Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

France To Force iTunes to Open to Other Players?

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 8 years ago | from the capitalism-doesn't-always-play-nice dept.

325

JordanL writes "It appears that France is pushing through a law that some feel may force Apple to open iTunes to other players. From the article: 'Under a draft law expected to be voted in parliament on Thursday, consumers would be able to legally use software that converts digital content into any format. It would no longer be illegal to crack digital rights management -- the codes that protect music, films and other content -- if it is to enable to the conversion from one format to another.'"

cancel ×

325 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Journalism at its finest (4, Insightful)

Phroggy (441) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914077)

Music downloaded from Apple's iTunes online music store currently can only be played on iPods. ...and Macs and Windows PCs using any application that uses QuickTime, including iTunes and (I believe) recent versions of RealPlayer.

The law, if enacted, could prompt Apple to shut its iTunes store in France, some industry observers say, to keep from making songs vulnerable to conversion outside France, too.

If Apple had to shut down iTMS in France, its competition would have to shut down for the same reason.

"The person who will have converted iTunes songs will be able to make it available elsewhere," Marc Guez, head of the French Collecting Society for Music Producers rights (SCPP) told Reuters.

Not legally. The music is still protected by copyright law. Currently, the DRM can be removed illegally, and then the music can be illegally shared. Making the first step legal doesn't make the second step legal.

The law would also mean that other online French music retailers such as Fnac, part of PPR, would have to make iTunes songs available on their Web sites.

Can anyone translate this from journalist-speak to tech-speak for me? What exactly would Fnac have to make available?

Police agents can monitor music exchange Web sites and trace back the email address of beneficiaries by asking the Internet service provider for it through a court order.

Presumably they meant they can ask the ISP for the billing information of the customer who was using a particular IP address (not e-mail address), which the police agents obtained through monitoring P2P services (not Web sites).

Re:Journalism at its finest (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14914104)

I would have made some kind of retort here, but I was blindsided by your three digit number.

So, ah, don't you have 8-tracks to convert?

Some explanations ... (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14914109)

"The law would also mean that other online French music retailers such as Fnac, part of PPR, would have to make iTunes songs available on their Web sites."

Fnac is a quite powerfull culture oriented retail group that has setup their own music file format. The point is that FNAC is one of the biggest music product seller in France. It has been proven by testers that Fnac salespersons were "not pushing at all" the Apple products and trying to push the products that were compatible with the online Fnac music store !

The law is just adding more anti-trust principles on digital music, so that corporate trust can not force people to by their own product and can not force the the people to by only at their shop.

Re:Some explanations ... (3, Interesting)

Phroggy (441) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914131)

Fnac is a quite powerfull culture oriented retail group that has setup their own music file format. The point is that FNAC is one of the biggest music product seller in France. It has been proven by testers that Fnac salespersons were "not pushing at all" the Apple products and trying to push the products that were compatible with the online Fnac music store !

The law is just adding more anti-trust principles on digital music, so that corporate trust can not force people to by their own product and can not force the the people to by only at their shop.


Thanks for the background info. The intent here sounds good, but I'm still confused as to what Fnac would be forced to do. Offer non-DRM AAC or MP3 versions of songs customers purchase from Fnac, which the copyright holders won't let them do? Offer FairPlay-encrypted DRM versions, which Apple won't let them do? Link to the iTMS?

Re:Some explanations ... (4, Interesting)

Saint Fnordius (456567) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914330)

From my (admittedly weak) understanding of the law, it means that Fnac would have to offer their songs in a format that iPods can play as well, since iPods don't support the WMA format. Since Apple won't let them have FairPlay, that means a nonencrypted MP3 or AAC format.

There seems to be some confusion in the article between iTunes and the iPod. The law would not affect just Apple, but all online music retailers and digital music players. But since Apple is the leader in both, it gets singled out.

My guess is that Apple may be forced by the recording industry to close iTMS France (after all, Steve Jobs has gone on record as saying that DRM isn't the answer), but eventually returning after a backlash from French artists and music purchasers.

Re:Some explanations ... (5, Insightful)

lovebyte (81275) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914279)

Fnac is a quite powerfull culture oriented retail group that has setup their own music file format.

They don't use their own format, they use Windows Media Audio with MS DRM. Like everyone except Apple.

Re:Journalism at its finest (2)

hashbrownie (313486) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914142)

"The person who will have converted iTunes songs will be able to make it available elsewhere," Marc Guez, head of the French Collecting Society for Music Producers rights (SCPP) told Reuters.

[comment] Not legally. The music is still protected by copyright law. Currently, the DRM can be removed illegally, and then the music can be illegally shared. Making the first step legal doesn't make the second step legal.[/comment]

You're misunderstanding Mr. Guez. He is against the law (note his affiliation), and he is arguing that if this law is passed, ordinary people will have the ability to illegally send the non-DRM'd content around the world, and thus Apple would close its French iTunes store. To him, this is a reason why the law should not be passed. In the original story, the previous paragraph explained this.

Short quotes from wire stories should not be taken out of context to criticize the story's author.

Re:Journalism at its finest (2, Interesting)

Phroggy (441) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914185)

You're misunderstanding Mr. Guez. He is against the law (note his affiliation), and he is arguing that if this law is passed, ordinary people will have the ability to illegally send the non-DRM'd content around the world, and thus Apple would close its French iTunes store. To him, this is a reason why the law should not be passed. In the original story, the previous paragraph explained this.

Alright, yes, if this law passes, it will become easier to remove DRM encryption, because the tools to do so will become legal and therefore the tools will become more readily available. So, sure, it would become easier to illegally redistribute copyrighted materials. I can't see why Apple would close the French iTMS for this reason, though. If France actually made it legal to redistribute the songs, then Apple might have a problem.

Short quotes from wire stories should not be taken out of context to criticize the story's author.

I don't believe I took anything out of context. I did quote the previous paragraph as well.

Re:Journalism at its finest (1, Interesting)

shmlco (594907) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914294)

First, Apple would close iTMS in France because its contracts require it to distribute music with FairPlay. Second, saying it's illegal to redistribute is one thing. Enforcement is something else entirely.

Personally, given its past pattern of behavior, I suspect that the French government is doing this not "for the consumer", but to drive Apple and iTMS and its foreign cultural influences out of France, opening the doorway for its own music and hardware industries.

Re:Journalism at its finest (3, Insightful)

lovebyte (81275) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914333)

but to drive Apple and iTMS and its foreign cultural influences out of France
Total BS. itunes sells exactly the same music in France as all the other online providers (in France). There is no "foreign cultural influence" there. Secondly, Vivendi is French and is the largest music publisher in the world. Thirdly it would be the first time the French government is interested in the consumers and not doing wathever the music lobbies want it to do.

Re:Journalism at its finest (3, Interesting)

Pieroxy (222434) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914462)

Actually, you're not even close to what it is. This is an amendment (dunno if it's an english word) to a law they are trying to pass, very close to the DMCA. This is there to shut up the people so they look quite positive overall with the entire thing. They they'll remove it just before getting it voted and it'll pass without the crap you're talking about.

Don't be mistaken, the music industry has a big influence in France as well, and they'll not give up on that one. Proof is the damn thing was supposed to be voted in December but the parliament is opposing much more resistance than the majors suspected.
--
XviD review [palmdrive.net]

Re:Journalism at its finest (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14914337)

The law trumps contractual clauses.

If DRM were to be made illegal then the clause in the contract requiring DRM would be invalid and non-enforcable. Just as if the record companies had a clause in their contract requiring Apple to kill a baby for every 100,000 song they sell.

The clause would be declared invalid in court and Apple would continue to sell music, just without Digital Restrictions Management.

Re:Journalism at its finest (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14914389)

Personally, given its past pattern of behavior, I suspect that the French government is doing this not "for the consumer", but to drive Apple and iTMS and its foreign cultural influences out of France, opening the doorway for its own music and hardware industries.

Hell, I live in the USA and I can't stand most of the shit our music industry makes available on iTunes. In this particular case I might be inclined to say that's a smart move on France's part.

I'll keep stealing my (better) music, thank you very much. I'm just a dick.

Re:Journalism at its finest (1, Insightful)

shmlco (594907) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914469)

"I'll keep stealing my (better) music, thank you very much. I'm just a dick."

And, apparently, a coward...

Re:Journalism at its finest (3, Insightful)

Captain Hook (923766) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914472)

Under a draft law expected to be voted in parliament on Thursday, consumers would be able to legally use software that converts digital content into any format.
Apple can still sell songs with Fairplay encryption present.

It's just that the end user would now have a legal right to break the DRM and convert the file into what ever format he needs which of course renders the DRM pointless but Apple would not be breaking their contract if this law was enacted.

Re:Journalism at its finest (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14914179)

No no, you're totaly wrong with this. I'm french so i know what i'm talking about. The law which is about to be voted is the inverse. I will be now ILLEGAL to crack drm, and even conturn the protection of the dvd to read it on a linux for example could be consider as illegal too.
This law is as strict as the american one.

The truth is that the french government want the online music store to open themselves to all the mp3 player but with the drm not without. They want them to use the same type of drm( I really don't think apple and microsoft care about France ...), but use drm become an obligation. I repeat conturn them will now be stricly forbidden.

If you understand french, go there http://eucd.info/ [eucd.info] . You will understand France is no longer freedom's country ...

Re:Journalism at its finest (1)

Tim_F (12524) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914198)

You've been around a little longer than I have, but still, that should be no excuse for practicing what you accuse others of practicing... If Apple had to shut down iTMS in France, its competition would have to shut down for the same reason Apple won't have to shut down, they will have to comply. Apple would only shut down to preserve what it already has. Not legally. The music is still protected by copyright law. Currently, the DRM can be removed illegally, and then the music can be illegally shared. Making the first step legal doesn't make the second step legal. What it does is make it easier for those that would trade the songs illegally. Are you suggesting that people should not protect what is theirs from those that would give it away to others? Anyways, next time, think a little before you write something like that.

