Steve Jobs' Testimony Expected to Play Major Role in iPod Antitrust Lawsuit

[gnasher729]

It works as with any other recorded documentation.

There is a difference between an arbitrary recording and a recording made for a court. There is a difference between "here is a recording showing Steve Jobs saying stuff" which is just hearsay and "here is Steve Jobs saying things in court".

When you hear something being dismissed as "hearsay" it's not because we don't believe the person claiming they heard something, especially if it was recorded. It's becauce the person who said something wasn't in court and had no obligation to say the truth.

 

[Small White Car]

This was about Apple wanting to break control. Apple was abusing its power for years. My bet is on Apple losing big time.

So in your world:

Labels insisting on DRM with legal contracts
Jobs publicly calling out DRM in an open letter
Apple being the first to push labels to abandon DRM based on Apple's market power

= Apple wanted DRM?

Is this opposite day?

 

[IJ Reilly]

So in your world:

Labels insisting on DRM with legal contracts
Jobs publicly calling out DRM in an open letter
Apple being the first to push labels to abandon DRM based on Apple's market power

= Apple wanted DRM?

Is this opposite day?

DRM was pretty clearly part of the Faustian bargain Apple made with the music industry to get them off dead center on downloads. This isn't really at issue, though. What is at issue is whether Apple thereafter refused to license FairPlay for the purpose of maintaining their market shares of digital downloads and media players. On their side, the plaintiffs present market statistics showing that Apple's share of these markets began to decline after DRM was removed.

 

[cocky jeremy]

I guess I should sue Sony for not letting me play PS4 games on my One!

 

[nebo1ss]

2004? How many different MP3 players were there? I would of thought maybe 2-3?

I assume you are kidding. There were many MP3 Music players long before the Ipod. They were around in the late 90's what Apple brought to the market that was different was not the Mp3 player but the Store, Itunes and Mp3 player wrapped together. There were competitors who were successful in interfacing with Itunes and Apple released a new version with changes to prevent that from happening.

 

[jm001]

My limewire service always worked well with my iPod
Not sure what the problem is?

I think they're saying the problem is the opposite... media bought through iTunes and those ripped from CD were in a format that couldn't be played on other players. That said iPods play mp3's and you can rip CD's into this format so what the hell is the problem?

 

[Mw0103]

There is a difference between an arbitrary recording and a recording made for a court. There is a difference between "here is a recording showing Steve Jobs saying stuff" which is just hearsay and "here is Steve Jobs saying things in court".

When you hear something being dismissed as "hearsay" it's not because we don't believe the person claiming they heard something, especially if it was recorded. It's becauce the person who said something wasn't in court and had no obligation to say the truth.

And just to clarify, my reading is that this is Steve Jobs' deposition testimony taken expressly for this case. So, under oath with lawyers from all sides having the opportunity to question the witness. Thus, Jobs being unavailable for trial, his prior testimony is likely largely admissible (subject to pretrial objections/motions in limine for specific subjects or lines of questioning).

 

[Agent007]

Steve Jobs death was the best thing for Apple

I've said this before and I'll say it again; Steve Jobs death was a godsend for Apple. We're talking about a guy who wouldn't even entertain the idea of an iPhone screen larger than 3.5" and now, look, the big iPhones are selling like hotcakes. He didn't want a smaller iPad Mini and gave us that BS about "having to shave your fingers down". What an arrogant douchebag.

I don't wish death on anyone but his death was good for the company. He was stifling innovation, end of story.

 

[SmileyDude]

So much misinformation, assumptions, misunderstanding about what the iPod/iTunes combo allowed and didn't allow 9+ years ago. Understandable, I guess, but a bit disappointing.

For those who don't remember (or perhaps weren't using iPods and iTunes back then), here is what Apple sold and allowed:

• iTunes would rip standard audio CDs into standard MP3 or AAC files without any DRM.
• iTunes and iPods supported standard MP3 files without DRM.
• iTunes and iPods supported standard AAC files without DRM.
• iTunes and iPods supported Apple's FairPlay DRM on AAC files.
• The iTunes store sold AAC files with DRM on it until roughly sometime in 2009, without DRM after that.
• AAC files sold on the iTunes store without DRM would playback on any device that supports the AAC file format.

