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.”
So governments can now tell you how much money you can make. There are numerous ways to purchase music and other mp3 players to buy. If you don’t like the ipod/itunes situation do a different one. It’s not a monopoly. Walk into the store and buy the cd. Use Napster. Also, you can buy songs on itunes and burn them. You don’t need an ipod to enjoy the music.
Buy a Zune or something.
It’s also not unreasonable to suggest that, in keeping with the spirit of the free market that those who don’t want DRM-protected content buy their music elsewhere.
It would certainly be a lot more convenient for me, personally, if the Chevron gasoline station down the block sold the Diesel I want, instead of my having to go 6 miles to the Exxon that sells it.
But no one held a gun to my head and forced me to buy a Diesel car. If convenience was so important to me, I should have bought a gas-powered car. I have no moral or legal right, since I voluntarily chose a car with limited fueling availability, to now demand that another party sell me what I WANT instead of what THEY CHOOSE to sell.
No one made any one else buy a fucking iPod. If you don’t want DRM-infected music, then buy a player that doesn’t require it. Nobody’s stopping you. You buy an iPod, you either learn how to strip DRM, roll your own or shut up. You’re a free citizen, and you knew what the deal was. If you didn’t, it sure ain’t Apple’s fault.
Thats a great idea, cause it might open up a new market of people who don’t want to pay 340 for a ipod, or 499 for an iphone or 10 dollars for a crappy ass shuffle, I think that is a great idea, but of course it can’t be made available to the Zune, but i think its not a bad idea.
1. “So governments can now tell you how much money you can make.”
Mmm… the US government enacted the DMCA which gives Apple its vertical monopoly. Without the DMCA, anyone would be free to crack the FairPlay DRM and play songs from iTunes anywhere. But our government has decided to protect Apple’s business model and to stifle true free markets, innovation, and competition.
If Apple wants to include DRM in its music to force people to buy Apple hardware. That’s great. I just don’t think it’s any government’s duty to enforce it.
#5,
Read the part on page 5 regarding the reverse engineering exception. This is just an executive summary, mind you, and it may no longer be applicable as the law may have been changed since 1998… but it seems to already address this issue, in the eyes of a non-lawyer like me.
http://www.copyright.gov/legislation/dmca.pdf
6. “Read the part on page 5 regarding the reverse engineering”
You apparently don’t remember, but Real attempted doing just that. Real wanted its online music to play on iPods, so it reversed engineered FairPlay to facilitate that. Apple threatened a lawsuit under the DMCA. Real backed down.
I just wanted to add, I agree with everyone that Europe should have no business telling Apple to open up their iTunes service and iPod hardware. However, I also think that the US has no right to keep Apple’s business model closed. The governments should get out of the way and let innovation and competition take care of any problems.
#7, Yes I do remember the attempt by Real, but a threat of lawsuit in one case does not equal a legal judgment for all cases.
8. “Yes I do remember the attempt by Real, but a threat of lawsuit in one case does not equal a legal judgment for all cases.”
I’m not entirely sure what you’re arguing about. I point out how the DMCA protects Apple’s vertical business model. I point out a real world example, (get it, a real world example, ha ha ha!), where the just the threat of the DMCA protected Apple’s vertical business model.
If you want to talk about what might happen in some hypothetical imaginary world, that’s fine. But this thread is about the real world. (I got you again, get it? The real world! Ha ha ha!)
France, Germany? You mean Old Europe?
Well those are some of the more powerful EU countrys, it would interesting if the EU as a whole gets involved. If the EU were to pass some law to force fair use, then companys would really have to start listening as they could not ignore such a large market.
All,
If Apple didn’t have exclusives, I’d say it’s a non-issue. But since through their popularity, they have made available ONLY to iPods / iTunes certain artists, tracks, performances. Therefore, if there something you want that is exclusive to iTunes, you don’t have much choice, do you?
Oh, and if this was any other company except the holy Apple, the flames would be burning very high. I just don’t get why these Apple fanboi’s have a royal hardon for Apple. I mean, does it really hurt you if Apple allowed ITMS purchases to be played on a Zen or some other device? These fanboi’s treat Apple like it was their girlfriend!
And if you try to claim that it’s government interference in forcing a company to open it’s DRM, well, it was government interference that blocked reverse engineering and gave us this lovely situation. Well, government by proxy. It was business that wanted it, and paid handsomely for the privilege.
#9, my point is that while the threat of lawsuit may have caused Real to back down, the reality is that the law may not actually be on Apple’s side. We will only know if somebody actually steps up and takes it through the courts.
As I originally stated, I was only linking to an executive summary posted on the US Copyright Office’s website, and I don’t know how accurately it reflects the current states of the laws. But your Real example, by itself, does not disprove my reference as it was never taken far enough to have a ruling made… because as you said, Real backed down.
Actually, now that you have caused me to do a little more digging, I found another article talking about what may be the real culprit here: patent law.
http://tinyurl.com/3cwldv
DMCA was the worst piece of crap ever passed by our Congress.
In general principle, anything that causes problems for Steve Jobs or costs him money is good.
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.”
WTF? When has this not been an option with iTunes???
