Apple to France: not so fast, mon ami
By Ryan Block 
posted Mar 22nd 2006 9:01AM
posted Mar 22nd 2006 9:01AM
So the French National Assembly
approved an ostensibly anti-DRM bill against Apple which had, as of yesterday, elicited no comment from Cupertino.
Today, however, the claws came out. Apple said, "If this happens, legal music sales will plummet just when
legitimate alternatives to piracy are winning over customers," and "iPod sales will likely increase as users
freely load their iPods with 'interoperable' music which cannot be adequately protected. Free movies for iPods should
not be far behind in what will rapidly become a state-sponsored culture of piracy." Funny how pro-consumer their
statement sounds, when they're actually trying to do is rail against being coerced into opening the iTMS and iPod. We
definitely get the impression, however, that if the law is passed when it hits Senate later this year, and Apple must
either open their DRM or withdraw from France, that due to what we can only imagine are contractual obligations DRM
record labels' recordings Apple will have to bail out and never look back.
Apple doesn't make enough off of just iTunes alone, right? What are the chances that France could just be cut off from iTunes music store, but still buy iPods? Heck, other companies might have to make THEIR DRM open to Apple that way... or would this be too underhanded and somehow illegal?
Screw France!
Apple should stick to it's guns!
Which means that in typical French fashion, 15 minutes later the government will pull out a few of those millions of white flags it owns and surrender.
Bloody French! It's not Apple that will lose out, it's probably not the record companies either, it would be the consumer who loses out. Why? Because Apple had a hard time convincing record companies to go with their online music store iTunes. It was only the comprehensive anti-piracy that Apple offered that convinced them to "give it a go" and clearly, they must be quite happy they did. If France succeeds in getting the DRM stripped, it's not so much that Apple will pull out, it's the record companies who will, as they can't afford to promote piracy. So it's the consumers that will lose out.
Apple will have to withdraw from France, and then iPod/iTunes will become a dirty feeling sub-culture that is totally intriguing. It will be legally obtaining music illegally. Some people in France will order iPods from other countries, and use iTunes with out-of-country credit cards. iPod/iTunes use will go down some inevitably, and piracy will go up some. Bad for Apple, bad for music labels, bad for artists, good for pirates. Probably good for competition. The problem is there isn't another good on-line music store available in France is there? I am still confused as to why the gov't would step in.
I agree, screw France.
There will be no way Apple could open the DRM up. That would break contracts with the RIAA. No offense to the rest of the world, but do you think an American Corperation, making most of its money off of Americans is going to give two shits about France?
jobogro: "If France succeeds in getting the DRM stripped, it's not so much that Apple will pull out, it's the record companies who will,"
I don't think this bill will strip DRM so much as make companies work together to allow DRM to work on other players, right? I could be wrong. If I am, and this bill is to remove DRM completely, there is no way that any record company is going to sell music in France!
France to begin with is going to be the loser here. Apple wouldn't care much if it loses like 1 country of its 116 country customer base. And plus iTunes? Oh, please its the French who's going to suffer. Chiraq, you listening?
It was Apple's decision to lock iPods to iTunes and that smacks of anti-competitive business. France is on the right path but, it is yet to be seen how it would be enforced.
If this passes the real winner is freedom of choice for the consumer. They can buy their music anywhere they want and put it on any DAP they want.
Evil
Yeah, it sucks that the iPod only works with iTunes. I hate that you can't copy music from CD's you buy from record stores...
We here in FInland are worried that France will try to ram the same law down the throats of the rest of the EU countries just like they did with the Farm subsidies issue. I'm with Apple on this on. Its not like people don't know that Apple (and indeed Microsoft) don't have their own DRM's and if they want to buy from the iTunes store they do so knowing full well it only works with an iPod. Next, France will probably pass some bill trying to force Apple's operating system to be put on ALL computers or Windows PC being forced to run Apple OS. Being France, of course they have to have there way.
But the bill has to pass Senate and, if I know my share of French politics, then, surprise, it won't.
hmm, this worries me that im siding with the french bashers...I see those of you who hate Apple BECAUSE of DRM siding against them without reading into the actual issue. The same goes for those of you who HATE France.
Ill start by saying I have no problem with France. I have no problem with DRM, I hate it, but I figure Apples Fair play has to be the best of the worst.
This is a precarious time for Apple- That being said, I'm betting Apple will just pull out France- its easier to not-do-business in a country 20% the size of the US than completly re-write their business model.
Itunes keeps track of what you listen to, and what you look at, that statistical model alone is what makes their algorythms able to recommend more music, using other players would make it that much harder for them to get music to you- so apple, the player is as much a part of the DRM as the DRM itself.
As for how much they make, if you scour the internet, you will realize Apple really ISNT making that much of a single itunes song sale.
Make no mistake- I hate DRM, I hate how fair play makes it so you cant use purchased mysic in a regular mp3 player, but if my choices are between this type of DRM and some of the "hold me down and pull money from my pocket everytime i HEAR the music i just purchased", Ill take Apples method. First France, then who else will jump in with the same demands?
-Straylight
Hey, France is not 100% for this Law. So don't screw all of us. French people is waiting for general election in 2007...
This law has been voted by the actual parlement, where the right party "UMP" has the majority since the election in 2002 ( "mistaken election of Chirac Jacques @ 82% against neo-facist Jean Marie Le Pen").
Note that the french UMP minister of Culture has been condamend by justice for "blanchiement" of black money for his party.
Note also, that there are 7 justice files where the name of Jacques Chirac is written. Jacques Chirac is the father of the UMP.
screw the banana republic of France and it's chief , Chirac Jacques, the "delinquant pr?dent". But not french poeple.
AaronS what are you talking about. ok lets look at this logic. iTunes is free. iTunes works on windows and mac. You can use any music from any cd. you don't have to buy music from the itunes music store to listen to it on your ipod. If you don't have an ipod and still want to use itunes to buy music then hello burn it to a cd and rip it back to your computer. walla its not copy prtected anymore. I don't know where your getting you can't copy cds that you buy from stores.
