PDA

View Full Version : European Countries Up Pressure On iTunes, FairPlay




Pages : [1] 2

MacRumors
Jan 24, 2007, 01:56 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Norway's Consumer Ombudsman has declared that Apple's Fairplay digital rights management system used in Apple's iTunes and iPod is illegal, according to a report at out-law.com (http://www.out-law.com/page-7691).

While the declaration is not legally binding, pressure is increasing on iTunes in Europe with consumer groups in Germany and France recently joining Norway's action against Apple. France has previously pushed legislation (http://www.macrumors.com/2006/05/11/softened-french-drm-law-passes-senate/) aimed at opening up closed DRM systems such as Apple's Fairplay. Apple originally called that law "state-sponsored piracy." Other countries reported to be involved in pressuring Apple are Denmark, Sweden, Finland, and the U.K.

The common goal of the complaints seems to be around the desire for consumers to be able to purchase music or videos from the iTunes store and use it on any device, not just Apple's. Apple has yet to license Fairplay, although some companies have taken cracks at reverse-engineering (http://www.macrumors.com/2006/10/02/another-fairplay-threat-licensing-fairplay/) the protection.

Background Information: Original Norwegian Complaint (http://www.macrumors.com/2006/06/06/norway-to-pressure-apple-to-change-itunes-eula/)



w00master
Jan 24, 2007, 02:02 PM
More reason to open things up. I know this isn't a popular sentiment on this website/forum, but imho it's the "right thing to do."

"If you legally acquire music, you need to have the right to manage it on all other devices that you own."
- Steve Jobs

w00master

evilgEEk
Jan 24, 2007, 02:02 PM
I think this is ridiculous.

Apple's not forcing anyone to use iTunes. If you want to use it then buy an iPod as well, I see nothing wrong with this.

longofest
Jan 24, 2007, 02:04 PM
The Omsbuden appears to have reversed its original stance. Originally, it wasn't looking like it was going to force Apple to open up FairPlay

cgc
Jan 24, 2007, 02:06 PM
I suppose they will sue BMW now because you can't use Ford parts on them. Why isn't Microsoft getting sued for something similar (e.g. WMP, Office, etc.)?

Steven1621
Jan 24, 2007, 02:11 PM
I suppose they will sue BMW now because you can't use Ford parts on them. Why isn't Microsoft getting sued for something similar (e.g. WMP, Office, etc.)?

I recall the EU wanted to make MS make a Windows version without WMP.

w00master
Jan 24, 2007, 02:12 PM
I suppose they will sue BMW now because you can't use Ford parts on them. Why isn't Microsoft getting sued for something similar (e.g. WMP, Office, etc.)?

IMHO, they should be.

Data is data in my book, and no device should hold back what YOU want to do with YOUR data.

w00master

shunpike
Jan 24, 2007, 02:12 PM
an ipod is only £55! come on people! a songis only 79p so what if it only works on itunes?

w00master
Jan 24, 2007, 02:14 PM
I suppose they will sue BMW now because you can't use Ford parts on them. Why isn't Microsoft getting sued for something similar (e.g. WMP, Office, etc.)?

Sorry, I just don't buy the "car parts" analogy. How bout I turn it around with this? What if you could only buy one type of TOOTHPASTE for the TOOTHBRUSH that you bought? Think that would be RIGHT?

Nope.

w00master

Robbouk
Jan 24, 2007, 02:15 PM
I recall the EU wanted to make MS make a Windows version without WMP.

They actually did. It's called Windows XP Home N, which is the same price as normal XP home, just without the Media Player bundled.

In all fairness, I own an iPod, an iMac and download my music legally off iTunes. Because I have purhcased this music, why shouldn't I be able to put it onto a PSP, or play it on my mobile phone?

SciTeach
Jan 24, 2007, 02:15 PM
I'm not liking this "I want to be able to play my music anywhere" junk. If you want to play songs from iTunes, buy an iPod. If you want to play it on other devices that use other software, use those devices. Seems that they want Apple to make the cake and then give it away. Buzz! Wrong Answer!

nemaslov
Jan 24, 2007, 02:16 PM
The tide is shifting. From this weeks' major music industry convention in Canne France, several of the major record companies are talking about opening up their catalogs without any DRM. Allowing people to download MP3s (yes that's right) with NO restrictions. They feel that it would actually spur on sales (too little too late??).

If that indeed happens, Apple may have to eventually open up since they won't be able to blame the record companies for limitations

war
Jan 24, 2007, 02:18 PM
Didn't Microsoft already demonstrate that licensing DRM for music files doesn't work very well with its "plays for sure" problems? They even gave it up with the Zune and tied it down just like the iPod. So, these European countries now are hoping that Apple will do better with it than MS did. Isn't the better idea to do away with DRM altogether? It's funny how people don't learn anything even though factual information of its high failure rate is easily found.

eenu
Jan 24, 2007, 02:22 PM
this is all ************!!!

There are loads of places to buy music from.....if you don't own an ipod you have plenty of places to purchase from! Those who purchase from iTunes own ipods! Simple.

This makes me very VERY angry indeed!

They should be doing the same to MS and others that license to single or limited devices if they want to do this to apple

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 02:22 PM
These countries are only to be congratulated.

As sooner Apple are forced to open up fairplay, the better.

- You aren't forced to use only one type of petrol for a particular type of car
- Any CD / DVD will work in any CD or DVD player

You should be able to play digital music on any device you like.

jakaj
Jan 24, 2007, 02:22 PM
It's sad to see how people not only do nothing when their rights are taken from them, but actually support the companies when they do it.

w00master
Jan 24, 2007, 02:25 PM
I'm not liking this "I want to be able to play my music anywhere" junk. If you want to play songs from iTunes, buy an iPod. If you want to play it on other devices that use other software, use those devices. Seems that they want Apple to make the cake and then give it away. Buzz! Wrong Answer!

And why is that? Sorry, I don't buy the "just buy an iPod" answer either. It's DATA on my COMPUTER and MY MUSIC PLAYER. I should be able to play it where I want to.

Also, answer this: why is it I can play SOME of my music anywhere, but not ALL of it? How is this a good user experience? Isn't a "great user experience" supposed to be the hallmark of Apple?

Again let's hear it from Steve Jobs himself:

"If you legally acquire music, you need to have the right to manage it on all other devices that you own."
- Steve Jobs

w00master

sccaldwell
Jan 24, 2007, 02:29 PM
I think this is ridiculous.

Apple's not forcing anyone to use iTunes. If you want to use it then buy an iPod as well, I see nothing wrong with this.

I agree 1000%. There are other options for buying, managing, and playing digital music. If you want to go with Napster and a Zune, that's your choice....good luck with it.

I'd bet money that behind the scenes, Micro$oft and makers of other MP3 players are lobbying hard for this type of legal maneuvering...

Craig

jakaj
Jan 24, 2007, 02:33 PM
Also, it's kind of interesting to see how when anti-monopoly and "open standards" initiatives target Microsoft, foolish followers of the Mac religion say how good it is, yet when the same happens to Apple, suddenly you "always have another option"...

whatever
Jan 24, 2007, 02:34 PM
IMHO, they should be.

Data is data in my book, and no device should hold back what YOU want to do with YOUR data.

w00master

Alright, this is just another example of Europe being backwards, again.

There is nothing preventing me from playing music that I purchase from the iTunes store on a Zune, CD Player or as a ring-tone.

w00master is not completely correct in saying that "data is data in my book, and no device should hold what YOU want to do with YOUR data."

Yes, technically today I can do anything I want with the data on my iPod, however it's not my data. I do not hold the copyrights. I cannot use this music commercially or illegally share it.

I feel as if these countries are just trying to screw with a sucessful American company which has figured out how to make money in the music industry.

I wonder why they don't go after the video game industry in the same way. Cause you know w00master claims that data is data and I believe that PS 3, X-box 360 and WII games are just a bunch of 0's and 1's.

w00master
Jan 24, 2007, 02:35 PM
I agree 1000%. There are other options for buying, managing, and playing digital music. If you want to go with Napster and a Zune, that's your choice....good luck with it.


So, if you bought a digital photo online on your Mac, you wouldn't have a problem if your printer couldn't print it?


I'd bet money that behind the scenes, Micro$oft and makers of other MP3 players are lobbying hard for this type of legal maneuvering...

Craig

Funny, b/c MS's DRM scheme is also being investigated as well.

w00master

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 02:39 PM
You cannot compare the software across incompatible to music**. It is simply ludicrious.

** I want to play Sony games on XBox argument.


--

If these European countries change their laws, Apple will have to "do what Romans do, when in Rome ".. otherwise withdraw.

Oh, also, this WILL apply to ALL digital music NOT just Apple.

--

"
I feel as if these countries are just trying to screw with a sucessful American company which has figured out how to make money in the music industry."

YOU ARE PARANOID!!!!!!! That is a simple minded oppinion.


Alright, this is just another example of Europe being backwards, again.

There is nothing preventing me from playing music that I purchase from the iTunes store on a Zune, CD Player or as a ring-tone.

w00master is not completely correct in saying that "data is data in my book, and no device should hold what YOU want to do with YOUR data."

Yes, technically today I can do anything I want with the data on my iPod, however it's not my data. I do not hold the copyrights. I cannot use this music commercially or illegally share it.

I feel as if these countries are just trying to screw with a sucessful American company which has figured out how to make money in the music industry.

I wonder why they don't go after the video game industry in the same way. Cause you know w00master claims that data is data and I believe that PS 3, X-box 360 and WII games are just a bunch of 0's and 1's.

jakaj
Jan 24, 2007, 02:40 PM
There is nothing preventing me from playing music that I purchase from the iTunes store on a Zune, CD Player or as a ring-tone.

Really? How can I play songs purchased from iTunes on my no-name mp3 player?

I wonder why they don't go after the video game industry in the same way. Cause you know w00master claims that data is data and I believe that PS 3, X-box 360 and WII games are just a bunch of 0's and 1's.

That would be a good thing, yes. But there are justified technological and practical limitations to that. However, the same does not apply for DRM, it's actually more work to implement it.

BUT, if you look on another area, document formats are becoming open standards based.

Do you also find it normal if Word documents can't be opened on a Mac, and vice versa?

SciTeach
Jan 24, 2007, 02:41 PM
And why is that? Sorry, I don't buy the "just buy an iPod" answer either. It's DATA on my COMPUTER and MY MUSIC PLAYER. I should be able to play it where I want to.

Also, answer this: why is it I can play SOME of my music anywhere, but not ALL of it? How is this a good user experience? Isn't a "great user experience" supposed to be the hallmark of Apple?

Again let's hear it from Steve Jobs himself:

"If you legally acquire music, you need to have the right to manage it on all other devices that you own."
- Steve Jobs

w00master

I understand what you are saying and your point of view, but I can't play PS3 games on an XBox 360. Why? It's business. I can still listen to the radio for free, but why do people pay $$$ to Sirius radio. Because it is a different medium and has different options (mostly, no commercials). I buy songs legally from :apple: and I still buy CDs. Most of my collection is from CDs. I chose to use a Mac and iTunes and iPods.

maxp1
Jan 24, 2007, 02:41 PM
I hesitate to enter this fray, but data on your computer doesn't mean that you have the right to do anything you want with it. Just like any other media it is still subject to the restrictions that you entered into when you purchased that data. If you don't like the restrictions, buy the data somewhere else, there's nothing stopping you, especially with music where you have numerous options for other purchasing, including CD and ripping your own.

The electronic format of the data is analogous to the physical format. If you bought a CD, don't expect to be able to play it on your LP player. I think the same thing hold true in this situation.

aine
Jan 24, 2007, 02:42 PM
What if you could only buy one type of TOOTHPASTE for the TOOTHBRUSH that you bought? Think that would be RIGHT?
Then I would not but that kind of toothbrush, and I would not buy that kind of toothpaste.

Unless I loved that kind of toothpaste so much that was willing to commit to buying their proprietary toothbrush in order to use it.

Same analogy with shavers and blades. It's everywhere. The EU is targeting Apple simply because they have so much marketshare.

w00master
Jan 24, 2007, 02:42 PM
Alright, this is just another example of Europe being backwards, again.

There is nothing preventing me from playing music that I purchase from the iTunes store on a Zune, CD Player or as a ring-tone.

w00master is not completely correct in saying that "data is data in my book, and no device should hold what YOU want to do with YOUR data."


So are you saying that the copyright holder owns real-estate on your harddrive? Sorry, it's still data.


Yes, technically today I can do anything I want with the data on my iPod, however it's not my data. I do not hold the copyrights. I cannot use this music commercially or illegally share it.

So, how exactly is it "illegally sharing" or "commercial use" if a user wants to stream their iTunes bough music to their XBox 360? Don't you think their is something wrong with that picture? Again, I ask this question:

How is this a GOOD USER EXPERIENCE? It isn't.


I feel as if these countries are just trying to screw with a sucessful American company which has figured out how to make money in the music industry.

I wonder why they don't go after the video game industry in the same way. Cause you know w00master claims that data is data and I believe that PS 3, X-box 360 and WII games are just a bunch of 0's and 1's.

And I feel that your defending Apple, simply because you love Apple and nothing more.

As for the games argument, well personlly, I think you should be able to buy a game and play it anywhere.

w00master

P-Worm
Jan 24, 2007, 02:44 PM
w00master,

The way I see things when speaking about rights is that Europe has no right to force Apple to change their product (unless it affects the environment we live in or kills people or something drastic like that, but we're not talking about that). What if all companies would have to do things that the consumers wanted. First thing I'm lobbying for would be "free products all the time" because that suits my needs.

I know that example is rediculous, but my point is that opening up Fairplay is no more right than making VCRs play both VHS and Betamax. Different formats call for different equipment whehter its because of technology or marketing strategy. Apple never got in this business to sell music, they got in it to sell iPods. If the DRM was open, they may as well bag the iTunes store.

P-Worm

nagromme
Jan 24, 2007, 02:44 PM
Opening up iTunes will probably happen one day, and it will probably mean good things like more choices for shoppers.

But this will also help Apple's competition, and allow others to make money from the system Apple has created. So I don't mind if Apple chooses the when and how of it, striking when they feel it is strategic to do so.

After all, the iPod and iTunes are a system that actually WORKS well together, and is designed to do so. The tie is not completely an artificial one.

And the quality and ease of this system is vital to Apple in competing against something that has nothing to do with quality or ease: the Microsoft juggernaut with its deep pockets and existing monopolies in computing... not to mention its own DRM, its own players, its own music software, and its frequent locking out of the Mac platform.

Apple opening up the DRM could actually hurt Microsoft and hurt the iPod both. Is it worth it? I don't know. Maybe someday. For now, I just hope the iPod and iTunes experience doesn't suffer.

I honestly don't think that other players are failing due to being "left out" of iTunes. iPods were big sellers long before iTunes was selling music. I think--and this may be crazy--that other players are failing because the iPod is simple to use and well-designed. And also, now, because the iPod has built up name recognition.

Someone else could design an integrated system as good as iTunes and iPod, and seize market quite nicely. But if they don't--and so many have failed--then I'm not sure why Apple should be forced to help them.

As for the consumer, ANY DRM sucks.... but it's the record companies, not Apple, who demand it. They would never have let iTunes happen at all without that. At least Apple's DRM is far more liberal than any non-piracy use I might personally have. (Except, that is, for splitting the iTunes/iPod system. Which I don't want--no other players are so good I need to have them--but I can understand that some do. Although maybe those people should be wishing for new software that's as good as iTunes and integrates just as smoothly with those other players.)

I do agree that I should be able to do what I want with my music, ideally--but at least I KNOW up front that I can't use another player, when I buy from iTunes. I have the choice to shop elsewhere (good ol' CDs) if I don't want to buy into the iPod/iTunes systems. I am not being tricked into anything.

One thing I can see Apple doing--when the time is right--is allowing other companies to be Fairplay-compatible (and making some money from them for the privelege) but NOT integrating other players with iTunes (beyond what they already do with synching playlists of CDs ripped to MP3). Not integrating them to the level of calendars and contacts and games etc.--so that the iTunes app is unaffected and does not become more complex or buggy. Let people synch m4p AACs but go no further. And Apple could then tout these other non-music iTunes features as selling points for iPods.

w00master
Jan 24, 2007, 02:45 PM
I understand what you are saying and your point of view, but I can't play PS3 games on an XBox 360. Why? It's business. I can still listen to the radio for free, but why do people pay $$$ to Sirius radio. Because it is a different medium and has different options (mostly, no commercials). I buy songs legally from :apple: and I still buy CDs. Most of my collection is from CDs. I chose to use a Mac and iTunes and iPods.

I understand it's a business, but it doesn't make it RIGHT. How does a fragmented video game market really benefit content producers? In the end it doesn't. It costs them more money to develop for multiple platforms.


w00master

superleccy
Jan 24, 2007, 02:48 PM
Personally, I wouldn't want Apple to "open up" fairplay. But, my reasoning seems different to other posters here.

I can already play my iTMS songs on all my devices without too much of a problem. Obviously they work great on my iPod, but I can also play them in my car CD player (and on the CD player in my living room, but thanks to AirTunes and Salling Clicker that doesn't happen so often these days), and on my Nokia N80. :eek:

OK, so to play them on my Nokia N80, I have to burn them to Audio CD and then re-rip them into iTunes as MP3... and i have to use SyncTunes to get them onto the N80's memory card... but that's a routine I've gotten used to, and there's no noticable loss in sound quality.

So, the music industry thinks iTMS is selling DRM-protected music (so it is happy, and continues to push more and more content into the iTMS), and I can strip off that DRM pretty easilly so I can do exactly what I want with the music that I have paid for. And BTW, I don't share my music collection with anyone.

If Apple opened up Fairplay, then the music industry might get cold feet, and start withdrawing content from iTMS, or insisting on stupid Zune-ish iPod tax and stuff.

So, I know the current situation isn't ideal, but frankly I'm happy enough. Let FairPlay stay as it is.

SL

PS: The irony is that the N80's MP3 player is so lame that most of the time I don't bother using it, and just carry my iPod round with me anyway. Roll-on the iPhone!

starcke
Jan 24, 2007, 02:48 PM
Maybe I'm naive, but I see two things here.

First, if I buy a song from iTunes and it moves to my computer, it becomes mine. No, I don't have the copyright so I can't (or shouldn't anyway) share it illegally or use it commercially, but for all intents and purposes that file is mine. Why should I be limited to using it with a certain device when there are loads of other devices that could potentially make use of the file?

Second, and more broadly, I don't see how opening up iTunes music/TV/movies to other devices hurts Apple. Who cares if Johnny down the street owns an iRiver player but really likes iTunes and wants to get his music that way... it's still money going to Apple, right? And if Johnny realizes (as so many people have/are with iPods and iTunes already) that Apple makes a good product and suddenly finds himself in the market for a new computer/mp3 player/etc, isn't that a positive?

I think at the end of the day fighting this is putting Apple on the wrong side of the fence. It might win the battle for a while, but eventually the market will demand an open and user-friendly music service that doesn't lock you in to one device.

Just my two cents...

w00master
Jan 24, 2007, 02:49 PM
w00master,

The way I see things when speaking about rights is that Europe has no right to force Apple to change their product (unless it affects the environment we live in or kills people or something drastic like that, but we're not talking about that). What if all companies would have to do things that the consumers wanted. First thing I'm lobbying for would be "free products all the time" because that suits my needs.

I know that example is rediculous, but my point is that opening up Fairplay is no more right than making VCRs play both VHS and Betamax. Different formats call for different equipment whehter its because of technology or marketing strategy. Apple never got in this business to sell music, they got in it to sell iPods. If the DRM was open, they may as well bag the iTunes store.

