nagromme said:
Not true--you agree to certain terms with a download, courtesy of the RIAA. And even if a download WAS legally identical to ripping a CD... those terms are between you and the store, not you and the maker of your player.
If those copyright terms are between you and the store, then why target my iPod and make it victim ? iPod should accept all formats of anti-copyrights by that logic. These so-called music should not have the ability to depict one player over another for playback. Afterall, some DVD's have DRM built in, but I don't see any brand of DVD players being able to play certain titles while others can't. In the absence of true standards, you can manipulate the DRM and argue anyotherwise that you are using it to protect this and that, when the ends don't justify the means.
nagromme said:
It's the RIAA (and the pirates) behind the need for DRM, not Apple. Apple should control their platform since they've never pretended otherwise--for lots of reasons people have stated here. But even if they don't beat Harmony, they'll STILL be on top by a mile. They have no need for DRM to lock in market share--they have the best product, and for once, they have the mindshare to go with that. Apple's market is secure. DRM is not some trick Apple's exploiting to promote an inferior player or jukebox. (Now, Real and Sony, on the other hand...)
I agree with you. However, Apple should be with the CONSUMERS not the RIAA. Apple should have made iPod playback any title, and made iTMS without copyright constraints. That would be in good image and integrity, something Apple can't sell without. It is in this north american world of ours that we seccumb to whatever choices offered to us, since that's how capitalistic systems work, but we can easily do better, there is no real limits on why we can not have a DRM free music store, or a player that does what it should, play music and nothing more or have 118 miles per gallon for our cars, Volkswagen Lupo 3L TDi had that in the 1980's. The only stumbling blocks are artificial, for example "why fix it when we already make profit ?" or "no other corporations are doing it, we're just along for the ride." in this anti-competitive society, as much as we claim it is competitive, is only competitive enough to offer you things of very minimal differences. They have a certain style of jeans, so we make them a little different, they have iTMS so we make Sony Music store, offering despite the minute differences, what is essentially the same in the end. Just look at those average north american cars, with same kinds of contours, gas mileage, and look at all those mass marketed PC's, HP, Dell, Gateway, you name it, all with practically the same innards and superficial differences. If competitiveness got us to where we are, then why do most of us dress alike ? Blue Jeans, Tee-Shirts ? Human natures is starting to show its ugly head protected by swarms of lawyers, politicians, corporations with massive funds, and economic oppression (the inability to do anything about anything unless you have money). Anyways....
)
