[mikeash]

I object to your continued use of "stolen" etc. I believe extracting the key for the proposes of interoperability is still legitimate, even if Apple doesn't like it.

Let's say that's the reason, in any case. Why would Apple pull the whole app rather than simply making them remove the key and reverting back to the old functionality? Some petty sense of retribution?

[mr_donk]

I did put stolen in quotes every time I used it because I'm not sure that is the correct term.

Here's how I see it. AirPlay is something Apple sells a license to. Assume Rogue Amoeba didn't buy a license, but used someone else's, and then sold the functionality that buying the license would have entitled them to.

What's that? Piracy? DMCA violation? Within Rogue Amoeba's rights? I don't know. Is Apple allowed to lock things down by requiring keys? Maybe they're in the wrong.

To me, this is similar to trying to sell software that uses DeCSS to play DVDs rather than licensing CSS. Regardless of my opinion, it doesn't seem to be legal (in the US, anyway).

Is that legitimate? If so, how is it different than other forms of piracy?

[mikeash]

DeCSS is only illegal because it circumvents the copy protection system on DVDs. Absent that, there would be nothing allowing the DVD people to force companies to license CSS rather than simply cracking it.

As far as I know, Apple is allowed to lock things down by requiring keys, and other people are allowed to crack Apple's lockdown if they can.

[mr_donk]

That's my point. Isn't getting the private AirTunes key equivalent to the DeCSS case?

If Apple had just made a proprietary undocumented protocol, that'd be one thing, and I'd agree that Apple wouldn't be able to force licenses on people. Absent the private key, there wouldn't be anything to stop you.

However, they made a proprietary protocol, sold licenses to use it and implemented a key enforce the license. Isn't circumventing the private key equivalent to circumventing copy protection? They obviously intended to restrict it to licensees, the way the DVD people intended to restrict CSS to licensees.

Wasn't there some case where printer manufacturers were doing something to stop 3rd parties from making cheaper ink/toner? How did that go? Maybe it's a more apt comparison (for the record, I honestly don't remember how this case turned out, so I don't know if I'm helping or hurting my argument).

[mikeash]

The key long predates any licensing deals. In fact, the system used for licensing is different from the one that the key in question applies to. The AirTunes/AirPlay system has changed over the years, and the key that was extracted is for an older (but still supported) system than in used for third-party licensees.

I don't see how it would be covered by the DMCA like DeCSS is, as the encryption is not for a DRM system.

Even if it is, well, I think most of us will agree that cracking encryption for the purposes of circumventing DRM for legitimate purposes should be allowed. But of course that gets us into discussions of how things are versus how things should be.