FairUse4WM - a WM/DRM removal program

[ROF]

Am I restricted to playing my DVDs only on my PC? No.
Do my DVDs have limited viewing times ? No.
Do my DVDs only give me 24 hours after purchase to watch them? No.
Is an internet connection required to obtain a license to watch them? No.

And that is the difference, plain and simple.

How do you play your DVDs on a device that does not contain Digital Rights management or content protection? All devices to include all ROM Readers, DVD Players, DVD Burners, etc. contain technical protection measures that allow the display of the DVD to play in such devices. The reason you see no restrictions is because you are using your devices in accordance with the digital rights of the copyright owner.

[MrTmar]

Am I restricted to playing my DVDs only on my PC? No.
Do my DVDs have limited viewing times ? No.
Do my DVDs only give me 24 hours after purchase to watch them? No.
Is an internet connection required to obtain a license to watch them? No.

And that is the difference, plain and simple.

How do you play your DVDs on a device that does not contain Digital Rights management or content protection? All devices to include all ROM Readers, DVD Players, DVD Burners, etc. contain technical protection measures that allow the display of the DVD to play in such devices. The reason you see no restrictions is because you are using your devices in accordance with the digital rights of the copyright owner.

There is a big difference, as sombodeez wrote.

I can play DVD's in my PC or standalone players throughout my house just fine. Sure there are copy protections on the discs and it happens to be digital. That is fine.

However, if I take one of my DVD-Audio discs and attempt to play them in these same machines I have different results. My standalone players play just fine in every audio format available on the discs. If I attempt to play the discs in my PC, the software "phones home". If my firewall blocks the connection (I had to try it) I cannot play the DVD-Audio in the highest-quality mode - just "standard" mode. Once I allow the license to be downloaded, it plays fine. End result? If I have no Internet connection I am prevented from enjoying my DVD-Audio discs on my PC.

[ROF]

Is it the disc MrTmar that is trying to phone home or is it because of the hardware(not standalone equipment) that is preventing you from listening to your DVD-A discs? This is TBC and Copy Protection. If it were just the discs DRM you would need the internet on your standalone player. Can you freely copy the files from these discs or do they require a "ripper" of some form to do so? If you need assistance software than indeed the discs are Digital Rights Managed or Copy Protected, but you requirement of the internet is because of the hardware you are using to listen.

Again, you can only blame piracy. Why else would these corporations spend profit to stop people? No one can possibly think the corporations(Labels and Studios) believe they will ever stop piracy, but if these DRM, TBCs, and Copy Protection stop enough pirates and enough casual pirates they(Labels and Studios) can perhaps break even on the deal. By breaking even I mean the money(both calculable and incalculable) lost through all forms of piracy in any given calendar year. Plus as public traded corporations these entities need to answer to their stockholders. As a stockholder I like to see an effort made to safeguard my dividends.

[DereX888]

The picture is a violation of the licensing agreement.

It should be said that I do not necessarily agree with the licensing agreement but nontheless it is a violation. In my personal opinion, if you bought the media you should be able to convert it or move it to whatever device you want so long as you maintain the music or other media and do not share it with others and thus harm the profit of both the media company and the artist. The sad fact is alot of folks out there do not use these products for those purposes. That is why media downloads are priced the way they are. Everyone pays the price for piracy, the corporation, the artist, the consumer, and the economy.

Dude, I really am sure now that there is something really wrong with you (as I suspected it in other post).

Downloads are priced the way they are simply because there is no other (legal) alternative to buy a single song, hence it is monopoly (although there are few different online 'retailers', this is monopoly by RIAA after all).
You can either buy a whole album on CD, or a single songs from itunes and such. No other alternatives at all.
Furthermore:
DO you see any logic in selling low-quality 'software' version of a music for the same (and often higher!!) price as the cost of the exact same 'hardware' version of exactly same music on a CD? Such fact is already a big red indicator that there is something wrong with this 'industry', it is not a 'free market', and that the prices of the product it sells have been certainly fixed! And obviously it is NOT the consumers who want to pay more for lesser and crippled version of the product
When you buy a CD you are legally allowed to copy it for personal use to your computers, mp3 players, you can even make unlimited number of backup copies.
Can you do it with the exactly same product (exactly same album or song) bought from online store? NO. And WHY NOT?
Because it is a legalized extortion system, possible ONLY because we allow RIAA to have such monopoly.