Re:Journalism at its finest (1, Interesting)

spacecowboy420 (450426) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914287)

You're right, because once it is legal, man there will be illegal music everywhere - you'll be able to get anything you want for free! ....oh wait.

It isn't the people stealing from the artists, they buy the tickets and the cds. It is the labels. Want to pay the artists? Freely promote their music independent of the studios - they'd make more money selling cds 3 bucks a piece and more people would buy them. Imagine if you could buy a download for a nickel... or give away your music altogether in download form while making your money from live appearences. The intellectual property protection paridigm is a loser, it is inevitable your content WILL be redistibuted - it is unstoppable. If you can see it or hear it, it can be reproduced and distributed. Make music free and find a better way to pimp it out.

Jes sayin'

Re:Journalism at its finest (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14914426)

Are you suggesting that people should not protect what is theirs from those that would give it away to others?

If he isn't I will. Fuck this obsession with property. There are much more important things going on, like the warming of the Earth that will eventually kill all of us. What the fuck does property matter if we're all fucking dead?

Get over it, this fixation we have on greed and self-interest above anything rational or sane is destroying us. Just stop already!

Re:Journalism at its finest (2, Insightful)

erik_norgaard (692400) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914217)

Police agents can monitor music exchange Web sites and trace back the email address of beneficiaries by asking the Internet service provider for it through a court order.
Presumably they meant they can ask the ISP for the billing information of the customer who was using a particular IP address (not e-mail address), which the police agents obtained through monitoring P2P services (not Web sites).

Given the recent data retention directive passed by the European Commision and parlairment and required to be ratified in national laws by mid 2007, police will have access to far more data than just billing information.

See this link on data retention directive [edri.org] .

Seems like it will be legally shared (1)

Eivind Eklund (5161) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914327)

At least if the P2P laws that's up in France goes through (flat rate per month to be allowed to use P2P legally for all material). So, suddenly all of France is one big loophole. This will be interesting, indeed.

Eivind.

Re:Seems like it will be legally shared (2, Insightful)

eqdar (820698) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914438)

At least if the P2P laws that's up in France goes through (flat rate per month to be allowed to use P2P legally for all material). So, suddenly all of France is one big loophole. This will be interesting, indeed.

That's not going to happen -- the whole "global license" thing has been rejected last week -- the French government made quite a fool of itself at this occasion (removed this particular part of the proposal although it had been voted in parliament, then introducing it again), but let's say that it won't be the first time, and that they're currently having other problems to solve

Re:Journalism at its finest (1)

catwh0re (540371) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914445)

An interesting side point is that you can already remove the DRM from purchased iTMS songs(burn them to CD). However if you at-your-option decide to re-encode these to other formats a minimal loss in quality occurs.

So Apple could argue that they already allow their music's DRM to be removed, as converting it to other formats will always be a lossy experience regardless if the middle ground is a burnt-cd/disc image.

Will the law stipulate that a prestine conversion be required? (Something which isn't technically possible.)

Well gee (1)

DrMrLordX (559371) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914079)

Seems sensible enough to me, even though the precedent set by a law of this sort would put the international IP cartels in a foul mood. Aw shucks.

Were this sort of law(and its associated precedents) to become common in other EU member nations . . . oh, the possibilities.

Re:Well gee (1)

Goth Biker Babe (311502) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914112)

Were this sort of law(and its associated precedents) to become common in other EU member nations . . . oh, the possibilities.

Yes. The possibilities. Like the possibility of the complete lack of any downloadable music what so ever...

Get real! The media companies want everything locked down to the hilt. We the consumer want everything to be open. So far Apple has been walking the fine line between keeping the media companies happy enough that they are willing to allow Apple to sell their media and keeping things open enough for we the consumers to use it. Yes Apple isn't totally mythantropic. The DRM does allow them to have a control over the media players that can use music purchased from their store but would you honestly expect any of the competition to be any different.

But as at the moment I can download music, play it on my Powermac dev. box, my iBook, my iPod and my Windows dev. box and at some point I could get another device to play it on; I can redirect it to the hi-fi in the front room by wi-fi and I can also burn it on to CD and play it in my car. That sounds flexible enough to me.

All this law will do is result in the closure of the on-line stores since they will have little content to sell.

Re:Well gee (1, Insightful)

R.D.Olivaw (826349) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914188)

I don't know if such a law would pass at all. But if it does and it means that the music industry won't sell online anymore then be it. At least you can legally buy CDs and rip them to mp3s and play them on any music player. The current setup may be flexible enough for you but not for everyone. You don't intend on ever buying any other music player than an iPod? What if in 5 years there is a amazing new player with an new file format that you fancy? Would you just bite the bullet and buy all your music collection again? Oh, you would never fancy a music player not made by Apple? Ok, what if Apple decide to change their music format? I'm sure they'll look into that once the choice of new features to put in new iPods and get people to upgrade gets to a certain level, then they will want new reasons to make you upgrade. Behold the new format, better quality, smaller files, etc, but hey it doesn't work on your current iPod.

Re:Well gee (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14914205)

Yes. The possibilities. Like the possibility of the complete lack of any downloadable music what so ever...
The kids can take their balls and go home. There is lots of non-cartel music available for download.

Re:Well gee (2, Insightful)

lisaparratt (752068) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914415)

Um, I hate to break it to you, but music isn't unitary. It's not like other products. If I get a bad deal from one company buying 3 units of music, I can't go to another non-cartel company and buy another 3 units, because it won't be the same product I wanted in the first place.

If I went looking for a copy of PPS Project - AC vs DC and came home with The Greatest Country And Western Album Evar!!!11, I'd be a deeply unhappy bunny. If you, on the other hand, have no great passion for music, then by all means go and buy no name music from pretentious indie labels.

How long before.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14914391)

Servers hosted in France provide the translation service. FTP PUT your DVDs and iTunes, pull down translated DIVIX and FLAC ones, legally....

L'iPod (4, Funny)

liangzai (837960) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914080)

L'iPod est mortes, vive l'iPod!

Re:L'iPod (5, Informative)

this great guy (922511) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914119)

There is a grammatical error, the correct writing is: L'iPod est mort, vive l'iPod.

See ? Being French is advantageous. Anytime someone tries to write something in french on /. you can be sure to find an error. So just do like me:
1- Reply to fix the error.
2- Wait for the nice "+5, Informative" mod.
3- ???
4- Karma increased !

Seen it coming (5, Interesting)

macadamia_harold (947445) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914084)

It appears that France is pushing through a law that some feel may force Apple to open iTunes to other players.

French = Freedom. I think that's already been established by the US Congress [cnn.com] .

Re:Seen it coming (1, Insightful)

quizzicus (891184) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914178)

Yeah, those sissy French were totally wrong about Iraq, things are going just great* there.


*(for those who like to blow people up)

Re:Seen it coming (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14914297)

If you are an American businessman selling stuff to the DoD this war is a great way to make lot of money. At the end who cares about the few thousand guys that are dying in Iraq. Most of them come from low income family or minority background.

French have already experienced many colonial wars after ww2 by the hard way. 40 years ago, De Gaulle warned Johnson not go for Vietnam, everybody knows the end. This will be the same in Iraq shortly when US troups will go back home, a new islamic state...

Re:Seen it coming (2, Funny)

zoeblade (600058) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914405)

French = Freedom. I think that's already been established by the US Congress.

That's the reason US eateries serve "freedom" fries instead of French fries now? I did wonder... That sounds a bit petty though. Let's hope France doesn't take back the statue of liberty in retaliation!

Under what justification? (3, Insightful)

phorm (591458) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914086)

Look, iTunes is popular, as are ipods. First, one could easily enough say they are independantly popular. They do feed off each other a bit, but both were pioneers that succeeded in their own right.

Secondly, while I could definately seen reasoning that you should be able to format-shift, I don't see why people have an automatic 'right' to conversion. I mean, it shouldn't be illegal to format-shift, but neither should Apple be required to put a sytem in place to do so. There are plenty of ways for me to move to a different format. Generally, some quality loss is involved, but no more than format-shifting between physical mediums had (such as tape to CD, CD to mp3, etc).

French Law. (1)

aepervius (535155) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914136)

1) this would not be Itune specific but for EVERYBODY. The headline is inflamatorry. 2) if I remmember corerctly we have under fair use in France a right to format shift for backup purpose. I Could be wrong. But if I am not, then the automatic right for conversion is in the law. And putting DRM obstacle in the way would be, in regard to blank cd tax and other law recently made, then be either illegal or quite turning around the law the late being also frowned upon.

Re:Under what justification? (5, Insightful)

top_down (137496) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914163)

Why do we need a justification? France is a democracy which means that the people are the boss. It is clearly in their interest to be able to format-shift and it is also of interest for the economy as a whole to be able to format shift. So why not do it? There are only positives.

And no, Apple isn't required to do anything. They can take it or leave it. It's their choice to sell stuff in France.

Re:Under what justification? (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14914276)

France is a democracy which means that the people are the boss.

Actually France is a republic (the "Fifth Republic", to be exact), though many would argue the goverment is actually socialist (less so now than fifteen years ago, but much more so than the U.S.)

Yes, I'm nitpicking. But France and the U.S. are not democracies and the people do make the laws. (if it were to go to a public vote, sharing copyrighted mp3's as well as many other vices would most likely be legalized in any democracy.)

