France DRM Law Gutted In Committee

Discussion in 'MacRumors News Discussion (archive)' started by MacRumors, May 1, 2006.

  1. macrumors bot


    Apr 12, 2001

    Boing Boing reports that the French DRM legislation that would have forced Apple and other online music stores to have their songs be interoperable with all portable media players in France has been gutted in committee.

    The original law was met by fierce criticism from Apple, who called the law "state-sponsored piracy." Many analysts believed that Apple would just as soon pull-out of the French market than to change their business model or allow free distribution of unprotected songs.

    The latest version of the law removes the requirement for DRM publishers (like Apple) to give information needed for interoperability. In addition, "information needed for interoperability" used to be defined as being able to obtain a copy of the copyrighted material in an open standard; this is now defined as being able to obtain a protected copy of a copyrighted work.
  2. macrumors P6


    Jun 4, 2003
    Great news, I'm glad to see that they didn't rule against Apple in this case. It would have been a big pain in the ass for Apple to shut down the iTMS in France, yet keep it open in other European nations, so it's better this way. Plus, I would argue that they didn't really have solid grounds for this complaint anyway.

    Well, now that this legal issue is resolved, Apple can focus more on the Apple Corps lawsuit... :eek: :cool:
  3. Administrator

    Doctor Q

    Staff Member

    Sep 19, 2002
    Hill Valley, California
    Either common sense prevailed or economic interests prevailed.
  4. macrumors regular

    JZ Wire

    Dec 18, 2003
    Miami, FL

    I knew that wasnt going to last. Lets see what happens next... :D
  5. macrumors 6502a


    Sep 13, 2004
    Johannesburg, South Africa
    I was very 2 sided on this piece of legislation, sure it would have been bad for apple, but do we as consumers really want to be restricted into one DRM format? If done right this could have been the end of any for of monopoly of any DRM, but seems that that is now not the case... just hope apple doesnt pull a M$ on itself!!
  6. macrumors member

    May 1, 2006
    2 down, 1 to go...

    Hey baseball fans!

    It's the bottom of the ninth inning, Apple's in the outfield, and there are two outs with no one on base. Steve is pitching and is about to do another "Job" on the batter, Paul Somebody from London. Previously at bat for the Music Mad Hatters were The Music Companies and The French Legislature, who collectively earned the two outs for their team. "The Steve" as he is called by his adoring fans and teammates is best known for throwing his "Reality Distortion Field" fastball. The batter can't see it coming and by the time they swing, the ball is already WAY past them and it's too late for them to catch up. Even if the batter were to get a lucky hit that didn't go foul, Apple's ability to innovate from way out on the fringes of the field always gets the ball to first base before their runner can clear the bureaucratic and unCreative calls by their coaches to run straight to first base. A reminder for those of you just tuning in, the score is Apple - 1 Billion home runs and The Music Mad Hatters - nothing, but the visting team does get to go home with a hefty portion of the gate receipts as a consolation prize.

    Welcome to the Diamond Apple Built
  7. macrumors G5


    May 2, 2002
    I hate DRM, but I can see that without it there could never have been an iTunes Music Store.

    I blame the pirates first, the RIAA second, and I don't blame Apple for having DRM. I do give Apple credit for making that DRM not be a pain to deal with, if we have to have it. (Although we don't... we can still buy CDs!)
  8. macrumors 68020


    Mar 22, 2005
  9. macrumors member

    Oct 17, 2005
    It seemed a somewhat idiotic idea from square one, I thought.. Silly Pierre... :D
  10. macrumors newbie

    Feb 24, 2004
    New York City
  11. macrumors regular

    Oct 9, 2003
    And again...

    *sigh* Yet another French surrender...
  12. (L)
    macrumors 6502

    Nov 12, 2005
    Not much of a French surrender. This would amount to Apple being able to do business well, not maintain a total monopoly, and there never was one in the first place. Nothing antitrust about forcing a corporation to support other corporations, as if that kind of thing is good. Glad to see they've also sanctioned private design that may be kept private, as opposed to open. The whole thing was totally socialist anyway.
  13. (L)
    macrumors 6502

    Nov 12, 2005
    Digital music may be copied without significant loss in audio quality. That allows copying on many levels - from burning your favorite playlists to a disc and maybe even sharing it a bit with friends all the way to copying, reselling, distributing so that music sales are hurt. Plus, with Internet transfer rates going up, folks are afraid of P2P and all that shuffling illegal music around, as it does movies, for example. Many CD's don't have that kind of barrier, but then, getting a CD into your computer and then redistributing it, though possible, takes more work.