In a real free market popular albums and songs would be priced differently than less popular albums or songs, exactly the same as i.e. cars - Hyundais cost less than BMWs.
By comparison: Hyundai crappy cars would cost customers same money as i.e. BMW cars if we would ever allowed similar monopolized market ruled by some "CIAA" the way RIAA does with music, and Hyundai would go belly up in a very short time since obviously most of the people would buy BMWs since the price will be the same. Whom would you blame, consumers or that "CIAA", for killing the market for Hyundai in such case?

Obviously its the RIAA who hurts artists, consumers and economy, as well as labels and corporations (indirectly) too.
I don't condone piracy, but if the consumer have no ability to legally buy and use the product in the way the law permits them to, then you cannot blame them for going to some 'grey area' and obtaining 'illegally' what they should have been able to get legally first and foremost.


Has anyone tried to make i.e. 'legal way' copy of a CD to their phone or any other DRMed player?
Its such a hassle that no wonder many people rather download illegal mp3 without any digital restrictions than bother with that shit (I tried once with WMP and smartphone lol... after few minutes I simply made a cd rip to unrestricted/unDRMed mp3s and dropped them to my phone's SD card; no hassle, no problems, and I can always copy it to CDRW for my car's player, move to any other portable player and so on without worry about 'licence' expiring if i reformat my comp or install linux instead of windows lol)

[ROF]

When you buy a CD you are legally allowed to copy it for personal use to your computers, mp3 players, you can even make unlimited number of backup copies.
Can you do it with the exactly same product (exactly same album or song) bought from online store? NO. And WHY NOT?
Because it is a legalized extortion system, possible ONLY because we allow RIAA to have such monopoly.

You misunderstand or choose to ignore that virtual media and hardcopy media require two different sets of rules. If you give somebody something for free and they can turn around(because of no DRM) and upload this track to millions of others(P2P) where is the safeguard?

I agree with you. the price is too high, but . . .

[MrTmar]

Is it the disc MrTmar that is trying to phone home or is it because of the hardware(not standalone equipment) that is preventing you from listening to your DVD-A discs? This is TBC and Copy Protection. If it were just the discs DRM you would need the internet on your standalone player. Can you freely copy the files from these discs or do they require a "ripper" of some form to do so? If you need assistance software than indeed the discs are Digital Rights Managed or Copy Protected, but you requirement of the internet is because of the hardware you are using to listen.

When the software recognizes a DVD-A disc it "phones home". No need to do this with DVD Video. Sure, the DVD-A disks are copy protected as well as the DVD Video discs. DVD-A have a small, extra provision to "phone home". Nowhere, in any of the documentation (box, help, or FAQ), does it discuss a requirement of Internet connectivity to play DVD-A. What if I bought a DVD-A disc with no Internet and no standalone player? Would the industry allow me to return my purchase?

Not sure where the TBC comes in for DVD-A. On my DVD-A discs still images are shown during high-quality playback. Note that the DVD-Video (included as an extra) does NOT require a "phone home" to play. I would guess there is standard protection on those tracks.

Consider this with the standalone player. If the Internet requirement was added to all existing DVD video or audio discs, how well would they sell? I have not seen a standalone DVD player (that anyone I know currently owns) having a provision for Internet so the consumers would need a new device to play DRM titles. With the PC it is an easy adaptation (and assumption) that you would have some type of Internet connectivity.

What happens in 25 or 50 years when this online service is no longer available? I would think it would be replaced with something else but could (would or should) anyone guarantee that? Since DVD-A is so widely used I am sure the market demands will be there in years to come.

Anyway, my point is DRM as usage monitoring and management versus existing copy protection and the above is an example. Getting into licensing and what your truly own from a physical and legal perspective is a different discussion.

[thecoalman]

By comparison: Hyundai crappy cars would cost customers same money as i.e. BMW cars if we would ever allowed similar monopolized market ruled by some "CIAA" the way RIAA does with music, and Hyundai would go belly up in a very short time since obviously most of the people would buy BMWs since the price will be the same.

You forgot to add once BMW corners the market the BMW's start looking like Hyundais.

[ROF]

When the software recognizes a DVD-A disc it "phones home". No need to do this with DVD Video. Sure, the DVD-A disks are copy protected as well as the DVD Video discs. DVD-A have a small, extra provision to "phone home". Nowhere, in any of the documentation (box, help, or FAQ), does it discuss a requirement of Internet connectivity to play DVD-A. What if I bought a DVD-A disc with no Internet and no standalone player? Would the industry allow me to return my purchase?

Yes. You can return your DVD-A or audio disc to a place of purchase and tell them that your device will not play this media because of no internet connectivity in your household.

That being said DVD-A is about as widely used in the marketplace as SACD. Most consumers never even heard of either.

[JohnnyMalaria]

I agree with you. the price is too high, but . . .