BTW, France is certainly not a "free" country, in that citizens don't have guaranteed rights that Americans supposedly have (like rights to a fair trial and freedom of speech.) Of course that's purely on paper, in actual practice the French have much more latitude to "go against the grain" and act out against the government (both foreign and domestic) as well as multinational corporations than their American counterparts... Which speaks more to national character than government policy. The French see themselves as rebels, and that's a good thing.

Wrong! (1)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914423)

Actually the French do have the right to a fair trial and freedom of speech. See http://www.hri.org/docs/ECHR50.html [hri.org]

Re:Under what justification? (2, Insightful)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914442)

France is a democratic republic. There is no contradiction in a country being both a republic and a democracy. That's why we have the clarifying terms such as "representative democracy" (which France as well as the USA both are) and "direct democracy".

And yes, I'm nitpicking... ;)

Re:Under what justification? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14914361)

> France is a democracy which means that the people are the boss.

Wrong. Only under anarchy the people are the boss. Democracy is still ruled by an elite. Try to present yourself to the next presidential election, you will see what I mean.

Re:Under what justification? (5, Insightful)

babbling (952366) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914196)

Yeah, well, currently Apple have been changing what you can do with the music you have ALREADY PURCHASED. They have been doing this via iTunes software updates. They changed the number of CDs you are "allowed" to burn for each song, and the number of computers you are "allowed" to have each song on.

I think in most countries, that would/should be regarded a very direct violation of consumers' rights. In Australia, you are supposed to get the product you paid for, not something different. By changing how you can "use" each song, Apple have essentially switched the product that people have.

Apple probably justify this by some stupid clause in their Terms & Conditions that states you don't really own the songs at all, or something. I'm sure they also have one of those "we reserve the right to change anything in the terms & conditions without notice" clauses, too.

Re:Under what justification? (1)

gellenburg (61212) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914324)

Here's the EULA (formatting will probably be screwed up):

The relevant section (under section 4, iTunes Music Store):

Apple and its licensors reserve the right to change, suspend, remove, or disable access to any Services at any time without notice. In no event will Apple be
liable for the removal of or disabling of access to any such Services. Apple may also impose limits on the use of or access to certain Services, in any case and
without notice or liability.

Then again, customers have no box to stand on to complain. THis language has been in the EULA since the beginning.

English
Apple Computer, Inc.
Software License Agreement for iTunes
PLEASE READ THIS SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT ("LICENSE") CAREFULLY BEFORE USING THE APPLE SOFTWARE. BY USING THE APPLE SOFTWARE,
YOU ARE AGREEING TO BE BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THIS LICENSE. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS LICENSE, DO NOT USE THE
SOFTWARE. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THE LICENSE, YOU MAY RETURN THE APPLE SOFTWARE TO THE PLACE WHERE YOU OBTAINED
IT FOR A REFUND. IF THE APPLE SOFTWARE WAS ACCESSED ELECTRONICALLY, CLICK "DISAGREE/DECLINE". FOR APPLE SOFTWARE INCLUDED WITH
YOUR PURCHASE OF HARDWARE, YOU MUST RETURN THE ENTIRE HARDWARE/SOFTWARE PACKAGE IN ORDER TO OBTAIN A REFUND.
IMPORTANT NOTE: This software may be used to reproduce materials. It is licensed to you only for reproduction of non-copyrighted materials,
materials in which you own the copyright, or materials you are authorized or legally permitted to reproduce. This software may also be used for
remote access to music files for listening between computers. Remote access of copyrighted music is only provided for lawful personal use or as
otherwise legally permitted. If you are uncertain about your right to copy or permit access to any material you should contact your legal advisor.
1. General. The software, documentation and any fonts accompanying this License whether on disk, in read only memory, on any other media or in any other
form (collectively the "Apple Software") are licensed, not sold, to you by Apple Computer, Inc. ("Apple") for use only under the terms of this License, and
Apple reserves all rights not expressly granted to you. The rights granted herein are limited to Apple's and its licensors' intellectual property rights in the
Apple Software and do not include any other patents or intellectual property rights. You own the media on which the Apple Software is recorded but
Apple and/or Apple's licensor(s) retain ownership of the Apple Software itself. The terms of this License will govern any software upgrades provided by
Apple that replace and/or supplement the original Apple Software product, unless such upgrade is accompanied by a separate license in which case the
terms of that license will govern.
2. Permitted License Uses and Restrictions. This License allows you to install and use the Apple Software. The Apple Software may be used to reproduce
materials so long as such use is limited to reproduction of non-copyrighted materials, materials in which you own the copyright, or materials you are
authorized or legally permitted to reproduce. You may not make the Apple Software available over a network where it could be used by multiple
computers at the same time. You may make one copy of the Apple Software in machine-readable form for backup purposes only; provided that the backup
copy must include all copyright or other proprietary notices contained on the original. Except as and only to the extent expressly permitted in this License or
by applicable law, you may not copy, decompile, reverse engineer, disassemble, modify, or create derivative works of the Apple Software or any part
thereof. THE APPLE SOFTWARE IS NOT INTENDED FOR USE IN THE OPERATION OF NUCLEAR FACILITIES, AIRCRAFT NAVIGATION OR COMMUNICATION
SYSTEMS, AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEMS, LIFE SUPPORT MACHINES OR OTHER EQUIPMENT IN WHICH THE FAILURE OF THE APPLE SOFTWARE COULD LEAD
TO DEATH, PERSONAL INJURY, OR SEVERE PHYSICAL OR ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE.
3. Transfer. You may not rent, lease, lend or sublicense the Apple Software. You may, however, make a one-time permanent transfer of all of your license
rights to the Apple Software to another party, provided that: (a) the transfer must include all of the Apple Software, including all its component parts,
original media, printed materials and this License; (b) you do not retain any copies of the Apple Software, full or partial, including copies stored on a
computer or other storage device; and (c) the party receiving the Apple Software reads and agrees to accept the terms and conditions of this License.
4. iTunes Music Store and other Services. This software enables access to Apple's iTunes Music Store which offers downloads of music for sale and other
services (collectively and individually, "Services"). Use of the Services requires Internet access and use of certain Services requires you to accept additional
terms of service which will be presented to you before you can use such Services.
You understand that by using any of the Services, you may encounter content that may be deemed offensive, indecent, or objectionable, which content may
or may not be identified as having explicit language. Nevertheless, you agree to use the Services at your sole risk and that Apple shall have no liability to
you for content that may be found to be offensive, indecent, or objectionable. Content types (including genres, sub-genres and Podcast categories and sub-
categories and the like) and descriptions are provided for convenience, and you acknowledge and agree that Apple does not guarantee their accuracy.
Certain Services may include materials from third parties or links to certain third party web sites. You acknowledge and agree that Apple is not responsible
for examining or evaluating the content or accuracy of any such third-party material or web sites. Apple does not warrant or endorse and does not assume
and will not have any liability or responsibility for any third-party materials or web sites, or for any other materials, products, or services of third parties.
Links to other web sites are provided solely as a convenience to you. You agree that you will not use any third-party materials in a manner that would
infringe or violate the rights of any other party, and that Apple is not in any way responsible for any such use by you.
You agree that the Services, including but not limited to graphics, audio clips, and editorial content, contain proprietary information and material that is
owned by Apple and/or its licensors, and is protected by applicable intellectual property and other laws, including but not limited to copyright, and that
you will not use such proprietary information or materials in any way whatsoever except for permitted use of the Services. No portion of the Services may be
reproduced in any form or by any means. You agree not to modify, rent, lease, loan, sell, distribute, or create derivative works based on the Services, in any
manner, and you shall not exploit the Services in any unauthorized way whatsoever, including but not limited to, by trespass or burdening network capacity.
Apple and its licensors reserve the right to change, suspend, remove, or disable access to any Services at any time without notice. In no event will Apple be
liable for the removal of or disabling of access to any such Services. Apple may also impose limits on the use of or access to certain Services, in any case and
without notice or liability.
5. Termination. This License is effective until terminated. Your rights under this License will terminate automatically without notice from Apple if you fail to
comply with any term(s) of this License. Upon the termination of this License, you shall cease all use of the Apple Software and destroy all copies, full or
partial, of the Apple Software.
6. Limited Warranty on Media. Apple warrants the media on which the Apple Software is recorded and delivered by Apple to be free from defects in
materials and workmanship under normal use for a period of ninety (90) days from the date of original retail purchase. Your exclusive remedy under this
Section shall be, at Apple's option, a refund of the purchase price of the product containing the Apple Software or replacement of the Apple Software which
is returned to Apple or an Apple authorized representative with a copy of the receipt. THIS LIMITED WARRANTY AND ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES ON THE
MEDIA INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, AND OF FITNESS FOR A
PARTICULAR PURPOSE, ARE LIMITED IN DURATION TO NINETY (90) DAYS FROM THE DATE OF ORIGINAL RETAIL PURCHASE. SOME JURISDICTIONS DO NOT
ALLOW LIMITATIONS ON HOW LONG AN IMPLIED WARRANTY LASTS, SO THE ABOVE LIMITATION MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU. THE LIMITED WARRANTY SET
FORTH HEREIN IS THE ONLY WARRANTY MADE TO YOU AND IS PROVIDED IN LIEU OF ANY OTHER WARRANTIES (IF ANY) CREATED BY ANY DOCUMENTATION
OR PACKAGING. THIS LIMITED WARRANTY GIVES YOU SPECIFIC LEGAL RIGHTS, AND YOU MAY ALSO HAVE OTHER RIGHTS WHICH VARY BY JURISDICTION.
7. Disclaimer of Warranties. YOU EXPRESSLY ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT USE OF THE APPLE SOFTWARE (AS DEFINED ABOVE) AND SERVICES (AS
DEFINED BELOW) IS AT YOUR SOLE RISK AND THAT THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO SATISFACTORY QUALITY, PERFORMANCE, ACCURACY AND EFFORT IS WITH YOU.
EXCEPT FOR THE LIMITED WARRANTY ON MEDIA SET FORTH ABOVE AND TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, THE APPLE SOFTWARE
AND SERVICES ARE PROVIDED "AS IS", WITH ALL FAULTS AND WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, AND APPLE AND APPLE'S LICENSORS (COLLECTIVELY
REFERRED TO AS "APPLE" FOR THE PURPOSES OF SECTIONS 7 AND 8) HEREBY DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES AND CONDITIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE APPLE
SOFTWARE AND SERVICES, EITHER EXPRESS, IMPLIED OR STATUTORY, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES AND/OR CONDITIONS
OF MERCHANTABILITY, OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OF ACCURACY, OF QUIET ENJOYMENT, AND NON-
INFRINGEMENT OF THIRD PARTY RIGHTS. APPLE DOES NOT WARRANT AGAINST INTERFERENCE WITH YOUR ENJOYMENT OF THE APPLE SOFTWARE OR
SERVICES, THAT THE FUNCTIONS CONTAINED IN THE APPLE SOFTWARE OR SERVICES WILL MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS, THAT THE OPERATION OF THE
APPLE SOFTWARE OR SERVICES WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR-FREE, OR THAT DEFECTS IN THE APPLE SOFTWARE OR SERVICES WILL BE CORRECTED.
NO ORAL OR WRITTEN INFORMATION OR ADVICE GIVEN BY APPLE OR AN APPLE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SHALL CREATE A WARRANTY. SHOULD THE
APPLE SOFTWARE OR SERVICES PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE ENTIRE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR CORRECTION. SOME
JURISDICTIONS DO NOT ALLOW THE EXCLUSION OF IMPLIED WARRANTIES OR LIMITATIONS ON APPLICABLE STATUTORY RIGHTS OF A CONSUMER, SO THE
ABOVE EXCLUSION AND LIMITATIONS MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU.
8. Limitation of Liability. TO THE EXTENT NOT PROHIBITED BY LAW, IN NO EVENT SHALL APPLE BE LIABLE FOR PERSONAL INJURY, OR ANY INCIDENTAL,
SPECIAL, INDIRECT OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES WHATSOEVER, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, LOSS OF DATA,
BUSINESS INTERRUPTION OR ANY OTHER COMMERCIAL DAMAGES OR LOSSES, ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO YOUR USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE APPLE
SOFTWARE OR SERVICES, HOWEVER CAUSED, REGARDLESS OF THE THEORY OF LIABILITY (CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE) AND EVEN IF APPLE HAS BEEN
ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. SOME JURISDICTIONS DO NOT ALLOW THE LIMITATION OF LIABILITY FOR PERSONAL INJURY, OR OF
INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, SO THIS LIMITATION MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU. In no event shall Apple's total liability to you for all damages
(other than as may be required by applicable law in cases involving personal injury) exceed the amount of fifty dollars ($50.00). The foregoing limitations
will apply even if the above stated remedy fails of its essential purpose.
9. Export Control. You may not use or otherwise export or reexport the Apple Software except as authorized by United States law and the laws of the
jurisdiction in which the Apple Software was obtained. In particular, but without limitation, the Apple Software may not be exported or re-exported (a) into
any U.S. embargoed countries or (b) to anyone on the U.S. Treasury Department's list of Specially Designated Nationals or the U.S. Department of Commerce
Denied Person's List or Entity List. By using the Apple Software, you represent and warrant that you are not located in any such country or on any such list. You
also agree that you will not use these products for any purposes prohibited by United States law, including, without limitation, the development, design,
manufacture or production of nuclear, missiles, or chemical or biological weapons.
10. Government End Users. The Apple Software and related documentation are "Commercial Items", as that term is defined at 48 C.F.R. 2.101, consisting
of "Commercial Computer Software" and "Commercial Computer Software Documentation", as such terms are used in 48 C.F.R. 12.212 or 48 C.F.R.
227.7202, as applicable. Consistent with 48 C.F.R. 12.212 or 48 C.F.R. 227.7202-1through 227.7202-4, as applicable, the Commercial Computer Software
and Commercial Computer Software Documentation are being licensed to U.S. Government end users (a) only as Commercial Items and (b) with only those
rights as are granted to all other end users pursuant to the terms and conditions herein. Unpublished-rights reserved under the copyright laws of the
United States.
11. Controlling Law and Severability. This License will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, as applied to
agreements entered into and to be performed entirely within California between California residents. This License shall not be governed by the United
Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, the application of which is expressly excluded. If for any reason a court of competent
jurisdiction finds any provision, or portion thereof, to be unenforceable, the remainder of this License shall continue in full force and effect.
12. Complete Agreement; Governing Language. This License constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the use of the Apple
Software licensed hereunder and supersedes all prior or contemporaneous understandings regarding such subject matter, with the exception of any
additional terms and conditions you are required to accept if you choose to use Apple's online music store which will govern your use of such store and any
music downloads you purchase through that store. No amendment to or modification of this License will be binding unless in writing and signed by Apple.
Any translation of this License is done for local requirements and in the event of a dispute between the English and any non-English versions, the English
version of this License shall govern.
13. Third Party Software and Service Terms and Conditions.
A. Gracenote CDDB Terms of Use. This application contains software from Gracenote, Inc. of Berkeley, California ("Gracenote"). The software from
Gracenote (the "Gracenote CDDB Client") enables this application to do online disc identification and obtain music-related information, including name,
artist, track, and title information ("Gracenote Data") from online servers ("Gracenote CDDB Servers") and to perform other functions. You may use Gracenote
Data only by means of the intended End User functions of this application software.
You agree that you will use Gracenote Data, the Gracenote CDDB Client, and Gracenote CDDB Servers for your own personal non-commercial use only. You
agree not to assign, copy, transfer or transmit the Gracenote CDDB Client or any Gracenote Data to any third party. YOU AGREE NOT TO USE OR EXPLOIT
GRACENOTE DATA, THE GRACENOTE CDDB CLIENT, OR GRACENOTE CDDB SERVERS, EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY PERMITTED HEREIN.
You agree that your non-exclusive license to use the Gracenote Data, the Gracenote CDDB Client, and Gracenote CDDB Servers will terminate if you violate
these restrictions. If your license terminates, you agree to cease any and all use of the Gracenote Data, the Gracenote CDDB Client, and Gracenote CDDB
Servers. Gracenote reserves all rights in Gracenote Data, the Gracenote CDDB Client, and the Gracenote CDDB Servers, including all ownership rights.
Under no circumstances will Gracenote become liable for any payment to you for any information that you provide. You agree that CDDB, Inc. may enforce
its rights under this Agreement against you directly in its own name.
The Gracenote CDDB Service uses a unique identifier to track queries for statistical purposes. The purpose of a randomly assigned numeric identifier is to
allow the Gracenote CDDB service to count queries without knowing anything about who you are. For more information, see the web page for the
Gracenote Privacy Policy for the Gracenote CDDB Service.

