Softened French DRM Law Passes Senate

[macnulty]

I'm not going to drag this thread into the Political forums, but:

If you do not live in France and/or pay tax there, you can't insult the French way of doing things because:

• You don't live or pay tax there;
• It's none of your goddamn business what they do in their own country;
• They don't give a f*** about what you think.

And before you say something, point 2 applies even if you're a non-French company. If you want to do business in France, abide by their laws. If not, piss off.

Don't get me wrong, you're more than free to express your opinion on the matter (e.g. "I disagree because..."). Just don't bloody tell the French (or any other country) that they're stupid/dicks/etc. because of the way they do stuff.

I personnaly view it as a good thing that Apple licenses its DRM system.

What poopy-cocky, your free to express your opinion but...not in a way I would disagree? They do not seem to hold back their opinions on an American way of doing things. French are surrender monkeys, do some rioting and Chirac caves like a Catholic in confession.

 

[Highland]

Amen. This law is damn near socialistic. It is taking a company with a rightfully earned majority share of a market and punishing it for being smart, playing its cards right, and treating its customers with respect.

You're missing some VERY, VERY big points.

If you buy a record or a CD or even a DVD, it plays on all brands of record, CD or DVD players. Songs bought via iTMS (or other proprietary online stores) don't play on all players. This locks consumers into specific brands, and IS anti-competitive.

I love Apple, macs and iPods (I own 4 macs and an iPod), but this is not good for consumers. The fact is that at some point governments or some kind of governing body probably DOES need to get involved.

Here's a talk given to M$ about DRM by Cory Doctorow:
http://www.craphound.com/msftdrm.txt

Honestly, don't even bother trying to argue in the favour of DRM until you have read that. It rips any possible argument for DRM to shreds.

Disclaimer: I don't blame Apple at all for Fairplay. In fact, I think they've made it about as good as it could be without the labels not wanting their content on iTMS. There's plenty of other worse DRM schemes. The fact remains that the DRM concept is flawed, and it really can't work long term.

And for all those from the US who are posting anti-french comments here ("we don't give a f**k what you think" etc), you guys seriously need to take a few steps back from all this and think about it from a global view. Yes, I believe we should all be able to voice our opinions, but doing so is making quite a few of you look VERY narrow minded.

 

[rickag]

...
Here's a talk given to M$ about DRM by Cory Doctorow:
http://www.craphound.com/msftdrm.txt
...

That talk was just a rah rah speech to the choir. Microsoft had its' but handed to it in a basket in the case of online music sales and all the song and dance rationals presented in this talk were designed to feed the ego of Microsoft.

 

[Highland]

Ok then, tell me how DRM benefits consumers, artists, labels and society.

I'll put money on the fact that you'll REALLY struggle with consumers, artists and society. You might be able to come up with some stats that'll suggest that DRM is good for labels, but the fact remains that no mainstream label has ever tried online sales without DRM.

As an artist, I'm completely against DRM. Why would I want anyone who's payed money for one of my songs to not be able to play it everywhere they want? Doesn't make sense.

And as for Cory's article... you just can't deny the "DRM systems don't work" section. Name one scheme that's survived! Go on! DO IT! Right now the only one I can think of is actually Fairplay 2 (Apple's current AAC wrapper for iTunes 6). Fairplay 1 was cracked quickly, as has everything else in the past (CSS etc). Do you think HDCP has a chance?

So... rah rah speech or not, there's some facts in there that just can't be denied. DRM hurts honest people and doesn't stop dishonest people.

 

[(L)]

garrettcumber, drlunanerd etc... you guys really need to actually think a little more before you speak.

DRM is NOT good for consumers.
DRM is NOT good for artists.
DRM is NOT good for society.
And... DRM is probably NOT good for business.

Read this thread please:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/197781/

This should be appropriately re-interpreted in this manner:

Apple providing content that will play on iPods is PERFECTLY FINE.
Apple providing iPod content is GOOD FOR CONSUMERS.
Apple providing iPod content is GOOD FOR ARTISTS.
Apple providing iPod content is NOT A COMMUNITY SERVICE, but a BUSINESS, which is far better.
And...therefore, Apple's DRM dealie is GOOD FOR BUSINESS.

Consumers do not have the right to PAY FOR IPOD CONTENT and then DEMAND TO PLAY IT ON A SONY.
Consumers do not have the right to DO THEIR OWN THING WITH ARTSITS' PROPERTY, distorting it, copying it outside general use, etc.
Consumers trying to force PRIVATE COMPANIES to provide for them certain forms of content is simply ABSURD...if there is a demand for it, it doesn't have to be Apple to fill it. This is why the law is socialist crap, only there to appease angry young folks and protect domestic businesses.