Screw France? Screw Apple! ..and the the rest of the DRM-pushing companies.
If all of the music selling companies sold DRM-free music, piracy may rise a little, but overall the levels of piracy will probably around about the same and they may actually sell more.
Currently, some people are pirating music because there is no other alternative. CDs are too expensive if you just want one song. Buying from iTunes, Napster, or other music selling sites is not an alternative, because they include DRM, and you can't play the songs on any player of your choice. So for some people, piracy or not even buying music is the only choice.
Therefore, if Apple complies with France and eventually does this worldwide, they may actually increase sales from those people who have a morale objection against DRM-ridden music.
I say, Go France!!
"It's not Apple that will lose out, it's probably not the record companies either, it would be the consumer who loses out."
Bollocks!!
The consumer is FINALLY haveing someone stand up for them! It's amazing to me how many of these comments are anti-France, pro-DRM. I don't love the French, but any large body standing up for the consumer who is now almost consistently delivered crippled goods laden with DRM (from the mundane to the rootkit-installing kind) I say thank you to France, about freikin time someone stood up to the media giants and said "enough."
This is in no way anti-consumer. A little pain on our side to see the wrongs that were allowed to grow now be righted is never, never a bad thing.
the ipod is not locked to itunes i have used musicmatch to update my ipod but, if you use itunes you can only update an ipod.
With regard to comment #9, that is false. iPods play MP3s and AIFF files just fine. You can buy CDs from record stores, rip them in iTunes (or any other encoder you like), and load them onto your iPod with no restrictions. Only iTunes Music Store Fairplay AAC files are protected and unable to play on other players. And that is a small fraction of the music currently stored on iPods, despite the billion tracks sold.
#9. You can import music from any CD (or MP3's) into iTunes. It is easy. I have moved over 100 CD's worth or music into my iTunes..
I think France picked on the wrong company. Steve Jobs has as big an ego as France, and I doubt that he will give in here. He would pull out of France before he opens up the iPod to other music services. In the big scheme of things, I doubt that this would affect Apple too much. If anything, it may make the iPod and iTunes even more popular in France....
The difficulty arises not from Apple bailing out of France--it only account for 5% of IPods sale there--but if others in Europe (or European union) follow suit and enact similar laws. Surely, Apple can't take themselves out of the market place then. At that point, Apple will probably be forced to open up.
I hate to tell all of you, but DRM is here to stay. It is not Apple that requires DRM, it is the music companies. The bottomline is that Apple's Fair Play system, while not perfect, is pretty dang flexible. I have imported hundreds of songs from CD's and other M3's into my iTunes. It is easy and legal. The fact of the matter is that if you want to listen to an iPod, you have to use iTunes. If you want to listen to MP3's through Napster, Yahoo, etc, you just buy a different MP3 player... Why is this so difficult to understand?
Next you will have France saying that Microsoft and Sony need to make games compatible on both the PS3 and Xbox360... Not gonna happen. They are proprietary systems...
Go France! All you anti-French bandwagon douches would have nothing to say if it were any other country.
#15...
No alternative to pirating music? You act as though the music is public domain. It isn't - you do have an alternative to piracy. You have a few:
1) Purchase DRM'ed music, and deal with the fact you limit your player options.
2) Purchase an entire CD
3) Don't listen to the music if you can't handle what needs to be done to legally listen to it
Nobody is holding a gun to your head to listen to any particular music. You do it because you WANT to. And because you want to, and the music does NOT belong to you, you must pay for it. Anything less makes you nothing more than a petty theif.
what proportion of each iPod user's content is downloaded from iTunes? I don't know, but I bet it isn't a big propoprtion. This sounds like a non-issue.
I have a Sony player and I'm pleased to say I've never bought from their donload shop. What's wrong with buying a CD (better quality master copy) and ripping it?
Keep the album alive!
Here's something I don't think I've seen in any discussion of this decision so far...
1. The draft law says no company can lock-in a format on their player...whatever format you use has to be more or less universally compatible (and not through workarounds like burning and ripping CDs).
2. Apple and Microsoft pull out to avoid opening their DRM. After all, France is only 5% of Apple's market.
3. Some enterprising company sees that 5% as a significant amount of market share, and figures out a way to work with the law.
4. Barring a completely incompetent execution by this hypothetical company, French music fans end up with the best music download system in the world. The record industry (assuming they have some capacity for rational behavior - perhaps an unwise assumption) will go along, because the issue is not DRM-less product, merely interoperable product. This law really has nothing to do with music copyrights.
#17 it's called sarcasm.
I didn't post the message but I got the point loud and clear. People are whining about DRM and forgetting they can still buy CDs and rip them and get all the quality DRM free they want.
DRM is a necessary evil to get record companies to sell their music online. Remember the music that most of you are obsessed with is owned by the record companies and as such they can do whatever they want with it even if you dislike it.
If you want something that has less DRM then start supporting Indies.
#14, #17, and #18. It was a joke. I was making a point that saying iTunes + iPod is a completely closed system doesn't make sense to me...Thank you for bringing it up to others, though, that you CAN in fact copy music that wasn't purchased from iTunes to your iPod.
#20 DRM is fine as long as it's an OPEN STANDARD. The monolithic dominance of iTunes in the marketplace is not healthy for the long run. France is not opposing DRM per say, just DRM that is locked to one vendors products. It's like Microsoft only allowing Windows on Microsoft hardware. The US government has stepped in to break up previous monopolies (think Bell)
Re: 5
This just in: Law trumps contracts. The EU has their own music 'union'(which I'm sure is made up of most of the same companies but I dont think they operate under the RIAA) who have saw this coming(if they didnt, they need to hire better lobbyist). If this was to become law and Apple followed the law, what do you think the music industry would do? Sue Apple for breaking a contract? They wouldnt even get in the courts front door. The industry is gonna have to take this up the EU and GOOD LUCK WITH THAT. MS has showed that even with the most money, if the EU is gunning for you, well you're gonna get gunned down.
