Apple to France: not so fast, mon ami
By Ryan Block 
posted March 22nd 2006 9:01AM
posted March 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.
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