Think of it this way - you pay a premium for the option of buying just the one song you want, rather than having to by the whole album.

I remember all too well having to purchase an entire album just for one track - unless that track was also released as a single.

Most of the anti-DRM arguments I see here seem to be of the "I shouldn't have to pay that much" type. Well - tough sh1t !!! In a free market economy, the seller can charge what they like - if it's too much, don't buy. If enough people don't buy, then the pricing model may change. But if enough people think 99c a song is fair, the model won't change.

[ROF]

I agree with you. the price is too high, but . . .

Think of it this way - you pay a premium for the option of buying just the one song you want, rather than having to by the whole album.

I remember all too well having to purchase an entire album just for one track - unless that track was also released as a single.

Most of the anti-DRM arguments I see here seem to be of the "I shouldn't have to pay that much" type. Well - tough sh1t !!! In a free market economy, the seller can charge what they like - if it's too much, don't buy. If enough people don't buy, then the pricing model may change. But if enough people think 99c a song is fair, the model won't change.

Comparatively speaking I think 99 cents is too much. I pay this but as a consumer of it I still think it is too much. I just don't believe individual songs or whole albums in the virtual landscape should cost as much or more than their hard copy counterparts. I also feel that lower quality music should be pumped out to anybody who wants to download it. Give people 96-128K Bps tracks and you will see piracy and hits for programs such as this dwindle. You will also, I believe, see an increase in sales for higher quality virtual tracks and hard copy media.

If the corporations used the internet as they did the radio waves I think they will draw more customers.

[Cornucopia]

Comparatively speaking I think 99 cents is too much. I pay this but as a consumer of it I still think it is too much. I just don't believe individual songs or whole albums in the virtual landscape should cost as much or more than their hard copy counterparts. I also feel that lower quality music should be pumped out to anybody who wants to download it. Give people 96-128K Bps tracks and you will see piracy and hits for programs such as this dwindle. You will also, I believe, see an increase in sales for higher quality virtual tracks and hard copy media.

If the corporations used the internet as they did the radio waves I think they will draw more customers.

Now, there I would be in agreement with you...

I would go one further, however, and say:

DRM on such "freely given away" 96-128kbps tracks means it really isn't "freely given away", so it wouldn't promote awareness, or goodwill, and thus no increase in sales.
If you've accepted that the internet model is equal to the radio broadcast model (both of them being "teasers"), it makes no sense to lessen their "penetration" with techological LOCKS.

Scott

[MJA]

"FairUse4WM Cracks Windows Media DRM, Again"

"Only days after Microsoft patched the FairUse4WM DRM hack, the creators of the program have released an update that once again breaks the restrictions on protected WMA and WMV files. The utility works by stripping the DRM information from protected windows media files allowing users to freely manipulate the files and play them back as they see fit."


http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=4043

[jntaylor63]

ROF, you're missing the point.

With DRM you will never really own the product. You are always at the control of the provider. If something happens to your content, or you want to transport it into an open system, its Tuff S*&T from the provider. Unlike CD's and DVD's, you have the ability to make a copy and save your investment or move it from disk to harddrive to portable of your choice.


Sorry ROF, but you are getting a bad rep here on this site as the content provider's little poster boy bit*h.

"Yes sir Mr. RIAA/MPAA! I'll let you tell me what I can-can't do with product I own even though I am not breaking any laws."

To everyone else: buy the product legit, don't give copies, and do what you can to protect and get the most out of it!

[ROF]

ROF, you're missing the point.

With DRM you will never really own the product. You are always at the control of the provider. If something happens to your content, or you want to transport it into an open system, its Tuff S*&T from the provider. Unlike CD's and DVD's, you have the ability to make a copy and save your investment or move it from disk to harddrive to portable of your choice.

Umm . . . Even without DRM you do not own the content. You own a license to view and listen to it. Nothing more. It has been that way for decades.

Sorry ROF, but you are getting a bad rep here on this site as the content provider's little poster boy bit*h.

Getting ??

To everyone else: buy the product legit, don't give copies, and do what you can to protect and get the most out of it!

If everyone could just follow that simple rule there would be no need for DRM and we could all enjoy our music and videos anywhere anytime without the need for these tools.

[yoda313]

Not without removing the copy protection/DRM first. Same thing as for iTunes downloads et al.

Well regarding to ripping dvds there are actually a few commercial dvds I've seen without css encryption. And I'm not talking about the cheapo $1 50s tv shows or cheasy horror flicks. I've actually got a Weird Al video collection on dvd that doesn't have css on it. That means I can do whatever I want with it since I'm not bypassing any protection features on the disc.