This PC World article (http://www.pcworld.com/resource/article/0,aid,124434,pg,1,RSS,RSS,00.asp) says that in 2005, digital music downloads accounted for 6% of all music sales. Does this not mean that the iPod can (by default) play 94% of the music that was purchased in 2005 (obviously, there are some CD's that have copy protection on them when purchased in store which prevents copying to a computer, but you get the general idea)? Wouldn't that number increase even more considering iTunes contains the largest online music store? If I've got a device that can play 90% + of all music being purchased, that's good enough for me.
My understanding of this is that, Apple gets around 2% of their profits from France, they could easily pull their French iTunes store and still sells ipods etc and not loose too much money there, but if they refuse to comply then the goverment will make it legal for people to strip the DRM from iTunes bought music and play it on whatever they want.
DRM doesnt really bother me that much, being that i sometimes buy from iTunes, convert my CDs in iTunes and put them straight on my ipod. But if DRM is what got record labels to sign up to iTunes in the first place, then the French government (if they make this law) will be undermiming that, making it legal for people to essentially have pirated music.
Those crazy French, they'll be banning head scarves next...oh no wait...
I dont see how this bill is anti-drm. All it will do is allow apple's competitors to make money off the ipod hype. It breaks the apple business model. its not like apple's a forced monopoly like Microsoft, if you dont like apple, dont buy the ipod. If this only makes it easier to get music from another DRM-laden store, how is it beneficial?
It would be different if the law advocated removing drm entirely. Then i would cheer. But this law only makes it so that other drm companies can enjoy apple's success. In the end, maybe there is a slightly wider choice for the customers, but the apple business model is badly hurt, and most probably it would just result in the withdrawal of the itunes music service from france. Its a tirade against a store, a brand, not a monopoly as such.
Apple's monopoly is because it has a good and attractive product, so it commands the market share. Its not because customers are forced to choose ipod because 99% of the music dosentt play in other players (like the windows monopoly).
I like the idea of disabling the DRM for the very simple reason of it allowing me to enjoy my music more. The iPod EQ implementation is pretty flawed and leads to clipping and cracking. To get around this, I use MP3/AACGain and normalize my music a couple of decibels quieter to reduce the clipping.
However, with the DRMs in place, I can't actually use MP3Gain to make my legitimately purchased music more enjoyable.
Dave (#16) you're missing the point, read Thill (#20).
This whole DRM set up is something the music labels have insisted upon, not Apple. The French government will not force global change here, more likely shoot themselves in the foot and lose out. DRM is here to stay, if you buy from Apple, you're in their DRM. If you rip your own CDs you can do what you like. Seems fair to me.
Jobogro.
It is all very confusing. I don't download any music...hey, I don't even buy commercial music CDs...so I have no intention of giving Apple (or Sony) 99 cents for anything they have to sell...so I am out of the DRM circus.
What I don't understand is that one day, everybody is whining about how DRM is the greatest enemy of 'freedom' in the world and today everybody is saying how DRM must be preserved from the evil French government's attempts to circumvent it.
What is it, people? Are you for it or against it?
Torontoguy #30
Yeah we hate DRM in principal, but i am aware that without it iTunes would never have existed. As Apple proved to the Music labels, they could sell their stuff online "safely", I accept that DRM has allowed iTunes and indeed other online stores to exist. So for that I am grateful, and therefore "for DRM".
jobogro
au revoir DRM. bonjour free culture!
You people surrendered to Apple long ago. Your ears are chained to your white flag as it is chained to iTunes.
Resist, resist your oppressor!
C'est la lutte finale
Groupons-nous, et demain
L'Internationale
Sera le genre humain!
I'm stunned at how many people are slagging of the french for being anti DRM, the french maybe tossers but iTunes is an anti-competitive monopoly which only cares about its bank balance - you have to consider the effect that DRM has on small labels who cant afford to get these DRM licenses and legal issues sorted out before they can publish a record, effectively it pushes out the small players so you are left with the big players in the music industry which seem to sell crap music to us and really lack creativity
Let's see . . . Apple invests money to develope and produce the iPod . . . Apple invests money in infrastructure, marketing, supply chain, and R&D to establish a (non-mandatory, non-critical -- we're not talking about food or energy here) product/service business model . . . . Apple gets the recording, TV, and movie industries to embrace on-line media sales for the first time, and for all of this work Apple wants to collect a profit! WHAT IS WITH STEVE JOBS?
People: there are other digital audio/video media players and services out there and many can play music or video in almost any format it's available. If you're upset with Apple, go buy one of those other devices. What you say? Apple has enormous market share? 60%? 80%? Is that an indictment of Apple's business model or an endorsement? Seems that most people vote with their wallet, more often than not. And MOST people who like to listen to and/or view media digitally and portably are saying (with their collective wallets): Apple's product/serve is the best available combination of features for the price at this time.
Is it ANY surprise whatsoever that a Socialist country takes issue with a Capitalist company and business model?
If iTunes got artists and labels to switch to their service because it's 'safe' from piracy, then why would they (artists, labels) agree to be placed (without DRM) on a French version of iTunes? I think the French just have a anti-American agenda in general and this is just a way to push American corporations away (to be replaced by their own). Isn't communist China doing something similar?
This bill is so complicated, unclear and confusing that it was easy for Engadget to misunderstand it... It's not anti-DRM at all, it a DMCA-like bill. And it became so unpopular because it's said to have been written under influence of audio and video content providers. The chapter about DRM makes sure DRM protections are legal, which was unclear before. But it also says DRM should not be used to lock users into a proprietary system and Apple has to provide APIs to competitors. Since the bill doesn't really care about technical details, it could take years to have Apple actually change something on iTunes.
I like the analogy to Sony and Nintendo...
Can you imagine a future where some artists can only be heard on the Apple platforms, and others exclusively on Microsoft, and others locked out entirely because they dare to sell through a non-DRM'ed channel?
Go ahead, pretend you're still rebels, pretend this is what capitalism is all about. Third parties controlling what you do with your own property is sooo liberating.
If peope want to copy music and media they will find a way.
