THE European Union's consumer chief has hit out at Apple's bundling of its iPod music players and its iTunes online music store. "Do you think it's fine that a CD plays in all CD players but that an iTunes song only plays in an iPod? I don't. Something has to change," EU Consumer Protection Commissioner Meglena Kuneva was quoted as saying in weekly magazine Focus. Apple could not be immediately reached for comment on the report.
Norway, a European country that is not in the EU, is battling Apple for the same reason. In January, it said the computer and software giant must liberalise its music download system by October 1 or face legal action. Pressure on Apple has been building, with consumer rights organisations from Germany, France, Finland and Norway recently agreeing a joint position in their battles against iTunes. They argue that Apple uses digital rights technology to limit consumers' free use of songs bought on iTunes, including the ability to copy and transfer songs to other users and other MP3 devices besides the Apple iPod. Both at the national and EU levels, however, the issue has been looked at by consumer agencies rather than the competition watchdogs whose role it is to decide whether a business activity violates rules on fair competition
View: The full story
News source: AustralianIT
Norway, a European country that is not in the EU, is battling Apple for the same reason. In January, it said the computer and software giant must liberalise its music download system by October 1 or face legal action. Pressure on Apple has been building, with consumer rights organisations from Germany, France, Finland and Norway recently agreeing a joint position in their battles against iTunes. They argue that Apple uses digital rights technology to limit consumers' free use of songs bought on iTunes, including the ability to copy and transfer songs to other users and other MP3 devices besides the Apple iPod. Both at the national and EU levels, however, the issue has been looked at by consumer agencies rather than the competition watchdogs whose role it is to decide whether a business activity violates rules on fair competition
View: The full story News source: AustralianIT
Example: http://www.cnbc.com/id/17258736
Computing-centric sites typically don't report elevator news. They do report Microsoft and Apple news, therefore we see a skewed version of events.
Personal jetpacks, FTW!
But it is unfair to only target itunes and apple when Microsoft have there own format that yes is supported by more stores but still there format cant be played on an ipod, a mac or a linux or other box.
please EU your representing Europe when you talk get the facts right!
Ok get your facts right - first, Apple are a _monopoly_ (just like MS is in a different market) - this is not a good thing for you and me (the consumer). Second, Apple sustain that monopoly by _not licencing_ their DRM - something which MS actually does (believe it or not). So Apple are in a position of dominating the market and effectively locking out competition. Nice.
Err.. what?
WMA doesn't work on the iPod because Apple won't let it - not because Microsoft won't. Apple disabled that ability in the chip. And i don't use a mac or linux, but i'm pretty sure there are players for both operating systems that play WMA...
Ok get your facts right - first, Apple are a _monopoly_ (just like MS is in a different market) - this is not a good thing for you and me (the consumer). Second, Apple sustain that monopoly by _not licencing_ their DRM - something which MS actually does (believe it or not). So Apple are in a position of dominating the market and effectively locking out competition. Nice.
Apple has a monopoly on their products, much like Microsoft has a monopoly on the Windows OS, much like Ford has a monopoly on Fusion cars....etc etc. There is nothing wrong with these monopolies. They all dominate their respective market (well maybe not the Fusion). Microsoft got into trouble by using anti-competitive tactics. What has Apple done to keep other companies from succeeding in the portable music player or the online music stores? Nothing at all. Creative, Microsoft, and whomever the hell else can enter these markets. All Apple is doing is protecting their products. If they choose to not let some music format on THEIR players, they have that right. If they choose to not allow other players to play songs purchased from THEIR store, they have that right.
There is nothing wrong with these monopolies.They all dominate their respective market (well maybe not the Fusion). Microsoft got into trouble by using anti-competitive tactics. What has Apple done to keep other companies from succeeding in the portable music player or the online music stores?Nothing at all.Creative, Microsoft, and whomever the hell else can enter these markets. All Apple is doing is protecting their products. [??] If they choose to not let some music format on THEIR players, they have that right. If they choose to not allow other players to play songs purchased from THEIR store, they have that right.All Apple is doing is protecting their products? From what exactly? And isn't that something Microsoft would say?
