Talk to the hand!
FT.com / Companies / IT – Norway declares Apple’s iTunes illegal — Now this is getting interesting. Of course Americans, who haven’t actually witnessed “consumer protection” for at least 30 years, will be flabbergasted by all this.
Apple was dealt a blow in Europe on Wednesday when Norway’s powerful consumer ombudsman ruled that its iTunes online music store was illegal because it did not allow downloaded songs to be played on rival technology companies’ devices.
The decision is the first time any jurisdiction has concluded iTunes breaks its consumer protection laws and could prompt other European countries to review the situation.
The ombudsman has set a deadline of October 1 for the Apple to make its codes available to other technology companies so that it abides by Norwegian law. If it fails to do so, it will be taken to court, fined and eventually closed down.
Apple, whose iTunes dominates the legal download market, has its proprietory system Fairplay. Songs and tunes downloaded through iTunes are designed to work with Apple’s MP3 player iPod, but cannot be played on rival devices.
found by Sergio Gasparrini
Sweet! 🙂
Can’t wait till the EU picks up on this, Apple might have to rethink their plans if the whole of the EU starts enforcing similar rulings.
Yes, heaven forbid a company create a low-to-no-profit service that adds value to its hardware to help drive sales, and not expect to also have to make it benefit its competitors as well.
What’s amazing that Apple has gotten away with it so far. If Microsoft or Sony pulled this (and MS is trying with the Zune), no one would go along, but Apple gets a free pass for a few reasons:
— Apple and the iPod are perceived as, um, “cool”
— Many people are probably ignorant of the iTunes platform lock-in
— The iPod and iTunes integration have been smoothly implemented
I heard a rumor — not sure if it’s true — that the iPhone will only be able to call other iPhones. If you call another kind of phone, you get a message: “We’re sorry, the phone you’re calling isn’t expensive enough. Please get some trendier friends and try your call again.”
Am I the only one who thinks this makes sense.
@#4
I highly doubt that legal actions aren’t brought against Apple because their products are “cool”. It has taken time, but they are having these actions brought against. I feel indifferent towards this case. I own an iPod and the reason why I got it was for it’s functionality and how well it worked, not because it was “cool”. If they open it up, that’s fine with me, but if they open up their service and the quality of the product goes down, that’s when I’ll be concerned with this case. Also, why is everyone so adament about bringing the big guy down? Everyone hates Microsoft for the OS monopoly, everyone hates Apple for their online music service monopoly, and everyone hates Wal-Mart for their consumer goods monopoly. Cry me a river, because I won’t hear you. I’ll be too busy shopping at Wal-Mart with my iPod’s ear buds in my ears.
How much would you like to bet that Apple will do what it threatened to do in France and just close down the iTunes store in Norway?
Frankly, this whole thing is a silly issue. There are ways to move songs purchased from iTunes to another player. And no one is forced to buy from iTunes even to populate their iPods. You can still buy CD’s and rip them. And put them on any player you want.
I have no problem with Apple’s business model, but that’s mainly because I wouldn’t want any other player anyway. Not because the iPod is “cool” but because it works so well.
On the other hand, this business model will have to change eventually. Besides the pressure from European countries, there is the rumbling that the music companies are considering selling non-DRMed mp3 files. If this becomes widespread, Apple will definitely have to find another hook.
The point is not to bring down the big guy. The point is to protect consumers from something most of them are unaware of.
If I buy a CD, I can play it in any CD player, period. If I buy a song from ITunes it only plays on my iPod unless I go through an unlocking process that’s only “easy” for techies.
Many people keep bringing Macs or Microsoft into the argument. Problem is that the real end product here is only peripherally related to computers/software. The product is recorded music which is completely a consumer commodity. A consumer should be able to only pay for a song once and do anything they want with it within the constraints of Fair Use with no artificial roadblocks.
#4 – At the iPhone introduction, didn’t Jobs call a non-iPhone? I think you’re being sarcastic, but I’ll tell you something along those lines that bugs the hell out of me. When I go to a website and it tells me I need Internet Explorer! So that page can’t play in all browsers? Better sue the owner of the website.
It would be nice if iTunes music could play in other players right after download. In the meantime, create a music CD, then rip the songs back to mp3.
Am I the only one who thinks this makes sense.
No, probably most of Europe feels the same way.