P-Worm

I agree with you in part. I myself do not like that a government is being involved with this. However, as a consumer, I don't like being locked into one device.

As for the VHS and Betamax argument, it doesn't hold water for me. Why? Because eventually (because of the market), I could by a VHS player made by Sony, JVC, Toshiba, etc. etc. You can't do that with iTunes bought music.

Personally, I don't give a hoot about Apple's investment into the iTunes music store. I should be able to purchase digital music anywhere and not worry about what device it can play in and what it can't.

Will market forces open Apple up? Will we see the same thing happen to DRM what happened to VHS/Betamax? I really hope so, because that's the way it should be.

w00master

jakaj
Jan 24, 2007, 02:49 PM
I basically have just one question for all of you that are on Apple's side here:

Why? What do you gain from DRM? I really want to know.


It's obvious to me what we lose with DRM. It's also obvious what companies gain with DRM. But what is not obvious is what YOU gain from it.

whatever
Jan 24, 2007, 02:51 PM
Really? How can I play songs purchased from iTunes on my no-name mp3 player?
Oops, I was wrong! You need to rip a disc first.

Sorry for the confusion.

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 02:52 PM
I understand what you are saying and your point of view, but I can't play PS3 games on an XBox 360. Why? It's business. I can still listen to the radio for free, but why do people pay $$$ to Sirius radio. Because it is a different medium and has different options (mostly, no commercials). I buy songs legally from :apple: and I still buy CDs. Most of my collection is from CDs. I chose to use a Mac and iTunes and iPods.

The walkman would have been a laughing stock if you could only play tapes from tape manufacturer A, on Walkman manufacturer B's product.

This also applies to digital music.

In 10 years time the world would laugh at the current suitation where you cannot play Fairplay music on the Zune.

Digital music will only *signficiantly* take off when there is no dependency between music source and media player.

It astounds me that people like their freedoms limited just because this is Apple. If Apple where in microsoft present position regarding digital music, people would be spitting blood saying microsoft should open up their DRM to other digital players.

P-Worm
Jan 24, 2007, 02:54 PM
I basically have just one question for all of you that are on Apple's side here:

Why? What do you gain from DRM? I really want to know.


It's obvious to me what we lose with DRM. It's also obvious what companies gain with DRM. But what is not obvious is what YOU gain from it.



We don't gain anything, but in my eyes it's not fair that Apple should have to change because of what some government says. I feel that the market should be driven by consumers rather than governments (except for extreme cases). Remember, if consumers really didn't want Fairplay on their songs, they wouldn't have bought the songs from iTunes in the first place. If the iTunes store had no sales due to lack of accessability, Apple would either modify the agreement or shut it down.

P-Worm

jakaj
Jan 24, 2007, 02:54 PM
Not to difficult to do.
Step 1: Open iTune's Preferences
Step 2: Select Advance
Step 3: Select Importing
Step 4: Importing
Step 5: Change Import Using to MP3 Encoder and select your Quality Setting.
Step 6: Click Ok
Step 7: Select the songs from your library you want to convert
Step 8: Control Click
Step 9: Select Convert Selection MP3

This will not change the Protected AAC file, but create a second version of the song(s) as MP3.

Not very difficult. Could this be streamlined? Sure, but since a majority of the people buying music from the iTunes use an iPod, why should Apple bother.

We're talking about exporting, not importing it. I know I can import my music from my mp3 player and play it on the iPod.

maxp1
Jan 24, 2007, 02:54 PM
First, if I buy a song from iTunes and it moves to my computer, it becomes mine. No, I don't have the copyright so I can't (or shouldn't anyway) share it illegally or use it commercially, but for all intents and purposes that file is mine. Why should I be limited to using it with a certain device when there are loads of other devices that could potentially make use of the file?



Well, there's nothing stopping you from playing the music you bought on iTMS any any other device. All you have to do is a format conversion. Write to CD and then rip to MP3. This is exactly the same as it would be for buying music in a physical medium.

If you buy a CD and want to listen on a tape player you don't expect the maker of that tape player to support a CD, right? You do a format conversion. You record the CD to tape. Simple, works the same way here.

aine
Jan 24, 2007, 02:56 PM
So, if you bought a digital photo online on your Mac, you wouldn't have a problem if your printer couldn't print it?
If this was not disclosed until AFTER I bought the photo, then I would be ticked, of course.

However, if BEFORE I bought the photo, it said "will only print on Epson printers", then while I might think twice about buying it, I would have to make an informed choice. I might then choose to look elsewhere. Or I might decide to buy into the Epson brand if I liked the photos as well as the service.

Apple makes no secret that music purchased on iTunes will only play on Apple products. So, as with photos, you have bought into the Apple brand when you accepted this arrangement.

I personally don't buy much music on iTunes for this very reason. I buy CDs.

P-Worm
Jan 24, 2007, 02:56 PM
If Apple where in microsoft present position regarding digital music, people would be spitting blood saying microsoft should open up their DRM to other digital players.

That is absolutely true, but would it be the right thing, or just the popular thing?

P-Worm

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 02:56 PM
Another person who forgets this process takes time and is an inconvience.

Well, there's nothing stopping you from playing the music you bought on iTMS any any other device. All you have to do is a format conversion. Write to CD and then rip to MP3. This is exactly the same as it would be for buying music in a physical medium.

If you buy a CD and want to listen on a tape player you don't expect the maker of that tape player to support a CD, right? You do a format conversion. You record the CD to tape. Simple, works the same way here.

That is absolutely true, but would it be the right thing, or just the popular thing?

P-Worm

Th right thing, of course ;-)

If this was not disclosed until AFTER I bought the photo, then I would be ticked, of course.

However, if BEFORE I bought the photo, it said "will only print on Epson printers", then while I might think twice about buying it, I would have to make an informed choice. I might then choose to look elsewhere. Or I might decide to buy into the Epson brand if I liked the photos as well as the service.

Apple makes no secret that music purchased on iTunes will only play on Apple products. So, as with photos, you have bought into the Apple brand when you accepted this arrangement.

I personally don't buy much music on iTunes for this very reason. I buy CDs.

On iTunes STore does it say any where that the music is only playable on iPod?
( just interested !)

superleccy
Jan 24, 2007, 02:56 PM
Not to difficult to do.
Step 1: Open iTune's Preferences
Step 2: Select Advance
Step 3: Select Importing
Step 4: Importing
Step 5: Change Import Using to MP3 Encoder and select your Quality Setting.
Step 6: Click Ok
Step 7: Select the songs from your library you want to convert
Step 8: Control Click
Step 9: Select Convert Selection MP3

This will not change the Protected AAC file, but create a second version of the song(s) as MP3.

Er... this doesn't actually work. Does it really work for you? On protected AAC files?

motorazr
Jan 24, 2007, 02:58 PM
Ok... while I really would like to be able to use itunes music other places... it's apple's store, in apple's ipod software, desigined to be used with apple's ipod! Go buy a disk if you really dislike this...oh and btw, what about the zune? With the Zune you can't use CDs at all!

Antares
Jan 24, 2007, 02:58 PM
Like a lot of people say: If I buy music, I want to be able to play it wherever and whenever I want....in iTunes, on an iPod or in some other software or music player, etc.. I'm not a fan of DRM because I want to do what I want with what I buy. Same applies to downloaded games... If I buy a Wii game online, I want to be able to take it with me and play it on any Wii system, not just the Wii I bought (and not have to buy the game again if my Wii breaks and I have to get a new one).

Anyway, I do realize the reality of DRM. I don't see it going away. But it's the record companies who are forcing Apple's hand at DRM. The iTunes Store would not exist without it. And if Fairplay was licensed, so songs could play on any other device, how would the DRM remain intact? Computers are currently authorized to play a song. This is managed by Apple/iTunes. If an iTunes purchased song was to play on other software or music devices, how would that authorization be validated?

And yes, you can burn an iTunes song to a CD and rerip it. But why waste time and blank cd's for this? The solution would be no DRM...but the record companies would likely pull their songs if there was no DRM. Other than completely redesigning the DRM system, what can Apple do?

P-Worm
Jan 24, 2007, 02:58 PM
Oh, the right thing ;-)

Hehe. I guess it's settled then. ;)

P-Worm

jakaj
Jan 24, 2007, 02:59 PM
We don't gain anything, but in my eyes it's not fair that Apple should have to change because of what some government says. I feel that the market should be driven by consumers rather than governments (except for extreme cases).

If you live in a country in which the government doesn't represent the majority of it's citizens (=consumers), then I'm sorry. But that's mostly not the case here in Europe.

bretm
Jan 24, 2007, 02:59 PM
It's sad to see how people not only do nothing when their rights are taken from them, but actually support the companies when they do it.

Hmmm... I'd like you to actually quote that "right." Which ammendment was it you were referring to? Or was it possibly in the original draft of the consitution? Let's see.. freedom of speech, the press, and digital music distribution.

Wonder what other "rights" people here think they have.

tack
Jan 24, 2007, 03:00 PM
It has been stated that the apple store exists to sell iPods. From what I have read, and this could have changed, the iTunes store is not profitable for apple. I donít buy things from the apple store because I, personally, do not want to be locked in. However I am curious, from the people who want apple to be forced to open up their DRM.

Letís say I invent a product and to differentiate it in the market place I create a service that could only be used with my product. Are you saying that particular business model should be illegal? Or only if that service is selling digital content?

nagromme
Jan 24, 2007, 03:00 PM
Er... this doesn't actually work. Does it really work for you? On protected AAC files?

No, it doesn't. What you CAN do is burn to CD (a handy DRM-free backup anyway, and also playable in cars and home stereos) and then rip to MP3. Now your iTunes purchases work with any player. It's not Apple-friendly nor encouraged, but it does work and needs no hacks or downloads. iTunes alone will do it.

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 03:00 PM
EDIT: somone has already replied above.
Er... this doesn't actually work. Does it really work for you? On protected AAC files?

Nope, you can't converted protected files like this.

whatever
Jan 24, 2007, 03:01 PM
Maybe I'm naive, but I see two things here.

First, if I buy a song from iTunes and it moves to my computer, it becomes mine. No, I don't have the copyright so I can't (or shouldn't anyway) share it illegally or use it commercially, but for all intents and purposes that file is mine. Why should I be limited to using it with a certain device when there are loads of other devices that could potentially make use of the file?

Second, and more broadly, I don't see how opening up iTunes music/TV/movies to other devices hurts Apple. Who cares if Johnny down the street owns an iRiver player but really likes iTunes and wants to get his music that way... it's still money going to Apple, right? And if Johnny realizes (as so many people have/are with iPods and iTunes already) that Apple makes a good product and suddenly finds himself in the market for a new computer/mp3 player/etc, isn't that a positive?

I think at the end of the day fighting this is putting Apple on the wrong side of the fence. It might win the battle for a while, but eventually the market will demand an open and user-friendly music service that doesn't lock you in to one device.

Just my two cents...
Here is my two cents.

The only reason that Apple managed to make the iTunes Music store successful was because of their DRM. That got them to the table.

Apple took a gamble and it paid off. If they were to strip away the DRM today, there is nothing preventing a third party to step in with a new DRM and then the music industry can strong arm Apple to pay to use it. Even worst, what if each record label imposed their own DRM on Apple.

Please everyone look at the big picture. Apple is doing the right thing and since Apple makes more money from the US iTunes Music store, they can sit back in continue operating the way they are.

The only way I can see Apple dropping DRM from the iTunes store is that all of their current partners sign a one sided contract in Apple's favor which prevents them from forcing another DRM on Apple or pulling their content from the iTunes Music Store. Now what are the chances of that happening?

P-Worm
Jan 24, 2007, 03:01 PM
If you live in a country in which the government doesn't represent the majority of it's citizens (=consumers), then I'm sorry. But that's mostly not the case here in Europe.

It's not as cut and dry as that. Businesses should have rights too or else I would be lobying for free products from every business out there because that's what I want. Are you saying that if you got enough citizens to lobby for that the government should step in and make it so?

P-Worm

sparks9
Jan 24, 2007, 03:02 PM
I agree 1000%. There are other options for buying, managing, and playing digital music. If you want to go with Napster and a Zune, that's your choice....good luck with it.

I'd bet money that behind the scenes, Micro$oft and makers of other MP3 players are lobbying hard for this type of legal maneuvering...

Craig

You cant "lobby" the Norwegian Ombudsman.

maxp1
Jan 24, 2007, 03:02 PM
Another person who forgets this process takes time and is an inconvience.

If you don't like it then don't buy from iTMS, you have a choice. Apple is not limiting your choice about where to buy music, there is nothing wrong with what they're doing.

I don't buy music from iTMS, and I still don't think they should be forced to do business in a way that they don't want to as long as it's not unfairly restricting consumer choice. (which I think it is well established that there are many other ways you can buy music)

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 03:04 PM
You forget this is NOT only aimed at Apple.

If these countries get their way, it will apply to ALL DRM formats.

Here is my two cents.

The only reason that Apple managed to make the iTunes Music store successful was because of their DRM. That got them to the table.

Apple took a gamble and it paid off. If they were to strip away the DRM today, there is nothing preventing a third party to step in with a new DRM and then the music industry can strong arm Apple to pay to use it. Even worst, what if each record label imposed their own DRM on Apple.

Please everyone look at the big picture. Apple is doing the right thing and since Apple makes more money from the US iTunes Music store, they can sit back in continue operating the way they are.

The only way I can see Apple dropping DRM from the iTunes store is that all of their current partners sign a one sided contract in Apple's favor which prevents them from forcing another DRM on Apple or pulling their content from the iTunes Music Store. Now what are the chances of that happening?

bretm
Jan 24, 2007, 03:05 PM
If you live in a country in which the government doesn't represent the majority of it's citizens (=consumers), then I'm sorry. But that's mostly not the case here in Europe.

So if the majority of your fellow citizens decides to elect a leader that wishes to ban a certain people of a certain religion that would be ok? That'd be democracy right? Whatever the majority wants?

I think someone needs to look into just exactly why the founders of the US's greatest fear was a democracy. Democracy is majority rules. Chaos. Over here we're a rebublic, even though most citizens don't know it. Guaranteed rights no matter what the "majority" wants.

adelaney
Jan 24, 2007, 03:05 PM
How can it be piracy if it's state-sponsored? Wouldn't that be privateering? Or privatercy? Piracy is activity that ain't cool with the government.

nagromme
Jan 24, 2007, 03:05 PM
On iTunes STore does it say any where that the music is only playable on iPod?
( just interested !)

Yes, though the term they use is "Apple-authorized devices" rather than "iPod."

(Terms of Service > Usage Rules.)

I would fully support Apple making this extra clear to people who don't read agreements before accepting them. Apple could certainly phrase it in a non-scary way that touts iPods and iTunes as designed to work together. It need not be some off-putting red warning, but it could be less buried, for the sake of shoppers who don't already know about the tie between iTunes and iPods.


You forget this is NOT only aimed at Apple.

If these countries get their way, it will apply to ALL DRM formats.

True--and that could be good for Apple, especially at the right time.

SciTeach
Jan 24, 2007, 03:06 PM
The walkman would have been a laughing stock if you could only play tapes from tape manufacturer A, on Walkman manufacturer B's product.

This also applies to digital music.

In 10 years time the world would laugh at the current suitation where you cannot play Fairplay music on the Zune.

Digital music will only *signficiantly* take off when there is no dependency between music source and media player.

It astounds me that people like their freedoms limited just because this is Apple. If Apple where in microsoft present position regarding digital music, people would be spitting blood saying microsoft should open up their DRM to other digital players.

Possibly. I don't think my "freedom" is limited because I can still buy CDs and play them on a Zune or other MP3 player. I can play them on an iPod also. I just have to rip the songs from the CD a second time.

Not to change subjects, but I'm wondering if opening up the DRM (All of it, Apple, WMP, etc) would hurt the recording industry. Wouldn't there be even more opportunity to copy music illegally?? Would the recording industry have to work harder on copy protection?? (I honestly, don't know this aspect):confused:

superleccy
Jan 24, 2007, 03:06 PM
And yes, you can burn an iTunes song to a CD and rerip it. But why waste time and blank cd's for this?

Another person who forgets this process takes time and is an inconvience.

Yes, it's an inconvenience, but personally it's one I'm prepared to put up with. If you've a backlog of hundreds or thousands of purchases to get through using this method, than yes it's a real pain. But if you do it as you go along, it's not much of a hassle.

As part of the process, you also get an audio CD backup of all your purchased content... and come on now... blank CDs aren't exactly that expensive.

As much as I hate DRM... if it wasn't for DRM we wouldn't have iTMS in the first place... and I like iTMS.

SL

jakaj
Jan 24, 2007, 03:07 PM
It's not as cut and dry as that. Businesses should have rights too or else I would be lobying for free products from every business out there because that's what I want. Are you saying that if you got enough citizens to lobby for that the government should step in and make it so?


The citizens form the environment in which they want to live, yes. And the companies have to follow.

You're forgetting that if the government somehow forced all business to give up their work for free, they would never produce anything. And that's why that won't happen, because it's not in the interest of every citizen that thinks more than 1 week in advance.

Unless if you're talking about forced labour here, but that's a whole another level then...

maxp1
Jan 24, 2007, 03:07 PM
Letís say I invent a product and to differentiate it in the market place I create a service that could only be used with my product. Are you saying that particular business model should be illegal? Or only if that service is selling digital content?


Let's not lose this one. It's an important point.

whatever
Jan 24, 2007, 03:08 PM
We're talking about exporting, not importing it. I know I can import my music from my mp3 player and play it on the iPod.

Excuse me, but by following my steps, you are creating MP3 versions of the Protected AAC files, which you can drag or do whatever you need to do to get them on to your non-iPod.

aine
Jan 24, 2007, 03:09 PM
Why? What do you gain from DRM? I really want to know.
We gain nothing.

But that's not the point. The point is that Apple has created a product that you can (1) buy, or (2) not buy. Simple as that. It's economics. All goods, even iTMS songs, have "utility", or usefulness, and we are willing to pay for them based on how much we value them.

If you have ever purchased a song from iTMS, and understood the conditions of purchase, then you have implicitly decided that it was worth 99c of your money to be able to play that song on your iPod (or burn to CD, or whatever). You made a decision to buy based on the value proposition offered by Apple.

You cannot demand that the terms of the sale be changed after-the-fact.

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 03:10 PM
I would think that Fairplay already is popular enough for hackers to 'have a go' - and there isn't much of that going on at the moment.

Personally I'm thinking, having more Fairplay enable devices wouldn't change this current situation.



Not to change subjects, but I'm wondering if opening up the DRM (All of it, Apple, WMP, etc) would hurt the recording industry. Wouldn't there be even more opportunity to copy music illegally?? Would the recording industry have to work harder on copy protection?? (I honestly, don't know this aspect):confused:

jakaj
Jan 24, 2007, 03:11 PM
Excuse me, but by following my steps, you are creating MP3 versions of the Protected AAC files, which you can drag or do whatever you need to do to get them on to your non-iPod.

Where am I importing them from? From an iPod?

Even if that's possible, I don't have one. And I was asking about playing music purchase on iTMS on my no-name players, not the music I necessarily have on my (non-existant) ipod.

whatever
Jan 24, 2007, 03:11 PM
No, it doesn't. What you CAN do is burn to CD (a handy DRM-free backup anyway, and also playable in cars and home stereos) and then rip to MP3. Now your iTunes purchases work with any player. It's not Apple-friendly nor encouraged, but it does work and needs no hacks or downloads. iTunes alone will do it.