I don't think it's unreasonable that Apple would limit themselves to on DRM implementation on the iPod. They provided a number of ways to get media onto the iPod -- MP3, AAC, AAC w/DRM, WAV, Apple Lossless. They even supported unprotected WMA files when using iTunes on Windows.

What RealNetworks was doing was taking their music sold from their store with their DRM on it and stripping off the DRM and wrapping it in FairPlay using a reversed engineered method. This isn't about Apple being anti-consumer in any way -- this is about RealNetworks trying to keep the music they sold protected with some sort of DRM, despite the underlying device not actually supporting the DRM.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if Apple broke RealNetwork's hack, but in all honestly, there wasn't much upside for Apple in allowing this to work. For one, they would be the one to get the blame if a user suddenly couldn't play back their purchased tracks from this competing store. Plus if FairPlay DRM could be faked by a 3rd party, it's inherently flawed. Apple certainly knew they would eventually be using FairPlay on movies and TV shows, even if they didn't know yet they would be using it for applications. They couldn't go to the labels and tell them with a straight face that their DRM is secure if RealNetworks had broken it.

And in all honesty, I'm okay with whatever they did to keep this not working because in the end, Apple pushed for and eventually removed all DRM from their music tracks on their own store. In a world without DRM, there is much more potential for competition -- iPods can play any standard MP3/AAC file and people can take their AAC files from the iTunes store and play it on any device. Everyone wins.

 

[AppleTools]

Hmmm... Can I sue SONY because my playstation games won't work on an Xbox???

Don't think this lawsuit has a solid base to start with. Software and Media has been platform proprietary since the beginning of computing... DVD players have zones for example to avoid certain media play on unlicensed devices.

Oh wait! May be I can refill my McDonald's cup at TacoBell or spend my Target Gift card at Walmart...

 

[H2SO4]

Steve Jobs' Testimony Expected to Play Major Role in iPod Antitrust Lawsuit

Whoops.

 

[H2SO4]

Hmmm... Can I sue SONY because my playstation games won't work on an Xbox???



Don't think this lawsuit has a solid base to start with. Software and Media has been platform proprietary since the beginning of computing... DVD players have zones for example to avoid certain media play on unlicensed devices.



Oh wait! May be I can refill my McDonald's cup at TacoBell or spend my Target Gift card at Walmart...

You've got it all wrong. The XBox thing has been dealt with, you obviously haven't read back far enough;
Whether or not Apple were underhand in marketing,
Sony actually market the PS4 as playing PS4 games, not xbox games or any other. If they implied it would play any game you'd have a point.

 

[majordude]

Why won't my PS3 games play on an Xbox?

And, for that matter, why won't they play on a PS4?

 

[goobot]

I've said this before and I'll say it again; Steve Jobs death was a godsend for Apple. We're talking about a guy who wouldn't even entertain the idea of an iPhone screen larger than 3.5" and now, look, the big iPhones are selling like hotcakes. He didn't want a smaller iPad Mini and gave us that BS about "having to shave your fingers down". What an arrogant douchebag.

I don't wish death on anyone but his death was good for the company. He was stifling innovation, end of story.

The iPhone 5 was more than half way finished when he died so obviously he supported bigger than 3.5 inches.

 

[daftpunker909]

If this happened to Microsoft (as it has in the past with the internet explorer) you biased fanboys would shred them to pieces.
Pathetic that you can't recognize an effort in favor of the average user.

 

[Klyster]

I'm not really the kind of person who'd stick up for Apple or Jobs but I had no problem playing mp3's from my library on my old ipod touch. I could even reef mp3's from my iTunes music folder and play them on my pre smartphone. I never encountered DRM.

That said, Id3 tags were a nightmare on iTunes, glad I don't have to suffer iTunes anymore.

Can really see the issue here. I had more of an issue having to pay for a firmware upgrade on the ipod, what was that about?

 

[valanchan]

Not really dirty tricks. But on the face of it, if I buy a mp3 player that is not an iPod, will all the songs I download from itunes work?