Who needs to think more before he speaks? You do, silly. Let's not be playing blind - Apple sells a product, people buy the product, some people wish the product could do things it can't. So what? I don't buy a car and expect it to fly (at least not without flapping my arms really fast)...why buy music for iTunes and iPod and expect it to play on a third-party player? That's just bogus, however you try to argue it.

 

[(L)]

Ok then, tell me how DRM benefits consumers, artists, labels and society.

DRM benefits consumers because without it, they wouldn't buy iTMS music. Did you ever make a note of the phenomenal success of iTMS? Yeah - all that music...let's just say that would have never happened.

DRM benefits artists because artists want to be able to sell a product without being ripped off, and more power to them if they can do that through iTunes. If you don't like the iTMS, remember that all those artists sell cd's, too, you know.

DRM benefits labels because iTMS benefits labels by providing their products to a previously nonexistent market only captured through being able to securely provide such content. DRM does prohibit the consumer from doing some things with their music, namely, illegal or undesireable things (like playing it on a Sony). Why don't the labels force iTMS to provide such content so they could sell to Sony player users? Because iTMS doesn't need them to hurt iPod sales. Plain and simple. Can't find as good a store as iTMS for your Creative Zen? Then wonder why Creative has no music store, or why you bought the Zen in the first place - don't go about trying to force Apple to sell you stuff you want - business is civil, not an act of brutal compulsion.

DRM does not need to benefit society. Don't talk like a socialist - it's unbecoming...having no regard for the hard work of others.

I'll put money on the fact that you'll REALLY struggle with consumers, artists and society. You might be able to come up with some stats that'll suggest that DRM is good for labels, but the fact remains that no mainstream label has ever tried online sales without DRM.

I don't know about "REALLY" struggling - I personally don't have the mental inhibition of wanting everything to be a community service or wanting to be able to buy music and play it on a toaster if I wanted to (and Apple sure as hell better sell music that will play on my toaster!!!!). No mainstream label ahs ever tried online sales without DRM...well DUH! Did you ever ask yourself why? Why don't you do it yourself, and find out why, if you don't get it? Sheesh...some people just love to try to force companies to be run to their own whims. Stop telling other people how to run their businesses.

As an artist, I'm completely against DRM. Why would I want anyone who's payed money for one of my songs to not be able to play it everywhere they want? Doesn't make sense.

As a slighlty less socialist-bent artist, I'm completely for DRM, inasmuch as being able to sell specifically for iTunes/iPod users. I actually realize that if I would sell my music through iTMS and then let it play on players other than iTunes or iPods, that would cost Apple money, cost me money, and risk mass-copying and whatnot. I would rather that Sony come up with its own good store, or other stores to come up, so that THEN we could start to solidify into one secure format. The way it is right now, iPod sales would be hurt, and therefore hurt Apple and iTMS, if iTMS content could be played on other players. Ideally, if there were multiple online stores, we could combine the DRM format (to say, Apple's) and be able to provide content that would play on multiple players, without having any problems.

It's kind of like if you decided to mass produce a walkman that plays only vinyl discs, and then demand that all the CD labels start providing their CD's in vinyl disc form. Same music? Eh, sort of. Same thing? Nope. If you want to buy CD's, you have to buy a CD-capable piece of hardware. If you want to buy from the iTMS, buy an iPod. If you just want to be able to buy music online, there's a few major alternatives. If you're unhappy with the alternatives, have patience and wait for them to improve, or buy a bloody iPod!

And as for Cory's article... you just can't deny the "DRM systems don't work" section. Name one scheme that's survived! Go on! DO IT! Right now the only one I can think of is actually Fairplay 2 (Apple's current AAC wrapper for iTunes 6). Fairplay 1 was cracked quickly, as has everything else in the past (CSS etc). Do you think HDCP has a chance?

Who cares? How does this have anything to do with anything? Are you trying to say that because DRM doesn't last forever, you might as well do away with it? Isn't that odd? You are trying to get rid of something you think will fail on its own...lol

So... rah rah speech or not, there's some facts in there that just can't be denied. DRM hurts honest people and doesn't stop dishonest people.

DRM doesn't hurt honest people. Where in the world do you get such ideas? DRM would only hurt honest people if Apple claimed that iTMS content would play on third-party products. They don't, in case that's where you went wrong.

There's some facts in there that JUST CAN'T BE DENIED? They JUST can't be? It sounds more like you're trying to convince yourself than others.

DRM doesn't stop dishonest people? Are you sure it doesn't make it just a bit harder for them? More importantly, does it stop teenagers? Well, does it? Every time iTMS comes out with legal versions of content, there's a huge number of switchers that start downloading and paying for content that they used to download off of p2p networks illegally. Why? A sense of guilt, perhaps? Or wanting the real deal? They opt for restricted, commercial versions over free, unrestricted versions...why is that, do you think? Or more importantly, since you're outnumbered by such people, what good is it to tell them that they should prefer unrestricted content, when they've made their choice? Think of every song sold on iTMS as a complete denial of your anti-DRM argument.