>>
but Apple gets a free pass for a few reasons:
– Apple and the iPod are perceived as, um, “cool”
– Many people are probably ignorant of the iTunes platform lock-in
– The iPod and iTunes integration have been smoothly implemented
>>
And so they should:
1. It _is_ “cool”, most people like “cool” and will pay a premium for it — Apple is just giving people what they want here.
2. Caveat emptor. They don’t make any claims that the music you purchase on iTunes can be played anywhere other than the iTunes application or an iPod. For most people that buy music from iTunes, this is not a problem. I personally have never bought DRM’ed music because I want it to play on my Media Center, so I stick to CDs and eMusic, but I still use my iPod and iTunes (on Windows, no less) every day and like them both a lot. Tell me how exactly am I locked in?
3. Yes. Again, giving customers what they want.
At the end of the day I’m conflicted about this story. I don’t see the problem if people are willing to buy into it, but anything that puts another nail in the coffin of DRM is to be welcomed.
Why do consumers need protection if there are so many other options out there? I have yet to hear a good argument. I am sorry, I feel if people are uninformed about products they are getting involved with, then they need to suck it up. Same thing for Windows, Windows is dominant, yet I use OS X. I knew what I was getting into when I switched. I don’t hate Microsoft, I made a choice to use a less popular computer/OS.
Dont like Wal-Mart – Go to Target
Dont like Windows – Use Linux
Dont like iTunes – Use Napster
Bottom line, I cannot stand laziness on the part of a consumer, then turn around to their government saying how unfair it is.
As one of the libertarians on this board, I am willing to recant a bit on my support for the Apple/Itunes/Ipod business model. Libertarians believe in complete and INFORMED consent to the largest extent possible, so Apple should make it VERY CLEAR when using the iTunes store that the songs will only be able to be played on that consumers iPods.
But, once the consumer agrees, it is a done deal. [The iPod works perfectly well as a mp3 player, without ever needing songs from iTunes]
Consumer protection is important, but it must be default to the form of information and consent, not control into reasonable agreements between a two parties.
And to my previous posts on the DRM issue, being a libertarian is *not* being a facist, quite the opposite. We believe in government control to enforce informed agreements between any two parties, individuals or businesses. Most of us (the practical ones) believe that government control of specific business practices and markets should be limited to truly important ones (public health, and safety), and SURELY not anything to do with entertainment.
We believe that owners and creators of property (intellectual and real) should have complete control of how their property is used, including the ability to make bad decisions (like a musician who signs with a record company who uses iTunes music store, that will only play on iPods).
#8 –
To respond to your contentions briefly and succinctly: bullshit.
“The point is not to bring down the big guy. The point is to protect consumers from something most of them are unaware of.”
“Protect” them? They’re in danger? The songs they buy and put on their ‘Pods play just fine, and they’re quite happy.
Every time someone brings up “protecting” some sane, competent adult who is happy with the things they willingly, voluntarily purchased, you will find the Nanny-State mentality at work, where everyone is a “victim” – whether they themselves know it or not!
“If I buy a CD, I can play it in any CD player, period.”
100% wrong. You can rip the songs from it and put them on any device you care to.
“If I buy a song from ITunes it only plays on my iPod unless I go through an unlocking process that’s only “easy” for techies.”
Again, 100% wrong. It is so trivially simple as to be absurd.
Here’s this incredibly complicated process, in it’s entirety:
(1) Select the songs you want and add them to an iTunes playlist
(2) Insert a 25¢ blank CD-R into the drive.
(3) Click once on the little “burn” button in the upper right
(4) Go about your business for a few minutes
(5) After you hear the little chime, the CD is done. If you want to put those song on your Rio, Zune, Zen or whatever, reinsert the CD and select the songs you want.
(6) Click on the same little button, which is now labeled ‘Import’.
If that is beyond your abilities, then I honestly pity you. You have no business attempting to operate anything more complex than a can opener.
My 92-year-old granny with Alzheimer’s can do it. 8-year-old kids do it. And you can’t??
That’s simply pathetic. So if lazy technoilliterates like you get your way, say goodbye to most of the stuff you wanted to buy from iTMS, since the copyright owners will withdraw it. Your laziness and desire to have Nanny Government fix everything and make it all better for you will fuck it all up for everyone.
Thanks in advance.
Funny to see the apple fanboys crying about these apple lawsuits, when they are the same ones who cried for more lawsuits against microsoft.
Hypocrisy is a stinky cologne, boys.