The Gracenote CDDB Client and each item of Gracenote Data are licensed to you "AS IS". Gracenote makes no representations or warranties, express or
implied, regarding the accuracy of any Gracenote Data from in the Gracenote CDDB Servers. Gracenote reserves the right to delete data from the
Gracenote CDDB Servers or to change data categories for any cause that Gracenote deems sufficient. No warranty is made that the Gracenote CDDB Client
or Gracenote CDDB Servers are error-free or that functioning of Gracenote CDDB Client or Gracenote CDDB Servers will be uninterrupted. Gracenote is not
obligated to provide you with any new enhanced or additional data types or categories that Gracenote may choose to provide in the future and is free to
discontinue its online services at any time.
GRACENOTE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS
FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE, AND NON-INFRINGEMENT. Gracenote does not warrant the results that will be obtained by your use of the Gracenote
CDDB Client or any Gracenote CDDB Server. IN NO CASE WILL GRACENOTE BE LIABLE FOR ANY CONSEQUENTIAL OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES OR FOR ANY
LOST PROFITS OR LOST REVENUES.
B. Kerbango Tuning Service Terms and Conditions.
Terms of Service. By using 3Com Corporation's ("3Com") Kerbango tuning service, ("Kerbango Tuning Service") you agree to be bound by the following
terms and conditions (the "TOS"):
3Com Links. The sites displayed as search results or linked to by the Kerbango Tuning Service are owned and operated by individuals and/or companies
over whom 3Com
exercises no control. 3Com assumes no responsibility for the content of any site included in any search results or otherwise linked to by the Kerbango Tuning
Service.
Personal Use Only. The Kerbango Tuning Service is made available for your personal, non-commercial use only. Use of the Kerbango Tuning Service to sell
a product or service, or to increase traffic to your Web site for commercial reasons, such as advertising sales is expressly forbidden. You may not take the
results from a Kerbango search and reformat and display them, or mirror the 3Com's Kerbango home page or results pages on your Web site, or send
automated queries to Kerbango's system without express permission from 3Com.
If you wish to make commercial use of the Kerbango Tuning Service you must enter into an agreement with 3Com to do so. Please contact
sales@kerbango.com for more information.
Changes In Terms and Conditions and Kerbango Tuning Service. 3Com may modify or terminate its services from time to time, for any reason, and
without notice, including the right to terminate with or without notice, without liability to you, any other user or any third party. 3Com reserves the right to
modify the TOS from time to time without notice.
Disclaimer of Warranties. 3Com disclaims any and all responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, completeness, legality, reliability, or operability or
availability of information or material displayed in the Kerbango Tuning Service results. 3Com disclaims any responsibility for the deletion, failure to store,
misdelivery, or untimely delivery of any information or material. 3Com disclaims any responsibility for any harm resulting from downloading or accessing
any information or material on the Internet through the Kerbango Tuning Service.
THE KERBANGO TUNING SERVICE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITH NO WARRANTIES WHATSOEVER. 3COM EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS TO THE FULLEST EXTENT
PERMITTED BY LAW ALL EXPRESS, IMPLIED, AND STATUTORY WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, AND NON-INFRINGEMENT OF PROPRIETARY RIGHTS. 3COM DISCLAIMS ANY WARRANTIES REGARDING THE SECURITY,
RELIABILITY, TIMELINESS, AND PERFORMANCE OF THE KERBANGO TUNING SERVICE. 3COM DISCLAIMS ANY WARRANTIES FOR ANY INFORMATION OR ADVICE
OBTAINED THROUGH THE KERBANGO TUNING SERVICE. 3COM DISCLAIMS ANY WARRANTIES FOR SERVICES OR GOODS RECEIVED THROUGH OR
ADVERTISED ON THE KERBANGO TUNING SERVICE OR RECEIVED THROUGH ANY LINKS PROVIDED BY THE KERBANGO TUNING SERVICE, AS WELL AS FOR ANY
INFORMATION OR ADVICE RECEIVED THROUGH ANY LINKS PROVIDED IN THE KERBANGO TUNING SERVICE.
YOU UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT YOU DOWNLOAD OR OTHERWISE OBTAIN MATERIAL OR DATA THROUGH THE USE OF THE KERBANGO TUNING
SERVICE AT YOUR OWN DISCRETION AND RISK AND THAT YOU WILL BE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES TO YOUR COMPUTER SYSTEM OR LOSS OF
DATA THAT RESULTS IN THE DOWNLOAD OF SUCH MATERIAL OR DATA.
SOME STATES OR OTHER JURISDICTIONS DO NOT ALLOW THE EXCLUSION OF IMPLIED WARRANTIES, SO THE ABOVE EXCLUSIONS MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU.
YOU MAY ALSO HAVE OTHER RIGHTS THAT VARY FROM STATE TO STATE AND JURISDICTION TO JURISDICTION.
Limitation of Liability. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHALL 3COM BE LIABLE TO ANY USER ON ACCOUNT OF THAT USER'S USE OR MISUSE OF OR RELIANCE
ON THE KERBANGO TUNING SERVICE ARISING FROM ANY CLAIM RELATING TO THIS LICENSE OR THE SUBJECT MATTER HEREOF. SUCH LIMITATION OF
LIABILITY SHALL APPLY TO PREVENT RECOVERY OF DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, AND PUNITIVE DAMAGES
WHETHER SUCH CLAIM IS BASED ON WARRANTY, CONTRACT, TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE), OR OTHERWISE (EVEN IF 3COM HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES). SUCH LIMITATION OF LIABILITY SHALL APPLY WHETHER THE DAMAGES ARISE FROM USE OR MISUSE OF AND RELIANCE
ON THE KERBANGO TUNING SERVICE, FROM INABILITY TO USE THE KERBANGO TUNING SERVICE, OR FROM THE INTERRUPTION, SUSPENSION, OR
TERMINATION OF THE KERBANGO TUNING SERVICE (INCLUDING SUCH DAMAGES INCURRED BY THIRD PARTIES). THIS LIMITATION SHALL ALSO APPLY WITH
RESPECT TO DAMAGES INCURRED BY REASON OF OTHER SERVICES OR GOODS RECEIVED THROUGH OR ADVERTISED ON THE KERBANGO TUNING SERVICE
OR RECEIVED THROUGH ANY LINKS PROVIDED IN THE KERBANGO TUNING SERVICE, AS WELL AS BY REASON OF ANY INFORMATION OR ADVICE RECEIVED
THROUGH OR ADVERTISED ON THE KERBANGO TUNING SERVICE OR RECEIVED THROUGH ANY LINKS PROVIDED IN THE KERBANGO TUNING SERVICE. THIS
LIMITATION SHALL ALSO APPLY, WITHOUT LIMITATION, TO THE COSTS OF PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES, LOST PROFITS, OR LOST
DATA. SUCH LIMITATION SHALL FURTHER APPLY WITH RESPECT TO THE PERFORMANCE OR NON-PERFORMANCE OF THE KERBANGO TUNING SERVICE OR
ANY INFORMATION OR MERCHANDISE THAT APPEARS ON, OR IS LINKED OR RELATED IN ANY WAY TO, THE KERBANGO TUNING SERVICE. SUCH LIMITATION
SHALL APPLY NOTWITHSTANDING ANY FAILURE OF ESSENTIAL PURPOSE OF ANY LIMITED REMEDY AND TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW.
SOME STATES OR OTHER JURISDICTIONS DO NOT ALLOW THE EXCLUSION OR LIMITATION OF LIABILITY FOR INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, SO
THE ABOVE LIMITATIONS AND EXCLUSIONS MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU.
Without limiting the foregoing, under no circumstances shall 3Com be held liable for any delay or failure in performance resulting directly or indirectly from
acts of nature, forces, or causes beyond its reasonable control, including, without limitation, Internet failures, computer equipment failures,
telecommunication equipment failures, other equipment failures, electrical power failures, strikes, labor disputes, riots, insurrections, civil disturbances,
shortages of labor or materials, fires, floods, storms, explosions, acts of God, war, governmental actions, orders of domestic or foreign courts or tribunals,
non-performance of third parties, or loss of or fluctuations in heat, light, or air conditioning.
Miscellaneous Provisions. These TOS will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, without giving effect to its
conflict of laws provisions or your actual state or country of residence. If for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction finds any provision or portion of the
TOS to be unenforceable, the remainder of the TOS will continue in full force and effect.
These TOS constitute the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes and replaces all prior or
contemporaneous understandings or agreements, written or oral, regarding such subject matter. Any waiver of any provision of the TOS will be effective
only if in writing and signed by 3Com.
EA0305