You know what, I stand corrected. I've stayed away from MP3 files for years.

But actually the whole burn to CD method works too.

Sorry everyone.

ChrisA
Jan 24, 2007, 03:11 PM
This is great. The public needs to be educated about DRM. Once they understand it they will demand that it goes away. Once again the Eu leads in consumer rights. Here in the US we are stuck with "corporate rights" predominating.

The trouble is that music is protected by copyright. The point of copyright is so that only the author can publish his work. By law the consumer has the right to do most anything with the work except publish it but DRM greatly restricts the consumer from exercising his rights under copyright

Apple could actually find that they sell more if the DRM was removed. They'd gain me as a customer if they would only (1) remove the DRM and (2) offer better quality than 128kbps. I want it to be as good as a real CD.

dadrop
Jan 24, 2007, 03:12 PM
Excuse me, but by following my steps, you are creating MP3 versions of the Protected AAC files, which you can drag or do whatever you need to do to get them on to your non-iPod.

but you are just wrong...unless you have some itunes hack I have not heard about.

bilbo--baggins
Jan 24, 2007, 03:15 PM
Someone should put pressure on Apple to make movies and TV shows available on iTunes in Europe.

Hattig
Jan 24, 2007, 03:16 PM
I suppose they will sue BMW now because you can't use Ford parts on them. Why isn't Microsoft getting sued for something similar (e.g. WMP, Office, etc.)?

In this case it would be that both cars meet certain design requirements (safety, chassis size, power, etc) that allow them to be road legal.

Fairplay is a closed format. It's the fairest of DRM schemes, but it currently does lock you into a single-supplier ecosystem that does not benefit consumers. Hence Europe, which is far more consumer friendly than corporate America (which is far more biased towards personal-responsibility and personal-choices-and-living-with-the-consequences), will try and open it up. This doesn't mean that they will force the system to be completely open.

The rumours about Apple opening it up to select MadeForIPod manufacturers are probably true because of this. Apple will pick select companies to provide 'competition' to their products. This should be enough to get Europe off their backs, and is no different from any licensed media format (e.g., CD, DVD, ...).

This does mean that Zune will also have to be opened up when they enter Europe. Bad luck Microsoft - entering the closed DRM ecosystem at the time when Apple is just about to open it up.

bretm
Jan 24, 2007, 03:16 PM
Like a lot of people say: If I buy music, I want to be able to play it wherever and whenever I want....in iTunes, on an iPod or in some other software or music player, etc.. I'm not a fan of DRM because I want to do what I want with what I buy. Same applies to downloaded games... If I buy a Wii game online, I want to be able to take it with me and play it on any Wii system, not just the Wii I bought (and not have to buy the game again if my Wii breaks and I have to get a new one).

Anyway, I do realize the reality of DRM. I don't see it going away. But it's the record companies who are forcing Apple's hand at DRM. The iTunes Store would not exist without it. And if Fairplay was licensed, so songs could play on any other device, how would the DRM remain intact? Computers are currently authorized to play a song. This is managed by Apple/iTunes. If an iTunes purchased song was to play on other software or music devices, how would that authorization be validated?

And yes, you can burn an iTunes song to a CD and rerip it. But why waste time and blank cd's for this? The solution would be no DRM...but the record companies would likely pull their songs if there was no DRM. Other than completely redesigning the DRM system, what can Apple do?

It would seem that the record companies have loosened up. Other companies are selling without DRM from what I read here. But Apple is most likely still bound to their contract and in the end, they don't make money off the store. They make money off the appleTV, off the iPods, etc. If DRM were declared to be illegal here in the US, you can be the first fatality would be the iTunes music store.

BOTTOM LINE - I'm starting to feel like an old man. I paid more for freakin' cassette tapes that had 8 songs on them and wore out in a month. Copies? Copies of tapes sucked. Hell, the tapes themselves sucked. CDs? We didn't have no CDs. A CD player was a grand for the longest time.

The only songs we could buy for 99cents was a 45 rpm disc made of vinyl. Yeah, those lasted a long time. Nobody replaced them when they wore out. Nobody complained about their rights when they got scratched.

We're talking 20+ years ago and the price of music is cheaper and more available today than it ever has been. DRM. SO freakin what? You want the alternative? No iTunes MS?

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 03:20 PM
A. I wonder how many people whined about those DRM protected CDs that had the side effect of not being able to play on certain CD Players, i.e., car CD players, portal cd players were often affected

B. I wonder how many people in (A) think that Apple are in their rights to keep iTMS music tied to Apple devices only?!
( kind of two faced , if you ask me!)

In scenario (A) - the media player came first ( i.e., cd players, iPod )- and then the affected media ( i.e., crippled ( drm ) CDs and fairplay music ) came second...

Small White Car
Jan 24, 2007, 03:21 PM
If you don't like it then don't buy from iTMS, you have a choice. Apple is not limiting your choice about where to buy music, there is nothing wrong with what they're doing.

I don't buy music from iTMS, and I still don't think they should be forced to do business in a way that they don't want to as long as it's not unfairly restricting consumer choice. (which I think it is well established that there are many other ways you can buy music)

I've probably spent about $2,000 at the iTunes music store. So for me to switch to a Zune I'd either have to lose out on that music, buy it again, or find a way to break the DRM.

So my current barrier to buying a non-Apple player is at $2,000 and rising. That seems like "unfairly restricting consumer choice" to me.

Now, I don't care since I'm never going to buy a non-Apple player. But just because I don't care doesn't mean it's not a problem for someone else.

superleccy
Jan 24, 2007, 03:21 PM
Someone should put pressure on Apple to make movies and TV shows available on iTunes in Europe.

Off topic... but I second that.

eenu
Jan 24, 2007, 03:22 PM
LOOK. At the end of the day when you buy from iTMS you know the score on the media and its limitations. Those limitations are set like that as that is the result of apples negotiations with the record labels. If you don't like it, don't buy from iTMS. SIMPLE.

Buy from elsewhere where you can do what you want with your media, don't moan here. Apple makes little to no money on its music sales, iTMS is only there for iPOD sales....without the iPOD there is no iTMS and with no iTMS there is no iPOD (well that is an exaggeration now given its market share...but thats the way it was).

eenu
Jan 24, 2007, 03:23 PM
Someone should put pressure on Apple to make movies and TV shows available on iTunes in Europe.

Hardly going to happen now is it. Europe runs the risk of ruining that one for us by kicking off about the music!

combatcolin
Jan 24, 2007, 03:25 PM
2 years ago i used to be an ardent Apple fan, now i still admire the company but am not blinded by Steve reality force field.

More power to the people, yes people should be able to play there music on any player, and yes the iPod is streets ahead of the competition.

hayesk
Jan 24, 2007, 03:25 PM
These countries are only to be congratulated.

...

You should be able to play digital music on any device you like.

I do agree with you.

However, there is also this scenario:
1. Apple is forced to open Fairplay up to other device manufacturers
2. Creative (or Sandisk, whoever) makes a player that works with Fairplay, but it is buggy. Their WMA code is fine.
3. People buy a bunch of songs from iTMS and generic WMA store to play on their generic MP3 player. But, the WMA songs play fine, and the iTMS songs don't.
4. They then conclude that the iTMS store is broken, sucks, whatever. Apple gets a bad reputation because of a poorly developed generic MP3 player.

That is the entire reason that Apple wants to keep tight control on who gets to use FairPlay.

dejo
Jan 24, 2007, 03:26 PM
Someone should put pressure on Apple to make movies and TV shows available on iTunes in Europe.
Or perhaps someone should put pressure on the copyright owners of those things in those countries to make them available on iTunes in Europe. Remember it takes more than just Apple alone to make this happen.

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 03:28 PM
That is just hypothetical - it may not actually happen.

There is nothing to stop Apple from having a certification - kind of like what microsoft do with its hardware 'Certified for use with Vista' for example.

"Works with Fairplay" on the box.

I do agree with you.

However, there is also this scenario:
1. Apple is forced to open Fairplay up to other device manufacturers
2. Creative (or Sandisk, whoever) makes a player that works with Fairplay, but it is buggy. Their WMA code is fine.
3. People buy a bunch of songs from iTMS and generic WMA store to play on their generic MP3 player. But, the WMA songs play fine, and the iTMS songs don't.
4. They then conclude that the iTMS store is broken, sucks, whatever. Apple gets a bad reputation because of a poorly developed generic MP3 player.

That is the entire reason that Apple wants to keep tight control on who gets to use FairPlay.

maxp1
Jan 24, 2007, 03:28 PM
I've probably spent about $2,000 at the iTunes music store. So for me to switch to a Zune I'd either have to lose out on that music, buy it again, or find a way to break the DRM.

Apple provides you with the way to break the DRM. Burn to CD and rip as MP3.

Still, that's not the choice I was talking about. I was referring to the choice of whether to but from iTMS or not. You could choose to stop buying from the iTMS today. No penalty, you'd still get to use your iPod, you could still buy music and play it on your iPod. There's not restriction of your choice here. But the music that you did buy from the iTMS is still subject to the restrictions that it was when you bought it. I don't see that there's anything wrong with that.

dejo
Jan 24, 2007, 03:28 PM
So my current barrier to buying a non-Apple player is at $2,000 and rising. That seems like "unfairly restricting consumer choice" to me.
Let's say I've purchased $2,000 of games for my Playstation. I cannot use them on my Xbox. Is that also "unfairly restricting consumer choice"? I don't think so.

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 03:31 PM
Let's say I've purchased $2,000 of games for my Playstation. I cannot use them on my Xbox. Is that also "unfairly restricting consumer choice"? I don't think so.

You can't compare the two. Totally, totally different type of markets.

swingerofbirch
Jan 24, 2007, 03:33 PM
I think the difference is that Apple is pumping previously player-independent content into a closed ecosystem. I think it is their right to do so, and even as a liberal who believes in economic fairness, I think this is an instance where the market can sort itself out. iTunes definitely has limitations that CDs do not and that PlaysForSure systems do not. So, if it is such a terrible thing to be locked into iTunes, people presumably have the free will not to buy from iTunes, not to buy iPods, and create their own ecosystems and markets as they please. Apple is essentially selling cassette tapes that can only be played on Apple cassette tape players (an oversimplification I know, since you can burn CDs). But don't people know this? The only reasonable action I could see a government taking would be to require this to be stated in more simple language than is usually present in a contract.

Small White Car
Jan 24, 2007, 03:34 PM
Let's say I've purchased $2,000 of games for my Playstation. I cannot use them on my Xbox. Is that also "unfairly restricting consumer choice"? I don't think so.

In that case it's not unfair because there are legitimate technical reasons that make it impracticle. It's not up to the companies to make sure their product works with everything.

But in the case of music it WOULD have worked except for the barriers these companies put up. It's the opposite, in other words.

Similar to music...have you bought any DVDs in your life? Want to watch them on your iPod? Well, get ready to buy them all again from the iTunes store. It's illegal to rip your DVDs for use on your iPod, you know.

You're really ok with that? It kind of bugs me.

eenu
Jan 24, 2007, 03:34 PM
You can't compare the two. Totally, totally different type of markets.

YES YOU CAN! He bought the playstation games knowing they wouldn't play on his Xbox as i bought my iTMS content knowing it wouldn't play on anything but my ipod.

If anything the music industry is better as there are LOADS of sources that i can get my stuff from that i can use on any platform.....can't do that on a games console!

sishaw
Jan 24, 2007, 03:35 PM
These countries are only to be congratulated.

As sooner Apple are forced to open up fairplay, the better.

- You aren't forced to use only one type of petrol for a particular type of car
- Any CD / DVD will work in any CD or DVD player

You should be able to play digital music on any device you like.

Fine, but that should go to Microsoft's DRMd files as well. I like iPods, I should be able to buy music from the Zune store or a "PlaysForSure" compatible store and play it on my iPod. Why is it ONLY Apple being pressured to open its DRM?

Small White Car
Jan 24, 2007, 03:35 PM
YES YOU CAN! He bought the playstation games knowing they wouldn't play on his Xbox as i bought my iTMS content knowing it wouldn't play on anything but my ipod.

What the consumer thinks doesn't matter. From an engineering perspective music DRM and video games are the exact OPPOSITE when talking about them in this way.

It's silly to say opposite things are the same.

whatever
Jan 24, 2007, 03:37 PM
This is great. The public needs to be educated about DRM. Once they understand it they will demand that it goes away. Once again the Eu leads in consumer rights. Here in the US we are stuck with "corporate rights" predominating.

The trouble is that music is protected by copyright. The point of copyright is so that only the author can publish his work. By law the consumer has the right to do most anything with the work except publish it but DRM greatly restricts the consumer from exercising his rights under copyright

Apple could actually find that they sell more if the DRM was removed. They'd gain me as a customer if they would only (1) remove the DRM and (2) offer better quality than 128kbps. I want it to be as good as a real CD.
Basically illegal file sharing/stealing of copyrighted material is the reason why we have DRM. We need to protect the holders of the copyrights.

I'm on the fence about better quality (greater than 128Kbps). Originally people wanted as many songs as they could get on a 5GB generation iPod (would you rather have CD quality and get only 10 CDS on an iPod). Apple had to decided between music quality vs quantity of songs. Now that Apple has higher capacity iPods (the 80GB iPod can hold 100 CD quality albums) and only getting larger people will have a choice.

Now why am I on the fence, well. I have bought some "re-mastered" CDs that sound like crap and I actually have some AAC content from the iTunes Music store that sounds superior to the same music on CD (my favorite example of this is The Who's It's Hard album (the content from iTunes sounds vastly superior to the CD and that's just one example).

I listen to a lot of music and I have a good sense of what sounds good and what sounds like crap and I know that CDs should sound better, but....

What I would really love is that Apple offered higher quality music and if iTunes would store and play the higher quality music and that it when it synced to my iPod it would automatically sync up lower quality (AAC 128) on the fly.

That would be really cool!

PS - I want to apologize again for my Protected AAC to MP3 statement I made earlier. Is there a way I can delete the post?

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 03:37 PM
YES YOU CAN! He bought the playstation games knowing they wouldn't play on his Xbox as i bought my iTMS content knowing it wouldn't play on anything but my ipod.

If anything the music industry is better as there are LOADS of sources that i can get my stuff from that i can use on any platform.....can't do that on a games console!

NO!

Ever since god created computers, there have been different systems - most of each, incompatible with each other.

Music, on the other hand, has always been compatible with the media type and player type.

i.e., Tapes -> works with any tape player
Records - works with record players
CDs - ..

There is nothing different about digital music. The format is different, but thats the only difference. Consumers should not be locked in.

Let me refer you back to a previous post:

"
A. I wonder how many people whined about those DRM protected CDs that had the side effect of not being able to play on certain CD Players, i.e., car CD players, portal cd players were often affected

B. I wonder how many people in (A) think that Apple are in their rights to keep iTMS music tied to Apple devices only?!
( kind of two faced , if you ask me!)

In scenario (A) - the media player came first ( i.e., cd players, iPod )- and then the affected media ( i.e., crippled ( drm ) CDs and fairplay music ) came second..."

What do you think of scenario (A)?

Do you think its right that one of those drm'ed CDs wouldn't play on your cd player ( even though the package said - this is protected )?

gwangung
Jan 24, 2007, 03:37 PM
OK with the result (no DRRM), dislike the legal reasoning reported--it seems the basis is by size or by success alone, and not anything like abuse of monopoly power.

On the other hand, Apple is probably not the only impetus behind the DRM of Fairplay---the RIAA is quite a prime mover and shaker there. If there is governmental pressure to remove FairPlay, and quite a few record labels start to give it up, I suspect Apple won't be too unhappy.

eenu
Jan 24, 2007, 03:38 PM
What the consumer thinks doesn't matter. From an engineering perspective music DRM and video games are the exact OPPOSITE when talking about them in this way.

It's silly to say opposite things are the same.

Thats crap and you know it. There is nothing to stop a game being multi platform (WOW is an example). It comes down to economics and making money and at the end of the day you buy iTMS content knowing your limitations same as when you buy a certain type of console and the games for it.

gwangung
Jan 24, 2007, 03:39 PM
There is nothing different about digital music. The format is different, but thats the only difference. Consumers should not be locked in.

They're not.

It's not convenient to move it from one player to another, but it's quite possible.

Ease and convenience changes the legal argument, and I suspect the rhetoric.

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 03:39 PM
Read the article. No one is saying the DRM should be removed.

OK with the result (no DRRM), dislike the legal reasoning reported--it seems the basis is by size or by success alone, and not anything like abuse of monopoly power.

On the other hand, Apple is probably not the only impetus behind the DRM of Fairplay---the RIAA is quite a prime mover and shaker there. If there is governmental pressure to remove FairPlay, and quite a few record labels start to give it up, I suspect Apple won't be too unhappy.

Small White Car
Jan 24, 2007, 03:40 PM
Why is it ONLY Apple being pressured to open its DRM?

Becuase, like any court case, it's easier to go down than up.

IF they have their way with Apple then how long do you think it will take them to apply the same rules to every other company? About a week.

On the other hand, if they start with the smallest music company over there and win...well that does nothing for them when fighting Apple. You always go for the biggest guy when it comes to court.

eenu
Jan 24, 2007, 03:41 PM
NO!

Ever since god created computers, there have been different systems - most of each, incompatible with each other.

Music, on the other hand, has always been compatible with the media type and player type.

i.e., Tapes -> works with any tape player
Records - works with record players
CDs - ..

There is nothing different about digital music. The format is different, but thats the only difference. Consumers should not be locked in.

Let me refer you back to a previous post:

"
A. I wonder how many people whined about those DRM protected CDs that had the side effect of not being able to play on certain CD Players, i.e., car CD players, portal cd players were often affected

B. I wonder how many people in (A) think that Apple are in their rights to keep iTMS music tied to Apple devices only?!
( kind of two faced , if you ask me!)

In scenario (A) - the media player came first ( i.e., cd players, iPod )- and then the affected media ( i.e., crippled ( drm ) CDs and fairplay music ) came second..."

What do you think of scenario (A)?

Do you think its right that one of those drm'ed CDs wouldn't play on your cd player ( even though the package said - this is protected )?

You just don't grasp it do you? No one forces you to buy from iTMS!

Buy from somewhere else, you can get non DRM music from loads of sources on the net that will work on any player.....no one is holding a knife to your throat. People have made the decision to buy from iTMS knowing the restrictions. Get over it.

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 03:42 PM
Erm, I DO grasp it, actually!

I believe in consumer rights / freedom, not consumer lock in.



You just don't grasp it do you? No one forces you to buy from iTMS!

Buy from somewhere else, you can get non DRM music from loads of sources on the net that will work on any player.....no one is holding a knife to your throat. People have made the decision to buy from iTMS knowing the restrictions. Get over it.

Small White Car
Jan 24, 2007, 03:43 PM
Thats crap and you know it. There is nothing to stop a game being multi platform (WOW is an example).


I never said it was impossible. My only point was that it took time and money to convert software and games. You dissagree with that?

So WOW just magically recompiled itself for different platforms without any extra work from its creators?

I was under the impression that doing that kind of stuff took time and money, but you're saying it's free?

SeanMcg
Jan 24, 2007, 03:44 PM
If this all goes through, is it possible that the EU, or just the countries mentioned here, would see their iTunes Stores disappear? I mean even though "good business is where you find it," if Apple's content suppliers aren't willing to allow digital sales in countries where DRM is considered "illegal," - and let's not forget that they are under no obligation to sell through iTunes, or anywhere - what is there to sell?