About time DRM is as illegal as many other american inventions and should be defeated
Ah, Lauren the FIsh… I’ve been waiting for you to peep up with your inane, insulting bullshit. I’ve broken your arguments before and I’ll do it again.
In fact, I’m just going to post my whole statement from my last post and let you read it.
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.
#14 – So the Norway and the rest of the EU is hallucinating. There is no proprietary format or any other kind of DRM? Interesting.
Apple wants to limit their market to only ipods. Oh my freaking gawd, what next! Soon GM will only sell spare parts for GM’s and not fords.
20,
Can I buy non-GM parts for my GM car? Yes?
#20 lol
Just don’t buy from iTunes. A lot of these arguments sound like “I’m suing Sony because their betamax movies don’t play in my vhs player”.
#21
Can you load non-iTunes songs on your ipod? yes?
The time and energy should go towards fixing the DRM mess.
So has Norway asked everyother online muisc store to unlock/remove DRM?
Now mind you I am talking a bit out of my ass here but I am sure that other DRM specifications can be licensed and that is why they are making a big deal out of iTunes. So Apple could offer licenses to use it’s DRM scheme and plugin to itunes for an appropiate value… ie one billion dollars.
In the end they will all whine about how it is too big of a barrier. I just think that they should shutdown the itunes store in these countries. SImilar to how they limit the TV shows and movies outside the US.
#18, your iTMS vs Windows comparison is not really a valid one.
Apple has always produced the iPod and later added the iTMS as a value-added service to promote their hardware sales, and has never advertised or implied that the iPod + iTunes was anything but a closed, end-to-end system for portable music.
This is in contrast to Microsoft, who never produced their own hardware, and as a result had to resort to anti-competitive OEM licensing incentives and tactics to create a situation where Windows became the sole OS installed on most of the personal computers sold.
Your mentioning of exclusive content is also irrelevant and not applicable to the context of your comparison. Firstly, exclusive distribution agreements are widely used throughout many industries. And secondly, Apple having the exclusive right to digitally distribute an album on the iTMS is not the same as Microsoft using its licensing agreements to prevent OEMs from distributing competing software products and services along-side their’s on a machine pre-installed with Windows.
Norway illegally hunts whales and pirates fish from small isolated Pacific nations and now conducts seabed trawling in Antarctica, without penalty. And they have the audacity to whack Apple for being popular. Screw them, due for a timely reminder that isolationism has a high price, shut down their stores and make them buy their gear from Sweden. Europe is full of these anti-American nut cases, bitter, twisted, angry and impotent. Engaging with them on any civilised level only panders to their egos. It’s time to use the F-word, yes, Firewall.
18 Sure, I can download software that will allow me to rip the songs off my iPod and drop them on a computer …
Transferring from an iPod to a computer? That is the only time you would need extra software, or be violating the DMCA.
18 Burn 10000 CD’s and re-import for the next 15 years?
You take the time to download 1,000,000 songs – and then bitch about the time it takes to archive/transfer them?
18 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.
“He” has bought a computer, started an ITMS account, bought an iPod, transferred songs to an iPod… all while blissfully ignorant of the DRM restrictions, and without a clue regarding how to backup the songs to CD, from within iTunes itself???
Bullshit.
18 allows Apple to reassure the content producers that their product is protected blah blah blah…
And why is this such a downplayed item? Apple, MS, Real… they are all “middlemen” selling someone else’s property, and signing deals to keep the content owners happy.
18 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.
I always considered it using Mac users as “beta testers”, but everyone has an opinion.
18 They don’t want to, because they want to sell iPods, iPods and more iPods.
As I would expect them to.
18 Apple has become the defacto standard for MP3 players to your Joe Sixpack crew. And Apple has forced vendor lock in.
Difference I see is Microsoft developed monopoly power – and then used tactics to undermine rivals, and maintain market dominance.
Apple had lock-in from the get-go and still smoked the competition…
18 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…
Then there won’t be any more need for Fairplay, will there?
If the content owners no longer require DRM on iTMS songs???
Or, do you think Apple will continue applying DRM to songs when the content owners don’t require it?
18 Anyhoo, the real trivial part is allowing Apple to sync to other devices.
Really? Apple should provide free software support to any company who makes a competing music player?
