Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Norway To Pressure Apple To Change iTunes EULA?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well, I am not sure what "adhesion contract" exactly means, but thanks for your response. A lot of countries allow international binding arbitration to attract foreign investors who do not trust or want to deal with different judical systems. I wonder if Norway is one of those. If so, it could be hard for them to complain about iTunes contract that utilizes such an option unless "arbitration" is only restricted to B2B conflicts by law.BRLawyer said:
Is Norway a small enough market that Apple would consider saying no thanks to the Norwegian market entirely if Apple can't negotiate terms it finds acceptable, or if Apple refuses to make any accommodations at all?
Seems to me that the Norweigens (sp) are trying to force Apple to change the terms under which it offers its product for sale. However, they are doing it in the wrong way. Instead of trying to use law and threats of lawsuits to get Apple to change, they should use something more powerful. Their wallets. Same goes for any other country where consumers disagree with the way products are being offered. Don't buy the damn thing and when the seller sees no sales he/she will investigate and adapt in order to make a sale.
Simple economics folks.
The prospective buyer using the law to force a company to sell a product under the specific conditions the buyer demands is totally wrong. Telling Apple,"Hey, I am not going to buy your product and here is why" is the way it should be done. If Apple sees the benifit of the sale by changing its terms then so be it. But Apple will just as soon close the Norwegen iTMS as change the terms just so a few more Norwegiens might consider buying a song or two.
Simple economics folks.
The prospective buyer using the law to force a company to sell a product under the specific conditions the buyer demands is totally wrong. Telling Apple,"Hey, I am not going to buy your product and here is why" is the way it should be done. If Apple sees the benifit of the sale by changing its terms then so be it. But Apple will just as soon close the Norwegen iTMS as change the terms just so a few more Norwegiens might consider buying a song or two.
Replacement of lost music
First, Apple clearly states it is up to the person downloading the music to make back ups of it. I do, and all my data on my computer is backed up and archived on a regular basis.
Second, as a Macintosh consultant I've dealt with 2 clients who accidentally erased their iTunes music folder thus deleting all music they've uploaded from CD's and downloaded from iTMS. I recommended that they contact Apple and explain the situation in a civil way. Apple customer service allowed both customers to redownload all purchased music with the admonition that they were responsible for backing up their music. The customers were able to download their music within 24 hours of Apples response.
Anyone who has ever lost data on a computer once, becomes an instant convert to a backup regime.
Finally, no retail store I know of is going to replace a lost CD or DVD you've purchased. Some will allow you to exchange defective discs within a given time frame.
First, Apple clearly states it is up to the person downloading the music to make back ups of it. I do, and all my data on my computer is backed up and archived on a regular basis.
Second, as a Macintosh consultant I've dealt with 2 clients who accidentally erased their iTunes music folder thus deleting all music they've uploaded from CD's and downloaded from iTMS. I recommended that they contact Apple and explain the situation in a civil way. Apple customer service allowed both customers to redownload all purchased music with the admonition that they were responsible for backing up their music. The customers were able to download their music within 24 hours of Apples response.
Anyone who has ever lost data on a computer once, becomes an instant convert to a backup regime.
Finally, no retail store I know of is going to replace a lost CD or DVD you've purchased. Some will allow you to exchange defective discs within a given time frame.
I'm not sure. I don't feel comfortable accepting a user agreement that isn't regulated by Norwegian law. We have a very good law regarding consumer protection. I also don't like that Apple can change the rights I have to the music I've licensed after I paid for it.iGary said:
I know that some of the most conscious buyers avoid the iTMS because of this, but then again I also think they avoid it because of the DRM.
I don't care enough to let it stop me using the iTMS, but I would be happy if Apple obliged by the ombudsman's recommendations.
I'd say, yes, it's small enough. The average Norwegian has enough money to spend, but the population is only 4.6 million people after all.iGary said:
Edit: I don't like polls that puts words in my mouth. My poll vote with that wording is "none of the above".
Hear hear!
And we Danes took the idea as well and used silver, added some more rounded corners, and sold it to millions of fat American tourists as "exclusive Danish design"!
shigzeo said:
And we Danes took the idea as well and used silver, added some more rounded corners, and sold it to millions of fat American tourists as "exclusive Danish design"!
I would be happy if Apple allowed you to re-download already purchased songs for a small fee (say $0.15), to cover bandwidth.
The Real Problem?
Most of their complaints are against DRM in general (which is all the fault of the music industry, and this one won't be destroyed anytime soon).
As for the "liability clause", this is standard practice for all software licence agreements as not EVERY possible avenue of attack can be predicted. Microsoft should definitely be the first to be pulled up on this, as their Windows OS helps cause the most damage of any piece of software available.
As for governing by "English law", I assume that the music content is transferred from England, if this is the case then "the service" is being provided from England. iTunes, is not the service, the music itself is.