I’m supposed to give credence to anything else they are rambling-on about?
Commies:
1. Yes, the government is “protecting” Apples business model. Just like the government protects all legal agreements between people. Just like the government protects patents and copyrights.
2. So iTunes has exclusive music. So what. Say IMAX comes out with a movie in high definition. Does the government have a right to mandate they come out in standard definition? Come out with a PSP version? This is ENTERTAINMENT. Every content provider has exclusives, that can only be accessed on their terms.
Apple also has the ‘right’ to shut down their operations in those countries!
See, I did learn something from Atlas Shrugged!
If Sony introduced a CD/DVD format that would only play on Sony hardware, 1) no one would buy it, and 2) there would be an incredible uproar. I’ll never understand why Apple gets a free pass from some people for doing effectively the same thing. Of course Apple just screws itself with tactics like this, but it also shows how dimwitted members of the Apple cult really are.
17,
So, you’re a Commie? The gubmint shouldn’t be in the business of protecting businesses UNLESS it’s a fascist or communist state. Isn’t that what the “free market” is supposed to do?
as for your second point… IMAX movies are still available in non IMAX and on DVD, which is playable by all. Bad argument, try again. But, if you are FOR government protecting businesses, then you should be FOR government forcing interoperability. Unless you’re a commie / fascist, which I suspect you are. And since fascist is a “dirty” word, replace it with corporatist.
19,
Like I said. Apple fanboi’s treat the company like it’s a girlfriend.
#13 –
“Oh, and if this was any other company except the holy Apple, the flames would be burning very high. I just don’t get why these Apple fanboi’s have a royal hardon for Apple. I mean, does it really hurt you if Apple allowed ITMS purchases to be played on a Zen or some other device? These fanboi’s treat Apple like it was their girlfriend!”
Troll Call, gentlemen, Troll Call…
#19 –
“If Sony introduced a CD/DVD format that would only play on Sony hardware, 1) no one would buy it, and 2) there would be an incredible uproar.”
Really? Is that so? Let’s look at not what “would” happen, but rather what HAS happened:
(1) 3 out of 4 people buy an iPod – so much for “no one buying it;” and
(2) The vast majority of them are quite happy.
BTW, that “incredible uproar” you hear is in actuality the sound of your totally fallacious analogy falling flat on it’s ass.
Please post any pictures you may have of Steve Jobs threatening to shoot people’s dogs if they don’t buy iPods…
Better yet, why not go run out and buy a new Chevy Impala and then sue GM because you can’t run it on hydrogen?
#14
Mike, I think what SN is getting at is that you are not seeing the big picture with the DMCA. While the law has provisions that allude to being able to crack FairPlay, there are other aspects in the law that might make the process of cracking it (or unsuccessfully cracking) illegal. Either way, the DMCA provides enough clout that you can legitimately threaten an expensive lawsuit or series of lawsuits to protect your effort.
The point that everyone made about the DMCA was that it would have stifle innovation by giving the big players a tool to use for threatening competition with lawsuits. The case with Real was a prime example. Many times whether or not you are in the right does not matter as much as whether you have enough money to prove you are right in a court of law.
21,
Straw man argument for the first point. -10 karma to you. Now, answer the question… would it hurt you or your iPod if someone using a Zen, or iRiver or any device downloaded from iTunes and was able to sync with the device? No. It would not. But you would feel like your girlfriend / boyfriend was banging someone else, and THAT hurts.
and your second point is so poorly constructed I can’t even comment on it. Chevy Impala and hydrogen? WTF? You can buy a Chevy Impala and fill it up at an Exxon instead of a GM branded gas station you tool.
Lauren — I was expressing my bafflement that Apple’s scheme has worked — since the same scheme wouldn’t work in my Sony hypothetical — and suggesting that folks who buy iTunes are being duped. I take it you would buy a DVD that was playable only on a Sony player…
#23 –
“…would it hurt you or your iPod if… ” yadda yadda yadda…
Why, no, since you ask. The question to you is, who said it would? Talk about straw men…
“…you would feel like your girlfriend / boyfriend was banging someone else, and THAT hurts.”
That’s how I would feel, eh? Nice to know that.
Projection: It’s not just for movie theaters any more!
“You can buy a Chevy Impala and fill it up at an Exxon instead of a GM branded gas station you tool.”
You, my esteemed friend, are the one who’s got it bass-ackwards.
You wanna buy a Rio or Zen or whichever POS player suits your fancy (which runs on the MP3 equivalent of common gasoline), and then bitch about not being able to patronize the iTMS (like the hydrogen fueling stations that only the owners of specially equipped vehicles can avail themselves of).
BZZZZZT! Nope, sorry. Circle gets the square. But hey, thanks for playing, and Jay has some nice parting gifts for you, like the home version of Dvorak Uncensored…
25,
Now that you admit no harm done to the end user, Apple exclusives on ITMS have become a defacto monopoly situation. Sure, you can buy what ever player you want, but IF you want an exclusive from iTMS you have to buy an Apple player. That’s unfair practice. There is NO difference between the bits and bytes of an ITMS song and any other store, except for the encryption licensing from a company. It is tantamount to your fueling station having the SAME gas, but different nozzle attachments. There is no difference otherwise. Your hydrogen / petroleum argument is just awful, so please stop it.
