July 1st, 2006, 08:23 AM
France Lawmakers Approve 'ITunes Law'
now i hear that this 'iPod" device and the "iTunes" service is quite popular with the young people? my heart sings at the importance a government places upon media devices and licensing; there are no other concerns to deal with, correct? meaning like crime, poverty, corrupt officials, environment concerns, etc.? and no, that is not pointed at the French, but governments in general, they all have their moments.
iTunes and French Lawmakers Link
so, okay, should Apple be forced to allow the iPod player and iTunes service compatible with rival offerings? i am no expert in free market or enterprise, however, as a consumer, that melding would be convenient, however as a business person, i might feel it threatens my competitive advantage. other ideas?
France Lawmakers Approve 'ITunes Law'
By LAURENCE FROST and NATHALIE SCHUCK, Associated Press Writers
Fri Jun 30, 6:53 PM
PARIS - French lawmakers gave final approval Friday to government-backed legislation that could force Apple Computer Inc. to make its iPod music player and iTunes online store compatible with rivals' offerings.
Both the Senate and the National Assembly, France's lower house, voted in favor of the copyright bill, which some analysts believe may cause Apple to close iTunes France and pull its market-leading player from the country's shelves.
\"Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? The Shadow knows!\"
\"The weed of crime, bears bitter fruit...\"
July 1st, 2006, 09:17 AM
I can remember way back then, when Big Blue (IBM) were hit with an anti-trust action for deliberately tweaking their microcode to make rival manufacturers' kit incompatible.
however, as a consumer, that melding would be convenient, however as a business person, i might feel it threatens my competitive advantage. other ideas?
That was back in the days of 5250 dumb terminals and the IBM PC and possibly PC XT had just started to appear. My boss thought he was the cat's pyjamas because he had a PC that did 5250 emulation!
In a similar vein, I think it was HP that fell foul of European anti-trust legislation by trying to fix their printers so you could only use (overpriced) HP ink cartridges? (/me has Dremel and hypodermic syringe )
Polaroid won their case though. There was a mob who made cameras, but Polaroid didn't care about that, as they actually sold cameras at a loss!..... BUT when the "Yellow God" tried to make Polaroid compatible film, they got hammered in the courts
July 1st, 2006, 06:07 PM
Uhm Johnno you forgot to mention MicroSoft and it's string of AntiTrust law suits..
Anyhow i don't see why they should have to make there software product what ever compatible with rival company's software, i mean they spent a fortune developing it etc, so why should some other company that hasn't even done squat cash in on there product.
i personally would just pull the item's etc and cut my losses, but then again i just don't like to share full stop..
July 1st, 2006, 11:08 PM
Personally, I don't understand how they can even apply anti-trust to the Ipod. If I remember correctly, a trust only exist when a competitor makes it impossible for others to penetrate the market? This is absolutely not the case, especially where prices are concerned. There are TONS of other services and products that are MUCH cheaper and just as good--some arguably better.
Consumers do already have a vast choice. They actively choose to purchase an overpriced, proprietary system (fully aware of the alternatives) to meet the status quo, or simply because they believe the service to be the best. Where is the lack of choice? They know it's proprietary before-hand, so why is Apple being forced?
"Whenever there's a choice, for consumers it's always a good thing," said Michael Gikas, a spokesman for the U.S.-based Consumers Union.
"Any artist's work that is legally acquired should be playable on any digital device," Culture Minister Renaud Donnedieu de Vabres told lawmakers before the vote.
Anyway, it's the French youth that lose out on this one. Apple said they would simply stop selling the Ipod products in France if this legislation where to pass. They make so much profit elsewhere with this proprietary software that they don't need France. Funny.
\"Greatness only comes at great risk.\" ~ Personal/Generic
July 2nd, 2006, 10:40 AM
Realistically, the issue would seem to be hardware and software/media?
The French government don't seem to like the idea of the iPod hardware being required for the media that Apple are also distributing?
Fronties~ I think that MS are a unique case, as they actually profit from compatibility, given that they are basically an OS provider?
July 2nd, 2006, 11:24 AM
Thanks for clearing that one up for me Johnno. I was thinking about it earlier while discussing it with my dad.