I can sum up my entire response into one word: (0, Redundant)

moochfish (822730) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914088)

Good.

Microsoft as well? (5, Interesting)

TimCapulet (954269) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914089)

The article only mentions that Apple would have to allow people to convert their songs into other formats. Does that also apply to Microsoft and other companies? If it applies to all digital media, then this law will effectively end all digital rights management!

Re:Microsoft as well? (2, Informative)

babbling (952366) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914212)

Actually, if I read correctly, the law would only make it legal for people to break the DRM and convert their files to a different format. I'm not sure that it would force companies to provide tools to convert the bastardised files into a different format. It's more of a correction to a very broken law, where people are currently not allowed to convert DRM files to a different format. (French DMCA equivalent)

Re:Microsoft as well? (1)

srussia (884021) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914380)

If it applies to all digital media, then this law will effectively end all digital rights management!

Yes, this is more far-reaching than many people (possibly the legislators themselves) realize. The problem is the concepts of "content", "format", "work", are very weak.

For example, would it make it legal to "convert" an encrypted MPEG-2 DVB-S stream into a different "format", say, a rasterized array of photons emanating from a CRT?

Microsoft already licenses its DRM to others (1)

I'm Don Giovanni (598558) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914465)

I don't know whether Microsoft would be covered by this law or not, but Microsoft alreadly licenses its DRM to anyone that wants to use it (which would include Apple, if Apple wanted to add support of DRM WMAs to iPods). Apple is different since they don't allow their iTMS DRM to be used by anyone except themselves (specifically iTunes apps on Mac and Windows, and iPods).

So, Microsoft allows any manufacturer of portable digital music players to use its DRM while Apple does not.

Vive la France! (5, Funny)

eclectro (227083) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914094)

I vote to change our "freedom fries" to "french fries"!

I also think that whole "fance surrenders" thing was silly too.

they finally got tired of /. ragging on them (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14914154)

And decided to make themselves into geek paradise.

Re:Vive la France! (1)

ashSlash (96551) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914242)

Just remember who saved your asses in the Battle of Independence buddy!

Vive les frogs!

Re:Vive la France! (1)

Squirrelgirl (680742) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914326)

France actually fought valiantly with the british to help norway resist german invasion. When both the Netherlands and Belgium just gave up the front grew too long and far for France to effectively resist an invasion so they surrendered to save their people from harm. How is that so terrible in principle? Its always easier in hindsight to have wished to have acted differently.

The legend of 'Fall Gelb' (1)

Savage-Rabbit (308260) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914387)

When both the Netherlands and Belgium just gave up the front grew too long and far for France to effectively resist an invasion so they surrendered to save their people from harm.

I am getting rather tired of this whole roll-over and surrendermyth. The Netherlands and Belgium didn't roll over and surrender they fought back and fought hard. They simply got overrun by a combination of massive airborne assaults, innovative commando operations and armored warfare on a scale and using tactics they were in no way prepared for. In addition, since their governments and military leaders had seriously neglected equipping their airforces in partickular with up-to-date weapons they also lost control of their airspace within a matter of days. What happened in France and the Low countries in 1940 was the result of a massive tactical, technological and organizatorial military reforms since Napoleon. To add insult to injury those reforms in Germany were in many ways the direct result of the de mitlitarization of the country dictated by the treaty of Versailles since it brought a whole generation of young military thinkers into positions/ranks they would not have had a chance to get in other armies. Making fun of the Belgians, Netherlanders, French, and yes even the British (Contrary to popular beleif they got their ass kicked as well in 1940) is pretty unfair. I am willing to lay odds to the fact that if there had been US troop in France in 1940 they would have gotten spanked by the Germans as well.

Re:Vive la France! (1)

Half a dent (952274) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914363)

And that would have been the totally incompetent British generals? They were as big a factor in losing the war as George Washington was in winning it!

Well, this would be absolutely terrible (0, Flamebait)

Budenny (888916) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914097)

I mean, poor little Apple has not got its share by illegal means unlike some but by making better products, so its entitled to it.

