France amends bill amid opposition from Apple

French Senate introduces amendments to assuage company fears that legislation would result in "state-sponsored piracy."

The story "France amends bill amid opposition from Apple" published May 11, 2006 at 5:06 AM is no longer available on CNET News.

Content from Reuters expires after 30 days.

[Thomas, David]

Makes more sense

From my initial readng of this law. It now appears that someone
has come up with a reasonable solution for handling this issue.
Whether or not someone can implement it is another thing. If a
standardized conversion protocol can be established, to
maintain the DRM encryption, from one format to another, then
that should quell the worries of the content providers.

As much as I hear some people complain about DRM, its the only
natural way to allow the content providers to ensure some level
of security for their product. As much as audio enthusiasts
dislike it, or some feel that music should be free, I guarantee
you that they, nor their wives and children want to give away
their toil for free.

[jabbotts]

We forget those who toiled to create the music

The listeners want non-DRM media. The musicians want non-DRM media. The middleman (content providers) want to keep there traditional business model unthreatened by progress.

I bet when fridges became a house hold item, there where a lot of ice delivery workers that wanted laws to ban personal water freezing units. Some instead understood the change in the market and developed new business models.

[hadaso]

Real piracy was always state-sponsored ...

Real piracy (i.e. pirates on a ship robbing other ships) was always state sponsored.

But with copyrights it's the opposite: copyright infringement is not stealing and not piracy. Copyright is state sponsored. It is the state that takes away from the public the right to make copies of certain information, and grants these rights as monopoly rights to certain parties. The state does it because the legelators believe (or had believed in the past) that these restrictions on specific rights are better in particular situations than not restricting them. And as the state is the creator of copyrights, the state can just as well decide not to grant these rights if the legislators believe now that in the present situation the public interest has changed.

So if you want to apply the word "piracy" in the context of copyrights properly, use it to refer to the state-sponsored restrictions that rob the public of the right to freely diseminate information. In this case the french legislators desire to control the piracy they sponsor so that the pirates do not take from the public more than what the legislator has meant to monopolize!

[Thomas, David]

I am VERY Confused by your Post.

Can you please re-phrase that. It didn't make sense.

I am not from France. I do NOT know how the French goverment
works. You speak of the "state" as some entity separate, and
without interest of, the people the body is supposed to govern.
I am assuming that the French governemt is a democracy, and
not in control by some totalitarian regime. I also assume they
hold elections, and have the same problems with lobbyists
business interests, that the US does (where I do live).

I am trying to figure out how anarchy is going to protect the
rights of the artists. We already know that the current music
corporations aren't. But cutting of the last remaining blood flow
to the artist does not do any good either.

If I am off-base, in regards to your post. Let me know so I can
understand it.

[Gromit801]

Alittle history lesson.

Piracy on the high seas is an act by outlaw individuals or crews, and
is not sanctioned by any government.

Privateering, is the act of doing essentially the same thing, but it
sanctioned by a government, who gets a share of the goodies.

[Peter Bonte]

This law is technically flawed

The article is wrong to, itunes music can be burned to regular
CD's so there is free and legal operability if the user wants to.

So as i read it there will be a comity that has the right to view
the DRM code and pass it on to the competing formats to push
them into compatibility or provide a tool to strip the DRM and
apply a different DRM (euh, burn CD?). If Apple agrees they will
get a fee (from what?) and a guarantee that the information is
safe with them. How can they guarantee that and what is the
compensation if the code leeks via the French government?

How will this bill make rented WMA playable on a iPod, Linux,
handheld or GSM? The only way to fully comply with this law is
allowing to convert all DRM music to generic MP3's.

[kxmmxk]

propaganda

It has been repeated over and over again that you can make a CD and then re-rip anyway you want. These constant statements that you are locked into a device are just propaganda, usually created by those that want an in to Apple's setup.

The iTunes store exists only as a support item for the iPod. This is by people that want to use the iTunes store for their own devices because it's a nice setup. However, the store itself cannot be sustained without iPod sales. So perhaps it's an end run to kill off the store?

But, the point is, if this happens it will probably kill the store because RIAA won't like it.

Talk about cutting of the nose to spite the face.

Just stupid