Originally posted here by nihil
I think that MS are a unique case, as they actually profit
from compatibility, given that they are basically an OS provider?
And i new i was thinking in the wrong direction, once again..
July 2nd, 2006, 12:07 PM
Hi there Fronties~ ,
I am probably a fair bit older than your Dad?
I go back to the days of 80 column punched cards, mainframes and dumb terminals!
If you looked at IBM, Apple, and ICL (a much smaller British outfit) they had a business model that sold both hardware and software. Other outfits like Compaq, Digital, HP and so on just did hardware as their main business model.
Then there were people like Corel and Lotus who did applications only...............
Bill Gates came along with an "operating system only" approach, and at first lived off IBM? It was a new business model, and it worked! (that is probably why he is the richest individual on the planet?)
He relied on others to provide the hardware and just went for the OS and a few applications (Office, for example?)
The problem that MS have, is that they are too dominant which is the same anti-trust situation that IBM faced back then............... and Standard Oil before that. The Apple situation is rather interesting, in that they provide a service that requires you to use their hardware?
I mentioned Polaroid, they make money out of selling the consumables, not the hardware and have never attempted to defend their hardware.
I guess that the anti-trust legislators don't like you trying to have both, so Apple get a slapped wrist and Polaroid are ignored?
My conclusion is that Apple have an outdated business model and really need to decide where their income is to come from............ but that is a problem they have had for some years IMO.
July 2nd, 2006, 03:28 PM
There is a deeper philosophical question here. If you buy a lamp or
a coffee maker, the maker is free to design in as he sees fit
up to the point where it plugs in to the wall. there is a government
specified interface there, presumably for safety, but maybe other reasons as well.
He who controls the interfaces controls the world. Who controls the relationships
(interfaces) between human beings? Church? State? Lawyers? Businesses not only
want to have a proprietary product, they want to own the interfaces.
Apple, Microsoft, Real player all want a vertical music monopoly. The device, the software,
the music. They want to take a commodity like water, slap a designer label on it
and say you can only drink it with a meal that they supply.
By the nature of the internet, governments have to be involved since so
many of the wires (or fiber) of net backbone run over gov't owned land,
and the telecoms that own that infrastructure are monopolies or semi-monopolies.
Apple shouldn't attempt to play hardball with the French gov't.
I needed money cause I had None
I fought the law and the law won
I fought the law and the law won
I came in to the world with nothing. I still have most of it.
July 2nd, 2006, 03:38 PM
C'mon rcgreen ......... this is a full disclosure site, tell it how it is?
We all know that George Bush is spying on us through the negative pin/socket
there is a government specified interface there, presumably for safety, but maybe other reasons as well
"robbing people with a six-gun,
I fought the Law and the Law won"
I did not even follow your link
July 3rd, 2006, 04:11 PM
If you don't like the format that iPod save their files in. Be a FREE person and don't use it. There are hundred of portable players on the market. Besides if one uses their brain they can change the import function of the iPod to MP3. It's like 4 mouse clicks. I know, I own one. It kicks ass.
Apple developed an audio format with digital rights management. If you download something from iTunes you are forced to use the format that limits copying. You can agree with that or not. I don't use it. But any music you rip can be imported using Mp3. So I am wondering who pissed off who in France. Oh, it only takes a couple of minutes to find full on iPod rippers what get around most of the controls anyway. At least on paper.
Not sure how forcing on online company developed for a certain device to work with other devices is fair in a free society but I am not French. That is why other online services thrive as well using MP3 over the iPods AAC. The good thing for iPods users, assuming apple doesn't stop selling them in that free and open society is all the hacks that would come out to thwart iTunes controls. Just like Dish Network hacks. And if that is also the case prices for songs will go up. iTunes is kind of superior to other services. So perhaps if they do chose to remain open, the others will go belly up as the masses swarm to iTunes. I know I would. I only steer away from iTunes because of the AAC format.
Basically France is saying... intellectual property here... no thanks. Cool by me. Their country.
West of House
You are standing in an open field west of a white house, with a boarded front door.
There is a small mailbox here.