For crying out loud, even with copy protection there is nothing to stop someone from doing a high bitrate digital recording of an audio feed.
Stupid asses.
This is about Apple keeping a grip on the market with their own proprietary formats. Like Apple gives a rats fart about keeping pirating down to a minimum.
The iPod was a huge success BECAUSE of pirated music.
First, it isn't France targeting Apple and the iTunes music store. Its France trying to mandate a common industry standard for DRM. An article with a headline that reads "French law could force Apple to open iTunes" is more likely to get read or picked up by other news services than one with a headline that reads, "France pushes for common DRM format".
Second, its not France trying to break Apple's perceived monopoly on the online music business. That already went to court in France with the French courts saying there were plenty of alternatives in the market to iTunes and the iPod. People just aren't buying those alternatives, that isn't Apple's fault.
Third, Apple doesn't mandate DRM. The people who provide the content that Apple sells do.
Why does Apple tie the iPod to iTunes? Simple, Apple doesn't sell just the iPod they sell the solution, part of which is iTunes. Why do they do that....besides the fact that yes they make money off the iTunes store? Because they control the total experience and hence can support the product better. Do they do that for the sake of the customer? No not really, it keeps their support costs down, simplifies their product offering, and if they do it right (and it appears they have) sell more product because people like it. Imagine what a pain it would be if you had to support everyone's music library software.
The problem with the industry is all the participants have their own idea how it should work to meet their vision and trust me, those visions are all different and tailored so that you the consumer part with as much cash as they can squeeze out of you. Preferably in the form of a recurring revenue stream via a subscription service.
How can any of you realy be a against compatibility. No one is trying to kill DRM, they're just saying a music devise should be able to play music, regardless of where you buy it from.
This is a good thing, because apple doesn't even have to open up Fairplay, they just have to provide codecs for playing those files. Sure they'll be reverse engineered, but who cares, because they've already been reverse engineered (Real/several open source projects).
Also, Fairplay doesn't hinder pracy. If people want to steal music, they're going to steal, Fairplay or no fairplay. In fact, the RIAA has probably sold even more CD's lately, because the minute an iPod user discovers that he can only play those apple files on his ipod or using iTunes, they start to think if it would have been smarter to buy the CD and rip it to the computer where I can play it using my software payer of choice (iTunes is decent, but there are better), my music player of choice (some people do use something other than ipods - though I love mine) and on Various OS's.
Also, Apple isn't pulling out of France. The RIAA is to greedy to willingly drop music sales from the Itunes music store in France over their phony veil of piracy. If you want to slow piracy, cut prices and you'll reach a point where stealing to save a buck or two is irrelevent. Of course i'm sure the RIAA considers that kind of talk blasphemy.
And what kind of business sense does it make for an artist to limit their audience to a specific product?
What kind of business sense would it make for Apple to sell an iPod that only played DRM music as you suggest, one that would not play MP3 or AIFF? I'm sure that would sell like, well, hotcakes to a room full of people on a low-carb diet.
In other words, not at all.
No third party is controlling what you do with "your content." It is the responsibility of any consumer who makes a purchase from iTunes or lays a few hundred dollars down to get an iPod to understand the limitations of the products. If you make the conscious choice to purchase DRM music that only plays on player X, and then decide that you really want to get player Y, well, that's a bed you've made, take some personal responsibility for your decisions and sleep in it. Don't ask the French government to come in and bail you out because you feel cheated.
Governments need to keep their dirty little paws out of business and allow them to make their own business decisions. Consumers need to make intelligent purchasing decisions and support good products.
The logic presented in many of the comments here confuses me to no end.
We bought our son a Leapster when it was first released. He quickly got bored of the three games written for his age group so I emailed LeapFrog and asked if they intended to open the Leapster up to third party game developers. Their reply was that the following year, four more games were planned for release but they would not open the Leapster to third party developers. We bought him a GameBoy and the Leapster's collected dust ever since.
Point is, it sucks that LeapFrog chose not to open the Leapster, but there are alternatives. Perhaps the French can rectify this Leapster issue for me and force interoperability.
God Bless France! Why is everyone getting so worked up over this? As I see it all they are trying to do is allow itunes music to work on non-iPods.
Apple is trying to scare everyone into thinking this somehow equates to piracy. Should be technically easy enough since Apples iTunes can convert from MP3 to their own format. We just need a piece of software that reverses the process. And yes, I know it's possible to burn a CD from itunes then re-rip as MP3, but that's not very efficient.
Aside from all this, it would be interesting to hear how and why this law got started in the first place.
Apple has no option really but to adhere to the law if it is passed. They aren't going to bail on France or Europe anytime soon. Once France passes this law other European companies will hopefully follow, then maybe the rest of the world will see the light.
If I buy a song on itunes and then next year decide to buy something other than an ipod, why should I get screwed into having to burn and re-rip everything into MP3?
So what is the technical solution? Random legislation with technical solution is pointless.
Legislate the 200MPG car.
Legislate XBOX and PS and Nintendo compatability.
Legislation doesn't make it so. No fan of DRM here, but I am no a fan of government interference where they have no clue what they are asking for.
There is no common DRM. Who does France suggest gets enriched by creating this neutral standard? How do you handle all the myriad of legacy players in the field.
There is no technical solution so Apple will pull out if it is enforced for that reason alone.
Though Apple may be exempt as you can already convert/remove DRM from Itunes songs by burning to CD anyway.
So actually this may be more of an issue for the play4Sure crowd as that system is even more locked in.
I shall reiterate....
France has no right to ask Apple to do this! Its called the razor and blades modal for a reason. Would you expect a razor company to allow their blades to be used with any other razor? Im not asking if you think its 'RIGHT', in an idealist sense, for them to do so, but would you EXPECT them to?
How about letting people bring their own food into a restraunt and sitting at THEIR table and have THEM serve it to you? Of course, within the analogy, apple actually lets you do this, but the point is clear enough - some of you guys have seriously overestimated what your consumer rights should be.
