Apple Files Microsoft-Like DRM System -

Apple Files Microsoft-Like DRM System
December 26, 2007 | by Christopher Nickson

No, it's not for music, but a system very much like Windows Genuine Advantage.

According to ZDNet, Apple has filed a patent application with the US Patent and Trademark Office for a system like Windows Genuine Advantage that would offer it control over its own software.

Microsoft introduced Windows Genuine Advantage to let it remotely validate its OS, with the aim of preventing software copying and pirating.

Apple’s "Run-time Code Injection to Perform Checks" would by a digital rights management (DRM) system that would inject code into application running on a user’s computer to check the software was authentic. If fake, it would close the application and render it unusable.

Mac’s OSX isn’t copyright-protected, but has assured the Patent Office that all checks would be transparent and hard to circumvent, with a cryptographic key that would need to be activated prior to a user receiving hardware.

Of course, Microsoft hasn’t had the smoothest of rides with Windows Genuine Advantage. Back in August the company loaded the wrong software, leaving12,000 users unable to register their software, while more recently other were wrongly locked out. The company has said that Vista SP1 will address those issues, and while warnings will be issued, the software won’t be disabled.

Post Your Comment...Comments

JS on Dec 26th, 2007 at 7:19 AM:

Wrong. ZDnet is not a reliable source. A lot of speculation going on here with no real basis in fact.

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/22/the-new-a...

JS on Dec 26th, 2007 at 7:19 AM:

Wrong.
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/22/the-new-a...

Pecos Bill on Dec 26th, 2007 at 9:26 AM:

Indeed wrong. It's the mechanism that prevents OS X from running on non-Apple hardware.

Louis wheeler on Dec 26th, 2007 at 4:09 PM:

The meaning of this patent is not yet clear. It only matters if Apple intends to use it as a form of DRM. But, Steve Jobs says that DRM is ineffective and is rightfully despised by consumers. So, If we take Steve Jobs at his word, then there must be a different reason for this patent.

People frequently lose, or have stolen, their laptops and cell phones. Would it be useful to remotely encrypt the data on a lost or stolen devise? And useful to customers to have a central location to call to render it inoperable? If the devise is permanently inoperable, doesn't that diminish any reason to steal it?

Would any software that checks that central location be similar to what this patent is about? Quite possibly.

Technophile on Dec 26th, 2007 at 7:54 PM:

Well, I hope that it is for another purpose, or even better yet, securing a patent for a potential product with no current use. One of the nice things about Apple products is that you don't have to flounder around with activation and serial numbers etc. It has worked well for the past 30 years they have been in business, even when they were the top PC manufacturer in the world.
It may be a reflection of the times and the possible necessity to avoid any slippage regarding their recent advances in the market.
I don't believe they will perform as badly as WGA, because Apple has far more control over every aspect of their systems. They may be afraid more people will start to build their own boxes and use a pirated version of their OS. Before, they didn't need to worry, because if you ran Mac OS, then you obviously had an Apple computer.

SidInKeyWest on Dec 26th, 2007 at 8:16 PM:

You have been given the reference to the article by Roughly Drafted. Where is your retraction? It is my dream that so called reporters and/or bloggers would do their own research before publishing and not rely on secondary sources. In this case Christopher Nickson did not do his research but relied on a questionable secondary source. The credibility of the writer/Digital Trends is at stake here.

Deano on Dec 26th, 2007 at 11:42 PM:

I see two potential uses -

1) To "confirm" that a Mac OS is running on a valid piece of Mac HARDWARE - This would apply to AppleTV, Macs and Xserves, and the like... It seems at least a little* unlikely that this will happen soon, given all the WGA problems - it's still part of the Mac marketing that it's so much "easier" than Windows, why sacrifice that until you are the dominantly-pirated OS? Even if the check was 100% local against the Intel TPM hardware, this makes very little sense - there's no clear "win" for Apple, only headaches for users;

2) To "phone home" to Apple from a non-hardware based system, to confirm that only a single instance is ever running on a given license key. But why would that useful? Well, I don't think they'd be too keen to do this with OS X Client, but having a single OS X Server "virtual image" install, that could phone home, would be the JUST the compromise needed to keep Apple moving into the server space... Virtualization is the future of the server room, and it'll take much bigger Xserves than Apple can put together (and still make money) to keep it all branded.

I'd be surprised if Apple didn't cop to a plan for virtualized OS X (server only) by WWDC 2008... I see a lot of OS X shops having to move into Linux when they virtualize - simply because there is no supported option to do so.

By having a "locked down" version of Server, Apple can keep it's fat client-side margins, while expanding the Server userbase (long term support revenues), as well as expanding the total number of running (virtual) OS X servers.

But, it's just a guess... Love to see it happen, though. We're about to chuck the 5 Xserves we have at one of our offices in SF for this very reason... It's just getting so much easier/cheaper/cooler to run 1-2 big fat boxes, housing several virtual servers each at 80% load, than to have a rack filled with boxes that idle.

Martin Pilkington on Dec 27th, 2007 at 6:35 AM:

The most obvious place for this to be used is the iPod/iPhone and I believe it is already being used for games on the iPod. When applications are allowed on the iPhone I can see this coming in to play as well.

And Deano, Leopard Server now allows you to virtualise is

SteveN on Dec 27th, 2007 at 9:47 AM:

Wrong again.

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/22/the-new-a...

http://www.osweekly.com/index.php?option=com_conte...

Frank J. on Dec 28th, 2007 at 10:35 AM:

To SidInKeyWest:

How is ZDNET not a credible source, and RoughlyDrafted is???

Sorry, but Digital Trends did the right thing by citing a CREDIBLE site instead of a generic blog.

FIT on Apr 7th, 2008 at 10:38 PM:

So is this true or false? I really want to know :/

Comment on this article

Please keep your comments relevant to this article. Email addresses are not displayed, they are only required to verify you are human.

When you submit your comment, an email will be sent to your email address with a confirmation link. Once you have clicked on that confirmation link your comment will be posted.

HTML is not allowed.

Digital Trends