Microsoft seems to be pushing their .wma format out to third parties, Apple is pushing their AAC nowhere and holding it to their own MP3 player. Maybe that doesn't seem wrong to you, but when the iPod's holding back playability to make sure people use iTunes or vice versa, it's doesn't help any of us consumers.
Either way, if you look at other places using the same argument, well.. would it be okay for Microsoft to not allow other third party applications of its choice to work on THEIR OS? Or if they chose to not allow say iTunes to install on Windows? Would that be okay? Or would that seem a bit.. anit-competitive? Ya know, considering that there are many more PC users than Mac users, Apple needs Windows functionality because I don't about the rest of you guys, but I'll be damned if I'm going to buy a stupid Mac just to play my iPod.
(Oh, and for the jackass that wants to bring up "iTunes doesn't work for Vista", that's something Apple's got to work on, not Microsoft. Same way every program developer has to make their application work for a new/different OS.)
Ok get your facts right - first, Apple are a _monopoly_ (just like MS is in a different market) - this is not a good thing for you and me (the consumer). Second, Apple sustain that monopoly by _not licencing_ their DRM - something which MS actually does (believe it or not). So Apple are in a position of dominating the market and effectively locking out competition. Nice.
Apple has a monopoly on their products, much like Microsoft has a monopoly on the Windows OS, much like Ford has a monopoly on Fusion cars....etc etc. There is nothing wrong with these monopolies. They all dominate their respective market (well maybe not the Fusion). Microsoft got into trouble by using anti-competitive tactics. What has Apple done to keep other companies from succeeding in the portable music player or the online music stores? Nothing at all. Creative, Microsoft, and whomever the hell else can enter these markets. All Apple is doing is protecting their products. If they choose to not let some music format on THEIR players, they have that right. If they choose to not allow other players to play songs purchased from THEIR store, they have that right.
If Fusion was a popular car, and if Ford also happened to have petrol company, this case would be like Ford limiting Fusion to its own petrol products. It probably wouldn't be illegal, but it would be taking unfair advantage of being both a petrol company and a car manufacturer.
edit: winmoose beat me with the metaphor
arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrghhhhhhhhhhhh
Wow, a politician with a brain!
DRM is largely a market control tool nowadays, and not just for copy protection.
Sure, what we will no doubt see here is the old brain dead "if you dun like it dun use it!" comment, but with that stance, we won't get far in good business practices. I'd much rather be able to use iTunes but be free in which players I choose.
It's simple what needs to be done, either abolishing DRM (which may not happen very soon), or doing something akin to what the movie industry has done. Standardizing on a protection scheme like AACS and using that. Then Apple as well as MS can go and encrypt their stuff in DRM Standard X and apply access rights in some standardized way. Protection and security has nothing to do with making things propreitary anyway... AES is an international encryption standard and it works great! Why can't a common DRM standard then exist?
Last edited by Jugalator on 12 Mar 2007 - 13:14
Oh yeah, cuz they always were, they just suck at it.
Whats next?
Suing Ford because their parts won't work in a Suziki?
Suing Atari because their games don't work on Linux?
Suing lock makers because their keys only work in their locks? (imagine this is already in process).
As far as Atari making games for windows only, windows isn't locked so only MS can make games for windows, the reason you can't play Aatari windows games on Linux is technical in nature, it's not an introduced limitation caused by anddign a non licenseable DRM to the games. And you can play windows games on linux if Linux has the right libraries to support it, wine/Cedega
Keys are allready pretty mcuh standardized you know. You can go ot a place that makes keys and they can make the key for you from a set of standard key molds.
Your ford/suzuki analogy would be more likecomplaingin you can remove the zune diisplay and put it on an iPod. And cars are just like CD and everything else standardized, anyone can make tired andwheels for any car you don't need o buy special ford gas. Your radio doesn't tune in to only ford radio and you can also replace it with any stanadard car radio.
Your arguments only goes to prove that Apple's DRM shoudl be licensed so that anyoen can use it on their devices.
It is more akin to ford selling a car, then saying you can only fill it with special ford petrol, which is inflated in price and no one else can produce.
If that was the case then you would be seriously ****ed off.