Who would want to run an iTune on anything other than an iPod anyway, it would be like putting a lawnmower engine in a Ferrari.

We don't want choice of what machines to play music on, we just want one good machine.

The unique selling point is the integrated experience, its the whole system, the iPod, the iMac, the iTunes, its not any one of them, its the whole thing.

They are no more expensive than comparably equipped competitive products, its just that they sell for more because they give you more.

Anyway, you can play them on other machines if you really really want to, though why you would is beyond me.

Well, now someone got all that out of the way, maybe we could have a discussion...? Because the implications are quite serious, not just for music. For the whole lockin approach. Once one country adopts this, first, it will be impossible to contain within its borders. Second, it will be impossible to contain it to music. It could get real interesting.

Re:Well, this would be absolutely terrible (5, Insightful)

digismack (262459) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914177)

I mean, poor little Apple has not got its share by illegal means unlike some but by making better products, so its entitled to it.

Apple is a large corporation, just like any other, they are concerned about their bottom line.

Who would want to run an iTune on anything other than an iPod anyway, it would be like putting a lawnmower engine in a Ferrari.

I think you have your analogy backwards. You're saying that taking an iTune, converting it and playing it on another player is better than playing it in an iPod.

We don't want choice of what machines to play music on, we just want one good machine.

Speak for yourself, I want to have a choice as to what hardware I play my music on.

The unique selling point is the integrated experience, its the whole system, the iPod, the iMac, the iTunes, its not any one of them, its the whole thing.

I can see your point, but then, why does Apple have iTunes for Windows?

They are no more expensive than comparably equipped competitive products, its just that they sell for more because they give you more.

If they are "no more expensive than comparbly equipped competitive products", then why did you say they "sell for more"? They have a higher price tag because iPod is the most popular brand name portable MP3 player.

Anyway, you can play them on other machines if you really really want to, though why you would is beyond me.

Thanks for your approval. ;)

Well, now someone got all that out of the way, maybe we could have a discussion...? Because the implications are quite serious, not just for music. For the whole lockin approach. Once one country adopts this, first, it will be impossible to contain within its borders. Second, it will be impossible to contain it to music. It could get real interesting.

Finally something we agree on. It could get realllly interesting.

Re:Well, this would be absolutely terrible (1)

Borg453b (746808) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914234)

What about my new Sony Ericsson W900i?

Granted its a bit bulky, but its pretty much an ipod, phone and organizer in one.

Re:Well, this would be absolutely terrible (2, Insightful)

krouic (460022) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914180)

Sorry to enter your RDF, but there are other players than iPods on the market, some are better, most are worse. Why iPods are so popular is more due to the formidable Apple marketing machine and hype than their sheer qualities.

What you call "integrated experience" (as in Windows XP :) I would call lock-in. Music bought on iTunes can only be played at full quality on iPods, so when it will be time to buy another player, you will have too buy it from Apple in order to listen (in full quality) to the music you bought.

Re:Well, this would be absolutely terrible (1)

lintux (125434) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914194)

> Who would want to run an iTune on anything other than an iPod anyway, it would be like putting a lawnmower engine in a Ferrari.

Does the iTMS add some special, errr, "magic" to a song to make it different from any other version of the very same song? It's the same damn song, and it certainly won't mind if you play it on a non-Apple device.

Re:Well, this would be absolutely terrible (3, Insightful)

famebait (450028) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914299)

Who would want to run an iTune on anything other than an iPod anyway, it would be like putting a lawnmower engine in a Ferrari.

Some of us plan to hang on to the music we buy for many years to come. iPod may be your favourite player right now, but already the are a couple of serious contestants, and who knows when a competitor shows up that you just have to have, or when apple is once again taken over by idiots and start selling cappy players, o you move into a different maret segment than they prefer to serve. Do you really want to be unable to play your accumulated collection on anything else than official apple hardware or software?

Consumer rights and IP (5, Informative)

ajdlinux (913987) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914105)

It seems to me that the French government is protecting consumer rights from music companies who just want to force their ways of protecting 'Intellectual Property'. Slashdot last year had a story about the Australian government introducing copyright amendment laws to make private copying of videos and TV shows (only for private purposes of course) legal.

Re:Consumer rights and IP (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914158)

Australian government introducing copyright amendment laws to make private copying of videos and TV shows (only for private purposes of course) legal.

Perhaps tomorrow a federal Government staffer will print out this article for John Howard to read while he has his morning tea.

Re:Consumer rights and IP (1)

GaryPatterson (852699) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914253)

I'm not so sure that one happened here in Australia. Noises were made, speeches made references to this, but I don't think a law has actually come up.

Re:Consumer rights and IP (1)

babbling (952366) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914269)

There was a little report a bit more recently, again describing the changes, but they were mostly superficial changes. Basically, they were adding things that bring us up to US copyright status. Before that, we were worse than the US when it came to copyright. (no fair use)

Re:Consumer rights and IP (1)

ajdlinux (913987) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914307)

But we had much better consumer rights overall and I still think we do.

Re:Consumer rights and IP (1)

babbling (952366) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914395)

Possibly. I have called the ACCC about iTunes before, since the iTunes Music Store DRM locks consumers into buying iPods or else losing the ability to play their music collection except on PC. The guy I talked to was nice enough and agreed that it was interesting as well as bad for consumers. Despite this, he said there wasn't anything the ACCC could do about it, but pointed out that there is illegal (in Australia, as well as the US) software available to crack the DRM and convert the files to another format.

My girlfriend also recently had an issue with her iPod where its HDD was dying. iTunes refused to play nicely with it, but the guy at the Apple Store also suggested she download certain software that would rip everything on it into MP3 files, which would also be illegal under Australian law.

It seems that both the government (ACCC) and Apple employees are willing to suggest the use of illegal software, but still want to keep it officially illegal and perhaps even sometimes enforce these ridiculous laws. I'll bet every politician and judge in Australia has a close relative who has violated copyright laws, yet we still think we should be extraditing one of our own citizens (guy in Perth, part of a "piracy ring") to the US to face prosecution there, despite the fact that we can't seem to extradite "Dr Death" (aka Dr Jayant Patel) who supposedly killed tens of people while practicing in Queensland.

Would pulling out iTMS France be enough? (4, Interesting)

Yaztromo (655250) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914115)

I wish I had access to the draft of the bill in question (along with a good English translation) -- the article suggests several things which may or may not be true.

One of these suggestions is that Apple may have to stop running iTMS France in order to avoid compliance. However, it also states that other online stores would have to provide songs in a form that allows them to be played on the iPod.

Now I'm assuming that the primary music labels from outside of France would prefer to simply no longer license their works for digital download in France than allow providers to distribute music in an unencumbered format (such as MP3). Which would mean that the only way French law could permit other online music stores to provide music in iPod format would be for them to be allowed to use Fairplay.

This would mean that either Apple would be forced to license Fairplay to any online music store in France, or these companies will be permitted to reverse-engineer it. They would likewise need to be able to access a users Fairplay key.

In which case, the only way Apple may be able to avoid this whole mess would be to pull not only iTMS out of France, but the iPod as well. And I don't see Apple doing this.

The only way I see around this would be for all of the online music stores in France -- Apple's iTMS included -- to come up with a common, France-specific music DRM format. And while the added flexability would be of benefit to French digital music consumers, I'm not sure if having nation-specific DRM formats is going to be all that great of an idea.

Yaz.

Re:Would pulling out iTMS France be enough? (2, Interesting)

SilentMobius (10171) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914156)

I dont see anything there that suggests that fairplay needs to be opened. Remenber that an ipod can play mp3's and non drm aac. So to offer 'ipod compatable' music you dont need access to fairplay. personally I think this is 'a good thing' the law is there to protect our rights not to protect someones business model.

Re:Would pulling out iTMS France be enough? (3, Interesting)

Yaztromo (655250) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914199)

I dont see anything there that suggests that fairplay needs to be opened. Remenber that an ipod can play mp3's and non drm aac. So to offer 'ipod compatable' music you dont need access to fairplay.

I think you need to read what I posted again, because I did indeed deal with this.

What incentive would, say, Sony BMG have to license music to any French digital music retailer, if that retailer wnated to sell their music in a non-DRM'ed format? Sony BMG (just as an example) could simply decide to get out of online digital music sales in France altogether, rather than have their music sold in MP3 or unprotected AAC format. And with no music to sell, the online stores will simply dry up and go away in France.

The only way the French government can get this to work is to allow the other vendors to reverse engineer Fairplay, and/or require Apple to license Fairplay to these other companies. The aim of this law doesn't appear to be to force online music stores out of business, and in order to work with Fairplay other online stores will need access to a users iTMS key. Because as I see it, every music company would rather stop selling all online digital music than permit legal, unprotected music downloads in France.

This is why, as I said, having access to the proposed text of this law would help clarify such issues.

Yaz.

Re:Would pulling out iTMS France be enough? (1)

bit01 (644603) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914345)

What incentive would, say, Sony BMG have to license music to any French digital music retailer, if that retailer wnated to sell their music in a non-DRM'ed format?

The same incentive as always, to make money. Removing DRM doesn't change that.

It might reduce the value to Sony BMG of the music involved but since the marginal cost to Sony BMG of each piece of music sold is close to zero all that value change is doing is making it a more rational free market. For the consumer this law might reduce the cost (because the retailer can pass on savings) and increase the value (because the consumer can do more with the product). I say "might" because as you say it depends on how the law is worded.

With luck it might even encourage other countries, particularly in the EU, to lift their mostly abysmal legal game on DRM, rights and the free market.

---

Unregulated DRM = Total Customer Control = Ultimate Customer Lockin = Death of the free market.