Don't get me wrong...I do look forward to the day that there will be a standardized form of data protection so that multiple music stores and players could compete with each other - but until then, it's no use trying to force Apple to sell products however you should like them to with the fist, the gun, or other forms of brutish force, let alone silly socialist arguments on MacRumors.

 

[whocares]

Of course it does. Other than yelling "Fire" in a crowded theatre a free person can say anything he wants. "I hate what you say but would die fighting for your right to say it". At least that's what we call free speech in the USA. Those who would oppress "offensive speech" are what we call fascists. Be careful with that shoe.



You may have missed it but parts Paris burned for a couple weeks this past autumn when a muslim teen was shot by police. Curfews were declared, emergency powers acts were invoked, warrantless searches were conducted, public meetings were banned, the government invoked censor power over the media, and police did battle with rioting muslim youth.



[last paragraph deleted, as it should be discussed in Political forums]

I posted those half drunk, which was probably a bad thing. My point is people here are commenting rather harshly on points on which they do not have the full cultural background to understand (no offense - I'm assuming they've never lived in France). France (as other countries) has a long history which has a big impact on what goes on today, good or bad. Don't expect media to give you the full story.

For e.g. the so called "race-riots" seem pretty straight forward (I was aware of what you were referring to), but trust me it's about more than a Muslim teen being shot by police (IIRC it was allegedly about 2 teens climbing into a power station and being electrocuted whilst be pursued by police). It's more about post-war French urban development, unemployment and yes, the French immigration/integration system (which is essence "like it or lump it") and the attitude of some French people towards some immigrants. It's also about a minister insulting urban teens, calling them "gangrene" and "rabble". The people rioting were not of any specific "race", but from a specific urban area (run down suburbs); hence these were not so much race-riots as urban-riots.

You are quite right about free speech and I agree, but calling people stupid whatever the reason is borderline-insult more than free speech, especially if you do not fully understand the reasons why you're calling them stupid.
If you don't get my point, walk up to a police officer, insult him and then claim free speech. Let me know how it works out for you.

This discussion got way out of hand, I was initially (and rightly so) pissed of at people expecting France to grease itself-up and bend over for Apple.


But back to the point at hand:

Apple is/was faced with a dilemma: they want to sell music to the French market (which is quite large), but don't like the French laws... Unfortunately it's up to Apple to adapt to French laws, not French laws to Apple's business plan ("like it or lump it"). France doesn't really care if Apple sells online music or not, somebody else will.

 

[whocares]

Amen. This law is damn near socialistic. It is taking a company with a rightfully earned majority share of a market and punishing it for being smart, playing its cards right, and treating its customers with respect.

No. It's legislating how companies do business in France. This is decided by the Assemblée Nationale which is elected by the people. Hence the people are deciding how business is done in their own country. I call this democracy.

But I see from this thread that many people are in favour of imperialism, at least when it comes to Apple doing business in different countries.

 

[Highland]

Consumers do not have the right to PAY FOR IPOD CONTENT and then DEMAND TO PLAY IT ON A SONY.

Ok, here's the deal.

While I agree with you on one level, consumers are getting a really bad deal here and I don't think the capitalist "supply and demand" model will end up with the best result.

Music files are music files and there's no technical reason why the files won't play on everything.

DRM benefits consumers because without it, they wouldn't buy iTMS music. Did you ever make a note of the phenomenal success of iTMS? Yeah - all that music...let's just say that would have never happened.

Err... I understand why iTMS *had* to have Fairplay. Once again, Apple did a great job. But, iTMS would have benefitted consumers even more without the DRM.

DRM benefits artists because artists want to be able to sell a product without being ripped off, and more power to them if they can do that through iTunes. If you don't like the iTMS, remember that all those artists sell cd's, too, you know.

They won't sell CDs for much longer though. Why would the majors sell both in 5 years time? They don't sell vinyl now. And they won't want to sell anything that doesn't have DRM.

And if you're a real artist then you'll know that we make more $ from publishing than mechanicals. Plus, if you think that removing the DRM from iTMS would actually change the number of songs you sell, then you're loco!

Anything can be downloaded from p2p as easily as it can from iTMS. People who buy from iTMS want to buy from iTMS. DRM or no DRM.

DRM does not need to benefit society. Don't talk like a socialist - it's unbecoming...having no regard for the hard work of others.

Trust me, I'm no socialist, but I do see that this will serve as the model for all digital IP for the future. Files are the new distribution medium, and that's probably going to stay for a very, very long time (it'll outlive any physical medium.