Bottom line is, if people wernt so lazy as to not want to go and actually buy the cd, or too impatient to have it delivered to your door through amazon, then this wouldnt be an issue. You CHOOSE to use the ITMS??!?! It's not offering some product that you cant get any other way?!?! Its an easy music service intentionally designed FOR ipod owners. Apple dont have to open it up in any way if they dont want to
Theres no monopoly here, theres a sucess story and a brat who wants to undermine it (the brat not being france, but those who think that you are apple are in some way tricking, taking advantage, or manipulating consumers)
If you dont like ITMS, dont use it. Don't use it then whine that it doesnt do what you want it to! Gah.
#39. Excellent points all around and agree. DRM is here to stay and Fair Play is actually one of the better DRM formats around. Steve Jobs and Apple had to play serious hard ball to get the music companies to accept Fair Play (the ability to burn CD's, the ability to have songs on more than one computer, the ability to import CD's and MP3's, etc).
If France opens up Apple's DRM the results could be a disaster. What I mean is that the record companies may look at this opportunity to standardize DRM across all MP3 players and SIGNIFICANTLY limit your ability to burn CD's and have music on multiple computers or players.
Just look at what they are doing with Blu-Ray and HD-DVD as an example. They are not going to allow the consumer the ability to copy media.
Careful what you ask for.. If you give the record companies more control (standardization across all media), we are all going to get burned...
If this were France vs. Microsoft (on the same issue), every one of these idiots crying "Screw France!" would be singing a different tune.
Don't you sycophants ever get tired of brownnosing to Apple?
if I were to judge americans by this thread, I'd have to say that we're all bigots and cocksmokers. Well, not all of us, just the xenophobes who have posted before me. Please, if you want to act like children, then please see yourself to www.disney.com. There's plenty of games for you children to use words that mommy and daddy taught you. And EnGadget, shame on you for allowing these rednecks to piss and moan that mcdonald's still doesn't serve "Freedom fries." Grow up, you fucking imbeciles.
it's really sad to see so many people be so insulting toward a country and a law which they obviously do not understand, probably because A/ they didn't read it and B/ They believe everything they read or see on CNN.
First the law is not targeted at Apple, Unlike in the U.S. Apple doesn't have a monopoly in Europe where Virgin is a big player. In France Apple has 40%, Virgin 30% and the rest is divided between smaller companies.
Second, the European Community pressured France to pass a law for digital content ( All countries in Europe had one except France) so the French government in a hurry to meet the deadline, wrote and passed this law.
The spirit of the law is that if one buy an mp3 player, that person should be able to choose any site to buy music from, and be able to put it on which ever MP3 player(s). The obvious problem is the only way to achieve that, since nobody want's to have a common copy-write protection standard, or design players that can read all copy-write protection standards, is to remove it, which is the unfortunate flaw of that particular law.
Third, as in this country, the law still has to go threw the French Senate before becoming law, who knows what will happen there.
Oh noes! Teh guberment is teh evil!!!1!!
Government defines what property is, government defines the rules of trade, government defines the penalties for violating property rights and the rules of trade...
but it can't define the rules under which digital music is sold? I'm sorry, what?
Since when is interoperability a "bad" thing?
I, for one, am glad to see the government, albeit France's, stick up for the consumer. Hell, if I were Jobs, I would be kind of smug that the governement of a major European country wrote a law with my hardware in mind.
BOO-Frickety-Hoo Apple!
What's with everybody? I keep hearing things like "DRM is here to stay" and that it's a "neccessary evil" I disagree. If we don't want DRM it's pretty simple for us to say so...don't buy DRM products. It annoys me that people just let corporations decide things (essentially interpreting laws which is supposed to be the task of the judicial system) and we just roll over and take it like there is nothing we can do. Every single corporation gets money from you and me, end of story. We have the power, most people have just forgotten that.
The fact that you can only play iTunes purchased songs on an iPod IS ridiculous (and don't give me that rubbish about burning to CD and ripping back again - A)the quality deteriorates and B) why SHOULD we have to do that?)
The reason that this issue doesn't seem to have affected iTunes sales so far is that the vast majority of consumers are utterly unaware that their iTunes purchased music is only playable on their iPods. I'd say around 90% of people are unaware of this (remember, not everyone is as tech-savvy as engadget readers). People therefore have no reason not to buy from iTunes as it is cheap and easy.
I'm all for iTunes, i'd just like to be able to play the songs on my Rio Karma. If Microsoft allow playsforsure support on every single player out there (except Apple of course who rejected their offer), why on earth can't Apple do the same.
THAT is the issue, my friends.
DUMBASS AMERICANS....
FEW YEARS BACK:
NAPSTER NASPTER...RIAA GRRR AND YOOOUUUUU BAAAADDDD DRM....
APPLE ARRIVES WITH ITUNES:
OH LOOK, APPLE SAVES US....YES SER I WILL BEND OVER AND YES SER THE RIAA IS A-OK NOW...DRM FEELS GOOD
If France does it, the EU will want a piece. IPODS ARE EXPENSIVE,SCRATCHED UP,WASTES OF MONEY. THEY LOCK YOU TOO ITUNES IF YOU DON'T RIP YOUR OWN CD'S OR GASP OWN ANY....BE F-ING REAL
HAVE YOU SEEN THE LIGHT? YEAH IT'S AN APPLE LIT LOGO.
ENGADGET TEAM....ARE YOU HAVING A GAY AFAIR WITH APPLE...POST OTHER SHIT. U S E F U L L ELECTRONIC GADGET NEWS....OH WAIT..................YOU CAN'T
"I think the French just have a anti-American agenda in general and this is just a way to push American corporations away (to be replaced by their own). Isn't communist China doing something similar?"
Yeah, better nuke em' or something.
Stinkin' commies.
...
#50. Apple makes very little money on iTunes sales. They make their money on the player (iPod). Why should they let Rio piggyback on Apple's hard work and effort?
Its not like there are not alternatives out there. If you want to play music on your Rio player, you can.