All in all, this stinks. It will die a quick death, mainly because the Recording industry we use it's power to make it go away.
Most of their complaints are against DRM in general (which is all the fault of the music industry, and this one won't be destroyed anytime soon).
As for the "liability clause", this is standard practice for all software licence agreements as not EVERY possible avenue of attack can be predicted. Microsoft should definitely be the first to be pulled up on this, as their Windows OS helps cause the most damage of any piece of software available.
As for governing by "English law", I assume that the music content is transferred from England, if this is the case then "the service" is being provided from England. iTunes, is not the service, the music itself is.
All in all, this stinks. It will die a quick death, mainly because the Recording industry we use it's power to make it go away.
VCH said:I always laugh at the I.T.M.S. I mean it's cool that it exsists, and great for people who are scared. But really, Limewire people! Music is Free! I use I.T.M.S. to browse for tracks that I'll later download with Limewire.
Music is NOT free, and there is no right to free music either. I myself write music, while I don't do it for profit (its a hobby to me) the time I invest in creating the music could quite easily have a monetary value attached to it.
If it was my sole source of income I'd be very annoyed at people ripping me off.
As the old saying goes, "there's no such thing as a free lunch", or free anything for that matter.
Open-source software okay is FREE, technically, but often there are some other obligations (non-monetary) which must be adhered to.
Just because you don't have to pay for something, doesn't necessarily make it free. The real definition of free here would be "no strings attached".
I know this is off-topic, but another change I wish Apple would make to the iTunes system is the ability to change the email address your account is attached to.
My iTunes account is attached to a .Mac email address, and if I ever cancel that email account, I'd like to be able to change my iTunes account.
Am I missing something? Do I already have that ability and not know it?
My iTunes account is attached to a .Mac email address, and if I ever cancel that email account, I'd like to be able to change my iTunes account.
Am I missing something? Do I already have that ability and not know it?
What a great day to be Norwegian...
But, seriously, I think this is a better case than the French "whining about Fairplay":
On a general note, I'm actually happy that consumer authorities are looking in to EULAs, because they have developed into abominations of legal language, and needs to be examined, and - if possible - made simpler and in more in accordance with consumer laws (for those areas that have such).
Oh, and I'm with Gekko on the poll: None of the above even remotely fits...
But, seriously, I think this is a better case than the French "whining about Fairplay":
I agree 100% with the concern for these points, but I think - and remember I'm not a lawyer - that Norwegian law stands over any EULAs. So the only point that's really an issue is the last one. Can Apple suddenly "deauthorize" all computers in a market, because they change their policy? That's a bit scary.Macrumors said:
On a general note, I'm actually happy that consumer authorities are looking in to EULAs, because they have developed into abominations of legal language, and needs to be examined, and - if possible - made simpler and in more in accordance with consumer laws (for those areas that have such
).Norway is a small market. And there was an article on a Norwegian news site a couple of days ago claiming that sales in the Norwegian iTMS was very slow. But... Norway is also a very rich marked, which even if it's small can be very profitable, and it sends the wrong signal to (potential) Mac buyers to close iTMS, even if they don't sell much. And it would also be very bad publicity-wise for the rest of the world if they had to shut down one of the iTMS stores. (And this could also trigger similar situations in several other European countries.)Doctor Q said:
Oh, and I'm with Gekko on the poll: None of the above even remotely fits...
VCH said:I always laugh at the I.T.M.S. I mean it's cool that it exsists, and great for people who are scared. But really, Limewire people! Music is Free! I use I.T.M.S. to browse for tracks that I'll later download with Limewire.
no, what you're doing is breaking the law. plain and simple illegal activity.
As has been stated Norway is a small market in terms of the numbers of people but Norway has several things that make it an attractive marketplace for hi-tech consumer goods (bar its high taxes):
1) Norway has the best quality of life in the world as measured by the UN's Human Development Index (HDI), and is one of the most developed. The market exists there in terms of consumers that are educated and interested in products and services such as iTMS and Apple/Computer products in general.
2) It is one of the richest countries in the world in terms of GDP per Capita (more so than the USA [just], ranking 5th over USA's 6th, comparing to the UK at 25), effectively meaning that its population are generally affluent (although this is complicated a little by higher taxation than most other countries, but, still, the basic point is that Norway is affluent).
So Apple wouldn't want to pull out of Norway because it would cost money to do so and it would obviously loose the money it gains from sales.
The interesting question to ask is how much would it cost Apple to enact the changes that are being asked for in this proposal?
I also read somewhere than simply clicking a box labelled 'accept' in a EULA agreement doesn't actually demonstrate legal understanding and can therefore be later challenged on these lines. Is this true?
Also it needs to be pointed out that Norway is not in the EU and therefore certain legislation doesn't apply, for example the single market idea, and if this is taken down a legal route and eventually passes then the consequence for EU iTMS might not be as great as if Norway was an EU country (if you see what I mean)
1) Norway has the best quality of life in the world as measured by the UN's Human Development Index (HDI), and is one of the most developed. The market exists there in terms of consumers that are educated and interested in products and services such as iTMS and Apple/Computer products in general.