    More importantly, though, Apple has a right to sell music that will only play on iTunes and on iPods, because if consumers did not want that, they would eventually go elsewhere. Other companies are also free to try to figure out a device that will play the music from iTMS - but they don't need to be given the instructions to do so by Apple. Ultimately, if you wanted cheap, easy, drm-free music, you'll have to hope for a competitor that will stay around. It's a restriction on consumer use, but my point is that it's absurd to purchase from Apple and then demand that the tracks play on a Sony. Talk to Sony about that, not Apple. People just don't understand that they are not buying away the ownership of art, but rather ownership of the data that would allow you to listen to the music, provided you can get the data to play on your end.
  14. macrumors regular

    Jan 10, 2006
    I expect Apple Executives lobbied goverment decision makers in no uncertain terms to bring this about;)
  15. macrumors newbie

    Sep 30, 2005

    ...well, this could go 2 ways: either you buy (and thus own) the data that enables you to play the song, in which case the data is yours to do with as you please, or you buy a copy of the "content", i.e. the entity that this data represents, in which case there can be legal regulations involved on the copyright of this data. personally, i think that it is a combination of both, since you are not allowed to freely copy the data around, but if you were to lose that data, you would be entitled to a new copy of that data at no/minimal extra costs, because you paid for the content already.

    a bit off-topic, but i have to say this:

    please people, i very often read all about this "piracy hurts the music industry so bad" stuff; i can tell you that this has a minimal effect on the amount of money that is involved in the music industry.
    now, don't get me wrong, i too think that piracy is bad, but the amount of money that is being charged to customers for cd's/dvd's etc. is outrageous. i can tell you from years of personal experience (i'm a professional studio sound engineer - i record cd's for a living), that you could go a long way with, say, 50 grand for a complete, highly professional cd recording. That's nothing! relatively speaking ;-)
    So why do all these new cd releases cost so much? because high-profile artists and label managers think that they should at least make 10 million dollars profit on each album release. i realize that i am biting the hand that feeds me, but this situation is enormously out of proportions. we pay a premium for a J-Lo album, so that she can have an extra hairdresser in her 40+ people travelling entourage. i still comb my own hair every day, and wouldn't have it any other way, lol :rolleyes:

    what i want to illustrate with the above is, that although there is a lot of music being downloaded illegally, the actual salaries of managers and artists only went up instead of down. now, who can tell me how this is possible??
  16. macrumors 601


    Jan 6, 2004
    Western US
    It looks like Teh Steve's band of ninja assassins finally delivered their message. Eeeeeeggzelent!
  17. macrumors member

    Oct 31, 2003
    ... this is bad news for you and me (the consumer), in case anyone misunderstood...
  18. macrumors 6502

    Feb 20, 2004
    You’re absolutely right. Anyone who is happy over this new doesn't really understand the issues in play.
  19. (L)
    macrumors 6502

    Nov 12, 2005
    On the first part, about doing with it what you please... Last I read there was a bit of a grey area, since for personal use you certainly can modify the data there...but sometimes doing so implies copying part of or a modified version of the DRM stuff, which itself may be copyrighted (?). I think that's what I read anyway. Bottom line is that you have tons of freedom to do with it what you will, as an individual. However, that's different from demanding that companies modify the data in your stead so that it'll play on your Zen or whatever - that's not Apple's responsibility.

    As for being entitled to a new copy of the data, I think that's included in the price, which is not just a download fee. This is major because if you lose a CD, even with a proof of purchase, you need to pay to buy a new one. If you lose iTMS music but can prove you bought it, you don't have the same restrictions, right? I suppose they could be stupid and charge a fee for dowwnloading it again.

    Well, even if their profit goes up, if it SHOULD have gone up higher, they deserve it. But don't get me started - I am thoroughly against so-called "artists" that make their living off of popular trends rather than the artistic value of their music, or at least I'm against such people as a personal issue. Still, they have a right to their money, since they don't sell music; they sell noise, and noise is in demand. Anyways, it's not about whether or not the piracy will cause the industry to collapse. It's about the moral right to defend against such immorality. In that sense, I'm all for DRM. But, I can understand that consumers may be against it in many ways, especially since several labels (cough...Sony...hack cough) often go too far. Apple, however, is just fine, from my perspective. It gets silly when people talk of DRM as robbing consumers of some right to do whatever they want with the data, when they were the ones to have purchased the DRM protected data to begin with. I personally buy CD's for the quality, so this is not even a concern for me, but it worries me to see people that have no clue act like this is a step against the consumer.

    Lol, how so?
  20. macrumors newbie

    May 2, 2006
    Of course, because there can only be one side to any issue, and if they were properly enlightened, of course they'd have to agree with you.

    What are you, 15? You sure sound like it.

    DRM is a thorny issue, there is merit to many different viewpoints.
  21. macrumors 6502

    Feb 20, 2004
    Less choice for you and I as consumers for one thing.

    Well I guess when the name calling starts that my queue to stop reading this thread. I love my Mac and my iPod but Apple's stance on this issue is bad for both of us as consumers. Have a nice day my friend.
  22. macrumors 68040


    Feb 17, 2003
    with Hamburglar.
  23. macrumors newbie


    Apr 28, 2006
    Washington, DC
    While this is good for Apple in the short run, I gotta think that this evasion of competition is not going to work in the long term...
  24. macrumors 68020


    Sep 27, 2005
    Location: Location:
  25. macrumors 6502a


    Jul 23, 2002
    sorry i had to reply to all this because as someone who is ignorant about drm and stuff. i dont under stand how this prevents us from having choice. other then not being able to put itunes music on other players. you can just go through a few step and convert your music. even if you bought a cd you still have to convert them. plus there is choices out there. many choices. if you dont like the apple standard use someone elses.. i dont get it. apple did not buy out every other company. they just make a very good easy to use product. you dont want to be locked in it then dont use it. you cant say that we dont have choices when there is music match, msn ,rapsody and napster. plus the countless other web based music servers that sell music. maybe i am mising something but i dont know why this is bad.

    i am a ignorant consumer too.. hehe

Share This Page