Apple, in most cases, usually tries to make the most easy to use, elegant, solution when they desing their products (whether it be the Powerbook, iMac, Mac Mini, iPod, iTunes, or a keyboard). They like to have control of the hardware and software and the thought of an ugly Rio player interacting with iTunes probabaly drives Steve Jobs nuts..
For those of you who think that it is unfair that Apple only allows iTunes music to be played on an Apple player, then don't use it. Use Napster, or Yahoo, or Microsoft/MTV, or whatever else you want. There are alternatives out there.
See my previous post. If governments force DRM to be standardized across all music platforms, the record companies will have the final say in how the DRM will be implemented and I guarantee you that it will be much more restrictive than the current DRM that Apple has implemented..
i just wanted to say screw france!!!!!!!!! again!!!!!!!!
The larger question here is: what does DRM do for the RIAA? Contrary to some comments above, there is no reason or evidence that would suggest that DRM cuts down on piracy. It is the iTunes Music Store's existence, not the DRM on the music, that cuts down on piracy.
Letting other music players play music purchased from iTunes is the first step in moving towards a completely open system -- and that would be a good move for consumers and for the RIAA. Free movies for iPods are already here. So is free music for iPods. Consumers would rather buy their music online and legally, but not if the restrictions are onerous. As consumers buy more and more of my music online, being chained to the iPod is a very real concern--and Apple should not be allowed to lock everyone into owning an iPod forever or else losing their music collections. That's blatantly unfair, anti-competitive, and bad for consumers.
socialists. what more can be said. this will never work out like France thinks it will.
Re "21. Go France! All you anti-French bandwagon douches would have nothing to say if it were any other country."
Yes we would. We'd say "Dang, that is as wacked as France."
So, let me get this straight. (As I said, I'm not into this whole downloading tracks game.) The music tracks that are sold on Apple iTunes (for 99 cents each) only work on the Apple iPod. However, the iPod itself will load and play tracks from other sources (like CDs or MP3s) so what everybody is upset about is that the French government is trying to make it so that other music players (Sony, Realistic, Olympus and a million others) can pay 99 cents a track to Apple TOO! (WHy they would want to I am not sure!) BUT, Apple is upset because then, it appears that the iTunes tracks might be freely (that is no money for Steve J) copyable between different devices thus cutting Apple out of the game...and since you won't need an iPod to use iTunes tracks, buying an (overpriced) iPod would no longer be necessary. I can see why Apple might be upset since their proprietary model would be broken but if they are still getting their 99 cents/track why should they care what device it is played on?
"Yeah, it sucks that the iPod only works with iTunes. I hate that you can't copy music from CD's you buy from record stores..."
You're missing the point. Lets say you buy a lot of music from iTunes. Then lets say your iPod breaks or something, or you want to change music player brands. Uh-oh, you can't play the music that you own anymore. Kind of like Windows. Except, Microsoft actually has a more interoperable DRM implimentation than Apple. That is to say, you can use it on devices from multiple companies, unlike the 2 or so portable devices you can with iTunes music.
AaronS, I got that it was a joke particularly since it's coming from this site, but everytime I talk to someone not tech-saavy looking into an MP3 player, that's their first question about the iPod; so it's understandable ppl didn't get it. There's this odd misunderstanding that they can't download their own music. Maybe it's time for another public service 'rip, mix... upload(?)' campaign.
Matt,
Very true -- and if this if portability of DRM-encoded music is a major purchasing concern than I would wager to say that the iPod is not your player of choice.
However, the fact of the matter is that most people simply don't care. If they did than the iPod/iTMS wouldn't be making money.
The market -- the consumers who many here claim to put first above all -- should decide whether or not a product is worth their money, not the government.
An aside, in your scenario -- if the person really was compelled to get the other player, than yes, they can go through the klunky method of burning and ripping to take their purchased music to the new player.
This, of course, is all information that an informed consumer to take into account when purchasing an MP3 player. People probably also shouldn't eat at McDonald's, but no one is trying to limit the number of Big Macs you can spend your money on at this point. (and yes, I'm aware that as far as a direct comparison that is tangential at best, but it's more to illustrate my point that the government - any government - should stay out of the private sector's business)
An aside -- I'm curious, not having any hands on with the Microsoft DRM music, can you burn that to CD in the same manner as music purchased from iTunes?
Jim
Typical Apple iPod fanboys. They don't bother to read the whole story, yet can write a long vacuous rant about it full of their misinformation.
...maybe that's why they are iPod fanboys, they don't know much or care to research things before they go out & buy (in this case, post & reply.)
Matt is correct...
It's not about the player people currently own, it's about music you have already legally purchased. If I have an iPod and I go to iTunes and purchase 1000 songs...I don't know that I'm STUCK with an iPod forever at this point. Now, if my player breaks...what can I do? Well if I go get another brand because I didn't like the iPod or there are better/cheaper alternative players out there, then I am out $1000 even though I still own it. This is a monopoly because Apple is FORCING you to continue buying iPods and taking away your choice.
To use the weak car analogy someone used before...It's more like if you buy a car and then buy and store gasoline for this car. Now, your car breaks down...you have all this gasoline that you purchased and own, but the gasoline only works for that brand of car. So you have two choices...1) buy a different brand of car and you lose out on the money you spent on the gas or 2) buy the same brand car. It's limiting choice, which is anti-consumer. IMO, the U.S. Gov't should be all over this, and I'm very anti big government.
#68. I love lame posts like yours.. Yeah, you are right, 70% or so of all digital music owners are complete morons, only people like you have the real solution...
I owned three different MP3 players before I finally broke down and bought an iPod Mini over a year ago. Best decision I ever made (aside from switching to OS X from Windows). For reasons you may never understand, the iPod just makes sense when you use it. A blind person (no offense) can use the click wheel to control the play of their music. The way that the iPod and iTunes interact with each other is not something I can even attempt to try to capture in this post. Everything just works. Plain and simple. I am not an iPod fanboy. I am an informed and knowledgeable consumer and will buy the best product that is available for my money. Yeah there are cheaper players on the market (unless you consider the Shuffle), but they are not an iPod. Sure there are players on the market that have more features than the iPod, but in the end they still suck becasue they missed the point.