This is just a hypothetical, a discussion starter.

Personally, I have no problems with DRM for many of the reasons stated in this thread already, and unlike others, I don't feel that my "rights" include everything I want.

As for the DRM-protected CDs (not the Sony spyware ones): I would have been fine with that if they had been able to do it in such a way that was within the accepted standard for audio CDs. It wasn't.

We don't own the copyrights, no matter if it is vinyl, cassette, CD, MD, DAT, MP3, or AAC, etc... We enter into a license agreement that allows us to use the physical copy we have in a prescribed way.

ShermDog
Jan 24, 2007, 03:44 PM
I think that Apple would be absolutely wrong to maintain their current closed iTunes/iPod system IF they were the ONLY online media store and portable player available. I hear a lot of people complaining that Apple restricts their choice and impinges on their freedoms because they can't play their digital music on whatever device they choose. Apple is doing no such thing. There are several online music stores and portable players from which to choose. You absolutely have choice here. iTunes and the iPod may be the best game in town, but they're not the only games in town. Feel free to purchase music from someplace else and play it on any other player you wish.

This situation seems analogous to purchasing software for PC vs. Mac. Let's say I had a PC, and purchased tons of applications to run on it. Later, I decide to switch to a Mac, but I can't run any of those PC programs on it. Well, I purchased them, I plan on abiding by the license to install them on only one computer, why can't that computer be a Mac and not a PC? You know going in that you can't run PC programs on a Mac (emulation and virtualization exceptions noted), just as you know that iTunes media can't be played on any other player than the iPod. Your rights as a consumer haven't been violated. You still have choice. You still have your freedom.

eenu
Jan 24, 2007, 03:45 PM
Erm, I DO grasp it, actually!

I believe in consumer rights / freedom, not consumer lock in.

Then don't buy from iTMS! Then you can lead your happy little consumer rights life!

Apple in no way hides the limitations on your iTMS purchases. I knew from day one i would be locked into iTMS and iPod i took that conscious decision with the millions of others all over the world. It would therefore appear that a lot of people disagree or at least don't care about "consumer rights/freedom" you go on about. If we don't want to be locked in we will buy elsewhere....

cal6n
Jan 24, 2007, 03:45 PM
NO!

Ever since god created computers...

Sorry, but god didn't create computers. See here (http://www.400monkeys.com/God/index.html) for more details.

The rest of your post, I agree with.

whatever
Jan 24, 2007, 03:47 PM
I've probably spent about $2,000 at the iTunes music store. So for me to switch to a Zune I'd either have to lose out on that music, buy it again, or find a way to break the DRM.

So my current barrier to buying a non-Apple player is at $2,000 and rising. That seems like "unfairly restricting consumer choice" to me.

Now, I don't care since I'm never going to buy a non-Apple player. But just because I don't care doesn't mean it's not a problem for someone else.

The thing is that you choose to first buy an iPod and then to purchase $2,000 worth of music. You had choices and you made the right one (good for you!).

My little niece and nephew both received Disney MP3 players for Christmas. They don't support DRM or any type or even unprotected AAC, only MP3 and MS Media player. My sister were shocked, even thought the box stated this. In my opinion they made a bad decision.

maxp1
Jan 24, 2007, 03:47 PM
A. I wonder how many people whined about those DRM protected CDs that had the side effect of not being able to play on certain CD Players, i.e., car CD players, portal cd players were often affected

B. I wonder how many people in (A) think that Apple are in their rights to keep iTMS music tied to Apple devices only?!
( kind of two faced , if you ask me!)

In scenario (A) - the media player came first ( i.e., cd players, iPod )- and then the affected media ( i.e., crippled ( drm ) CDs and fairplay music ) came second..."

What do you think of scenario (A)?

Do you think its right that one of those drm'ed CDs wouldn't play on your cd player ( even though the package said - this is protected )?

I'm going to answer this question so you can stop bringing it up.

A.) The copy protection that was put on those CDs was outside of the Compact Disk standard as published by Phillips. They were sold as a CD when in actuallity they were not CDs. This is false advertising and that's what was wrong with it.

B.) I think it is perfectly within Apple's rights to sell services that only work with their devices (in the original format that you bought it in.) There is no false advertising going on, I know what I am buying and where I can use it when I buy from the iTMS. I can chose to not buy it if I don't like the restrictions.

The reason that A is different than B is that A is not representing itself in a truthful way. B is.

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 03:47 PM
Ah, your from rip off britain, no wonder you have that attitude!

Then don't buy from iTMS! Then you can lead your happy little consumer rights life!

Apple in no way hides the limitations on your iTMS purchases. I knew from day one i would be locked into iTMS and iPod i took that conscious decision with the millions of others all over the world. It would therefore appear that a lot of people disagree or at least don't care about "consumer rights/freedom" you go on about. If we don't want to be locked in we will buy elsewhere....

That is a good response

The reason that A is different than B is that A is not representing itself in a truthful way. B is.

twoodcc
Jan 24, 2007, 03:51 PM
I think this is ridiculous.

Apple's not forcing anyone to use iTunes. If you want to use it then buy an iPod as well, I see nothing wrong with this.

i agree. but the masses might win....

eenu
Jan 24, 2007, 03:51 PM
Ah, your from rip off britain, no wonder you have that attitude!



That is a good response

I could say a lot about you being from Canada but i won't lower myself. At the end of the day you can't argue with what i have said! The restrictions have been on the iTMS since day one. Consumers have made the decision to buy that media with those restrictions END OF STORY.

I think the guy that posted about the transition to mac from PC put it very well. So well done to that man

And the 'GOOD RESPONSE' is the same as what i have been saying to you time and time again! iTMS has put no one under any false illusions!

whatever
Jan 24, 2007, 03:52 PM
Yes! A Protected AAC file should be thought as a different format as an MP3. They are different things, just as a Cassette tape is different than a CD. Alright I know what you thinking a cassette is analog and a CD is digital. Well, then let's compare it to DVD, BlueRay and DVD-HD. All digital content, but of varying quality. A BlueRay disc will not play on a DVD player. But I want it to, tough! The same could be said about Protected AAC. AAC is not the same as a MP3.

NO!

Ever since god created computers, there have been different systems - most of each, incompatible with each other.

Music, on the other hand, has always been compatible with the media type and player type.

i.e., Tapes -> works with any tape player
Records - works with record players
CDs - ..

There is nothing different about digital music. The format is different, but thats the only difference. Consumers should not be locked in.

Let me refer you back to a previous post:

"
A. I wonder how many people whined about those DRM protected CDs that had the side effect of not being able to play on certain CD Players, i.e., car CD players, portal cd players were often affected

B. I wonder how many people in (A) think that Apple are in their rights to keep iTMS music tied to Apple devices only?!
( kind of two faced , if you ask me!)

In scenario (A) - the media player came first ( i.e., cd players, iPod )- and then the affected media ( i.e., crippled ( drm ) CDs and fairplay music ) came second..."

What do you think of scenario (A)?

Do you think its right that one of those drm'ed CDs wouldn't play on your cd player ( even though the package said - this is protected )?

jmbear
Jan 24, 2007, 03:56 PM
Ok, if you know that when you buy music from the iTMS you can only play it on your iPod, and still you choose to do so, what is wrong with that? You are agreeing to the limitations when you buy music from the iTMS. If you don't like the idea, buy a CD and rip it!

Also, people think that monopolies are bad, that is not necessarily true. Monopolies are bad when they use their monopoly power to eliminate competition (Microsoft using their monopoly in OS to eliminate Netscape).

I don't see how Apple is using their monopoly power in the digital music player market, to eliminate competition. The same applies to the iTMS. The only problem I see is that by buying from the iTMS you are sort of compromising to using iPods forever, since the music won't play on some other device (Yes, you can rip it to CDs then back to mp3s but try doing that with a collection of 5,000 songs). But this is technically what happens with VHS. You invest in a collection of movies, and when DVDs come out, you can't play your VHS on your new DVD, you are locked to VHS, but you knew that was going to happen. And its not like the government can force the Movie Studios to trade all your VHS for DVDs. I know its not a perfect analogy, but its hard to find one.

My point is that Apple is not doing wrong because:

a) Consumers are choosing to lock themselves to an environment, Apple is not forcing them.
b) Apple is not using their monopoly power to eliminate competition.
c) Consumers still have an exit (a complicated one) to take the DRM from their music collection

What would be wrong? If iTunes put DRM on your mp3s as soon as you add them to your library so you could only play them on the iPod (Zune squirting anyone?)

In the ideal world, there would be no DRM, but then again, there would be no piracy. This is the next best thing in my opinion. Eventually some punk will come out with a program that takes the DRM from your music collection, so be patient =)

cal6n
Jan 24, 2007, 03:56 PM
I could say a lot about you being from Canada but i won't lower myself....

You lower yourself by taking that position. Rip-off Britain is the sad reality and the rest of the world knows it. I'm a resident of rip-off Britain who has visited Canada twice in his life and there's no comparison.

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 03:57 PM
Having lived in both countries, I can say Canada is *vastly* superior to the UK.

The iTunes + iPod backlash is coming, and it won't be too soon until Apple is:
(a) forced to license out
(b) licenses fairplay out before (a)

At the time of iTMS, consumers had little choice. iTunes or Napster - which didn't work with the most popular media player at the time.

As digital music matures Apple will have its hands forced, one way or the other. Just image being able to buy music CDs from HMV and no where else?

BTW - its been a blast debating with you :-)

I could say a lot about you being from Canada but i won't lower myself. At the end of the day you can't argue with what i have said! The restrictions have been on the iTMS since day one. Consumers have made the decision to buy that media with those restrictions END OF STORY.

I think the guy that posted about the transition to mac from PC put it very well. So well done to that man

And the 'GOOD RESPONSE' is the same as what i have been saying to you time and time again! iTMS has put no one under any false illusions!

Small White Car
Jan 24, 2007, 03:58 PM
And the 'GOOD RESPONSE' is the same as what i have been saying to you time and time again! iTMS has put no one under any false illusions!

Why is this even an argument? Would you also want Apple to stop putting out updates for OS X? So you get 10.4 and that's it until 10.5 comes out?

After all, people who bought Tiger knew what they were getting!

Why is it your desire for nothing to change after it's bougt? Seems to me that change can be good. Why be opposed to ANY and ALL changes?

Small White Car
Jan 24, 2007, 04:01 PM
In the ideal world, there would be no DRM, but then again, there would be no piracy. This is the next best thing in my opinion.

Really?,After an imaginary "perfect world" I see a world where Fairplay plays on other devices AND Microsofts DRM plays on iPods as being 2nd best.

Then the current situtaion as 3rd best, not 2nd.

JonDann
Jan 24, 2007, 04:02 PM
Argh! My post didn't show, sorry all.

eenu
Jan 24, 2007, 04:03 PM
Having lived in both countries, I can say Canada is *vastly* superior to the UK.


Having lived in both i can say that is cack! I am not claiming Britain is good at all - in fact i will be happy to leave but Canada is not 'Vastly' superior.

And as for the rip off thing, i used to think the US was cheap as chips until you see all the hidden charges......tolls, health insurance etc etc. When i worked it out it bascially wasn't much cheaper than living in the UK. So something that appears cheap on the surface isn't all its cracked up to be just as something that is 'rip off' on the surface isn't unnecessarily so rip off! There are many European country's that are far more 'rip off' than the UK!

codo
Jan 24, 2007, 04:03 PM
At last! I hope the UK, France & Germany also pressure Apple, because these are three markets Apple simply can not ignore.

The whole download industry should just standardise a format and use it.

Anyone defending Apple, in my opinion, is extremely deluded. Don't defend a billion dollar corporation at the expense of your own consumer rights - It's very obscure. Some claim iTunes provides users with the best consumer "experience" - If this truly is the case, Apple would loose no sales to a standardised format.

eenu
Jan 24, 2007, 04:06 PM
Why is this even an argument? Would you also want Apple to stop putting out updates for OS X? So you get 10.4 and that's it until 10.5 comes out?

After all, people who bought Tiger knew what they were getting!

Why is it your desire for nothing to change after it's bougt? Seems to me that change can be good. Why be opposed to ANY and ALL changes?

Apple is very much where it is now thanks to the money it has made on ipods.....without ipods there would be no iTMS as its not a money maker for Apple.....so give iTMS to everyman and his dog and apple suddenly reduces a huge income stream. I don't need to go into how this will affect apple and its future development as i am sure you are clever enough to work that out.

Its also thanks to the ipod and iTMS that apple is where it is at in terms of being popular

Without hardware sales Apple would be in the toilet pan.

jdechko
Jan 24, 2007, 04:07 PM
I really don't fault Apple or MS or any of the other content providers for the disaster that is DRM. This includes music, movies and software as well.

The problem stems from the people who actually own the content... the studios that make each of the products. They've gotten extremely greedy, such to the point that they're treating their customers like theives... gulity until proven innocent, but without the chance to prove innocence. That's the reason that DRM exists in the first place.

The way I see it, Apple et. al. are stuck in the middle between the consumers who don't want the DRM and would like to have the fair rights usage allowed by law, and the studios who'd like to make it illegal to play a CD in your car with someone who doesn't own the CD and/or make it illegal to invite a friend over to play the hot new game/watch the latest movie.

"If you legally acquire music, you need to have the right to manage it on all other devices that you own."
- Steve Jobs

Sure, Steve might feel that way, heck, he probably does or he wouldn't have said it. But what else came after that in the interview??? We don't know. For all we know, it could have been "... But the ********** recording industry won't let us put it out without any form of protection, so take your pick. No DRM, no music. No music, no iTMS.

They could have scrapped the iTMS all together and then we definitely wouldn't be having this argument. The iPod might not have been so successful and Apple wouldn't be enjoying it's sudden popularity right now. But Apple weighed the good and the bad, and in the end, they gave us the best possible combination: good store, fair prices, great music/media player.

RE: The Wii VC games. They're tied to the Nintendo store account (username and password) if your Wii is bricked, you can re-download the games for free using the same user/pw combination. Which is one thing the Nintendo store does better than the iTMS.

Small White Car
Jan 24, 2007, 04:10 PM
so give iTMS to everyman and his dog and apple suddenly reduces a huge income stream.

Why?

With their massive market Apple can demand lower prices on components.

They currently sell iPods at pretty much the exact same price as their competitors (while making more profit) and the design and function are better! And if you look at the numbers of iPods and songs sold, it's clear that the majority of iPod owners don't use the iTunes store at all.

So why, exactly, would iPod sales change much at all?

jakaj
Jan 24, 2007, 04:10 PM
But this is technically what happens with VHS. You invest in a collection of movies, and when DVDs come out, you can't play your VHS on your new DVD, you are locked to VHS, but you knew that was going to happen.

Yes, but you can copy the video from VHS tapes to DVDs with no complications involved, besides the purely technical ones.

Whereas to copy DRM'd music from iTunes to any other player, you have to go through a completely unnecessary step, that is put there just to make it harder for you to do so.

What if there was a requirement to copy only one song at a time, would you still be OK with that? What if you had to click on a picture of an iPod 10 times for each song? (stupid, I know, but technically just as stupid as CD burning...)

Where is the limit? How complicated can they make it for you? I say only what is absolutely necessary because of technical constraints.

I'm totally OK with Fairplay, if the possibility of export is available without the need to burn the CDs or any other unnecessary step.

eenu
Jan 24, 2007, 04:11 PM
on another note. Lets say Apple is forced to remove the DRM from the content in said countries. How exactly would that affect my previously purchased music?

How would the DRM be removed from the thousands of protected ACCs i have? And how would apple stop people in other countries outside the ruling using the software to remove the DRM

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 04:11 PM
There is absolutely nothing stopped the market players ( i.e., record companies, software compies et al ) from coming up with a standard DRM - iso standard for DRM.

Just like for other meduims and products.

DRM is no different.

I wouldn't buy that any 'iso' standard more prone to hacking than Fairplay is currently because its so widespread, and fairplay isn't being attacked on a daily basis causing no end of grieve to Apple.

on another note. Lets say Apple is forced to remove the DRM from the content in said countries. How exactly would that affect my previously purchased music?

How would the DRM be removed from the thousands of protected ACCs i have? And how would apple stop people in other countries outside the ruling using the software to remove the DRM

These countries want interopability, not the removal of fairplay.

Small White Car
Jan 24, 2007, 04:13 PM
on another note. Lets say Apple is forced to remove the DRM from the content in said countries.


Who has said anything at all about doing that? WHY would they do that?

eenu
Jan 24, 2007, 04:14 PM
Why?

With their massive market Apple can demand lower prices on components.

They currently sell iPods at pretty much the exact same price as their competitors (while making more profit) and the design and function are better! And if you look at the numbers of iPods and songs sold, it's clear that the majority of iPod owners don't use the iTunes store at all.

So why, exactly, would iPod sales change much at all?

Sorry how have you come to the conclusion about the figures that most ipod users dont buy from iTMS?

In my example i had a third party player and resented apple and iTMS as i couldn't play their music on it. I was forced to get an ipod even though i didnt want one. I made the decision though as i wanted to use iTMS. Remove the restriction and i will buy 'el cheapo' player elsewhere hence screwing apple income

eenu
Jan 24, 2007, 04:15 PM
Who has said anything at all about doing that? WHY would they do that?

The whole court case. When i say DRM i mean the ability to play on any player.....to me that is removing the Digital Rights Management as you have effectively removed any form of management on it as joe bloggs can do as they please with it

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 04:17 PM
The whole court case. When i say DRM i mean the ability to play on any player.....to me that is removing the Digital Rights Management as you have effectively removed any form of management on it as joe bloggs can do as they please with it

Its not like that, these countries want Apple to license out Fairplay so it can be implemented by other manufacturers on their devices, so the consumer is restricted iTunes <-> iPod, instead iTunes <-> any digital device

Small White Car
Jan 24, 2007, 04:17 PM
Sorry how have you come to the conclusion about the figures that most ipod users dont buy from iTMS?

There have been about 25 iTunes store song sales for every iPod sold. Everyone I know who buys from the store has bought a LOT more than 25 songs.

Therefore, if not everyone has bought 25 songs it must mean that some people are getting into the store and buy lots of songs while many others are simply not buying anything and using their CDs and MP3s on their iPods.

Small White Car
Jan 24, 2007, 04:18 PM
The whole court case. When i say DRM i mean the ability to play on any player.....to me that is removing the Digital Rights Management as you have effectively removed any form of management on it as joe bloggs can do as they please with it

Uhm, no. You clearly don't understand what they're asking for. It would simply NOT allow you to do whatever you please with it. Not even close.

eenu
Jan 24, 2007, 04:20 PM
Its not like that, these countries want Apple to license out Fairplay so it can be implemented by other manufacturers on their devices, so the consumer is restricted iTunes <-> iPod, instead iTunes <-> any digital device

In that case if every other music distributor is forced to do the same and hence would have to give apple the rights to theirs then i see no issue.

Though i still firmly believe that Apple shouldn't have to as we have all known from day one the restrictions. Having said that if everyone else gets their knuckles rapped for it and has to conform then at least it is fair all round.

Rocketman
Jan 24, 2007, 04:20 PM
iTunes content is installable on millions of Windows running devices now.

That is my legal defense for Apple assuming it is the PUBLISHERS requiring them to have some DRM, which is the case, not corporate greed on Apple's part.

Rocketman

Rustus Maximus
Jan 24, 2007, 04:20 PM
Erm, I DO grasp it, actually!

I believe in consumer rights / freedom, not consumer lock in.

No...I don't think you do "grasp it". Try reading eenu's statement again...