2) It is one of the richest countries in the world in terms of GDP per Capita (more so than the USA [just], ranking 5th over USA's 6th, comparing to the UK at 25), effectively meaning that its population are generally affluent (although this is complicated a little by higher taxation than most other countries, but, still, the basic point is that Norway is affluent).
So Apple wouldn't want to pull out of Norway because it would cost money to do so and it would obviously loose the money it gains from sales.
The interesting question to ask is how much would it cost Apple to enact the changes that are being asked for in this proposal?
I also read somewhere than simply clicking a box labelled 'accept' in a EULA agreement doesn't actually demonstrate legal understanding and can therefore be later challenged on these lines. Is this true?
Also it needs to be pointed out that Norway is not in the EU and therefore certain legislation doesn't apply, for example the single market idea, and if this is taken down a legal route and eventually passes then the consequence for EU iTMS might not be as great as if Norway was an EU country (if you see what I mean)
Other Claims by the Ombudsman
There are a few other claims by the Consumer Ombudsman that have not been discussed here.
A company that market products on the Internet is required to have a clause, giving the consumer the right to void the purchase within a limited period of time. The rationale for this is that the customer does not have the same ability to inspect a product as if it were offered in a store. Although current law is designed for goods, purcase of online content is not explicitly excluded.
The Ombudsman claims that territorial limitations may be in violation with EU open markets regulations. These limitations blocks effective competition on the EU market. (By the EEA treaty Norway is required to follow EU-regulations in that area.) Apple is required to respond to why only people with a norwegian address and a credit card from a norwegian bank may purchase from the norwegian store.
The Ombudsman is not convinced that Apple's arguments for DRM is valid, since it is easy to circumvent the copyright protection. The Ombudsman is concerned that DRM instead is used to block other digital music players.
Apple is required to respond to these concerns in two weeks from now.
The Norwegian Consumer Ombudsman has been joined by its counterparts in Sweden and Denmark as well.
There are a few other claims by the Consumer Ombudsman that have not been discussed here.
A company that market products on the Internet is required to have a clause, giving the consumer the right to void the purchase within a limited period of time. The rationale for this is that the customer does not have the same ability to inspect a product as if it were offered in a store. Although current law is designed for goods, purcase of online content is not explicitly excluded.
The Ombudsman claims that territorial limitations may be in violation with EU open markets regulations. These limitations blocks effective competition on the EU market. (By the EEA treaty Norway is required to follow EU-regulations in that area.) Apple is required to respond to why only people with a norwegian address and a credit card from a norwegian bank may purchase from the norwegian store.
The Ombudsman is not convinced that Apple's arguments for DRM is valid, since it is easy to circumvent the copyright protection. The Ombudsman is concerned that DRM instead is used to block other digital music players.
Apple is required to respond to these concerns in two weeks from now.
The Norwegian Consumer Ombudsman has been joined by its counterparts in Sweden and Denmark as well.
VCH said:I always laugh at the I.T.M.S. I mean it's cool that it exsists, and great for people who are scared. But really, Limewire people! Music is Free! I use I.T.M.S. to browse for tracks that I'll later download with Limewire.
Hey! What a great idea! Free stuff!
You know, I hear there are these places with all this free stuff just sitting on shelves, rows upon rows of them. I think you should go and take some of this stuff because, you know, it's FREE!
You can't use that as a comparison. When you buy a CD you not only get he music, but you get a media that contains the music. When you buy of the internet you only get the music. Two totally different things.whatever said:
When Apple are restricting the use of the music, they should give some back IMO.
bretm said:I have a mortgage. It does change without my consent. Of course, I consented to it changing without my consent, so I guess it doesn't.
Your cell phone contract can change without your consent. But it is then breach of contract and you can then remove yourself from the contract. Of course, that's all in the contract, so it's not a breach of contract...
No your mortgage does NOT change without your consent. Your PMI may go up or the city/county taxes may go up or down but the terms you agreed to DO NOT change (if you have a fixed rate). If you have a ARM then you agreed to the changes in the interests rates before signing the contract. Your cell phone analogy is where the Norwegians are heading. They are saying that Apple is breaching the contract when they unilaterally change terms of the contract by changing the number of times you can burn to disc etc.
If I remember correctly iTunes adds DRM after the file download. To avoid DRM change don´t upgrade to future version of iTunes that may limit your original rights. Perhaps markets like the Norwegian will have their own versions of iTunes that never change the DRM, nor for better or worse.
SeaFox said:
The number of burns per playlist is hardly restrictive. If, for some reason, you had a need to burn more than 7 copies of whatever music you've purchased, you could just make a copy or copies of the already burnt disc(s).