Re:Would pulling out iTMS France be enough? (1)

SilentMobius (10171) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914481)

I was refering to TFA and I also don't think your argument is as cut and dried as you suggest. Sure they _may_ pull out for a while, but I think the market incentive of an entire country will soon turn someones head.

I simply don't see this resulting in apple licensing Fairplay. It's possible but I think the least likely outcome.

All in all, still a "good thing"(tm)

Re:Would pulling out iTMS France be enough? (2, Insightful)

Herve5 (879674) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914243)

Nobody will pull iTMS out. Indeed, the only thing this (very long and complex) law may do, is to legally allow one person to change a document format, which for instance in the case of music would mean that when I convert an Apple's DRMed file to mp3 for personal use on my third-party mp3 reader, I would'nt do something illegal any more.

And I say *may* do.
Because in the end, the law may even be amended to allow this only to institutions (libraries...) --originally in this very same law, converters themselves were explicitly illegal!

But I am still hopeful, because the story of this laws' vote has been funny enough (at one point in time, there was one article that would have legalized P2P exchanges provided one would pay an extra monthly fee!).
The resulting mess (government illegally removing that already voted article, then putting it back one day at midnight in the hope that it will be legally removed later once the majority's deputies have been aligned...) is so large that almost everyone is conscious there is something bad happening for young, supposedly "mp3-lover" electors.

As a consequence, the final removal of that "P2P legalized" article may well push the positive couterpart that the article about format translation (ie, removal of DRM) be accepted, as a sort of compensation.

This, is what I hope.

And there is absolutely nothing in the law about Fnac, Apple, or anyone else, and no obligation at all to them. It's only DRM fans that say Apple may close ITMS volutarily by fear that lots of french user would de-DRM ITMS songs. Which is, of course, ridiculous.

Re:Would pulling out iTMS France be enough? (1)

Yaztromo (655250) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914272)

You sound like someone who has either read this draft law, or whom has at least read some better analysis of it then has been provided by the press in North America thus far.

The one thing I do have to ask, however -- is software to remove DRM from media currently illegal in France? I wasn't aware that it was. So far as I was aware, the only country that has made defeating DRM illegal is the US. Here in Canada, at least, it would seem that removing DRM for the purpose of making a personal copy is completely legit.

Is my impression that DRM removal is currently permitted in France incorrect? Or is this just a case of a law being created to explicitly permit what was previously only implicitly permitted?

Thanks for the feedback -- as I said in my original post, having a copy of the draft law in question would be handy, because TFA makes several wild suggestions, without any information to back them up.

Yaz.

iTunes or Napster? (2, Interesting)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914123)

This will more seriously affect services like Napster that work on the subscription basis.
Why keep up your subscription if you can download all the music you want and then keep it .

Re:iTunes or Napster? (1)

Saint Fnordius (456567) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914372)

True: with all the brouhaha concentrating on the market leader (Apple), this will affect ALL music stores. They must now accept converting WMA or the DRM du jour into an iPod-acceptable format, and not just the iTMS allowing conversion of FairPlay files into a format other players can understand.

I doubt that this law, if passed, would affect the sales of iPods much, though it might help the competing stores if they swallow that bitter pill and distribute in a non-DRM'ed format the iPod can understand.

Which American Legal and Lobbiest Firms... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14914133)

Really, this will make law firms all over the world filthy rich. Tons of laws will have to be passed and debated to deal with this. After all, from what I can imagine, this would in fact render DMCA useless in France. Therefore software can be written a by French firm that can remove the DRM from music files (such as iTunes and Windows Media). In I understand this correctly, then a legitimate product can be made available (such as DVD Jon's DRM remover for iTunes) and then theoretically sold elsewhere.

I'm not 100% sure, but I think DMCA does in fact cover the use of applications of this sort, but there's nothing that specifically says that a user couldn't provide key information to a french company and ask them to remove the protection for them. It should seem logical, that if a user uploads a copy of their music to a web site in France and the French website removes the DRM and transmits back the unprotected copy where both parties delete the original protected file, then the DMCA would not have actually been broken within the US and from what I understand, the exchange of music is theoretically legal, such as loaning a friend a CD for the weekend.

The Apple sponsered Legal and lobbiest firms (hopefully publicly traded) would make a bundle trying to pass laws to cover every loophole related to what this would open up.

The only real question is, whether it is in fact legal to read your own iPod identification code. As far as I can tell, since you do in fact own your iPod and it should be possible to maintain that you can in fact legally read product identification information from it, there shouldn't be a real issue.

I want to invest in the law and lobby firms that Apple is intending to employ to make the 100 new laws or law amendments in the US alone. Can someone please point me to who the likely candidates are. If I invest $100k in them, then I figure I can then afford to pay for my music and even the cost related to the removal of the protection too.

Re:Which American Legal and Lobbiest Firms... (1)

EzInKy (115248) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914162)


Really, this will make law firms all over the world filthy rich. Tons of laws will have to be passed and debated to deal with this. After all, from what I can imagine, this would in fact render DMCA useless in France.


The DMCA is already useless in many more countries than just France.

Re:Which American Legal and Lobbiest Firms... (1)

thedletterman (926787) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914241)

The consumer should have the right to take apart, improvise, improve, destroy or otherwise misuse anything they buy, physical or intellectual. This should be the basic principle of all intellectual property laws. I don't have the right to use my property to commit a crime, but if I want to rip DVDs to DiVX format, and load them on my Xbox running XBMC, there's no reason the RIAA should be able to tell me, "I can't use my dvds like that" or Microsoft can tell me, 'That's not what my xbox was intended for.."

Re:Which American Legal and Lobbiest Firms... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14914229)

After all, from what I can imagine, this would in fact render DMCA useless in France

Um, the DMCA is a fascist American law, so of course it is useless in France (and every other country that is NOT the USA). Why do Americans continue to think that the rest of the world is subject to the laws that their oppressive government makes for their own people?

Ob. Simpsons Quote.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14914148)

HA-HA!

</nelson>

EUCD? (1)

jimicus (737525) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914152)

IANAL, but could someone who understands this better explain how France proposes to marry this law up with the European Copyright Directive, which AIUI provides a DMCA-like law across the EU.

Re:EUCD? (1)

famebait (450028) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914322)

The directives are subject to interpretation like everythinge else. And France has quite a bit of clout within the EU system, so I suppose they are not too afraid of sanctions, and rather hope to gather sufficient support for their interpretation, or else for changing the directive.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/skins/sk/skins/skins- (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14914167)

roflmafao cowbastard320947238947324832742398472343847238 cant you read this shit u fuckin stick Score: 0 (Logged-in users start at Score: 1). Create an Account! To confirm you're not a script, scoring a girl is hard MAAAYN DUUUYDE ROTFL Services Broadband PriceGrabber Sponsor Solutions Special Offers Tech Jobs















FUCKOFF.net hey man the floor is wet Makuria was a kingdom located in what is today Southern Egypt and Northern Sudan. It was one of a group of Nubian kingdoms that emerged in the centuries after the fall of the Kindgom of Meroë, which had dominated the region from around 800 BCE to 350 CE. Makuria originally covered the area along the Nile River from the Third Cataract to somewhere between the Fifth and Sixth Cataracts. Its capital was Dongola. By the end of the 6th century it had converted to Christianity, but in the 7th century Egypt was conquered by the Islamic armies, and Nubia was cut off from the rest of Christendom. In 651 an Arab army invaded, but it was repulsed and a treaty known as the baqt was signed creating a relative peace between the two sides that lasted until the 13th century. Makuria expanded, annexing its northern neighbour Nobatia either at the time of the Arab invasion or during the reign of King Merkurios. The period from roughly 750 to 1150 saw the kingdom stable and prosperous, in what has been called the "Golden Age". However, increased aggression from Egypt, the Islamization and Arabization of the populace, and internal discord saw the state collapse in the 14th century. (continued...) Recently featured: Theodore Roosevelt - Amateur Radio Direction Finding - Scotland in the High Middle Ages. COol eh? fuck u Score: 0 (Logged-in users start at Score: 1). Create an Account! To confirm you're not a script, NOW! Former Yugoslav leader Slobodan Milosevi? dies in his prison cell in The Hague, Netherlands. NASA's Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter enters Martian orbit. The Laotian rock rat is identified as part of a group previously thought to have disappeared 11 million years ago. The United Nations launches the Central Emergency Response Fund to provide aid to African regions currently facing starvation. NASA announces the Cassini probe has detected geysers of water on Enceladus, one of Saturn's moons. Wikinews - Recent deaths - More current events... ROTFL LMFAOOKAKAKAKA

236598 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14914270)

Misleading article (5, Informative)

romain wartel (918183) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914281)

I'm afraid the article does not relate *at all* what happens in France at the moment, regarding DRM and "Internet piracy".

The French parliament is currently discussing new laws, that will implement the EUCD directive, by forbidding and severly punishing any attempt to circumvent DRM protection and copyrighted material downloads. This project is called DADvSI.
Some MPs are even pushing to forbid the development, diffusion and the use of P2P software.

Lots of (artits, users, musicians, etc.) communities are opposed to all this.
MPs first voted against this project and adopted a global licence (monthtly fee for unrestricted private downloads), but the French minister of Culture said it was not acceptable and he had the parliament to re-discuss the project again.