You just don't grasp it do you? No one forces you to buy from iTMS!

Buy from somewhere else, you can get non DRM music from loads of sources on the net that will work on any player.....no one is holding a knife to your throat. People have made the decision to buy from iTMS knowing the restrictions. Get over it.

Note the "no one forces you" and the "no one is holding a knife to your throat" parts. Also particularly note the "People have made the decision to buy from iTMS knowing the restrictions." section. Economic socialism fails, without exception and that, dear friends, is all this is. Paint it over however you want. The European nations signing on to this lunacy are trying to force socialist economic ideals onto Apple and its business model.

eenu
Jan 24, 2007, 04:21 PM
There have been about 25 iTunes store song sales for every iPod sold. Everyone I know who buys from the store has bought a LOT more than 25 songs.

Therefore, if not everyone has bought 25 songs it must mean that some people are getting into the store and buy lots of songs while many others are simply not buying anything and using their CDs and MP3s on their iPods.

Many people i know with ipods dont even buy music digitally they use their CDs as you say

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 04:22 PM
Sigh....
Read MY statement again...
"I believe in consumer freedom, not consumer lock in".

Its a different point of view to yours, yes, but I still 'get it'.

I think that all music from non iTMS stores should be playable on all devices - iPod, Zune etc. Any digital music playable on all digital devices.


No...I don't think you do "grasp it". Try reading eenu's statement again...

In the French case it wasn't only aimed at Apple but all DRM providers, including, microsoft. I'm sure thats the case with the other countries too - the articles do only mention Apple - though thats because its ( Fairplay ) the most popular.

In that case if every other music distributor is forced to do the same and hence would have to give apple the rights to theirs then i see no issue.

Though i still firmly believe that Apple shouldn't have to as we have all known from day one the restrictions. Having said that if everyone else gets their knuckles rapped for it and has to conform then at least it is fair all round.

JonDann
Jan 24, 2007, 04:24 PM
Many will disagree with me here, but I have no problem with DRM on the iPod. The iTS has shown that people are willing to pay for content as long as it's not too expensive. I have no illegal content on my Mac and I'm proud of that, my iPod works excellently and iTunes itself is a great media player. I now only buy CDs when they're on sale, the extortionate prices of CDs is partly to blame for the huge quantity of pirated material that's available. The only reason I have no pirated material is becuase they've made music affordable.

DRM has allowed Apple to provide this great service, which it could not have done if the record companies weren't pleased with DRM. Apple have merley offered a service, which many consumers want, like any good business should do. Clearly many people are happy with the system, shown by the amount of money the site makes, and it would be a disaster if the EU passed legislation that caused Apple to pull ou tof Europe. Many would consider returning to piracy, which would be a shame.

Anyway, no government has asked my opinion on this, I think we can guarantee that they won't consult a proper consumer-base before passing legislation that cripples my music collection. If I wanted to play it on another player, sure I could rip it to a CD and re-import it, but I like the iPod, I haven't seen anyone else come up with a nicer player.

Small White Car
Jan 24, 2007, 04:24 PM
Many people i know with ipods dont even buy music digitally they use their CDs as you say

Right. iPods sell themselves. People only use iTMS because they bought the iPod in the first place. Altering the store will have little impact on the player. People love 'em for what they are already.

GFLPraxis
Jan 24, 2007, 04:25 PM
FairPlay for music is fine, because you can burn a CD and take off the DRM.

FairPlay for videos on the other hand, doesn't let you burn to a DVD. That's the more irritating one for me.

Small White Car
Jan 24, 2007, 04:27 PM
FairPlay for music is fine, because you can burn a CD and take off the DRM.

FairPlay for videos on the other hand, doesn't let you burn to a DVD. That's the more irritating one for me.

Yup. This is still only a small issue only because very few people have video-capable iPods/phones at the moment.

But in 5 years this is going to be a HUGE issue. You can rip CDs and you can burn Fairplay music to CDs. People are used to that. With movies you get NEITHER of these. Once more people start to learn this fact it's going to get ugly.

uaaerospace
Jan 24, 2007, 04:32 PM
Because I have purhcased this music, why shouldn't I be able to put it onto a PSP, or play it on my mobile phone?

You knew when you purchased the music from iTunes that you would not be able to use it on these devices***. If you want to use it on such devices, go buy a regular CD and rip it yourself (or from another online store). Apple didn't force you to buy from iTunes.

This is ridiculous.


*** without burning CD and then ripping

TheBobcat
Jan 24, 2007, 04:39 PM
Ultimately, this is what happens when capitalist companies try to operate in socialist ones. :D

*Puts up flameshield.

SeanMcg
Jan 24, 2007, 04:45 PM
Yes, but you can copy the video from VHS tapes to DVDs with no complications involved, besides the purely technical ones...
"...besides the purely technical ones..."
And this requires a separate piece of hardware, whether it be a dual deck, video card or bridge. I don't see how this is any easier, or more complicated, than burning out a CD and re-ripping it, giving you both a backup, as others have mentioned, and an additional way to listen to your purchases. By the time you're done, you can listen to your music on an iPod, any CD player, the other (inferior, IMHO) digital media player of your choosing, and your computer. How's that for choice?

Ultimately, this is what happens when capitalist companies try to operate in socialist ones.

*Puts up flameshield.

I completely agree.
*Room for two back there? :)

OhEsTen
Jan 24, 2007, 04:56 PM
These countries are only to be congratulated.

- You aren't forced to use only one type of petrol for a particular type of car
- Any CD / DVD will work in any CD or DVD player


Actually....

Diesel cars/trucks take diesel fuel, and some cars recommend you use 91 octane (granted you don't have to), and as for DVD's, you are restricted by region codes.

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 04:59 PM
Ultimately, this is what happens when capitalist companies try to operate in socialist ones. :D

*Puts up flameshield.

LOL.

( or, when Control Freaks operate in socialist countries )

SPUY767
Jan 24, 2007, 04:59 PM
Also, it's kind of interesting to see how when anti-monopoly and "open standards" initiatives target Microsoft, foolish followers of the Mac religion say how good it is, yet when the same happens to Apple, suddenly you "always have another option"...

Because when Microsoft places subtle cchanges in its file formats to foul up compatibility with other Word Processors, and when they completely CHANGE the format to force users to upgrade to another version, there really is no other choice. I could, however, just as easily buy a snasa. I rip all my music from CD's anyway, so I don't give a damn either way.

Plutonius
Jan 24, 2007, 05:01 PM
These countries are only to be congratulated.

As sooner Apple are forced to open up fairplay, the better.

- You aren't forced to use only one type of petrol for a particular type of car
- Any CD / DVD will work in any CD or DVD player

You should be able to play digital music on any device you like.

- You aren't forced to buy music or an iPod from Apple either. If you don't like fairplay, you can purchase the player and music elsewhere.

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 05:02 PM
Because when Microsoft places subtle cchanges in its file formats to foul up compatibility with other Word Processors, and when they completely CHANGE the format to force users to upgrade to another version, there really is no other choice. I could, however, just as easily buy a snasa. I rip all my music from CD's anyway, so I don't give a damn either way.

He's right, IMO.

use open office and use open XML document format ( what ever its called ).

No one is forcing you to use microsoft word, if you need to:
Load your word document into Open Office, take 3 hours correcting the format, and your all good.

However, its not practical.


If Apple are negatively affected by say Patents, you get a load of people saying "Patents are evil, company X is evil".

As soon as another company is seen to imped on an Apple patent - all of a sudden its - "Apple needs to protect its patents.".

SPUY767
Jan 24, 2007, 05:03 PM
It all goes back to one simple premise. Apple wants to control the distribution of their product to maintain quality. Apple doesn't want people buying music from napster, having it fould up their iPod, and thinking that the iPod is a piece, nor do they want people using iTMS to purchase music for their ZUNE, having the zune go the way of the dodo, and then thinking th iTMS is the problem. It's a simple, vertically integrated business model, Apple has made it work, others have not. There is ABSOLUTELY no reason to forca a company to do anything unless they are harming the consumer. You can make all the dumb comments you want, but I assure, nothing that Apple is doing is harming any consumer.

eenu
Jan 24, 2007, 05:04 PM
LOL.

( or, when Control Freaks operate in socialist countries )

I don't agree with the term 'Control Freaks' in this case.

- You aren't forced to buy music or an iPod from Apple either. If you don't like fairplay, you can purchase the player and music elsewhere.

I agree 100%

Small White Car
Jan 24, 2007, 05:07 PM
Because when Microsoft places subtle cchanges in its file formats to foul up compatibility with other Word Processors, and when they completely CHANGE the format to force users to upgrade to another version, there really is no other choice.

Sure there is. There are other word processors out there, aren't there? No one forced you to buy Word. Why is it wrong for Microsoft to do this?

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 05:09 PM
Sure there is. There are other word processors out there, aren't there? No one forced you to buy Word. Why is it wrong for Microsoft to do this?

However, microsoft have caved and will be supporting open Document in the next version of Word. Why: pressure.

notice the similarities between this and Apple / Fairplay.

Paco
Jan 24, 2007, 05:13 PM
Here's my problem with Apple:
I want to buy an Apple computer.
I like Mac hardware. I like OSX. I'm tired of Windows. BUT...

I don't like ITunes and I don't like IPods. I don't like being locked in to one option. I don't like not being able to replace the battery. I don't like 128kbs. I don't like not having a volume buttom on the player. I don't even like the scroll-wheel (god save me). I'm not saying that you have to agree with me - so please don't flame me because you love those things and I don't.

So why should my decision to buy a COMPUTER and a computer operating system mean that I have to use a music app I don't like (ITunes), buy a player I don't want (IPod), buy music from a store I don't want to use (ITMS), in a format I don't want to buy? I want a computer, not a lifetime contract to products I don't want.

Yes - I could buy CDs exclusively instead of using ITMS - but if everyone wanted to buy CDs exclusively, song-at-a-time music stores wouldn't have taken off as they have. Yes I could buy AAC songs and re-rip them. But seriously - do you REALLY think that's an ideal situation? REALLY? I don't want AAC in the first place, I don't want to waste a CD, I don't want to have a loss of quality by reripping. It's just a waste of my time just to get proper access to what I would rather have bought in a format I preferred, but wasn't allowed to by the Apple ecosystem.

Many posters are saying that I have a choice - that I coudl get the music in other ways, that I could just not get an iPod, that I could stick with a PC.

But what it comes down to is this: If I like Apple COMPUTERS and I like music, I have to accept that the computer comes with a lifetime ball and chain relating to all sorts of non-computer things. I would have to buy a new portable music player, use a music app I don't like, and buy music from a store that I find annoying, unattractive, and unnecessarily restrictive.

That is not choice. That is building an ecosystem that restricts my choice.

And it's just about enough to steer me clear of Apple all together. Which, frankly, annoys me all the more. I want an Apple computer. Let me buy it without forcing all the other things on me.

*End of rant*

Loge
Jan 24, 2007, 05:13 PM
- Any CD / DVD will work in any CD or DVD player


Not true of DVDs because of region coding.

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 05:17 PM
Not true of DVDs because of region coding.

DVDs - true, however, its extremely easy to get hold of a region free DVD player, or to change your existing DVD player to region 0 (*most). Problem solved.

* DVD regioning stinks - its not about piracy but about price controls in those regions of the world ( i.e., keep DVD prices higher in Europe than say, North America )

eenu
Jan 24, 2007, 05:18 PM
Here's my problem with Apple:
I want to buy an Apple computer.
I like Mac hardware. I like OSX. I'm tired of Windows. BUT...

I don't like ITunes and I don't like IPods. I don't like being locked in to one option. I don't like not being able to replace the battery. I don't like 128kbs. I don't like not having a volume buttom on the player. I don't even like the scroll-wheel (god save me). I'm not saying that you have to agree with me - so please don't flame me because you love those things and I don't.

So why should my decision to buy a COMPUTER and a computer operating system mean that I have to use a music app I don't like (ITunes), buy a player I don't want (IPod), buy music from a store I don't want to use (ITMS), in a format I don't want to buy? I want a computer, not a lifetime contract to products I don't want.

Yes - I could buy CDs exclusively instead of using ITMS - but if everyone wanted to buy CDs exclusively, song-at-a-time music stores wouldn't have taken off as they have. Yes I could buy AAC songs and re-rip them. But seriously - do you REALLY think that's an ideal situation? REALLY? I don't want AAC in the first place, I don't want to waste a CD, I don't want to have a loss of quality by reripping. It's just a waste of my time just to get proper access to what I would rather have bought in a format I preferred, but wasn't allowed to by the Apple ecosystem.

Many posters are saying that I have a choice - that I coudl get the music in other ways, that I could just not get an iPod, that I could stick with a PC.

But what it comes down to is this: If I like Apple COMPUTERS and I like music, I have to accept that the computer comes with a lifetime ball and chain relating to all sorts of non-computer things. I would have to buy a new portable music player, use a music app I don't like, and buy music from a store that I find annoying, unattractive, and unnecessarily restrictive.

That is not choice. That is building an ecosystem that restricts my choice.

And it's just about enough to steer me clear of Apple all together. Which, frankly, annoys me all the more. I want an Apple computer. Let me buy it without forcing all the other things on me.

*End of rant*

Its a shame you spent so long on a post that has little point. You can simply use another player and buy music from another digital supplier. You can have your mac and your digital music without an ipod and without iTMS....whats your issue?

birdguy747
Jan 24, 2007, 05:19 PM
Really you all need to use your head for a minute. This isn't Apples fault. This is every music labels fault. They wanted you to stop stealing their music. Apple gave you a way to do that while satisfying the music labels. Apple wanted you to have a way to digitally listen to your music. This isn't Apples fault 1 bit. All the posts upon posts for people who want to do whatever you want with your music, fine, do what you want, but if you wouldn't have stolen so much in the first place you wouldn't have this problem. GREED CONSUMES US ALL!

Loge
Jan 24, 2007, 05:20 PM
DVDs - true, however, its extremely easy to get hold of a region free DVD player, or to change your existing DVD player to region 0 (*most). Problem solved.

* DVD regioning stinks - its not about piracy but about price controls in those regions of the world ( i.e., keep DVD prices higher in Europe than say, North America )

Yes, inconvenient workarounds exist same as they do for protected content purchased from iTunes.

macjackpro
Jan 24, 2007, 05:22 PM
There is nothing illegal about tying products together, which is what this is. It is also not anti-competitive since anyone is free to enter the market. As long as the threat of entry is there, a dominant company will not engage in monopoly pricing and output.

It's pretty sad that governments don't understand economics. It's sadder that it seems Apple is the only company right now that knows how to write good software for their good hardware.


I think this is ridiculous.

Apple's not forcing anyone to use iTunes. If you want to use it then buy an iPod as well, I see nothing wrong with this.

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 05:24 PM
Yes, inconvenient workarounds exist same as they do for protected content purchased from iTunes.

Buying a DVD player ( $40 ) is easier than having to Burn -> rip. Its a waste of CDs and thus, more expense.

* buy when you replace your existing dvd player after it goes up in smoke. Burning and Ripping is extremely time consuming.

That statement is subjective.
2.5% marketshare to microsoft's - > 90%.
Even when microsoft have been restricted from its dodgy practices.


It's sadder that it seems Apple is the only company right now that knows how to write good software for their good hardware.

2ndPath
Jan 24, 2007, 05:42 PM
These countries want interopability, not the removal of fairplay.

Exactly. In the first place they just want the music to be playable on all players.

And it would also be nice if the iPod as well supported playing DRM protected music from other vendors than the iTMS. Does anyone here know whether the iTMS offers all the Music offered by all the other online Music stores?

And to all the people who say there are alternatives: These alternatives are usually at least equally limited. So one could choose them instead but that would also mean that one could never buy an iPod, because it doesn't play the music.

That's the reason why I don't buy music online - ok, I spent 99c on the iTMS just to try how it works.

Actually....

Diesel cars/trucks take diesel fuel, and some cars recommend you use 91 octane (granted you don't have to), and as for DVD's, you are restricted by region codes.

And diesel fuel as well as high octane fuel are sold by all major gas station brands. many different companies. It's not a single company that has a monopoly on them.

And the DVD region coding is a different story and really a problem. But the EU was at least at some point even investigating against that. I don't know what came out of this in the end. But at least in Germany the electronics resellers seem to be aware of the problem and offer DVD players including the directions to make them region code free.

Nermal
Jan 24, 2007, 05:50 PM
Good grief.

I have read through this entire thread, and frankly I am stunned. The number of people here who do not want choice amazes me.

At this stage I'm not planning to buy another iPod, but I want to be able to play my iTunes-purchased music on the player I end up getting. For this to happen legally, we need interoperability (or I can go via CD and lose time and quality). I have stopped buying from iTunes, but I still have hundreds of downloads from there that I will no longer be able to play. I'm watching DoubleTwist with interest, as they may provide a solution whether Apple wants it or not.

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 06:02 PM
Isn't it just.

But, you must realise, for a lot of people - Apple are the true path who can do no wrong. Blinded by SJ's RDF.


Good grief.

I have read through this entire thread, and frankly I am stunned. The number of people here who do not want choice amazes me.

At this stage I'm not planning to buy another iPod, but I want to be able to play my iTunes-purchased music on the player I end up getting. For this to happen legally, we need interoperability (or I can go via CD and lose time and quality). I have stopped buying from iTunes, but I still have hundreds of downloads from there that I will no longer be able to play. I'm watching DoubleTwist with interest, as they may provide a solution whether Apple wants it or not.

eenu
Jan 24, 2007, 06:10 PM
Isn't it just.

But, you must realise, for a lot of people - Apple are the true path who can do no wrong. Blinded by SJ's RDF.

Bull! Just some people made a decision and knew the outcome if they wanted to change player. Its called an informed decision. Like i say i never wanted an ipod but i liked iTMS so i made an informed decision!

weitzner
Jan 24, 2007, 06:23 PM
open it up. license it. if creative wants iTunes music to work on a zen or whatever, they can pay apple a fee for every device they sell. apple will clearly benefit from this, consumers *could* benefit from this but in all reality, if they did this, i doubt creative would go along with it. the true reason anyone gets a zen instead of an iPod is 1) they dislike the idea of iPods and feel like going against the norm or 2) the zen is cheaper. So while i think that apple should be able to do whatever they want with their technologies, i think it would benefit them to license it - and it would get the EU off of their back.

Digitalclips
Jan 24, 2007, 06:28 PM
this is all ************!!!

There are loads of places to buy music from.....if you don't own an ipod you have plenty of places to purchase from! Those who purchase from iTunes own ipods! Simple.

This makes me very VERY angry indeed!

They should be doing the same to MS and others that license to single or limited devices if they want to do this to apple

Correct! If they want to buy music to do with as they wish go buy a CD!

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 06:28 PM
If Creative could license Fairplay they would in a shot - the ability to play Fairplay content is very atttractive. Think - Real - they hacked fairplay so Realplayer could play f/p content - just this scenario.



open it up. license it. if creative wants iTunes music to work on a zen or whatever, they can pay apple a fee for every device they sell. apple will clearly benefit from this, consumers *could* benefit from this but in all reality, if they did this, i doubt creative would go along with it. the true reason anyone gets a zen instead of an iPod is 1) they dislike the idea of iPods and feel like going against the norm or 2) the zen is cheaper. So while i think that apple should be able to do whatever they want with their technologies, i think it would benefit them to license it - and it would get the EU off of their back.

jeffod
Jan 24, 2007, 06:31 PM
Sorry, I just don't buy the "car parts" analogy. How bout I turn it around with this? What if you could only buy one type of TOOTHPASTE for the TOOTHBRUSH that you bought? Think that would be RIGHT?

