French Plan to Open iTunes?

[dylanemcgregor]

I'm not weighing into heavily into this discussion with what should or should not be a law. As a consumer I long ago decided that I would not buy any music that is tied to a device that is only made by a single manufacturer, which is a choice I made, which doesn't necessarily mean this should be a law that forces this.

However, I haven't seen anyone mention the concept of product "tying" which I think is relevant and gives some precedent for regulation. Apple can be accused of trying to use their current dominace in MP3 players along with the ITMS to lock people into buying Apple branded music players in the future. If I've spent $1000 on music in the ITMS that can only be played on an Apple player, I will have a strong incentive to continue to purchase Apple players in the future.

Tying by itself is not illegal, but it is potentially illegal if the company has "market power" in the given product, which a reasonable argument can be made that Apple has.

FWIW

-Dylan

 

[PeteyKohut]

Don't be so harsh. They make good looking women, too, last I looked.😛

EDIT: Not that they "manufacture" women or anything like that...I mean, I'm not trying to objectify wonderful human beings...oh, never mind.

That is...when they shave their pits.

 

[PeteyKohut]

You know....I hate this whole "let's get monopolies" thing. It says to companies, you are too good. And your being such as sharp business, and marketing your item properly, and selling it well, we are going to punish you. If you hate that MS Windoze comes prebundled with Media Player, then don't use it! Use OS X or Linux. That's what I do. I knew about the protected iTunes files before I bought my iPod. I could have used another player and other software, but I said, NO! I like Apple's solution. If you don't like it, there are other solutions out there. USE THOSE!

 

[jacobj]

I have been giving this some thought, especially in regard to Apple's response to the proposed law. They fear that by ensuring that DRM protected media can be converted to an open format will result in greater piracy.

I do not believe this to be true. In reality most of us here could happily download music from peer-to-peer networks if we wanted to. Our decision to buy the music from an online service stems from our sense of fair play and our desire to actually own the copy.

Apple's statement is therefore a blatant fallacy based on their fear that unlocking the iPods DRM would open up the market to alternative media players and online stores.

There is a discussion here regarding monopolies which I find interesting. Monopolies are prevented for numerous reasons and it is the spirit of the law that is important.

An anti-monopoly ruling is not a punishment for a company doing too well, it is a ruling preventing that company from taking actions that lock out competitors. Apple's DRM does exactly that. Apple were the first to successfully bring a online music store to the market which led to greater iPod sales which increased the market share of the online store which increased the demand for the iPod. This carries on today and is now at the point that no other competitor can get into either the MP3 player or online music store service. The reason that they cannot do so is because starting a service at the size the iTunes music store was when it first emerged is no longer good enough to make a difference.

Therefore Apple can continue to dominate without threat from any competitor and therefore they are a monopoly. Bringing in an anti-DRM law means that Apple can only continue to dominate the market by being exactly what they were when they started, ingenious and affordable. The law is not preventing Apple from being dominant, nor is it preventing them from being ingenious and affordable, it is however stopping them from closing down the competition and that can only be good.

 

[Digitalclips]

I support Apple on this

To me this isn't about music or digital protection it is about Apple Computer. I want them to remain strong. Apple should simply remove iTunes France but allow the French people to buy via another Euro based web site. Apple must not give an inch in protecting their turf or we will see the same thing happen as happened to the Apple Macintosh GUI when that was allowed into the hands of Microsoft back when Apple ruled the personal computer market. It would take no time at all for Apple's lead to vanish in a sea of boring, cheap products running a Microsoft interface. I for one like seeing Apple the dominant player. They do not let their monopoly position hold back innovation as is the case now with the PC world and Microsoft.

 

[Sunrunner]

Yes, having a monopoly is great. For Apple. (or Microsoft or..)

It's bad for competition, which is bad news for the consumer. That's why I'm very much in favour of this French bill, and hope this is just the start.

Your supporting idealistic liberalism and free-everything without regard for viable buisness models and *sane* IP protections. The reality is simple, if you dont want in on Apples strategy DONT BUY FROM THEM. It is an OPT IN, not something forced on the masses. That sort of liberalism and socalist crap run-amok is exactly the reason France is going to implode AGAIN in the near future. Lazy people want everything for free.

 

[Sunrunner]

The law will fail and heres why, Apple doesn't want to open iTunes and Microsoft doesn't want to give more fire to the iPod, everyone will pull out of France rather then open up the rights and the only people that will lose are the French.

You've got it exactly right

 

[ftaok]

Eureka!

I've just realized something.

The French legislators are going about it in the wrong way. Instead of forcing Apple (and others) to open up their DRM, why not force the record companies to drop the requirement for DRM altogether. That way, no one is locked into anything.

Piracy won't be a concern since part of the bill is to heavily prosecute pirates.

Seriously, this whole thing is out of control.