I think this is more of a media scam for France than anything else. France has so many problems right now with their own country, their citizens should be outraged that their government is wasting French tax money on such a ridiculous bill. If France really wanted to look out for its consumers, it would offer a discount on the iPod, or ban all the other crappy players from being sold on the market :)
Actually Thill, I enjoy posts from iPod fanboys such as yourself because they are such morons and they are quite entertaining.
I'm basically doing the typical "iPod fanboy" action and not reading your whole post, probably, because like most iPod fanboy comments, it's vacuous, but I'll reply anyways (now I'm down to your level for a short time.)
However, 2 things did stick out during the scan: "I am not an iPod fanboy." then later "If France really wanted to look out for its consumers, it would offer a discount on the iPod, or ban all the other crappy players from being sold on the market :)"
umm yeah, you're not a fanboy.
The iPod is open. It plays regular, un-DRMed files alongside Apple's proprietary DRM. There is no reason to "open" given the other tenet of the law that says that it is legal to crack DRM.
Just crack the DRM and put the unencrypted file on the iPod. Done.
I would also note this law has ammendments attached for Vivendi/Universal which makes it explicitly legal for publishers to force artists to release their content with DRM on it. It might as well be called the Archos/Vivendi handout act. Well, the the French want to give handouts to their local companies, then they deserve to have to rely on just their for their products and content. Good luck with that.
#71 o rly (Is that you, Bill O'reilly)? You really cannot get a joke huh?? I guess that makes you a Microsoft fanboy huh (let me guess your MP3 player of choice is either a Sony or a Rio)? Sorry to hear about another Vista delay, maybe you can convince a foreign government to sue Microsoft....
I better keep this post short so you can actually read it, since you seem incapable of reading more than a few sentences at a time... Sorry there are no pop-up pictures...
Viva La Microsoft, you M$ fanboy!
Screw France?? Are you people stupid?
France is the only country standing up for the consumer! If you understood the issues you would be hoping that other countries follow suit.
Go France Go!
> Legislate XBOX and PS and Nintendo compatability.
This is a whole different problem. We're not talking about some random product, like a lawnmower (which has to comply with many regulations) or a video game, which are not in the general case considered as relevant regarding to the literary and artistic work regulations (think Berne Convention).
> No fan of DRM here, but I am no a fan of government
> interference where they have no clue what they are
> asking for.
They ask for a minimal guarantee that companies don't build monopolies based on some random technical excuse. But it seems that you are not really a fan of fair competition.
@ 73/Thill : " #71 o rly (Is that you, Bill O'reilly)? You really cannot get a joke huh?? I guess that makes you a Microsoft fanboy huh (let me guess your MP3 player of choice is either a Sony or a Rio)? Sorry to hear about another Vista delay, maybe you can convince a foreign government to sue Microsoft....
I better keep this post short so you can actually read it, since you seem incapable of reading more than a few sentences at a time... Sorry there are no pop-up pictures...
Viva La Microsoft, you M$ fanboy!"
lol is that the best you can do? You make a stupid comment that contradicts your previous statement so you reply that it's a "joke?" Yeah sure iPod fanboy, nice try to save yourself but you've already "outed" yourself.
Someone who likes something other than an iPod must love Microsoft or Sony or Rio/Sigmatel? Sounds like more iPod iFanboy speak to me.
How sad, the quality of iPod fanboys has deteriorated. I'd say you can do better next time, but you are an iPod fanboy after all.
What is with all these people trying to some how justify this incredible dumb decision with their hate for DRM. The only people who do not like DRM are people who like to pirate music. This claim that removing DRM will some how increase sales is ludicrous its like criminals saying if you remove the locks in your house then there will be less crime. I mean I have never had a problem with a DRM song bought on iTunes. I mean are you going to tell me that you are honestly the type of person that is having a problem with having their music on just 5 computers. I just never really had that experience were I found myself wishing that I could play the music I bought on my sixth computer. I mean who owns and runs iTunes on six different computers. And is desirous of playing the same songs on each of them, no less. Come on guys, the only people who are anti-DRM are the people who want to pirate music.
As for the lack of choose, you have plenty of choose. You have Napster, Microsoft, Apple, Creative, etc. I feel like those pushing this law are just these embittered politicians that are angry that one company is actually succeeding in France. Oh no, we need to cripple the company that at this time is making the best product just so these inferior products that no one chose in the first place will have a better chance. Lets let the market roll, if the product suck no one will buy. The consumer will choose the best product. Apple has plenty of competition cell phones, other mp3 makers, and 9 billion dollars in Microsofts bank account. Try telling Microsoft that Apple has no competition.
Why do people think this is an anti-DRM bill? It specifically excludes DVDs from the law. You want to make something that can play DVDs without paying the DVDCCA? You want to make DVDs without paying the DVDCCA? Nope, this law won't help you.
This is a handout for local companies Vivendi and Archos. This isn't a consumer-driven bill.
Funny thing is, there has been a huge increase in iPod advertisements all over billboards and metro's in Paris.
Wonder if they are trying to build up support for their case by pumping the market full of iPods and then telling consumers that the French gov't has taken away their iTunes store...
"It's not about the player people currently own, it's about music you have already legally purchased. If I have an iPod and I go to iTunes and purchase 1000 songs...I don't know that I'm STUCK with an iPod forever at this point."
How is buying a song from iTunes different from buying software for a game console? If I had bought a NES in 1985, spent thousands of dollars on cartridge games and the NES broke in 1995, should I have yelled and screamed that Nintendo didn't put support for NES games in the SNES?
How is that scenario any different than the one you described? In both cases I have the knowledge that the NES/iPod is the *only* player for the software I am purchasing -- well, portable player, I'll always be able to play the music in the iTunes computer software.
I just don't see the point of introducing new legislation to force Apple's hand in something that is, in the end, a business decision. I just hope that no one in the United States is foolish enough to propose such a bill, yet alone vote for it.
@ Virgil, you might want to read the complete article over again, your iFanboy is showing. lol @ France angry with one company's success, iDiot.