Nope.

w00master

Okay, get a grip. The car analogy makes sense. Your toothpaste one is stupid, and irrelevant.

If you don't like iTunes ****** off, I like it I don't need Apple pulling out of my country because some idiot wants INTEROPERABILITY with some cheap peice of ****** player. Because ultimately that is what Jobs will do.

YOU DO REALISE he is a control freak. It will be his way or the HIGHWAY and they won't boot him off the board again as he has proven there is no APPLE without him.

TheBobcat
Jan 24, 2007, 06:50 PM
Apple invented iTunes, Apple brought iPod to market. If Apple wants only them to work together, then go right ahead. That is not anti-competitive or a monopoly because it does not lock out competitors from the market, it just keeps the specific iPod + iTunes system closed.

These socialist countries get mad whenever someone foreign is successful, and they think that they can force companies to do whatever they want. Its obnoxious. If they want to make a big enough stink of it Apple will just leave. Steve will not bend.

weitzner
Jan 24, 2007, 06:53 PM
If Creative could license Fairplay they would in a shot - the ability to play Fairplay content is very atttractive. Think - Real - they hacked fairplay so Realplayer could play f/p content - just this scenario.


So, if fairplay was licensed, i.e. any hack to allow it is ludicrisly punishable by law, would Real have paid Apple a fee for every copy of Real Player that was downloaded? I think not.

riversky
Jan 24, 2007, 06:55 PM
Why can't I play my Xbox titles on my Playstation Norway??!!!!

I don't see how this is any different?

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 07:04 PM
So, if fairplay was licensed, i.e. any hack to allow it is ludicrisly punishable by law, would Real have paid Apple a fee for every copy of Real Player that was downloaded? I think not.


It depends on the licensing terms - a lump sum over a period of time - doesn't have to be per copy.

Real may have been OK with a per download license terms... neither YOU or I know that ( and due to that, I see little point in debating this point - since its all speculation ).

Ardchoille
Jan 24, 2007, 07:15 PM
Ah, your from rip off britain, no wonder you have that attitude!

As a Canadian, I find that statement embarrassing. Please avoid jingoistic embellishments. Stick to the arguments rather than ad hominem attacks.

cgc
Jan 24, 2007, 08:01 PM
Okay, get a grip. The car analogy makes sense. Your toothpaste one is stupid, and irrelevant.

If you don't like iTunes ****** off, I like it I don't need Apple pulling out of my country because some idiot wants INTEROPERABILITY with some cheap peice of ****** player. Because ultimately that is what Jobs will do.

YOU DO REALISE he is a control freak. It will be his way or the HIGHWAY and they won't boot him off the board again as he has proven there is no APPLE without him.

Maybe this analogy is more relevant: I wanted to buy an SLR camera. There are many different manufacturers out there, each with pros and cons. I realized before making my purchase that I'm buying more than a camera, I'm buying into a company who is the sole source of lenses, flashes, and other add-ons for that camera. I bought Canon which means I cannot buy Nikon, Pentax, etc. Should I expect Canon to somehow enable me to use Nikon lenses? Absolutely not, I bought into an entire line of camera products, I can blame nobody but myself (and I blame nobody, I am very pleased).

Archmagination
Jan 24, 2007, 08:14 PM
Right now I don't like what these European countrys are doing.. they are targetting one company(Apple) and trying to force them to get rid of DRM. Thing is when they do that it puts Apple at a large disadvantage since everybody else still gets to keep their DRM. Instead of doing that why don't they pass a law that says DRM's are illegal. BOOM there you go you just leveled playing field for everybody.

Call42350
Jan 24, 2007, 08:18 PM
Because of Macrovision, you would be unable to duplicate some titles (first ones showed up around 1985).

Can we look to Norway, France and Germany to remove CSS from DVDs? That's the same scenario as removing DRM from music downloads. I can't play my vast DVD collection on my Linux boxes without buying a licensed player program.

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 08:20 PM
Because of Macrovision, you would be unable to duplicate some titles (first ones showed up around 1985).

Can we look to Norway, France and Germany to remove CSS from DVDs? That's the same scenario as removing DRM from music downloads. I can't play my vast DVD collection on my Linux boxes without buying a licensed player program.

Read and understand the article and you'll realise your point above isn't valid regarding removing DRM from content.

Call42350
Jan 24, 2007, 08:28 PM
Read and understand the article and you'll realise your point above isn't valid regarding removing DRM from content.

According to the article, they say that songs are unable to be played on any other player besides an iPod.

It said that the fact that the technology stopped songs bought from iTunes being played on any player other than an iPod broke the law in Norway.

1) Some Motorola phones
2) Windows based PCs
3) Macintosh based PCs
4) (via CD rip) anything that supports MP3

Of course I am being literal, but option 4 is quite possible, just not convenient. I guess that is why folks use the vertical Apple model... convenience.

Curious Stella, how many songs have you purchased from the iTMS?

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 08:31 PM
It says they want Apple to license out Fairplay - so other manufcaturers can implement it on their own devices. This isn't isn't the same as stripping out the DRM.

"The Consumer Council believes that Apple has only three options: it can license Fairplay to any manufacturer that wants iTunes songs to play on its machines; it can co-develop an open standard with other companies; or it can abandon DRM altogether."
(* ok, so it briefly does mention removing drm!)
Removing the DRM isn't going to happen, due to the record companies.

I've purchased 30 odd... but I'd like Apple to license out Fairplay so I can play these on other devices without degrading quality and spending more money on CDs to burn -> rip. I have better things to do with my time. I don't really like being locked in to the Apple structure.



According to the article, they say that songs are unable to be played on any other player besides an iPod.


1) Some Motorola phones
2) Windows based PCs
3) Macintosh based PCs
4) (via CD rip) anything that supports MP3

Of course I am being literal, but option 4 is quite possible, just not convenient. I guess that is why folks use the vertical Apple model... convenience.

Curious Stella, how many songs have you purchased from the iTMS?

michmacman
Jan 24, 2007, 08:35 PM
It seems to me that as long as apple informs the consumer that they songs only work on ipods/itunes then they should be able to do what they want. If someone else comes along with more options/better choices/no restrictions then the consumer will buy that product. Isn't this the essence of capitalism?

I'm not saying I like that the songs are restricted, it just seems like its apple's decision to make.




Just an aside:
Germany was a "Rebublic" before World War II......:eek: I don't believe anyone has "Gauranteed Rights". Someone can take your "Right" to live away without asking you.

So if the majority of your fellow citizens decides to elect a leader that wishes to ban a certain people of a certain religion that would be ok? That'd be democracy right? Whatever the majority wants?

I think someone needs to look into just exactly why the founders of the US's greatest fear was a democracy. Democracy is majority rules. Chaos. Over here we're a rebublic, even though most citizens don't know it. Guaranteed rights no matter what the "majority" wants.

Call42350
Jan 24, 2007, 08:38 PM
It says they want Apple to license out Fairplay - so other manufcaturers can implement it on their own devices. This isn't isn't the same as stripping out the DRM.

So how many songs have you bought?

The only leverage the Ombudsman/men have is that Apple is breaking their law, right? Sounds a little subjective to me. The statement in the article was saying that because Apple wasn't allowing their DRM on competitors players, it was breaking a law. They must either show a law exictly prohibiting this business practice, or they don't have much to stand on if/when Apple lets it go to the various EU/UK courts.

Licensing out FairPlay is only 1 of 3 options offered to Apple to make them happy.

Call42350
Jan 24, 2007, 08:42 PM
30 songs, sorry. I've bought about 12! :)

Dagless
Jan 24, 2007, 08:54 PM
As iTunes expands this is what eventually will happen. More people will want to "download a song for 79p" but choose not to buy an iPod.

It's progression.

And I don't have an opinion on the subject. I only use iPods, I don't care for "iTunes" on my ROKR or anything else so I'm perfectly unaffected by this.

Call42350
Jan 24, 2007, 09:10 PM
More people will want to "download a song for 79p" but choose not to buy an iPod.

So who is forcing you to use iTMS? If you invest in songs, you can always get out of being locked in by taking the CD route. Heck, you should be backing up your investment to CD anyways... You didn't throw away your money as the CD is virtually the same quality (if you can tell the difference, you should be buying CDs exclusively).

What bothers me is that the TV show and movie downloads are not exportable to a non-Apple format. I will NOT buy anything like that from Apple and I hope/expect they will change as they realize others are reluctant for the same reason.

mdriftmeyer
Jan 24, 2007, 10:28 PM
Oh No!!

Not Norway! A country with less than 5 million people is turning up the heat!

Stella
Jan 24, 2007, 10:50 PM
Oh No!!

Not Norway! A country with less than 5 million people is turning up the heat!

Yea, but its not only Norway, its Germany, France, UK. Combined.

Large markets for music.

Apple could pull out of each one, but I doubt they would. As online music stores becomes more popular Apple will be left without an online presence... and without a digital player that could play content in these countries. There are plenty of other online stores that will take its place.

Apple would only be spiting itself, and that is extremely short sighted - but then, Apple have been known to do this before.

JoeG4
Jan 24, 2007, 10:59 PM
Steve Jobs is such a huge hypocrite. First he was against DRM, now he's for it.

*shrug* Nothing's changed rofl. I've always been against DRM, and don't like that at all about the iTMS.

So I'm definitely supporting the EU in this one :)

digitalbiker
Jan 24, 2007, 11:21 PM
I understand what you are saying and your point of view, but I can't play PS3 games on an XBox 360. Why? It's business. I can still listen to the radio for free, but why do people pay $$$ to Sirius radio. Because it is a different medium and has different options (mostly, no commercials). I buy songs legally from :apple: and I still buy CDs. Most of my collection is from CDs. I chose to use a Mac and iTunes and iPods.

The point is that Apple is a monopoly in terms of market share for digital music. They are using their market position to prohibit other mp3 players from competing against the ipod by not allowing others to license fairplay.

Personally, I hope the entire DRM movement fails miserably and I will do everything in my power to help it along. These DRM restrictions are ridiculous and cause all kinds of headaches for managing various media on various machines. I haven't bought one song from itunes because I won't support any DRM.

The fact is Apple music sales would increase if DRM was removed. There are many people like me who don't buy DRM media. People stole digital music in the 90's because their were no good alternatives for acquiring digital music other than buying overpriced CD's. The stolen songs were most times of poor quality and didn't include any cover art etc. With songs priced at $0.99 or lower, almost all people will buy their music. There will be a few thiefs but DRM isn't stopping those few anyway.

Rustus Maximus
Jan 25, 2007, 12:22 AM
The point is that Apple is a monopoly in terms of market share for digital music. They are using their market position to prohibit other mp3 players from competing against the ipod by not allowing others to license fairplay.

Personally, I hope the entire DRM movement fails miserably and I will do everything in my power to help it along. These DRM restrictions are ridiculous and cause all kinds of headaches for managing various media on various machines. I haven't bought one song from itunes because I won't support any DRM.

The fact is Apple music sales would increase if DRM was removed. There are many people like me who don't buy DRM media. People stole digital music in the 90's because their were no good alternatives for acquiring digital music other than buying overpriced CD's. The stolen songs were most times of poor quality and didn't include any cover art etc. With songs priced at $0.99 or lower, almost all people will buy their music. There will be a few thiefs but DRM isn't stopping those few anyway.

So digital...what mp3 player do you use? I know you don't buy from iTunes...but obviously you still rip songs from the CD into a more portable, space efficient format correct? So which player are you using to do that?

maxp1
Jan 25, 2007, 12:22 AM
The point is that Apple is a monopoly in terms of market share for digital music. They are using their market position to prohibit other mp3 players from competing against the ipod by not allowing others to license fairplay.

Huh?? They may be a monopoly but if they are they're not an abusive monopoly, which is the bad part of being a monopoly. The manufacturers of other digital music players are not prevented from doing business or selling their product by not having access to the iTMS catalog. Other digital music player have their own online music delivery methods that Apple is locked out of.

That those other digital player/music store products are not as popular as the iPod/iTMS is not the fault of Apple. It is the fault of the consumers who have chosen, by their own free will and without any coersion (other than clever advertising) from Apple, to buy the iPod/iTMS product. Contrast this with the abusive monopoly that was (and some may argue still is) held by Microsoft, where consumers were prevented from buying an x86 PC without Windows. Apple does not prevent anyone from buying whatever digital music player they want and using any competitor's music store to buy music for that player. That Apple does not allow those competitors to use it's Music store is not an abuse of their dominant market position because they're not forcing anyone to buy their product.

Rustus Maximus
Jan 25, 2007, 12:56 AM
Sigh....
Read MY statement again...
"I believe in consumer freedom, not consumer lock in".

Its a different point of view to yours, yes, but I still 'get it'.

well...ok...le sigh right back at ya...

First, you have consumer freedom now. You are not "locked in" to iTunes or any other music service. Go. Shop around. It's your freedom...which you already have. Did I mention you already are free?

So, no, you still aren't getting that.

I think that all music from non iTMS stores should be playable on all devices - iPod, Zune etc. Any digital music playable on all digital devices.

Now, again, you are not being locked in or "lock boxed" by anyone or any company here. You have the freedom to go anywhere and use their service. With Apple there are many alternate ways already covered here to get music to and from your iPod/Mac/PC/iTunes.

The real issue you have is you don't have what you consider "consumer freedom". Your definition of "consumer freedom" doesn't make very much sense from a business perspective. Apple sells iPods. They sell lots of iPods. They want people to buy even more iPods. They want people to buy them so much that they give away iTunes to encourage said purchases of iPods. Take away that integrated link...and I bet they don't sell so many iPods. Again, not good business or good sense from a quality control perspective either.

In the French case it wasn't only aimed at Apple but all DRM providers, including, microsoft. I'm sure thats the case with the other countries too - the articles do only mention Apple - though thats because its ( Fairplay ) the most popular.

I don't care who the French were aiming at. They should never have fired the gun. It's none of their business what Apple does with Apple's product as long as Apple isn't breaking any sort of law. They aren't. That goes for ANY company affected by this French blustering. End of story.

Rustus Maximus
Jan 25, 2007, 01:07 AM
...That is not choice. That is building an ecosystem that restricts my choice.

And it's just about enough to steer me clear of Apple all together. Which, frankly, annoys me all the more. I want an Apple computer. Let me buy it without forcing all the other things on me.

--- scans the news and all knowing web blogs for stories indicating where, how and when Apple's Steve Jobs aka Digital Hitler by DRM opponents, stormed and destroyed all other PC manufacturers' plants and HQ's as well as personally slaying each and every CEO of each and every competitor to ensure total Apple world domination.

When asked about this claim and why he would ever do such a thing Jobs replied:

"To crush my enemies, to see them driven before me, and to hear the lamentations of their women."

Jobs then sounded a barbaric yawp (yes yawp) over the rooftops and thundered off on what appeared to be a souped up Segway with spiked tires. ---

Rustus Maximus
Jan 25, 2007, 01:11 AM
Good grief.

I have read through this entire thread, and frankly I am stunned. The number of people here who do not want choice amazes me.

Frankly, I and many others are stunned and amazed at the number of people here who do not realize they have a choice.

Rustus Maximus
Jan 25, 2007, 01:14 AM
Maybe this analogy is more relevant: I wanted to buy an SLR camera. There are many different manufacturers out there, each with pros and cons. I realized before making my purchase that I'm buying more than a camera, I'm buying into a company who is the sole source of lenses, flashes, and other add-ons for that camera. I bought Canon which means I cannot buy Nikon, Pentax, etc. Should I expect Canon to somehow enable me to use Nikon lenses?

Only if you live in France, Norway, Germany or any of those other economically progressive European states. I hear the French are now working on their next proposal involving being able to squeeze mustard from your ketchup bottle so it may be a bit before they get to the camera thingie there...just give them time.

Rustus Maximus
Jan 25, 2007, 01:16 AM
Yea, but its not only Norway, its Germany, France, UK. Combined.

Large markets for music.

Apple could pull out of each one, but I doubt they would.

Oh you should never, ever doubt what nobody is sure about.

2ndPath
Jan 25, 2007, 01:48 AM
Maybe this analogy is more relevant: I wanted to buy an SLR camera. There are many different manufacturers out there, each with pros and cons. I realized before making my purchase that I'm buying more than a camera, I'm buying into a company who is the sole source of lenses, flashes, and other add-ons for that camera. I bought Canon which means I cannot buy Nikon, Pentax, etc. Should I expect Canon to somehow enable me to use Nikon lenses? Absolutely not, I bought into an entire line of camera products, I can blame nobody but myself (and I blame nobody, I am very pleased).

I used a Sigma lens on a Nikon camera. So there are options for lenses from other manufacturers for Nikon cameras at least. So this analogy is the oposite of the iPod case again.

jhande
Jan 25, 2007, 03:09 AM
OK, let's try and turn it around: Has any market, anywhere, at any time been hurt by increasing interoperability? The usual effects have always been bigger market, more choice, more economic viability, and new uses for technology.

Having said that, although I detest DRM in all its forms (because nothing in DRM makes my life easier, as a consumer (in theory -- read on)) if I measure the impact that Fairplay has on my life, Apple has actually done a pretty good job so far.

I've probably bought a couple of hundred songs from ITS, and use it in various ways.

BUT, there are a lot of songs that ITS do not have - and that's when I go the p2p, library CD or whatever route.

I don't mind the 8dkr (denmark) that I have to pay for a song - the defining point for me is convenience. If there was NO DRM whatsoever, I would still buy from ITS since it's much easier than p2p.

I think Apple gets the point. The labels haven't yet. Every time we've pushed the technological barrier RIAA/MPAA and others have screamed bloody murder that it would destroy their industry (remember vcr's when they first came out?), and every time the market has just increased by orders of magnitude.

Is the ombudsman right in this case? In theory I think it is, if you view DRM as an artificial restriction on consumer rights. However, I also think that we are in a transitional period for intellectual property rights, and we've got a good decade to go before this has played out.

I'd rather be in the Apple camp, where I after all have technical possibilities for migrating my data (burn CD), than the Vista camp where draconian DRM has been integrated in the OS itself.

As an aside, there's a hell of a difference between applications and data. The analogy of wanting a program on the WII to run on an XBox doesn't hold water. MP3's and document files, on the other hand is a different matter.

my .02

confeos
Jan 25, 2007, 03:34 AM
Apple should just close the European iTMS. That would solve the problem. Then we can listen to them complain about that, too.

I don't understand what the big deal is. If you want to play music on your god-awful zen or zune, then don't buy from the iTMS. How much simpler could this possibly be?

Or you could jut buy a CD. Your rights as a consumer are not violated and are not restricted in any way simply because you bought from the iTMS.

Why don't you put pressure on Creative and Microsoft to open their own music store? Then you could buy from them.

Apple is a closed system, and it should stay that way. Apple took a gamble and it paid off, then everybody, and I mean everybody jumped on the bandwagon. And didn't they all fail? Didn't they all tank?

Why should Apple be forced to open their proprietary system, just because everyone else was too scared or too stupid to do it right?

Just shut the stores down. Problem solved.

discodicky
Jan 25, 2007, 04:28 AM
We don't gain anything, but in my eyes it's not fair that Apple should have to change because of what some government says. I feel that the market should be driven by consumers rather than governments (except for extreme cases). Remember, if consumers really didn't want Fairplay on their songs, they wouldn't have bought the songs from iTunes in the first place. If the iTunes store had no sales due to lack of accessability, Apple would either modify the agreement or shut it down.