And I can see you’re getting angry. You must love Apple the company far too much than is healthy.
…would it hurt you or your iPod if… ” yadda yadda yadda…
Why, no, since you ask. The question to you is, who said it would?
Apple did.
“The French implementation of the EU Copyright Directive will result in state-sponsored piracy,” Apple said in a statement.
http://mac.sillydog.org/archives/001180.php
You don’t even win the home edition of Dvorak Uncensored.
#24 – Kendall B
“I was expressing my bafflement that Apple’s scheme has worked…”
Ah, but you see, since when is this Apple’s ‘scheme’?
I cordially invite you to examine the creator of the century-old strategy that Steve J & Co have adopted ;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Gillette
My point? No one who buys a Shick razor sues Gillette because they can’t use Gillette blades in it… you want what the iTMS’s got? Then buy an iPod. Or not. Your choice. As that great American, Dr. Nick Riviera says: “It’s a free country!”
28,
ANOTHER bad example. Generic blades are available for all brands. Are generic / independent players available for iTMS? Nope.
#26 –
“And I can see you’re getting angry.”
What did I just tell you about projection? I need to introduce you to Andrew.
“There is NO difference between the bits and bytes of an ITMS song and any other store, except for the encryption licensing from a company.”
It would appear that you don’t pay very close attention, old fruit. You couldn’t possibly be more wrong. (But I’m sure you’ll keep trying!)
The songs on the iTMS are not MP3s, they are M4A/B/P, encoded in AAC and they are most definitely not bit-identical to MP3s, leaving aside the fact that they are regarded by most to be sonically superior to MP3s for identical bitrates…
“Apple said in a statement.” yadda, yadda, yadda… So now, in your mind, I’m a spokesperson for Apple? Or I dictate what Apple officially says? This is all very confusing…
#27 – pedro
Oh-oh, I see you’ve been out with Fusion, sticking your heads in his plasma containment field again. You really should cut that out, it’s gonna result in permanent damage.
“It would be fun that the EU convinced the Fraunhofer Institute to revoke MP3 licensing to mac.”
(1) Who is this ‘mac’ you keep referring to? A Mac is a computer. The company that has the iTMS is called Apple, Inc.
(2) It would be fun, since AFAIK, Apple pays Dolby Labs for encoding product in AAC; they don’t sell MP3s, and anyway, FhG doesn’t have exclusive rights to the format, and if they were to attempt to withdraw licensing rights (which they by themselves can’t do, last I heard), they would be exposing themselves to a massive countersuit from Apple, since Apple’s actions, whatever they are alleged to be, are not violations of any licensing agreement regarding transcoding files, they relate to the DRM wrapper, and FhG, Dolby, et al, have no dog in that fight.
Jeez, how many different ways can someone be wrong in a mere 17 words? I think you set a record there, p-dawg.
So, pedro, fill up that pipe again, and dream on, bro.
30,
Nope. You’re wrong again. You know how computers work? Two numbers. 1 and 0. Everything else is just a layer on top to encode those 1’s and 0’s. Get a clue.
You asked the question who would be hurt by iTMS opening up to third parties. The answer is Apple. There is no effect on the end user, just the owner. The customer would benefit to the detriment of Apple.
#31 –
“You know how computers work?”
Why, no, now that you mention it. Wanna teach me? I’s typing this on a Timex/Sinclair ZX81with what the guy tole me was 15k of cram, or somethin’ like that. I gots a real nice green-on-black 12″ TV connected to it so I can read whatchu say. Next year, I’m gonna get me one ‘o them there paper-tape dealies!
“Everything else is just a layer on top to encode those 1’s and 0’s.”
Now it becomes clear what kind of dolt I’ve been wasting my time trying to discuss things intelligently with.
Whatchoo talkin’ ’bout, Willis? What the fuck is that supposed to mean?
An uncompressed music file gets run through an encoding program. That program outputs a new file. Here’s a clue for you, Brainiac: there’s no fucking “layer of” anything put on top on anything. The entire file is turned into another, much smaller file. Data in the original file is thrown away. That’s what the fuck the word ‘compression’ means, simplified so you can maybe understand it. And since it’s smaller, maybe you could explain for the rest of us idiots how a file of a given size can possibly be identical to a file of a different size. If you actually think a 70Mb file of a song is “identical” to a 7Mb MP3 encoding of that file, that a 70Mb file with a “layer on top” added to it can be one-tenth the size, then either you’re an idiot or you got ahold of some bad drugs.
A DRM-protected file has a wrapper added to it, but is otherwise identical to the original – but that doesn’t have Jack Shit to do with what we’re talking about, the format the file is encoded in, if it’s even encoded! And M4As are far from identical to an MP3 of the exact same song file. Apple sells M4As, not MP3s. If they were identical, what the flying fuck would be the point?
Tell us all about it – if you have time before Dad comes home and expects you to get off his computer…
And a bit of appropriate lagniappe for the literate among us:
Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain.
– Schiller