Your analogies only work if Ford embedded a chip in their parts which meant they refused to function when not part of a Ford car.
Apple's store.
Apple's right to decide the terms of use of said product and store.
Seems the EU is moving a little too far to the left on this one.
Do you think it's fine that a CD plays in all CD players but that an iTunes song only plays in an iPod? I don't. Something has to change.
And a swing and a miss . . . a CD is itself a standardized medium on which information is stored (at this point.) An iTunes song is only a particular file format with protective elements attached to it. Apples and oranges.
And where's the uproar from consumers??? The iTunes store is doing excellent business. It seems this DRM issue is *not* being pushed to the fore by the average consumer.
Who, then, is fueling this argument? Cui bono?
Is it unfair for someone to have to buy a CD player to listen to an audio CD?
but why should Apple abide by such silly standard and rules of competition and consumer rights, just because every other product class has to abide by standard of consumer rights doesn't mean they have to.. or should.. they're apple, they can't do anythign bad...
Making apple license their DRM so the CONSUMER is able to play THEIR music, THEY payed for with THEIR money in any DAP device THEY choose to is not a bad thing. It's called consumer rights, why you would even argue this is questionable, akin to something like blind faith, but then there's a lot of that in your posting history when Apple is involved.
Even Apple wouldn't be hurt by licensing Fairplay, they'd get money form licensing, and they'd still get money from sellign iPod. afterall iPod are a superior device and peopel would still buy it even if it's not the only DAP you can use with iTunes... right... ? or are you saying locking customers in is the only way for apple to sell the iPod?
As I have said, and has been stated several times over by everyone inthe industry and consyumer right organizations. Digital music may in some cases by tech limited to play on only certain devices true, but this isn't true for iTunes music, the reaosn you can't play iTunes music on other devices is because they are sold with "protective" code that only allows it to be played on the iPod. a code that could easily be licensed to third parties and still be secure, if apple wasn't using it to only lock customers to iTunes. afterall if MS can make their DRM licenseable and still be more hack proof than FairPlay... Then surely Apple can do it as well, or is their FairPlay protection inferior and so fragile they can't share it with anyone because it will instantly be broken then ?
and yes, this is entrapment :p
Apple's store."
Yes, and they have the right to not sell their products in Europe if they dislike European consumer protection laws.
+1
People can like Apple all they want but its actions here only serve their shareholders and restrict consumers. I don't see why people are so quick to defend multi-billion dollar companies seeking to make more profit, particularly when here Apple has a negative impact upon the market and the consumer.
<bender>Ahahahaha. Oh wait, you're serious. Let me laugh harder.</bender>
Superior how? Market share? Or because it plays Fairplay tracks from iTunes? It's not because it has better audio fidelity or a greater range of supported formats like my 3 year old Karma does...
and when MS moves their Zune store and copy protection over to europ makign a Zune-zune lock in, they will go after MS as well.
and when MS moves their Zune store and copy protection over to europ makign a Zune-zune lock in, they will go after MS as well.
Didn't think of that. Good point.
Buying toothpaste at Wal-Mart doesn't require a Wal-Mart toothbrush.
Apple intentionally created a proprietary format to make money. They're shutting out their competitors purposefully. That's illegal.
If you don't want DRM then forget about buying music online(for a while at least).
The EU knows very well that the big four record companies refused to sell music on-line unless there was strict control over what can be done with the files once downloaded. Steve pointed out that on-line sales account for less that 10% of the world music sales - which leaves 90% of music DRM free. Apple has been forced to do a deal that required strict use of DRM
Please don't act as if Jobs is in between a rock and a hard place. He loves the situation he's in. He gets to make money off of the RIAA's scare tactics all the while making more money on selling his bolt-on player.
I don't believe the record companies said anything about that, in fact I believe they said they'ld love for him to license fairPlay to others.
You can stick your head in the sand and continue to be raped by multi-billion dollar companies (seeking to make a profit and please their shareholders) if you so desire but don't try to include me in that - I support the EU's consumer protection laws and the way they have been enforced. I have no sympathy for Steve Jobs, in fact I rather dislike that little windbag.
No, people don't know that.
that's the dumbest thing I've read yet
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.