You cannot use iTunes to download MP3 format.

 

[CFreymarc]

How is this so different from Sony with minidiscs? Sony took an already viable music container (magnetic media) and put it in a format that only worked with Sony devices or those licensed to use it. Some people, including myself, would not buy an iPod or use iTunes because it was too proprietary - those other MP3 manufacturers thrived off of that weakness, now they want to turn around and sue over its strengths.

Exactly. Issue here is that anti-competitive behaviors can only be illegal if you have a monopoly and you use that position to suppress competition in other markets.

Apple to this day does not have a monopoly in any of it's markets with healthy competition on all levels. The Mac share of the PC market is less than 10% and the iPhone in the smartphone market is less than 50%.

There is nothing illegal with keeping a system proprietary. As far as iPod goes, at the time of these allegations, there were many different portable digital music players and music services in competition with the iPod.

The only winner on this one are the attorneys and their fees. Love to see the plaintiff bill after this one closes.

Open systems is nice but there are no regulations forcing open interconnects in the consumer electronics market.

Telecommunications base station equipment is another story.

 

[valanchan]

This email may be about the iPod brand. It only mentions that Music Match cannot us iPod when they launch.

He seems to be concerned about Music Match's marketing material not listing the iPod as an endorsed player.

It doesn't say anything about music or songs cannot be used on an iPod.

 

[CFreymarc]

You cannot use iTunes to download MP3 format.

And you don't have to use iTunes to access music on your iPod. There are many third party tools to load MP3's on your iPod.

Apple could have turned that off and encrypted the iPod memory. Then only allow iTunes to connect via an Apple license server distributing keys every iPod connection to a PC.

It wasn't music nor an iPod, but I worked on a very secure system like that with some rather sensitive video streams going on.

 

[rdlink]

These are all the same reasons Apple would not support Blu-ray discs. Apple wants to limit your access to content. They want to funnel you into the content that they will sell you.

Apple doesn't do what is best for its customers; it does what is best for itself.

Very clear and lucid argument. Except for the tons of evidence that completely nullifies it...

 

[IJ Reilly]

Exactly. Issue here is that anti-competitive behaviors can only be illegal if you have a monopoly and you use that position to suppress competition in other markets.

Apple to this day does not have a monopoly in any of it's markets with healthy competition on all levels. The Mac share of the PC market is less than 10% and the iPhone in the smartphone market is less than 50%.

There is nothing illegal with keeping a system proprietary. As far as iPod goes, at the time of these allegations, there were many different portable digital music players and music services in competition with the iPod.

Close, but not quite. The correct concept is market power or monopoly power, and this is an important distinction. A company doesn't have to own a market utterly to have the power to engage in illegal anticompetitive behavior. As the plaintiffs in this case show in their complaint, Apple owned 70-80% of the relevant markets. This is more than enough to have market power. Did they abuse that power? This is the question before the court.

 

[Tech198]

I'm sure glad video can be used as evidence, otherwise Apple wouldn't have a shred of hope..

So, Apple restricts stuff, so what ?

 

[CFreymarc]

You cannot use iTunes to download MP3 format.

Close, but not quite. The correct concept is market power or monopoly power, and this is an important distinction. A company doesn't have to own a market utterly to have the power to engage in illegal anti-competitive behavior. As the plaintiffs in this case show in their complaint, Apple owned 70-80% of the relevant markets. This is more than enough to have market power. Did they abuse that power? This is the question before the court.

I stand corrected. Hope you can bill for hours like that. This is the most sound legal explanation I have seen on this board.

 

[T-R-S]

total Bull Crap - I owned the very first iPod 5GB it cost me almost $700 with tax it played MP3's - I can't believe complainers with their sill lawsuits - I wish them luck!

FWIW that was the REASON why I bought an iPod it played MP3's and it also played Wave (.wav) & (.aif)
what a joke!

and one more thing I am sure some has mentioned it Sony's ATRAC format was total crap you had to convert your MP3's to get them to play on ATRAC with a Sony player - which is why I NEVER bought one of those :/