P-Worm

But you have to realise that this is an extreme case. This is the same forum where people berate M$ for abusing its monopolies. Monopolies aren't a good thing for the consumer. imagine if apple managed to get an actual 100% monopoly on portable music players and online distribution and then hiked the price up to $30 per album and locked out the iPod from using any non-ITMS song. Scary?

Poff
Jan 25, 2007, 05:06 AM
I agree 1000%. There are other options for buying, managing, and playing digital music. If you want to go with Napster and a Zune, that's your choice....good luck with it.

I'd bet money that behind the scenes, Micro$oft and makers of other MP3 players are lobbying hard for this type of legal maneuvering...

Craig

The problem is, what if you used iTunes and an iPod, and spent $1000 on music in the iTunes Store. Two years later, your iPod breaks and you want to buy an mp3-player from LG. Only you can't because it won't play your $1000 worth of music, so you're forced to buy another iPod.

THAT'S the main problem here.


Edit: lets rephrase the question.

What if you're using Windows and a Zune. You buy $1000 worth of music on Microsofts music store. Then a year later you want to switch to Mac and kill your Windows PC crap. But you know you can't, because you'd have to spend $1000 on the same music all again. And that would make your iBook cost $2099! So you're forced to buy a new crappy Dell instead, with the extremely bad OS Windows Vista! Can you honestly say that this is how it should be??

IscariotJ
Jan 25, 2007, 05:30 AM
As much as it would pain me, it would serve the EU right if Apple shut down the stores. I've several iPods, and have purchased several albums from iTMS, but at no point was I deceived into thinking I could play the tracks on any other generic MP3 player. If it mattered that much to me, I would have bought the album on CD and ripped it.

Forcing Apple to open FairPlay, is pandering to all those companies that have flagging sales, and to all the people that are too lazy to do enough research on the products they are buying, or rip CDs themselves.

Ultimately, Apple's current position is not a monopoly, as we do have a choice. We are not forced to use iTMS, just because we have an iPod. We are not even forced to buy an iPod.

It will be amusing to see what happens when people who have bought the Zune want to move their music, and can't. Oh, that's right. M$ have already done that, and got away with it. Where was the uproar then?

crassusad44
Jan 25, 2007, 05:43 AM
Maybe this analogy is more relevant: I wanted to buy an SLR camera. There are many different manufacturers out there, each with pros and cons. I realized before making my purchase that I'm buying more than a camera, I'm buying into a company who is the sole source of lenses, flashes, and other add-ons for that camera. I bought Canon which means I cannot buy Nikon, Pentax, etc. Should I expect Canon to somehow enable me to use Nikon lenses? Absolutely not, I bought into an entire line of camera products, I can blame nobody but myself (and I blame nobody, I am very pleased).

And this analogy is more relevant because...? The difference in physical and electronic technology in Canon and Nikon mounts, makes it difficult to create interoperable lenses, flashes etc. But I can readily buy a Tamron or Tokina lens for my Canon EOS body. And I can buy an adapter ring to use old Zeiss lenses for Nikon F-mount on my Canon. File formats are built on the same technology (0's and 1's). Apple should licence (not open up as many here assume the EU countries are asking fore) its Fairplay DRM, so that players from Creative, Samsung, Sandisk and others can play songs you bought from iTS. That's your music that you have bought, and you should not be bound to one music player. It makes sense for Apple's buisness, but not for me as a consumer. If I buy $500 worth of music to play with my iPod, but then want to buy a Sandisk Sansa instead, why should I have to buy that $500 worth of music again? If it were a different technology (eg. cassette vs. CD, IBM chips vs. Intel chips) I would understand it, but a music file format should be able to play on all computer electronics. Apple IS restricting you to buy iPods and not Creative. It should not be like this, and I honestly cannot understand the hyper-Apple-zealots in this forum that thinks this is a good idea. Yes, I do know music bought from iTS is restricted, yes I DO have a choice to buy or not to buy from Apple. But I think Apple (and MS, and others) should give me the opportunity to use the music where I WANT. It will be interesting to see what Apple does when the music industry moves towards a more open DRM scheme (they ARE talking about it). If Apple continues to not licence Fairplay, this will tell more about Apple than the music industry...

*end of rant*

Dunepilot
Jan 25, 2007, 06:15 AM
I'm not a fan of DRM exactly, but I'm intrigued to know how tying one file to a device is any different from UMDs only playing on Sony PSPs?

whooleytoo
Jan 25, 2007, 06:26 AM
As much as it would pain me, it would serve the EU right if Apple shut down the stores. I've several iPods, and have purchased several albums from iTMS, but at no point was I deceived into thinking I could play the tracks on any other generic MP3 player. If it mattered that much to me, I would have bought the album on CD and ripped it.

Forcing Apple to open FairPlay, is pandering to all those companies that have flagging sales, and to all the people that are too lazy to do enough research on the products they are buying, or rip CDs themselves.

Ultimately, Apple's current position is not a monopoly, as we do have a choice. We are not forced to use iTMS, just because we have an iPod. We are not even forced to buy an iPod.

It will be amusing to see what happens when people who have bought the Zune want to move their music, and can't. Oh, that's right. M$ have already done that, and got away with it. Where was the uproar then?

On Zunerumors.com? ;)

I don't think an open Fairplay will hurt Apple, I think it'll actually benefit them, and the music industry as a whole. iTunes and the iPod are best-of-class products, I think they'll both do fine on their own.

The reason for the uproar from consumers is because Apple and Microsoft are taking something - music - which has always been open (from sheet music to vinyl records, to tape, to CDs) and restricting our usage of it. Is it any wonder people are upset?

I really can't understand people who argue against this. "Less choice is good"?:confused:

Kullenius
Jan 25, 2007, 06:31 AM
I think most of you who defend iTunes have missed the essence of the complaints. You state that if a consumer don't like DRM, they can go somewhere else - true. But you fail to see that most consumers don't have the slightest ideas about DRM. They think that buying music from iTunes will work just like any other music they buy, and in all fairness, why should they thing differently? THIS is the reason why some countries have put pressure on iTunes. The ombudsman in the Scandinavian countries actually just represents angry consumers, and not the governments.

And another point. The analogies for defence of iTunes in this tread has to be the worst I have ever seen. Quite a laught though.

Stella
Jan 25, 2007, 06:41 AM
What are you really saying is:
"Until I have the same point of view to yours, I won't 'get it'."

Get real.

1. If I buy any music (phillips standard ) CD I can play it on any CD player.
2. I buy a (phillips standard ) CD but can only play it on 'Manufacture A' CD player.

If (2) were to occur there would be consumer outrage, just like there was deep unhappiness about DVD region-ing.



well...ok...le sigh right back at ya...

First, you have consumer freedom now. You are not "locked in" to iTunes or any other music service. Go. Shop around. It's your freedom...which you already have. Did I mention you already are free?
<snip>


Apple have a real chance to make Fairplay to be a standard. But the boat will be leaving behind Apple as microsoft take that prize. Why won't Fairplay become a defaco-standard? Because of Apple's refusal to license out. iPod will not last for ever, and even now, there are other great devices on the market now that have a great chance of taking market share.


I would love to be able to play back microsoft DRM media ( video and audio ) on my Mac, but unfortunately I can't. Unlike Apple who had to really port iTunes to Windows - 95% of consumer market there - microsoft have little incentive - to support such a small percentage of users ( <5% ) - not much business sense to invest in such a small market. microsoft are beginning to cripple Word for Mac - i.e., no VBScript in Office 2007.

IscariotJ
Jan 25, 2007, 06:51 AM
On Zunerumors.com? ;)

I don't think an open Fairplay will hurt Apple, I think it'll actually benefit them, and the music industry as a whole. iTunes and the iPod are best-of-class products, I think they'll both do fine on their own.

The reason for the uproar from consumers is because Apple and Microsoft are taking something - music - which has always been open (from sheet music to vinyl records, to tape, to CDs) and restricting our usage of it. Is it any wonder people are upset?

I really can't understand people who argue against this. "Less choice is good"?:confused:

Zunerumors.com :) I like that.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not against FairPlay being open. I just don't think it will happen this way.

What is beginning to grate, though, are the number of people claiming that they are being restricted to buying an iPod. Why? No-one buys an iPod just for iTMS, nor does it require one. The choice is still there.

Want your music portable and unencumbered by DRM? Buy a CD, and rip it yourself.

IscariotJ
Jan 25, 2007, 06:55 AM
I think most of you who defend iTunes have missed the essence of the complaints. You state that if a consumer don't like DRM, they can go somewhere else - true. But you fail to see that most consumers don't have the slightest ideas about DRM. They think that buying music from iTunes will work just like any other music they buy, and in all fairness, why should they thing differently? THIS is the reason why some countries have put pressure on iTunes. The ombudsman in the Scandinavian countries actually just represents angry consumers, and not the governments.

And another point. The analogies for defence of iTunes in this tread has to be the worst I have ever seen. Quite a laught though.

The problem lies then, not with DRM but with un-informed buyers.

eenu
Jan 25, 2007, 06:56 AM
The problem is, what if you used iTunes and an iPod, and spent $1000 on music in the iTunes Store. Two years later, your iPod breaks and you want to buy an mp3-player from LG. Only you can't because it won't play your $1000 worth of music, so you're forced to buy another iPod.

THAT'S the main problem here.


Edit: lets rephrase the question.

What if you're using Windows and a Zune. You buy $1000 worth of music on Microsofts music store. Then a year later you want to switch to Mac and kill your Windows PC crap. But you know you can't, because you'd have to spend $1000 on the same music all again. And that would make your iBook cost $2099! So you're forced to buy a new crappy Dell instead, with the extremely bad OS Windows Vista! Can you honestly say that this is how it should be??

Sorry but you clearly have not understood what is being said!

Firstly when you purchased your iTMS content you know that you will not EVER be able to use it on another player. THEREFORE its your own problem two years down the line when you no longer want an ipod as you knew from day one what the situation was.

And your switching from windows to mac sounds a bit dodgy to me as you can just move the files to your mac and use your zune with your mac whether its natively or through bootcamp (windows) or parallels (windows) so that analogy is blown right out the water as being wrong.

Stella
Jan 25, 2007, 07:11 AM
So... you won't mind, when the iPod killer comes out and you buy it, repurchasing all your digital music again?

( alternatively you can spend a lot of time burning -> ripping your existing iTunes music and enjoying sub standard quality )

Sorry but you clearly have not understood what is being said!

Firstly when you purchased your iTMS content you know that you will not EVER be able to use it on another player. THEREFORE its your own problem two years down the line when you no longer want an ipod as you knew from day one what the situation was.

And your switching from windows to mac sounds a bit dodgy to me as you can just move the files to your mac and use your zune with your mac whether its natively or through bootcamp (windows) or parallels (windows) so that analogy is blown right out the water as being wrong.

aLoC
Jan 25, 2007, 07:22 AM
I don't know why individual Norwegians can't decide for themselves whether they want to buy music that will only play on their iPod.

IscariotJ
Jan 25, 2007, 07:22 AM
So... you won't mind, when the iPod killer comes out and you buy it, repurchasing all your digital music again?

( alternatively you can spend a lot of time burning -> ripping your existing iTunes music and enjoying sub standard quality )

I don't think anyone is denying that having iTMS purchases tied to iPods is a PITA. However, if you were the sort of person to run out and buy any iPod killer, I think it unlikely you'd have much in the way of purchases from the iTMS ( or cash, after buying the Zune, the Dell thing, the Creative... :).

crassusad44
Jan 25, 2007, 07:25 AM
Sorry but you clearly have not understood what is being said!

Firstly when you purchased your iTMS content you know that you will not EVER be able to use it on another player. THEREFORE its your own problem two years down the line when you no longer want an ipod as you knew from day one what the situation was.

And your switching from windows to mac sounds a bit dodgy to me as you can just move the files to your mac and use your zune with your mac whether its natively or through bootcamp (windows) or parallels (windows) so that analogy is blown right out the water as being wrong.

And you clearly don't get it either. What this case is about, is that several European countries believe that digital music customers, like you and me, SHOULD be able to switch between player, without needing to re-buy their music catalouge. They believe it is unfair for customers that the company that produces the most popular mp3-player in the market to tie that player with music bought in one digital store and vice versa. They don't argue that you have a choice to not buy music from iTS, but that iTS (and logically all other digital music stores as well) should be more open to other players, so that customers that want to buy from iTS (because it is convenient, has a large music catalouge, is easy to use or for whatever reason) have more choice in buying music players. Would you buy CDs with DRM that excluded you from playing that CD on other portable CD-players than Sony discman? Would you, really? Now what if Sony discman was the most popular portable musicplayer around, even though it cannot use CDs from other vendors (such as MS DRM CDs), and you got one from your girlfriend for Christmas. Would you still think it is fair that you only can use Sony CDs and not other DRM CDs? Wouldn't you like to use all your CDs on any player (it need not to be without DRM only that the DRM is open to other vendors)? This is what the case is really about.

And BTW: Isn't it a bit unpratical to be forced to install Windows on your Mac just to play the songs that you bought with your old Windows PC? Your arguement is mute and ad hoc.

eenu
Jan 25, 2007, 07:27 AM
So... you won't mind, when the iPod killer comes out and you buy it, repurchasing all your digital music again?

( alternatively you can spend a lot of time burning -> ripping your existing iTunes music and enjoying sub standard quality )

I'm find it very hard to understand why you can't grasp anything anyone says!

I DECIDED TO BUY THE IPOD KNOWING THE LIMITATIONS! Therefore i won't be purchasing the ipod killer....and yes if i am that desperate to leave iTMS and iPod i will go the CD route.

Whilst i (believe it or not) am very much for open source and open formats and strive to do so in all my files i whole heartedly disagree with the EU this time and don't think apple should be forced to open this up! Next they will be forced to sell OSX to PC users because they have locked that to their hardware too! Its absurd!

eenu
Jan 25, 2007, 07:32 AM
And you clearly don't get it either. What this case is about, is that several European countries believe that digital music customers, like you and me, SHOULD be able to switch between player, without needing to re-buy their music catalouge. They believe it is unfair for customers that the company that produces the most popular mp3-player in the market to tie that player with music bought in one digital store and vice versa. They don't argue that you have a choice to not buy music from iTS, but that iTS (and logically all other digital music stores as well) should be more open to other players, so that customers that want to buy from iTS (because it is convenient, has a large music catalouge, is easy to use or for whatever reason) have more choice in buying music players. Would you buy CDs with DRM that excluded you from playing that CD on other portable CD-players than Sony discman? Would you, really? Now what if Sony discman was the most popular portable musicplayer around, even though it cannot use CDs from other vendors (such as MS DRM CDs), and you got one from your girlfriend for Christmas. Would you still think it is fair that you only can use Sony CDs and not other DRM CDs? Wouldn't you like to use all your CDs on any player (it need not to be without DRM only that the DRM is open to other vendors)? This is what the case is really about.

And BTW: Isn't it a bit unpratical to be forced to install Windows on your Mac just to play the songs that you bought with your old Windows PC? Your arguement is mute and ad hoc.

I know what the case is about, don't speak down to me like some kind of idiot!

And no its not impractical as when you bought those songs on the PC you knew they were locked to windows! It was your choice when buying.

What this whole argument is about is people are now crying that they can't abide by a decision they made when purchasing their music whether it from Apple, MS or others. If you can't live by the sword and die by it then you shouldn't own a credit or debit card and shouldn't be buying digital music. Sorry but i can't excuse stupidity.

Kullenius
Jan 25, 2007, 07:37 AM
The problem lies then, not with DRM but with un-informed buyers.
One way of seeing it. Or, you could say that un-informed consumers isn't a problem had there not been DRM. And do you actually have to set yourself into anything before buying? Would you expect the bread to be different from how it's always have been? Music had never been a problem before. Most persons buys it just like they always have and not reading through every small letter sentence to see if anything changed, and then read up on what the heck that meant, is in your words "un-informed". Had Apple clearly stated on purchase something like "Warning! This music is not going to be playable on anything except on your iPod and up to three computer (or how many it now is), don't forget to learn how to register and un-register your computers, or your purchased music may not be playable anylonger" I would be ok with it - but how many would buy? As it is today, Apple - and for that matter anyone else who deals in DRM damaged goods - try to lure the consumers into that it is business as usual. Ombudsmannen have been informed because it has slowly started to be an outcry from ordinary people noticing that they might/have been locked out from there legally purchased music, and that they suddenly can't listen to it how they want to.

Just imagine that the newspaper tomorrow only could be read on your red chair, and only when you hadn't had a shower - oh, did your forget to read that rules changed since last time you ordered newspaper? How un-informed of you... :D

eenu
Jan 25, 2007, 07:40 AM
All your arguments are mute as our Scandinavian friend puts it. Hell i am going to write to the EU parliament today and complain that i bought Office 2003 for my PC then when i switched to Mac i had to buy office for mac! Its a disgrace i can't believe these monopolies can get away with it!

All the thousands of £'s worth of software i had to repurchase because i switched. Whilst you will moan its not the same as its more than just a block put on the same type of media......i disagree! I knew that when i purchased it on PC that it would become obsolete when windows progressed and i also knew it tied me to windows and that if i wanted to switch i would have to buy it all again!

I knew the same when i bought my stuff from iTMS and my iPOD.

eenu
Jan 25, 2007, 07:41 AM
I notice how most of the moaners here are Scandinavian! Maybe steve should just withdraw from there and have done!

Kullenius
Jan 25, 2007, 07:46 AM
[...]
I DECIDED TO BUY THE IPOD KNOWING THE LIMITATIONS!
[...]
You might have known, but the ordinary consumer don't. That's the essence.

eenu
Jan 25, 2007, 07:48 AM
You might have known, but the ordinary consumer don't. That's the essence.

As i said above 'I can't excuse stupidity'. There is plenty of information out there to know what the limitations are! If people don't want to read that to know what they are purchasing then its their own problem.

Do you just buy things without knowing anything about it? if you do more fool you...

Kullenius
Jan 25, 2007, 07:48 AM
All your arguments are mute as our Scandinavian friend puts it. Hell i am going to write to the EU parliament today and complain that i bought Office 2003 for my PC then when i switched to Mac i had to buy office for mac! Its a disgrace i can't believe these monopolies can get away with it!
[...]
It's sad that you can't seem to see the difference between physical hindrance and artificial ones. Your analogies would improve drastically if you did.

crassusad44
Jan 25, 2007, 07:52 AM
I know what the case is about, don't speak down to me like some kind of idiot!

It doesn't always sound like it from your reasoning

And no its not impractical as when you bought those songs on the PC you knew they were locked to windows! It was your choice when buying.

Yes it is unpractical... People do change their minds you know...

What this whole argument is about is people are now crying that they can't abide by a decision they made when purchasing their music whether it from Apple, MS or others. If you can't live by the sword and die by it then you shouldn't own a credit or debit card and shouldn't be buying digital music. Sorry but i can't excuse stupidity.

Again, no. This whole case is about whether or not people should need to make such a decision in the first place. If you read the statements by the Norwegian Ombudsman, or actually forbrukerombud, they have criticized Apple not because of the poor poor people that are so sad that they cannot live by their choices, but because Apple ties you to only one software/player solution, and that Apple should provide a licence/open up its DRM to other vendors.

Poff
Jan 25, 2007, 07:54 AM
Sorry but you clearly have not understood what is being said!

Firstly when you purchased your iTMS content you know that you will not EVER be able to use it on another player. THEREFORE its your own problem two years down the line when you no longer want an ipod as you knew from day one what the situation was.