Granted those are extremely rare cases. And yes I did buy an official store bought copy of that wierd al disc.

Actually there are plenty of easier ways to bypass the drm on your legally purchased music downloads. Two options:

1 - burn a cd then rip it back to your harddrive.

2 - play the file and record with another program at the same time.

It's not that hard to do. And since you already bought the song you should be able to do what you want with it.

These days I don't really bother with recompression too much. I have 1gb iriver t30 that I use with the wma's I buy off of yahoo music. Excellent quality at 192kbps. At 99 cents a good deal. Actually its 80 cents a song if you subscribe to their rental program.

[ROF]

I've actually got a Weird Al video collection on dvd that doesn't have css on it. That means I can do whatever I want with it since I'm not bypassing any protection features on the disc.

Granted those are extremely rare cases. And yes I did buy an official store bought copy of that wierd al disc.

This does not surprise me except for the part about buying that stuff. Just kidding.

But seriously, because it does have DRM doesn't mean it is not copyright protected which means you can't do what you want with it. You are still not permitted(in most countries) to make copies for others or make copies available to others without violating the copyright of the content.

[yoda313]

But I'm still legally transferring it to my iriver in its original format. Yahoo music wma's use PLAYFORSURE compatibility. My Iriver is PLAYFORSURE compatible.

I simply take the original downloaded file and copy it over to my iriver. Fully legal and supported by the yahoo music software.

[ROF]

But I'm still legally transferring it to my iriver in its original format. Yahoo music wma's use PLAYFORSURE compatibility. My Iriver is PLAYFORSURE compatible.

I simply take the original downloaded file and copy it over to my iriver. Fully legal and supported by the yahoo music software.

I wish most files could be like this but for some reason some people seem to want to do something to avoid paying for music that the original author and publishing company request payment for. It is their music we just listen to it. That is what this topic is about.

[Conquest10]

Anybody know if this works for DRMed WMV-HD DVDs?

[DereX888]

ROF = RIAA's Official

no one argues here about prices of the single songs.
Normally prices are always as high as people are willing to pay for the product.
I dont care are the single songs .99 or $10, I don't buy any crappy quality music in mp3 or aac compressions, since I can do it myself if I ever need crappy music for my players.

The point is that:
1
the same product (music) bought on CD is better quality and doesn't have any restrictions. You can legally copy it as many times as you want.
2
the same product (music) can be legally recorded from various analog or digital radio/tv broadcasts and won't have any restrictions. You can legally copy it as many times as you want.
3
the same exactly same product (music) bought from online service selling it in a highly compressed low quality bears any possible restrictions, and legally cannot be copied!

Do those of you who are for DRMs don't see anything wrong with this picture? :O


Same goes for books.
You can buy hardcopy for same money, and you can legally let all of your friends read it.
If you buy digital version of same book you can't even transfer it for yourself to another device unless it conforms to the specific DRMs!

And thats OK with yous?
So please reply with some real arguments, not the usual RIIAs propaganda-speak.

[mats.hogberg]

OK folks - I'm getting pretty fed up with this DRM legality bull this way or that. If there's one more post "off topic" - That is, not specifically related to the FairUse4WM application - Instant warning. And beware - I have plenty of yellows up my sleve.
I know I've been adding my share in this thread too, but enough is enough.

/Mats

[devilcoelhodog]

specifically related to the FairUse4WM application

Does anybody have tested the program yet?

I think that it will be nice many people testing it and give some feedback about success, failures, bugs, improvement suggestions, etc, about the program.

Thanks.

[mats.hogberg]

Haven't any DRMed Windows Media files, I'm afraid - Anyone else?

/Mats

[DereX888]

Haven't any DRMed Windows Media files, I'm afraid - Anyone else?

/Mats

Neither do i, but Im curious too

[olyteddy]

My end-run for DRM'd audio is Total Recorder. So far it has worked with .WMA, iTunes and Audible, the only three formats I've been exposed to. It can convert at less than real time (8x on this laptop with Audible). I can also capture any audio stream with it, sometimes accelerated (WinAmp streams usually capture at twice normal speed). I set LAME to a VBR profile of 64-224 kbits and let it run. iTunes usually encode to about 160 kb, Audible to 80, internet streams up to 200, etc...Depends on the source.

[ROBERT BLACK]

Anybody know if this works for DRMed WMV-HD DVDs?

This is what I'd like to know. Wouldn't it be a kick in the arse if it could?

[jolo]

If you have to question why media downloads are so expensive you need only look at this thread and the Application it discusses. The consumer is the one who pays for these people who want to abuse the licensing agreements.