@ 82 / Jim F : "How is buying a song from iTunes different from buying software for a game console? If I had bought a NES in 1985, spent thousands of dollars on cartridge games and the NES broke in 1995, should I have yelled and screamed that Nintendo didn't put support for NES games in the SNES?
How is that scenario any different than the one you described? In both cases I have the knowledge that the NES/iPod is the *only* player for the software I am purchasing -- well, portable player, I'll always be able to play the music in the iTunes computer software."
Well Jim F, I don't think many people bought an NES game hoping it would fit in their SMS, Atari 2600, or ColecoVision; however a lot of people buy songs from a subscription/rental service and think it will play on any DAP player. Your analogy seems to be about backwards compatiblity (NES->SNES), while France seems to be on a "DRM'd music crosswide compatiblity" issue.
I'm rather amazed at most of the posts here. Let's review for a moment: the law doesn't say you cannot have DRM. It says 'you cannot use DRM to force a consumer to use ONLY your devices'. This is a GOOD thing people. It's good for consumers. It's actually good for the industry.
It doesn't eliminate DRM. It makes DRM do what it's supposed to be doing - protecting music from illegal copying. Companies like Apple and Microsoft use that as a way to force buy their music and only use it on their products. That is NOT a DRM function and it harms the consumer.
The French law is the first seriously pro-consumer law that's come out of the last few years of obsessively pro-business shift in IP law. It's about time this happened.
All of you who are putting down the French government - I want to ask you one question: what do YOU gain from Apple being able to lock your choice of music to their iPod? (Or Microsoft to FairPlay... or Real to RealVideo...) Unless you work for (or own shared in) these companies, your first and ONLY obligation should be to your own interests and DRM in any form is NOT in your immediate interests as a consumer. It only has value if it provides access to more product in a way you find acceptable. Adding brand locking (iTMS only on iTunes) adds no value to you as a consumer over a generic cross-platform DRM - in fact, it decreases value since it reduces your options and choices.
I wish people would start thinking as *consumers* and not as brand zealots or worse, as if they were producers of products, because you're not and you have little, if anything to gain from thinking that way.
You are not Apple, you are not a part of Apple, Apple doesn't know who you are, they don't love you and Apple is not your friend. Apple wants your money and they'll do whatever it takes to get it.
Get over it.
#86. Jeff, I hear what you are saying, and I don't necessarily disagree with you. But there are some points that are important here:
1. Apple makes very little money (based on their total revenue) on iTunes. They make most of their profit off the iPod player itself. iTunes was designed, from the ground up, to work exclusively with the iPod. It will not be trivial to open iTunes up to every available MP3 player on the market or not, whether Apple wants to or not, and I am still not sure that Apple should really be forced to do this.
2. If it is agreed that it is "illegal" to have incompatible DRM's across players this opens up a whole can of worms from record companies. This gives them the opportunity to to enforce a very resrtictive DRM across all music players that hurts us, the consumers.
Personally, I could care less if somebody can download iTunes songs on their Rio player, or download Napster content onto their iPod. Makes zero difference to me. But if the record companies restict how many players you can put a song on (one), if you are able to make copies of that song, if you can burn that song (more than once) onto a CD, and whether or not I can have the song on more than one computer, then this would be a really, really, bad thing...
Like Apple or not, without them we would most likely not have the flexibility with the music that we pay for today. It is not a secret that the only reason we have the Fair Play system today is because Steve Jobs was in a postion (and is a stubborn egomaniac) to play hardball with the record companies.
I still don't think Jobs will cave on opening up Apple DRM to all companies even if it means pulling out of France. This is a guy that would not give his ex-girlfriend one penny for his daughter because he refused to accept that he was the father (even though the guy named one of the biggest projects in Apple's history after her, Lisa).
Jeff,
On a personal level I can agree with you on the potential benefits of a universally-compatible DRM, if implemented correclty. Honestly though, I don't buy enough digital music for it to make a difference to me.
My issue is a philosophical one pure and simple - I don't believe that government has any business telling businesses how to market their products.
I am a strong believer in personal responsibility; if a consumer does not choose to educate themself on how music downloads work and what players play what than that is their problem. If you spend $300 on an iPod and then drop a few hundred at iTMS and decide that you really wanted a Rio -- that is your problem plain and simple. Do some research, stop looking at the government to legislate things to "protect you" from your own choices.
I'm not approaching this subject as a "brand zealot," but rather as a Libertarian. Consumers need to make their own choices, business need to make their own choices -- and governments need to stay out of people's lives as much as possible.
Additionally, I am rather dubious of any government's legislation when it comes to technology. The spirit of such legislation might make a lot of sense "for the consumer" on the surface, but how often does this actually translate into successful implementation?
This entire issue seems like a clear case of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." The market has spoken with their dollars (or in this case, Euros). If Apple felt that it was a good business decision to open up FairPlay for use on other players or to addd PlayRight to the iPod they would. However, they do not -- if consumers were outraged to the point where this legislation might even seem remotely necessary Apple wouldn't be making the money they are on the iPod/iTMS product.
People have a wide choice of MP3 player solutions at this point -- while the iPod certainly is ubiquitous, it is not the only player out there.
There should also be some perspective here. We are not discussion legislation to encourage stem cell research, to help fund cancer research or to attempt to stop the spread of HIV/AIDS in Africa -- we're talking about fucking iPods.
Jim
I say go France!
What Jobs tried to do with the itunes + ipod combination is contrary to the very essence of the path digital music should take. He just added another intermediary to the purchase relation, and with the Ipod getting circa 85% share of the mp3player market, it is intentfully monopolistic, when the only ones who should be getting any money from music are the very artists that make it. I think the ideal model for digital music would be purchasing it through the artist web page and the only drm appliable to it should be one that would't allow you to share it to p2p networks.
Some further thoughts: music is supposed to be art, not a product. The ones to blame for that change are the RIAA, recording companies, etc. who for the latest years have been jamming our ears and radiowaves with sh** that can be hardly called music anyway. You stop that process, art begins to breathe again