The Register – 23rd January 2007:
France and Germany are joining the Scandinavian campaign to make content from iTunes work with players from companies other than Apple. In a statement released yesterday by the Norwegian Consumer Ombudsman, France and Germany joined Finland in calling for changes to iTunes.
The consumer protection groups want buyers to be able to choose what device they can play iTunes content on.
The statement says: “We believe consumers have a right to play material purchased online on a portable device of their own choice. As of now, the organisations suggest that iTunes allow their consumers to make the songs playable on other devices through re-ripping burnt CDs containing songs downloaded from iTunes.”
But the groups make clear that this is not a long-term solution. They urge Apple to make progress towards proper interoperability, and give a deadline of September 2007.
The statement is also critical of the way Apple applies contract law to people buying content from its iTunes stores. They make the not unreasonable suggestion that: “Consumers entering into a contract with iTunes should be able to rely on the consumer protection rules according to the law of the country in which they live.”
Ah Lauren, you character attacking semantically argumentative cunt. So I’m to assume that all my logic circuits in my computre parse your DRM in plain language. No. EVERYTHING IN MY PC IS A 1 AND 0.
Compression, expansion, plain language, your fucked up brain splattering on my screen in text form… IT’S ALL 1 AND 0! How do you think an ITMS song gets from Cupertino to my HD? Apple sing’s it into my analog port? No, 1 and 0. Alternating until it’s complete and then repackaged in a form that my player can parse and put out in an audio wave file.
I don’t care what you wrap it in, it all comes down to 1 and 0. This is why Bittorrents are so amazing. You don’t have to have Hollywood project the movie onto the video card in your computer. You DOWNLOAD THE 1 AND 0.
Get your paper tape dealies and wipe the shit off your ass and put it back in your head. You need the extra help.
Ooooh, Schiller!
Here’s Newton.
If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants
And if you know the context, all the better.
Governments protecting consumer rights?!?!? What a bunch of commies! 😉
I have read many comments by Lauren the Ghoti and appreciated them. This thread proves he is human though. From what I can understand Apple makes very little money selling songs in itunes. It makes most of its money from selling ipods. OS X is supposed to be a fantastic operating system. Apple only sells it with its hardware. Of course they control the hardware and thus ensure a proper running OS X so they thus must be ensuring a proper playing song by having itunes music play only on their ipod. I have however read somewhere about Apple being a hardware company, but those people must be mistaken. Oh I see Mr. Ghoti must be correct on this. My bad.
John
#36 –
Well, thanks for your kind word; how-some-so-ever, I feel it incumbent upon myself to try to bring this all back on-topic. (Which is a hoot, me being the OH, or, Original Hijacker)
Apple still being headed up as it is by Steverino, who in his younger days was, shall we say, far from adverse to engaging in computer-related hijinx of questionable legality himself, is hardly the pack of vicious greedheads some might have you believe.
Rather than pursue the Microsoft model of stomping on one’s own customers, Apple (or rather, Steve) has tried to tacitly honor the company’s counterculture roots in certain ways while living up to their responsibilities to their shareholders.
One of the ways to do this is the iPod strategy. The typical consumer who wants what the iTMS has to offer has to use an iPod, this is true; but those who are the least bit computer-savvy, or just sufficiently motivated, are fully aware that what appears to be a secure system (to Mom, Pop & Joe Sixpack – and the content producers legal staff) is really quite easily bypassed – and it’s hardly a secret.
A degree in rocket science is not necessary to quickly learn how to bypass the DRM restrictions. Buy your tune, download it, burn it, rerip it and thereafter play it on whatever you like. It’s so easy as to be trivial, and we all know about it – so what’s all the feigned outrage all about? You know and I know that we can put iTMS-purchased songs on any player we want to, in whatever format we choose, with a tiny bit of effort.
The so-called restriction is, in reality, a trivial inconvenience to us and allows Apple to reassure the content producers that their product is protected, thereby getting access to and making available to us all the desirable content that has made the iTMS the wild success it has become.
So what’s the beef here? It’s about governments forcing Apple to make iTMS content available to everyone, including the average consumer.
(a) This is an undesirable intrusion on the private sector;
(b) This benefits no one who, like everyone here, already knows how to bypass DRM;
(c) Being forced to make the content freely copiable by all will result in much of that desirable content to be withdrawn from sale by it’s rightholders.
That means, bottom-lining it, most of the good stuff will no longer be available on iTMS, all simply to appease consumers who are too ignorant or lazy to take a simple extra step to get what they want.
How does this benefit anyone, except computer-illiterates?
And it hardly benefits them, either. They’re shooting themselves in the foot, since, if this succeeds, there won’t be anything left for them to buy!