It never ceases to amaze me who the brainwashing of the marketing of the richest billionare companies have screwed up people people to feel that consumers feel guilty about that it is they who hurt the music industry, nut the industry themselves.

During the rare moment that a federal judge or an attorney general lijke Eliiot Spitzer has gone after the oligopoly/organized crime elements of the RIAA abnd RIAA members, there are those who still blame those are are the consumer of their deteriorating product. </a>
The fact that the cartel has millions going to lobbyists to make the consumer think that they are the problem is amazingly effective

Some quick facts:
Of all of the horrific raids of citizens that is made at the expense of all of use who ise ISPs. It increases ISP pricing to furnish the RIAA private information about all of us.

• I don't understand anyone allowing DRM files to touch their systems. Therer are other means of better choices and fair better quality than anything that has DRM in it.
• NOT one penny of anyt of the discusting lawsuits that wind up costing all ISP users more money, have ever gone to an ARTIST. No a dime.
• There is a currently lowsuit from veteren artists who are being screwed royally buy RIAA member companiues (screwing artists is what the RIAA does the best), over not giving the artists, like the Allman Brothers, the revenue that they are supposed to get under the ITunes agreement. The digital sales agreement gives .70 of heach somg to the record company, then .30 of that is supposed to go to the artists. BUT, what is being done with veteren artists, in this lawsuit whish has exmandedto a class action suit, the the artist is being paid a wopping 4.5 cents per song as if a CD or Record was purchased.
• In a lawsuit against, the sleaziest of the RIAA crime family, Elliot Siptzer, D.A. of New York proved the amount of price fixing and massive payola done to Clear Channel to make sure that their artists only get played. Have the feds picked up the lawsuit, NO.
• There are fewer and fewer releases of CDs being released each year. Even those that are seen on eBAY for over $100 for a used CD. This has amounted to the RIAA crime families having expanded their profits per CD and per song than ever before.
• How many of you took advantage of getting refunds due to the strong arm tactics of price fixing that the RIAA cartel was screwing you, and the artists with?
• There was so littkle publicity about the multi-millions class action suit that the tope 5 RIAA members got nailed on for price fizing. It involved $143 million going back to purchasers of CDs or Albums purchashed. With most NOT knowing about it. It was a nothing to make your claim and get as much as $20 back for any purchases you made. As of 2003, only 900,000 claimed their cash.

To but it bluntly, anyone who things the are "good, law abiding citizens", by supporting a system that hurts them and artists is a victim of the millions given to U.S. conventional news media agents, marketing machines and paid off politicians. THINK ABOUT IT. If you want to help the industry. DON'T support DRM, forget ITUNES, get used media, get media from allowmpe.com, which to me is the prototype of downloading music in the format that I the consumer wants. Let your politicians know that unethical laws need to be changed. An artist never losed a penny, by a download, in fact, it has added publicity, just when Radio was no Corporate controlled and DJs had control of what they can play. Remember free radio concerts on TV with FB stereo radio at the same time? FM radio announcing when a new album would be played? Concerts were all over. Since when does limiting artist exposure become a good marketing play. Since when does blaming its customers for theri failures become a marketing ploy.

Some artists are wising up, thank the lord and doing things outside of the RIAA's crooked hands.

Jon

[/list]
You are in breach of the forum rules and are being issued with a formal warning. See this: https://forum.videohelp.com/viewtopic.php?p=1571242#1571242
/ Moderator mats.hogberg

[somebodeez]

Isn't one of the Terminator movies DRMed WMV-HD ?

Edit: Yep T2 according to Amazon:
"the complete theatrical version of the film in Microsoft Windows Media 9 series, playable in high resolution and 5.1 sound directly from your PC's DVD-ROM"

I wonder if FairUse4WM would work on that...

[painkiller]

Yes, the T2 DVD included an additional movie in the form to be played on one's PC.
But I'm unsure if it is an WMV file. Quite probably though.

It was touted to be one of the first, if not the first, hi-def movies on DVD but intended to be played on the PC to achieve the hi-def display. (Meaning, of course, not the mpeg2 version on the DVD meant for your television.)

Windows Media 9 is also the first, if memory serves, to fully employ DRM features.

I wonder if anyone can really answer Somebodeez question - as I never tried using this T2 file.
(Of course, my systems have upgraded since I bought that movie/dvd. Maybe I could check this out myself.)

I'd be interested to hear the results if someone tries this app on this file.

[Conquest10]

Yes, T2 has the HD version on the second disc. It is WMV-HD. I asked if this worked on them because I am sick of having to go online and ask permission everytime I want to watch it.