scheme: Apple Genuine Disadvantage.

 

Some fear that Judgement Day is coming for the Hackint0sh... Well, not really since the scene will probably just Terminate any obstacle it encounters. Learn from Microsoft's mistakes anyone?

 

[Ruel Smith]

This is going to hurt Apple. As they cry about DRM in music, they introduce in their software. How nice...

 

This is why I might be going Linux fulltime instead of buying a Mac...

[Suzuka]

wasnt Apple against all the DRM, with the DRM=less music and all

If this happens, Im switching to Linux

[robotskip]

I don't think Apple is against DRM and being closed as long as it benefits them and doesn't make them look bad.

[Rez.]

I guess the world's largest dongle wasn't enough. Think Different indeed.

[NatMusak]

Ah, you're quoting Computerworld, which is driven by uninformed, Windows Enthusiast shills. InsanelyM$? What a pity.

[Dr. Hurt]

Well, at least we still have linux.

Please Apple, rethink your decisions.

 

Edit: All this is going to make is slow down real macs and make OS X bloated like windows and eventually be hacked to work on non-mac hardware. Take vista as your example.

[robotskip]

Ah, you're quoting Computerworld, which is driven by uninformed, Windows Enthusiast shills. InsanelyM$? What a pity.

Can you prove this? Also, "M$" went out of style in the 90s and surely by now you would've created some new way to 'insult' them.

[NatMusak]

Can you prove this? Also, "M$" went out of style in the 90s and surely by now you would've created some new way to 'insult' them.

 

Ha, M$ has never been in style.

 

As for proof, I'd like to see you try to prove me wrong. My main source is RoughlyDrafted.

 

I remember this site when it was OSX86, which was (and still is) a great resource. Unfortunately, the news here has been mainly hearsay recently, rather than original, objective Mac articles, and the sources used are hurting this site's credibility.

[REVENGE]

Well, you can call the commentary of the article whatever you want, but I assume you're not disputing the factuality of the patent?

[NatMusak]

Well, you can call the commentary of the article whatever you want, but I assume you're not disputing the factuality of the patent?

 

No, I'm sure the patent exists. The problem with this kind of slanted article is that it has almost nothing to do with what the patent actually applies to and everything to do with link-baiting and FUD.

[Kucksy]

If this news is true I believe that it is a bit of a double standard from Apple's standpoint, given their overwelleming acceptance and support of boot camp in allowing intel based macintosh computers to run the windows operating system - I just believe that if Apple gives their own computer users the choice of the O/S that they wish to choose to install on their own computers then they should have it both ways and let ibm pc users install the O/S of their choice - whether it be Mac OS or something else.

[MacApprentice]

It's a bad move from Apple. It'll be cracked so OSX86 users won't suffer much from this but legitimate Apple users will be spyed on and bugged by this... IMHO

[hecker]

I say screw them and I hope it comes back and bites them in their hairy corporate butts. Why the hell do these companies have to be so intrusive. You just sell software on a generic platform now so stop behaving like you're something special, Apple!

 

I guess our only hope is that linux copies, err... learns from OSX and finally rises from it's mediocre desktop status.

 

hecker

[Detosx]

It's Christmas, surely, not April fools day? The implementation remains to be seen but they have already sewed a damaging seed of doubt and, even if it works smoother than Microsoft's alienating and time wasting system, if you knock out the hackintosh users you dry a vast stream of knock on free advertising and take up of Apple computers. I didn't think that level of disconnect existed between Apple and their potential customer base. I am a huge Apple fan and they desperately need to get their people out of the office and back in amongst the university crowd and see what's going on.

 

For every one person of student age who sets up a Hackintosh, a large number of Apple skeptics get to see what OS X is about and join the Apple bandwagon and many buy Apple hardware, though more usually this happens when they subsequently move into a job. I can see why companies like Adobe might want to embrace some system that links an individual Adobe software item to one piece of hardware but for Apple, in terms of their operating system, it seems like an incomprehensible mistake. If you alienate the so-called hackintosh community, peopled in large part by people with little money who couldn't have afforded an ibook or imac either way and aren't therefore missed sales, you create a grassroots swell of ill will in people who freely and enthusiastically advertise the Apple platform. No, I don't feel great about running a Hackintosh but I do buy all the software, Leopard included (combined birthday present!) and when I have the money I will buy a Mac because they are not just cool icons but functionally more useful tools than most of what Microsoft has to offer.

 

The ill will caused by such a move will also see Apple loose some developers to the Linux community.

 

In that 'Linux' don't have an advertising budget as such, a lot of people don't know how incredibly easy it is to install Linux and how much less hassle than installing either OS X or Windows, simply because the Linux install DVDs come with most of the software you will ever need, which install at the same time. You're up and running and updated in little more than an hour. Linux's weakness is that it doesn't look like Leopard. Also, Apple also edges it in terms of productivity... which a vast number of potential buyers aren't going to know about if Apple closes off one of its most lucrative and free generators of publicity.

 

Perhaps there is still time for them to think this one through. I would be sad if they shift development and focus onto the iPhone, etc.

[borisbadenov]

And how long did it take for people to bypass WGA? And this sounds easy enough to shut off. As with other software that seems to run this way, all that seems to need be done is turn off the feature that checks for compatibility. If it does not check, it cannot come back with invalid info, thus letting the program run.

 

Since building my first Hackintosh, I have been saving for a genuine Apple but at their prices, it will take me a while to get there. Mind you, if I never ran a Hackintosh, I would never have wanted a real Mac.

[hei_zen]

If this will be implemented my OSX times will be gone like my Windows times.

 

But I've big hope the OSX86 guy will find a way to bypass this

[Nico3d3]

I was considering buying an OS X license to be more legal with my hackingtosh setup, but if they decide to implement a WGA style protection, it's not even worth using this OS.

[X-Ray Mac]

Lame. All that needs to be said.

[diegah]

{censored}

[apowerr]

This really sucks. Good job Apple

[robotskip]

Ha, M$ has never been in style.

 

As for proof, I'd like to see you try to prove me wrong. My main source is RoughlyDrafted.

 

I remember this site when it was OSX86, which was (and still is) a great resource. Unfortunately, the news here has been mainly hearsay recently, rather than original, objective Mac articles, and the sources used are hurting this site's credibility.

You don't really have any more credibility if RoughlyDrafted is your only source and I do not need to prove you wrong, rather you need to prove yourself right which you failed to do.

[NatMusak]

You don't really have any more credibility if RoughlyDrafted is your only source.

Did I say RoughlyDrafted was my only source? No, I said it was my main source. Also, unlike this site, RoughlyDrafted sites multiple articles from multiple, credible sources and is written by someone who actually knows what they're talking about.

 

I do not need to prove you wrong, rather you need to prove yourself right which you failed to do.

I didn't demand that you prove me wrong, I simply said I'd like to see you try. How do you know I failed to prove myself right? Have you read any of the RoughlyDrafted articles on Computerworld, like THIS ONE on Mike Elgan?

[Forceman]

Linux well be the only non crippled OS after this, be happy and just get Linux installed if OS X gets this. This is going to cripple them and I dont see Windows users moving over to the same {censored}.

[d235j]

This will probably be used for Apple's high-end software such as Final Cut Pro and Mac OS X Server. I don't think Apple wants to cause paying Mac OS X users headaches with such a draconian implementation.