More information (all in French) at:

http://fr.news.yahoo.com/10032006/7/projet-dadvsi- la-licence-globale-repasse-la-trappe.html [yahoo.com]
http://eucd.info/ [eucd.info]
http://lestelechargements.fr/ [lestelechargements.fr]
http://www.odebi.org/new/theme/ [odebi.org]
http://www.adami.fr/ [adami.fr]

Re:Misleading article (2, Interesting)

saberwarthog (961024) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914396)

I can add to this that the DADSVI is making very angry open source supporters, most of little artists, consumers association, ect.. out here in France, as it's would make DRM protections impossible to circumvent without the risk of an infringment of about 750 Euros (users of VLC or any media players using DevCSS would have some serious problems...).
But it also aim to permit interoperability (and you see here the problem : how can we make DRMised contents to be interoperable, as DRMs are made to stop interoperability ? )
At first vote in december, an amendment was passed to permit P2P use but the government had forced the parliement to discuss it again, and now this part of the law is totaly 6 feets under... But now, use of P2P to download copyrighted music/films/whatever could cost you 38 euros.
Last but not least, copy exceptions for research and teaching wouldn't be totally permitted...

Added to this the fact that the minister Donnedieu de Vabre (nicknamed "launderer minister", "the sinister of inculture" or "Ptipimousse") want this law to pass without been discussed correctly and tried to make a propaganda site (lestelechargements.com, using Dotclear but at a cost of... 180000 euros, and no real possibility to comment or discuss !), and you could understand why some of us are very angry here...

(sorry for the possible fault, but I'm french and mad about all of this, so it doesn't help ^^)

Nobody forces people to use iTunes or iPod (1)

Kunt (755109) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914288)

I personally think iTunes and iPod are some of the best products of the 2000s, but nobody forces you to buy an iPod or to use iTunes. There are plenty of alternatives. Hundreds, probably.

Re:Nobody forces people to use iTunes or iPod (1)

RazzleDazzle (442937) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914393)

Indeed. I have never used either iTunes or iPods before and I don't plan to unless someone happens to give me an iPod for some reason. I have nothing against either, just have no need to get either. I have an iriver that I bought off ebay a couple of years ago, it works great and does what I want it to do. I don't know what the full functionality of iTunes is, but my linux iriver gui works just fine for me.

/me smug (0, Offtopic)

BestNicksRTaken (582194) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914291)

I'm so glad I'm moving to France, where free speech actually means something still.

I returned to the UK from the USA nine months ago after getting fed up with the corporations owning the US government.

Soon France is going to be the only place in the world where you can use P2P (I couldn't even download Fedora 5t3 the other day as my UK ISP TalkTalk blocks BitTorrent) and actually listen to your own music!

That Linux box sitting on the end of my ADSL2+ connection in France is going to be really useful when I'm working in the UK ;-)

A little help please (0)

arpk4n3 (919729) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914295)

Okay...so tell me where my logic falls awry. Apple develops a product (iPod) that requires a software interface (pragmatically speaking a 'driver' of sorts, which is iTunes)...why should iTunes be forced to work with any other product than its intended medium, the iPod? I understand issues of monopolization and anti-competitive action but this doesn't strike me as such. It simply strikes me as Apple developing a better product. Should certain software NOT be restricted to certain hardware?

Digidesign's ProTools recording software only works with Digidesign interfaces (or more recently, the M-Box by M-Audio). This is the same scenario, in my eyes. Should ProTools be forced to open to other DAW controllers and recording interfaces, or is it simply a form of patent protection that can be viewed as two pieces of an identical system, necessary to operate one another?

Am I missing a step?

Re:A little help please (1)

dikkyboy (961028) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914342)

I'm rather partial to dumb analogies so shall use one here. Imagine designing a fantatstic toaster, the king of toasters. However when buying this bread browning marvel the small print says you can only use it with a specific type of bread, which they happen to bake. Now whats amazing is that this toaster actually sells, but thats more to do with a market of users who find toasters difficult to use and this new 'toaster king' does it better than most. Despite all that, the usability, perfect toast etc, I'f find it difficult to buy, knowing I was limited to ONE type of loaf.

Re:A little help please (1)

thatshortkid (808634) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914487)

sorry, your analogy is close, but a bit off.

you can still put generic white, wheat, or rye in the 'toaster king'. it doesn't happen to take raisin, but raisin is only eaten by a few raisin-lovers anyway, in comparison to the white-wheat-rye-loving masses.

however, the toaster king company, inc. also bakes its own rye. you can buy this rye, but it will only toast in your 'toaster king'. it is possible to toast this rye in other toasters, but you'd have to tear off the crust in order to get it to toast in another toaster.

Interesting experiment (4, Insightful)

frinsore (153020) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914314)

From what I can glean from the article it would be legal or required to have a program that converts one DRM format to another, but I don't see how this would require an unencrypted version of the media.
Most likely all the DRM companies would come together to make a program that converts from each DRM to another, and probably impose a time on the key to ensure if company X's DRM is broken that doesn't allow a hole that all other DRM media can be drained out through.
I digress.
What this would do economically is allow all digital media to compete on an equal footing. Don't like the price of a song on Napster? try iTunes. Want the latest MS Plays for Sure device but have a backlog of iTunes media? just convert it over. This would give consumers choice in their digital media and break the lock in that currently exists.
From what I know of Apple is that they make almost no money on iTunes but a huge amount on hardware, so in theory this would allow them to use their iTunes's competitors to seel iPods. And from the MS side this would break the stranglehold that Apple currently has on the portable media market. In theory this looks like a win-win for everyone. But I don't expect anyone to go for this, in business if your competitor is winning that usually means you're losing. And what multi-billion dollar company wants to take that chance?

Not a bad idea (5, Insightful)

ajs318 (655362) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914335)

What is really required is for the law to state unequivocally, once and for all that, as long as you own a recording on a legitimately-acquired medium sanctioned by the copyright holder, your "fair dealing" rights include the right to make an unlimited number of copies of that recording in alternative formats for your own use, and to perform any necessary step in the process: copyright would not be infringed unless you used a copy you had made in some way that you would not be permitted to use the original.

What would be even better would be a ban on DRM systems that prevent absolutely the exercise of Fair Dealing rights and/or copying under Special Licence {e.g., I have permission from the band Ocean Colour Scene to make copies of any of their work for my own use; any DRM system that does not take this into account, perhaps by requiring a password to enable copying, should be illegal}.

Governments vs Corporations (0, Flamebait)

Half a dent (952274) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914344)

Governments still like to look like they run the world when really the world has been run by multinational corporations for decades. Governments just feel they have to be seen to flex their muscles every now and again with trading regulations or small wars to try to prove they still matter (the wars usually help their military industries anyway).

Successful businesses just adapt their strategies accordingly (strategically placed donations to political parties is one example!).

The French have a poor track record in wars (small or otherwise), this only gives the French Government trade laws as an option when trying to boost their popularity. Anything not French is fair game be it Apple or Microsoft as the French government plays on national pride. The French are "pro freedom" because it is not a technology that French companies control just as the US Govt take the opposite approach because the companies involved are predominently American.

Re:Governments vs Corporations (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14914392)

Because you think the track record of US in Iraq, Somaly, Iran and Vietnam is so good? Ask the relatives of the KIAs what they think. You should enlist yourself if you are a pro war, Bush is looking for dead body (and flat brain) to join the ranks.

Why Apple ? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14914369)

I can't see why the article focuses on Apple while the law is obviously more general than that.
The draft law just states that any digital rights management system owner should provide device manufacturers access to its DRM system, for interoperability reasons.
So, for instance Apple could require from Microsoft that it provides a licence in order for the IPods to be able to play WMA files.

" Les licences de développement des mesures techniques de protection sont accordées aux fabricants de systèmes techniques ou aux exploitants de services qui veulent mettre en oeuvre l'interopérabilité, dans des conditions équitables et non discriminatoires, lorsque ces fabricants ou exploitants s'engagent à respecter, dans leur domaine d'activité, les conditions garantissant la sécurité de fonctionnement des mesures techniques de protection qu'ils utilisent. "

It's a false claim. (2, Informative)

Tulka$ (929724) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914381)

This law is not for French customers but for the majors.
The goal was to force DRM everywhere event if the content was a free WebRadio with free content.
The second goal was to allow justice actions against every software that could be used to break copyright laws. (aka : remove DRM, exchange files, etc, etc.)
The third goal was to track users who share and download files to make sanctions.

BUT

They tryed to vote the law the 23 december 2005 at 23h pm so nobody is at the parlement to oppose the law.
They declared this law "urgent" so no consultation is needed.
French associations mobilised and include an amandement to make file sharing LEGAL.
So the law project was blocked for a while.

Now, discussions in the parlement has come back again and the debate is ridiculous : some want DRM and sanctions and others want free filesharing with taxes.

I think this law project will be completely removed, but who knows ?

Wait the vote if you really want to know what my country will do about file sharing. For now, everything and it's contrary has been told.

Greatings
A French observer. (sorry for my english)

Socialist France with a right wing president (5, Insightful)

jchuillier (846178) | more than 8 years ago | (#14914414)

It's funny that all the "socialist-consumer friendly" laws happening in France right now are being enacted by the conservative government of our beloved leader Jacques "the great" Chirac.

Last fall we had a law making it easy for customers to get out of phone and tv contracts where it was not possible to cancel the contract before the renewal period (usually 12 months).

Keep in mind that elections are due next year and that for those unaware of French politics (although VERY funny) Chirac has been elected last time with 82% of the votes because he was facing our local facist Le Pen, so the left voters HAD to vote for Chirac in the second round of the presidential election of 2002.

Then Chirac promised he would not "forget" this and make a government for "everybody" and not just for his "side". Of course this was quickly forgotten and now with the elections coming he has to steer a little bit to the left after 5 years of "shut up I've been elected and I do what I want".

Additionally I work with Czech people and in Czech "Curak" pronouced "shurak" is very close to "sheerak" and means "Asshole", languages are great aren't they ? And Bush is pronounced like "bouche" in French which means "mouth" and also "liar" if you use it in "c'est une bouche" translated as "he's full of mouth"...

Bottom line is that France is rediscovering freedom for consumers instead of corporations because elections are coming up, but it's a good time to grab things...
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?