And your switching from windows to mac sounds a bit dodgy to me as you can just move the files to your mac and use your zune with your mac whether its natively not - zune store DRMed files won't work natively on Mac. or through bootcamp (windows) or parallels (windows) so that analogy is blown right out the water as being wrong.

Hmm.. maybe that's how consumer laws work in the US (to the manufacturers favour), but that's not how they work in Europe. (to the customers favour)

I'll give you credit on using bootcamp or parallels to run windows. BUT you'd probably have to buy a new license for Windows as the one you had was probably OEM. (Only legal to use on the computer it came with. Ever.)

But what if you finally realized your Zune was a piece of crap, and you wanted to buy an iPod or iPhone? You'd still have to keep using your Zune as a music player or buy the $1000 worth of songs again.

Poff
Jan 25, 2007, 07:57 AM
I know what the case is about, don't speak down to me like some kind of idiot!

You get what you give.. :)

Poff
Jan 25, 2007, 07:59 AM
And no its not impractical as when you bought those songs on the PC you knew they were locked to windows! It was your choice when buying.


Can you guarantee that you will stand by everything you've ever said when you're 60 years old? Because that's practically what you want the others in here to do.

IscariotJ
Jan 25, 2007, 07:59 AM
You might have known, but the ordinary consumer don't. That's the essence.

And that's Apple's fault ( and the fault of all the others running stores that are tied to their product )? At some point, consumers have to accept responsibility for their purchases.

Rustus Maximus
Jan 25, 2007, 08:02 AM
You might have known, but the ordinary consumer don't. That's the essence.

Well, this more than explains your apparent backwards economic and social philosophies to a T. The lack of personal accountability. I am pretty sure that's why they have you click the accept button on those EULA's.

It's sad that you can't seem to see the difference between physical hindrance and artificial ones. Your analogies would improve drastically if you did.

No, no. His analogy is legitimate and correct. The Office dilemna would also be a software hinderance primarily which is why they can rewrite office for the Mac and then charge poor eenu for a new copy.

Poor, poor eenu. If only he weren't "locked in" by those nasty corporations.

Stella
Jan 25, 2007, 08:17 AM
I'm still baffled, given the two below scenarios, people would actually prefer the 1st option:

1. iPod - iTunes lock in.
2. No iTunes - iPod lock in. You can play iTMS music with any player you like - even the iPod killer than comes out 'tomorrow', or your perhaps, music orientated cell phone - that you like to use to play your music on occassionally.

* when i mean play - no time consuming, highly inconviencing burn -> rip.

rubberduck007
Jan 25, 2007, 08:28 AM
[QUOTE=w00master]And why is that? Sorry, I don't buy the "just buy an iPod" answer either. It's DATA on my COMPUTER and MY MUSIC PLAYER. I should be able to play it where I want to.

Also, answer this: why is it I can play SOME of my music anywhere, but not ALL of it? How is this a good user experience? Isn't a "great user experience" supposed to be the hallmark of Apple?



Hold on - if i buy a "diesel" car I can only put diesel in it - your analogy says that i should be able to put any fuel in it cos you own the car so you should be able to put "unleaded" in it... don't work like that - you buy music from iTunes - only works on an iPod - simple - want to use it on another device buy the CD and use it as you need!

IscariotJ
Jan 25, 2007, 08:29 AM
I'm still baffled, given the two below scenarios, people would actually prefer the 1st option:

1. iPod - iTunes lock in.
2. No iTunes - iPod lock in. You can play iTMS music with any player you like - even the iPod killer than comes out 'tomorrow', or your perhaps, music orientated cell phone - that you like to use to play your music on occassionally.

* when i mean play - no time consuming, highly inconviencing burn -> rip.

It's not that people are saying that they prefer option 1, just that the arguments used by people wanting option 2 are not substantial enough.

Stella
Jan 25, 2007, 08:34 AM
It's not that people are saying that they prefer option 1, just that the arguments used by people wanting option 2 are not substantial enough.

If you go back and read the posts, you'll actually find that they prefer to be locked in.

No argument will ever be enough - that is, until, Apple do license out Fairplay and then these same people will sing a chorus of Apple praise saying its the right thing, and how Apple are so good that they let iTMS be used with non Apple devices - how consumer friendly.

cortolemos
Jan 25, 2007, 08:37 AM
In France they decided that Apple's DRM was legal and offered no restrictions to the consumer whatsoever because:
1) the digital musica market it's a small part of the music market as a all
2) there are convenient work-arounds to strip the music bought in iTS of the DRM
3) there are other mp3 players that offer support of Microsoft's WMA DRM as an alternative to the consumer

http://www.conseil-concurrence.fr/pdf/avis/04d54.pdf (sorry but this is in French)

Kullenius
Jan 25, 2007, 08:45 AM
Well, this more than explains your apparent backwards economic and social philosophies to a T. The lack of personal accountability. I am pretty sure that's why they have you click the accept button on those EULA's.

Hmm, Sweden has a kick as economy, how is it with the US now again?... Scandinavia don't really have begging and people sleeping on the streets, how was it with US now again? Scandinavian countries are always on top on any charts for standard and best living, clearly that is proof of backward economy and social philosophies to a T.

By the way, do you know that laws differs in different countries? That's why it doesn't matter much what EULA states if it's not according to the law of the country you going to use it in. Norway for example have stated that iTunes EULA isn't legal, so why would a Norwegian be interested in reading that EULA?


No, no. His analogy is legitimate and correct. The Office dilemna would also be a software hinderance primarily which is why they can rewrite office for the Mac and then charge poor eenu for a new copy.

Poor, poor eenu. If only he weren't "locked in" by those nasty corporations.
No, it's not valid. If you play a music file it works on any device as long as you don't hinder it with DRM. A windows file only works on that os, and since the api's changes from time to time, it might not even work on older ones. To make it work with other companies os and there api's requires a lot of extra work - spelled money. Extra work to lessen the value, or extra work to make it even possible.

cortolemos
Jan 25, 2007, 08:59 AM
iTS it's not, and it never was an universal music store. It's a store that enables iPod owners with an easy way (and legal) to buy and download music in order to listen to it in their iPods. Now in the futur, if the evolution of market, and if the music industry companies let that happen, the iTS will off course offer unDRM'ed music or else disappear...

To those of you that think that the Music Companies will strike on Apple and start selling unDRM'ed mp3, I just have one question: What prevents them from doing that just right now? They own the music, they can sell it to whoever they want and in the format they want...

Rauha
Jan 25, 2007, 09:01 AM
This whole thing is obviously a cleaver plot to find the dumbest and most absurd car analogy ever invented.

BuzWeaver
Jan 25, 2007, 09:03 AM
It's not as cut and dry as that. Businesses should have rights too or else I would be lobying for free products from every business out there because that's what I want. Are you saying that if you got enough citizens to lobby for that the government should step in and make it so?

P-Worm

You're dealing with a socialist mentality (yes, I'm generalizing). When the US exerts its will its tyrannical, oppressive and imperialistic, when the EU exerts its will its to level the playing field and make things 'fair'(we don't like being inconvenienced), but that's a whole other subject. You are correct people often times fail to realize that business and private entities have rights too.

The Music industry is simply looking after their business, which music now is a commodity and Apple is looking after its interest. Will Apple yield, this will depend on save face measures that will also open avenues to revenue. I wouldn't have a problem if Apple puts its foot down just to spite the EU, as the EU practically goes out of its way to spite or thwart the US.

Stella
Jan 25, 2007, 09:04 AM
iTS it's not, and it never was an universal music store. It's a store that enables iPod owners with an easy way (and legal) to buy and download music in order to listen to it in their iPods. Now in the futur, if the evolution of market, and if the music industry companies let that happen, the iTS will off course offer unDRM'ed music or else disappear...

To those of you that think that the Music Copmpanies will strike on Apple and start selling unDRM'ed mp3, I just have one question: What prevents them from doing that just right now? They own the music, they can sell it to whoever they want and in the format they want...

They are letting some smaller stores sell DRM free music, already!

Your first point is exactly what those Euro countries do not like:
iPods and iTMS have become so popular, they see it now that Apple are abusing their position by locking in consumers to the iTunes - iPod by using Fairplay.

These countries want iTMS to be interoperable with other digital devices. They want flexibility for the consumer. Your point of how iTMS started out is a good point, and true, but due to its popular position, they want iTMS to go beyond this. From reading the article, from what I read, because of its popularity, iTMS should be able to support non Apple devices ( not necessarily by stripping the DRM!)

Kullenius
Jan 25, 2007, 09:04 AM
This whole thing is obviously a cleaver plot to find the dumbest and most absurd car analogy ever invented.
If I have a red car with blue seats, a red haired person would only be able to sit in the left front seat. Had it been a yellow sport car, only blond persons would be able to sit on the roof. Hence oranges are green! :D

Rauha
Jan 25, 2007, 09:10 AM
If I have a red car with blue seats, a red haired person would only be able to sit in the left front seat. Had it been a yellow sport car, only blond persons would be able to sit on the roof. Hence oranges are green! :D


I should have known that it would be a swede who comes up with the dumbest one. :D

Rustus Maximus
Jan 25, 2007, 09:10 AM
What are you really saying is:
"Until I have the same point of view to yours, I won't 'get it'."

Get real.

1. If I buy any music (phillips standard ) CD I can play it on any CD player.
2. I buy a (phillips standard ) CD but can only play it on 'Manufacture A' CD player.

If (2) were to occur there would be consumer outrage, just like there was deep unhappiness about DVD region-ing.

Which is the same thing you are saying about my point of view, that's the nature of debating. So, no, until you agree with my correct point of view...no...you won't get it ;).

Second, we aren't talking about CD's or DVD's. We're talking about iTunes, iPods and Apple's digital music files. It's Apple's product and they can do what they please. Had the CD manufacturers' wanted to do the same thing they could have.

Apple have a real chance to make Fairplay to be a standard. But the boat will be leaving behind Apple as microsoft take that prize. Why won't Fairplay become a defaco-standard? Because of Apple's refusal to license out. iPod will not last for ever, and even now, there are other great devices on the market now that have a great chance of taking market share.

It already is the standard. They have an 80% Ī market share and what is that about Microsoft? Are you referring to the Zune? Um...good one? The Zune is the joke it is precisely because of Apple's Fairplay. It's called a smart business model. Don't like being locked into iPods with your iTunes purchased music? then don't use it. The iPod still plays other formats (not the wonderfully open WMA though). Plus, if there are all these other wonderful new devices on the market already, these "iPod killers" then, what's your beef?

I would love to be able to play back microsoft DRM media ( video and audio ) on my Mac, but unfortunately I can't. Unlike Apple who had to really port iTunes to Windows - 95% of consumer market there - microsoft have little incentive - to support such a small percentage of users ( <5% ) - not much business sense to invest in such a small market. microsoft are beginning to cripple Word for Mac - i.e., no VBScript in Office 2007.

So, let me see if i understand your point. Microsoft is excused from not supporting iPods with the subpar WMA format because of the lame market share excuse. Yet, you place Apple in the 'Evil Despot' category for doing the same thing with the purchased music from their music service?

And...<cry> about the Word tidbit. As you yourself said, Open Office is a viable alternative. Mac users can just switch to that and Microsoft will end up supporting them anyway due to "consumer pressure" I believe you said.

eenu
Jan 25, 2007, 09:12 AM
Can you guarantee that you will stand by everything you've ever said when you're 60 years old? Because that's practically what you want the others in here to do.

Yes i can.

And to be honest to you two Scandinavians....why do you use a mac? Apple has locked you to their hardware. They are doing exactly the same to you with OSX and your Mac hardware as they are doing to you with protected ACCs and iPods!

If you practice what you preach i'd suggest you take them to court or sell your mac and get generic components and run linux

Kullenius
Jan 25, 2007, 09:18 AM
Yes i can.

And to be honest to you two Scandinavians....why do you use aa mac? Apple has locked you to their hardware. They are doing exactly the same to you with OSX and your Mac hardware as they are doing to you with protected ACCs and iPods!
Eh, no they haven't. I can run OS X, I can run any Windows or Linux on it. Have you missed out the event that Apple switched to Intel? Would I have bought a Mac before? Nope, but now I had the choice. Smart of Apple.

Stella
Jan 25, 2007, 09:19 AM
Which is the same thing you are saying about my point of view, that's the nature of debating.
I'm not saying that you don't get it - you are quite free to have your own opinion. You do 'get it' even if its a view than mine - and ofc, I respect that. Debating is fun! :-)

So, no, until you agree with my correct point of view...no...you won't get it ;).

LOL. ;-)



Second, we aren't talking about CD's or DVD's. We're talking about iTunes, iPods and Apple's digital music files. It's Apple's product and they can do what they please. Had the CD manufacturers' wanted to do the same thing they could have.

I don't see any different between CDs and digital music. Digital Music it just a a different music format to CDs that shouldn't be locked in to any devices.


It already is the standard. They have an 80% ± market share and what is that about Microsoft? Are you referring to the Zune? Um...good one? The Zune is the joke it is precisely because of Apple's Fairplay. It's called a smart business model. Don't like being locked into iPods with your iTunes purchased music? then don't use it. The iPod still plays other formats (not the wonderfully open WMA though). Plus, if there are all these other wonderful new devices on the market already, these "iPod killers" then, what's your beef?

I'm referring to microsoft audio and video formats - with or without DRM. I'd love to play microsoft-format content on my Mac - but unfortunately there isn't the Mac marketshare for microsoft to bother porting the DRM or support the latest version of its digital formats on Mac - so it remains unplayable.

No, your not understanding my point, it was a tad off topic, so I won't further it :-).

quote:
So, let me see if i understand your point. [/QUOTE]

rubberduck007
Jan 25, 2007, 09:20 AM
Yes i can.

And to be honest to you two Scandinavians....why do you use a mac? Apple has locked you to their hardware. They are doing exactly the same to you with OSX and your Mac hardware as they are doing to you with protected ACCs and iPods!

If you practice what you preach i'd suggest you take them to court or sell your mac and get generic components and run linux

hear, hear!!!! end of thread me thinks!

Call42350
Jan 25, 2007, 09:22 AM
Norway for example have stated that iTunes EULA isn't legal, so why would a Norwegian be interested in reading that EULA?

Is that the consumers of Norway or the lawmakers of Norway? Can you post a link to the these official findings? I honestly want to read it. I understand there are PARTS of the EULA that the Scandanavian countries disagree with, but EULAs are still honored (if legal), right?

I doubt that Apple+RIAA would ever allow a single song to be sold in the Land of Lutefisk without covering themselves legally.

Rustus Maximus
Jan 25, 2007, 09:23 AM
So, no, until you agree with my correct point of view...no...you won't get it ;).

LOL. ;-)

I thought you'd like that :D

eenu
Jan 25, 2007, 09:24 AM
Eh, no they haven't. I can run OS X, I can run any Windows or Linux on it. Have you missed out the event that Apple switched to Intel? Would I have bought a Mac before? Nope, but now I had the choice. Smart of Apple.

You still have to pay for your windows license which you were arguing a few posts up was unacceptable for those with music on a windows platform if they wanted to move to mac! Your going round in circles. I hope apple tell the Scandinavians to stick the iTMS where the sun isn't shining and i am appalled the UK has its name on the list of countries complaining!

I have no issue with open music and play it on what you want. I do have an issue with ANY COURT IN ANY COUNTRY telling a company like Apple or MS that they need to allow other music players to play music bought in their stores. As i and countless others have said, you knew the rules and limitations you bought and entered into the purchase under those conditions!

Maybe i should ring up MS and tell them i changed my mind about using Office 2003 cos i wanted to move to a mac and that i think they are legally obliged to provide me with the mac version now! I can't cos they aint and nor should they be!

crassusad44
Jan 25, 2007, 09:35 AM
Yes i can.

And to be honest to you two Scandinavians....why do you use a mac? Apple has locked you to their hardware. They are doing exactly the same to you with OSX and your Mac hardware as they are doing to you with protected ACCs and iPods!

If you practice what you preach i'd suggest you take them to court or sell your mac and get generic components and run linux

Now that is a bold statement... Please check back when your 60, and lets hear what you have to say then...

Your logic is really, really streched to its limits with your last argument. Selling a machine with propertary hardware and OS X is not the same as music files. If I wanted to, I could switch to a Windows PC and take with me all my files, pictures, movies and tunes. I would have no problem using these files on my Windows PC. I stay on OS X, however, because I find myself being more productive on a Mac, and I like the OS a lot more than Windows. Now (sorry for introducing a new analogy) you don't expect to be able to use all your parts for your Nissan when you buy a BMW. But you do expect your CDs that played nice on your Nissan to also work on the CD-player that comes with your BMW. Again, your argument is at best ad hoc...

eenu
Jan 25, 2007, 09:42 AM
Now that is a bold statement... Please check back when your 60, and lets hear what you have to say then...

Your logic is really, really streched to its limits with your last argument. Selling a machine with propertary hardware and OS X is not the same as music files. If I wanted to, I could switch to a Windows PC and take with me all my files, pictures, movies and tunes. I would have no problem using these files on my Windows PC.

INCORRECT! I couldn't take my software! Some of your files may not work as they were made in mac specific software, pictures are free you took them yourself (therefore no expense involved and you own the copyright ) and i'm interested to know how you have movies on your machine (if you refer to commercial ones) without them at this point in time being locked to a specific platform unless of course they are DVD rips which is illegal. Mind you it appears that in Scandinavia you don't care about the legalities of things and are that liberal to think that DVD ripping would be fine and within your rights. Hell i can't wait to see you lot moan that the Blu-ray or HD-DVD disks you bought can't play on the rivals players! And god forbid you buy the losing format!

If anyones argument is flawed its yours! I have to use both platforms so i know the ins and outs of a conversion and there would certainly be a large amount of cost and inconvenience caused if i wanted to move back to a PC. Not that i care because i knew that when i moved to Mac....I MADE AN INFORMED DECISION! and if i change my mind....its my own tough ****

crassusad44
Jan 25, 2007, 09:52 AM
You still have to pay for your windows license which you were arguing a few posts up was unacceptable for those with music on a windows platform if they wanted to move to mac! Your going round in circles. I hope apple tell the Scandinavians to stick the iTMS where the sun isn't shining and i am appalled the UK has its name on the list of countries complaining!

You are paying for a Windows licence when you buy a Dell as well. The price of the licence is included in the price you pay Dell. If you want to run Windows on a Mac, you can, but the price of Windows is not (and why should it) included in the price of the machine.

I have no issue with open music and play it on what you want. I do have an issue with ANY COURT IN ANY COUNTRY telling a company like Apple or MS that they need to allow other music players to play music bought in their stores. As i and countless others have said, you knew the rules and limitations you bought and entered into the purchase under those conditions!

Courts and governments have been telling companies what to do and not to do for ages. And again, Forbrukerombudet in Norway has started this whole thing because they believe that it should be possible to use media files bought digitaly on more than one device, just as CDs and DVDs can be used on more than one type of CD/DVD-player. They did not start this case to stand up for people who do not read EULAs and then gets shocked that their tunes will not play on an iRiver.

Maybe i should ring up MS and tell them i changed my mind about using Office 2003 cos i wanted to move to a mac and that i think they are legally obliged to provide me with the mac version now! I can't cos they aint and nor should they be!

Software is NOT, repeat after me, NOT, the same as media files with DRM. A Word created by Eminem with DRM would. Apple does not hold the copyright to the media files, and should not limit you to where you can and cannot use them.

dejo
Jan 25, 2007, 09:55 AM
Apple does not hold the copyright to the media files...
Ah, but neither do you...