I really don't care about what the government is or isn't getting out of this. The main reason I can't stand iPods is that if you wish to legally purchase music for one via download, you're left only with iTunes as an option. And subsequently, if you then wish to purchase another brand of player, you're left without all that legally-purchased music.

Now personally, I don't buy music downloads (except the latest Barenaked Ladies release which was 99 cents for three songs in MP3 format), but instead buy the CD and rip it to the format I want. But many people are enchanted by the convenience of this concept and spend a lot of money on it. Considering there are frequently better options than the iPod for hardware, these people are now left with choosing between a better player, or the possibly hundreds of dollars they've spent on music. When compared that way, most are going to settle for the potentially-inferior iPod in order to hold onto the music thye've purchased. Seems almost like extortion to me.

If this bill and concept became common, and suddenly music purchased for one player or another was compatible, I'd actually be slightly MORE likely to buy an iPod. It's only Apple's severely-limited format support and closed-off DRM that makes me ignore even their best players (although right now my Creative Zen Vision: M bests them in nearly every way). If they actually made a unit that managed to be the best hardware available and didn't close off my options, I'd be all over it. At least until their competition managed to one-up them again.