As a community, we do need to keep checks on big business. Just because things "are" doesn't mean they shouldn't be questioned.

I personally don't have the mental inhibition of wanting everything to be a community service or wanting to be able to buy music and play it on a toaster

Don't twist this into something it's not. I'm talking about playing music files on a music file player. It's something that ALL music file players could do if the DRM wasn't there. Think of MP3 files. They work everywhere, all the time. That's because the format doesn't have any DRM.

As a slighlty less socialist-bent artist, I'm completely for DRM, inasmuch as being able to sell specifically for iTunes/iPod users. I actually realize that if I would sell my music through iTMS and then let it play on players other than iTunes or iPods, that would cost Apple money, cost me money, and risk mass-copying and whatnot

LOL. Give me your artist name and if you're any good I'll find a file with no DRM on a p2p network. iTMS doesn't stop piracy, but it does give people an option that's actually a good alternative... it's just a shame it has DRM.

It's kind of like if you decided to mass produce a walkman that plays only vinyl discs, and then demand that all the CD labels start providing their CD's in vinyl disc form. Same music? Eh, sort of. Same thing? Nope

No. NO NO NO NO NO. Music files on music file players. The ONLY thing getting in the way is the DRM. The tech can do it with NO modification.

Don't twist this to suit your argument.

Who cares? How does this have anything to do with anything? Are you trying to say that because DRM doesn't last forever, you might as well do away with it? Isn't that odd? You are trying to get rid of something you think will fail on its own...lol

Yes. It will fail on it's own.

And do you know what's going to happen? Do you know where we are heading? If you look at the history of copy protection, it's getting more and more restrictive and will continue to until everyone is so incredibly frustrated that something will have to give. Just wait until HDCP hits at full strength! Then you'll understand.

Btw, do you agree with region coding on DVDs? What's happened to that? Most players are "world zone" now. Even Sony DVD players!

DRM doesn't hurt honest people. Where in the world do you get such ideas? DRM would only hurt honest people if Apple claimed that iTMS content would play on third-party products. They don't, in case that's where you went wrong.

My gf has an iPod. My gf has bought some music from iTMS. Her iPod died and was replaced, in the process most of her songs were unauthorized. Not a big deal, as I know my way around iTunes and was able to sort it out for her, but this wouldn't happen with CDs or music with no DRM. Because of this she knows that her iTMS songs are not immortal... there's a definite possibility that if she makes a mistake they could end up unplayable. Multiply that thought by most of the iTMS users.

DRM doesn't stop dishonest people? Are you sure it doesn't make it just a bit harder for them?

HAHAHAHAH. YES. I'm sure it doesn't make it any harder for them. Absolutely positive.

Think of every song sold on iTMS as a complete denial of your anti-DRM argument.

You're missing the point that most people don't even know it exists... yet!

Don't get me wrong...I do look forward to the day that there will be a standardized form of data protection so that multiple music stores and players could compete with each other - but until then, it's no use trying to force Apple to sell products however you should like them to with the fist, the gun, or other forms of brutish force, let alone silly socialist arguments on MacRumors.

What you'd like doesn't matter unless it suits the purpose of the 4 majors. That's kind of my point!

 

[Highland]

No. It's legislating how companies do business in France. This is decided by the Assemblée Nationale which is elected by the people. Hence the people are deciding how business is done in their own country. I call this democracy.

Sounds good to me.

I'm not French btw, but that post was a breath of fresh air.

 

[octoberdeath]

if you don't like how apple does stuff then don't buy their products. i like how seamless everything works. i have never had a fudge up with the way my iPod works with my computer. if apple is always trying to improve and innovate their products and bring more new content to the table and keep it reasonable priced then why would there be any reason to complain.

 

[Highland]

This isn't about Apple specifically. I do like Apple, and I do like their products.

It's about how we, as consumers and as a society, want to approach digital content for the next 100+ years. Apple & iTunes are only a small part of the equation.

Also, we can "vote" with our wallet, but if all the options are stifled by DRM then it doesn't really matter who you give your money to.

 

[Stella]

Device independent DRM is good for consumers. I don't care if it ruins Apple's day ( or any other company ). I'm going to skip the 'you can play any CD on any CD player' analogy because its correct, and people still don't get it - they start to compare against other industries such as software.

If the artists ( not record companies ) really good have a say in DRM then I'm all for it. If the artists would like their music played on any device, then so be it. They made the content...

Remember, this is not just targetted towards Apple, not ALL DRM.

I'm hoping that more countries take French stance and try to start opening up DRM - so it becomes device independent.

One day, there will be a unified DRM standard, and it'll be a great day when it comes.

If Apple chose to pull out of france for iTunes + iPod, then so be it - there are other companies ready to take their spot. The french can buy their iPods in neighbouring countries / mail order.