24,
Thanks for the reply Mike. But I must disagree with a couple of points…
First, the Apple Mac +iPod + iTunes was a tactic to push people onto the Mac / Apple platform to enjoy the combo of iPod + iTunes. It was only when the windows platform was released did the critical mass build up for it. Buying an iPod, yes. Buying an iPod PLUS a computer to use it? It was a tough sell even for Apple. So it was a completely closed system from end to end. But Steve knew he didn’t have the whole package to switch Windows users, so he took the carpet out from under our feet another way. Classic vendor lock in.
Microsoft did what any business with an eye on growth and a wallet full of cash would do. By (and BUY) any means necessary, take the competition out. Sure it was illegal, but the government stood in FRONT of MS, and not behind them. This is the opposite of the Apple / iTune / iPod lock in. Apple is using government mandated legislation to force people into their offering and have no compatibility. I’ll say it again. If DRM is required, why not license the DRM to third parties to manufacture hardware? The protection is still there, but Apple loses the part of their revenue that is moving the company forward. So, Apple claiming that forcing interoperability between manufactures USING DRM is legitimizing piracy is just a strawman argument from a protectionist, litigious company.
Exclusive content is not locked to one major vendor in both hardware and software except in the Apple iTunes world. Sure, Sony get’s to distribute their movies exclusively through their partners, but I don’t need a Sony DVD player to watch it.
25, The US illegally starts wars in foreign countries and murders thousands of innocents. Maybe the US should be firewalled, for the good of the world.
Headline:
“Norway declares Apple’s iTunes illegal”
#7 – Kim
“How much would you like to bet that Apple will do what it threatened to do in France and just close down the iTunes store in Norway?”
That’s my bet, too. Of course they’ll lose their Norwegian customers – all 243 of ’em.
I haven’t bothered to look – just how much death metal / black metal is on the iTMS, anyway?
—-
I can’t help but notice the deafening silence from those sad souls whose claims of insurmountable technical roadblocks to using their iTMS purchases I disintegrated…
Maybe they all ran off to get their PhDs in Computer Science from Caltech, so’s they can listen to the latest from Justin Timberlake on their Zunes.
I wonder how they would handle the idea of the iPhone only working with one carrier.
Isn’t that the same kind of thing? The way Apple (again) is working (in the US so far) with only one mobile carier. Isn’t that in some ways similar to the iPod/iTunes? Ok, the carrier can use other cell phones, so it’s only half way the same.
Will Norway sue Apple for only allowing Mac OS X to run on Apple branded computers?
If Microsoft releases the Zune to Norway will they face the same issues?
Consumer Protection = limiting consumer options to whatever a bunch of bureaucrats and politicians think they ought to be. If you don’t like the terms that I-Tunes offers, go somewhere else. I certainly don’t buy from them.
#27,
“Exclusive content is not locked to one major vendor in both hardware and software except in the Apple iTunes world.”
Sure it does. Game console manufacturers have produced franchise games exclusively for their hardware platforms for as long as the console gaming industry has existed. But at least in the case of music, even if some day you will only be able to buy a Beatles album on iTunes, you will still be able to buy the physical CD from another location.
I’m confused about your iPod timeline, but maybe it’s just that I’m reading it wrong. Let me restate it… Apple introduces the iPod as a Mac only device that uses the iTunes jukebox. When the iPod was finally released as both a Mac and Windows device, it originally came with Musicmatch as the jukebox for managing its content on Windows. Next, when the iTMS was introduced, it was only available on the then Mac only iTunes. The Windows port of iTunes with the iTMS was not ready for released until six months later.
1.) How was introducing a new portable music device in an, at the time, small market and only usable by people who were already Apple’s customers supposed to convert new Mac users?
2.) As you point out, iPod sales didn’t really start to take off until after they were made available to the entire PC world through Windows compatibility. So where was this overwhelming desire for Windows users to switch to Macs just to buy an iPod that only a small community of people were using anyway? The truth is that the iPod was made a Windows compatible device to sell more iPods… the effect the device had on platform switching was more a function of people simply becoming more familiar with Apple’s products.
3.) Again, when has the iPod + iTunes ever been marketed as anything other than a closed system? When they say the FairPlay licensing terms allow you to transfer your purchased songs to an unlimited number of iPods, they mean iPods.
4.) Nobody has ever been required to purchase song on the iTMS to put music on their iPods. Nobody is required to have an iPod in order to purchase music through their service. The only requirement involving the two is that in order to directly transfer a purchased song to a portable device, it must be an iPod. Because the iTMS is first and foremost a value-added service to drive iPod sales, and always has been. Apple has never pretended otherwise.