So Reasoneth The Ghoti
37,
Heh, you really have an interesting view of things.
A degree in rocket science is not necessary to quickly learn how to bypass the DRM restrictions…. blah blah…
A method to restrict the effortless and natural flow of music from the iTMS to any non-Apple device is still a layer. Sure, I can download software that will allow me to rip the songs off my iPod and drop them on a computer (this is also something verboten to Apple), or sync with Winamp are available, but should customers be breaking the DMCA to use their device to the fullest? Should customers have to do the buy (license, rent, whatever), burn, rip, re-import dance? Let’s say I have an iPod and I’m an idiot. I buy 1000000 songs from iTMS. My iPod is no longer working and / or cool, or Apple has moved from hardware / software to making tiddly-winks, or the next iPod requires the offering of your wife to Steve Jobs, so I buy a Zune (or iRiver, or Zen, or whatever). What do I do with my songs now? Delete them? Burn 10000 CD’s and re-import for the next 15 years? Joe Sixpack, who you are so protective of by supporting business lock ins is out his money, has no idea what to do with his music, and just can’t understand why his songs are stuck somewhere he can’t get them. Do you then have your business protectin’ gubnmint send him the Wikipedia entry on Gillette razors and blades?
The so-called restriction is, in reality, a trivial inconvenience to us and allows Apple to reassure the content producers that their product is protected blah blah blah…
Again, you’re blinded by the Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field. Stevie knew what the content providers wanted. Stevie also knew that he wanted to sell iPods and lock them in somehow. Stevie also knew that if he could get some kind of lock in, he would manage to dominate the field. So, yes, he did exactly what he wanted to. Of course, like all good cults, once you see the true lightness of being, you escape from it’s clutches. But when the customer runs from Apple, they’re surprised suddenly that all the extra money they gave that nice, kind countercultre company to buy some exclusive music is no longer available to them. Well, what did the customer do wrong? They followed the trends, they followed the law, they followed the company and now they got hosed. As you might say… Poor Apple for having to deal with such wretches…
So what’s the beef here? blah blah blah…
a) Government intrusion gave us the situation to being with by legislating and enforcing the DMCA. You don’t get a pass on blaming the government of one thing, but not another.
b) Wrong, it benefits everyone who has spent money on Apple and would like to listen to the music at some point in the future on a non-Apple device. And since Apple has sold a bajillion players, this potential is huge.
c) Seeing into the future is a very powerful ability. Why don’t you pick your and my lotto numbers instead. I’ll share my winnings with you. As you may have read on the Interweb tubes recently, music companies are figuring that unrestricted MP3 files just might be the way to go anyway… Look it up on your Sinclair. You might need a cartridge upgrade.
As for the rest of your comment, superfluous..
Now, back to the meat. It is very possible for Apple to sell iTMS songs and have them sync to any device. They don’t want to, because they want to sell iPods, iPods and more iPods. I guess you don’t remember that when the iPod came out, there was no Windows version. Stevie was hoping that your would buy and iPod and be forced to then by a Mac. When that strategy didn’t work as fast as he liked, they released a Windows version and locked in via iTMS. Steve sees farther into the future than you do, and looking back through the past, you can put his strategy together like a puzzle. Albeit a bit late.
As for Apple’s defacto Monopoly position… Microsoft was branded a monopoly for unfair practices, yet the Apple computer, Linux software, Sun, OS/9, OS/2, VMS, etc were all available. But due to their strong arming of OEM’s, the perception that if you don’t have Windows you can’t sell a machine, pre-loading softwares, “it ain’t done till Lotus won’t run”, locking out competitors, IE being integrated into the system etc, the gubmint decided that it was a defacto Monopoly. Were you supportive of Microsoft at that time? Apple has become the defacto standard for MP3 players to your Joe Sixpack crew. And Apple has forced vendor lock in. And exclusive deals locking out competitors. It looks like a duck, it quacks like a duck… guess what? It must be a duck!
Anyhoo, the real trivial part is allowing Apple to sync to other devices. The songs would still be protected since you would have to use iTunes. The music business would be happy since there are devices out there that they make money off when you buy them (eg Zune), Joe Sixpack is happy cause he can use whatever cool device he likes and whichever cool store he and his buds can use. Who’s unhappy? Apple. They can’t force the iPod on you. And possibly you.
Oh, and with the iPhone release, yes, Apple has shown itself to be the pack of miserable greedheads you swore he wasn’t.
Keep sucking the Apple. Maybe you’ll end up like Adam and eve. Some in your throat and a little more brain.
A couple of things everyone can agree on:
1. Steve Jobs needs to be slapped
2. The music industry needs to be slapped.