- Related Stories
-
Open-source iTunes rival launches
February 9, 2006 -
DRM: Media companies' next flop?
January 30, 2006 -
Music stops for Mac Windows Media Player
January 12, 2006 -
France may sanction unfettered P2P downloads
December 22, 2005 -
Antitrust truce frees rivals for bite at Apple
October 11, 2005
Lawmakers approve a law that aims to prevent Apple or any other company from getting a monopoly on digital music.
The story "France pushes ahead with iTunes law" published March 21, 2006 at 11:36 AM is no longer available on CNET News.
Content from Reuters expires after 30 days.
Don't get me wrong, I hate DRM, but it will take a much bigger
market than France to force any of the legal music download
companies to change their business model.
If you hate DRM as much as I do go out and buy a physical CD (not from sony) and do whatever you want with it. It doesn't take a nation. I know pleanty of people with ipods that don't pay for songs from the Apple store.
Don't get me wrong, I hate DRM, but it will take a much bigger
market than France to force any of the legal music download
companies to change their business model.
If you hate DRM as much as I do go out and buy a physical CD (not from sony) and do whatever you want with it. It doesn't take a nation. I know pleanty of people with ipods that don't pay for songs from the Apple store.
can freely move between different devices, a recent study of the
European Union project Indicare showed."
Why? Is there some reason I am missing as to why companies
would charge more to give their customers more flexibility? This
isn't a knock on Apple nor Microsoft, but I"d really like an
answer to this.
IT's stupidity, really. No one, after buying an iPod would then say "Hey, I'm going to go with a Zen Micro" or whatever. iPods are the best, always have been and always will be.
The thing is, Apple doesn't say "HEY YOU! You HAVE to own an iPod to use with iTunes." Apple says: "IF you want to use iTunes on a portable device,t hen it has to be an iPod." See the difference?
They aren't forcing anyone to use their products. And that's why France is wrong in this arena.
can freely move between different devices, a recent study of the
European Union project Indicare showed."
Why? Is there some reason I am missing as to why companies
would charge more to give their customers more flexibility? This
isn't a knock on Apple nor Microsoft, but I"d really like an
answer to this.
IT's stupidity, really. No one, after buying an iPod would then say "Hey, I'm going to go with a Zen Micro" or whatever. iPods are the best, always have been and always will be.
The thing is, Apple doesn't say "HEY YOU! You HAVE to own an iPod to use with iTunes." Apple says: "IF you want to use iTunes on a portable device,t hen it has to be an iPod." See the difference?
They aren't forcing anyone to use their products. And that's why France is wrong in this arena.
that illegal world body are anti-American, pro-Communists.
Also, the World Court doesn't deal in matters like this, but is set
up to whisk away American citizens or soldiers without a warrant
to stand trial on crimes that cannot nor will not apply to
Americans.
It's also why Congress has never ratified nor allowed our Courts
to be superseded to the World Court after the Supreme Court
has rendered a decision or let a previous decision stand.
Also, the World Court's intials are ICC for International Criminal
Court. They never dispute matters between govvernments, trade
bodies, or corporations to resolve.
As far as it goes, what if Apple just ignored France as a market?
Or that particular law? Just a thought or two.
For more information about the "World Court"/ICC, go to
www.thenewamerican.com. Numerous articles exist about the
subject there.
I know because in high school, I wanted to be lawyer for the ICC,
but after researching its sole purpose, forget that!
that illegal world body are anti-American, pro-Communists.
Also, the World Court doesn't deal in matters like this, but is set
up to whisk away American citizens or soldiers without a warrant
to stand trial on crimes that cannot nor will not apply to
Americans.
It's also why Congress has never ratified nor allowed our Courts
to be superseded to the World Court after the Supreme Court
has rendered a decision or let a previous decision stand.
Also, the World Court's intials are ICC for International Criminal
Court. They never dispute matters between govvernments, trade
bodies, or corporations to resolve.
As far as it goes, what if Apple just ignored France as a market?
Or that particular law? Just a thought or two.
For more information about the "World Court"/ICC, go to
www.thenewamerican.com. Numerous articles exist about the
subject there.
I know because in high school, I wanted to be lawyer for the ICC,
but after researching its sole purpose, forget that!
get authorization to play the music as such?
Actual reality dictates, though, that tech. has caught up with
music, and it's time to just give it away free. The "artists" may
not like it, but who really cares? I don't. Most people I know
don't. Like a nother poster wrote, he knows plenty of people
who buy a physical CD and rips the music. And I've seen person
after person use LimeWire to get whatever song they want,
copyrights and RIAA be damned.
I think France is onto something here. Somebody had to talk the
first step.
So Apple will lose money on iPod sales, but already being the #1
in sales, it doesn't matter anymore. Just be a brand now, like JVC
or Panasonic is for VCRs and DVD players.
People who bought other device will be happy to know maybe
their device can play iTunes stuff, and perhaps iTunes can then
just be a web music portal, allowing the user to download a
song for a buck if they don't want the whole album, or, again,
the user can just copy the song from LimeWire or something.
Since I know most albums are filler songs, and only two to four
songs are singles, I'd rather pay $4 over $10 or $20 for the
album. And if I think another type of player is better than iPod,
then I'd rather use it, this concept behind the French law is
great. Apple still get's my $4 for four songs, and I get to use the
device I want.
But, as stated, if Apple wants to raise the price, to say, $2, then
$8 is pretty close to $10 at Wal-Mart, so I'd just do that instead
and buy the disc.
However, France has no right to tell Apple what to do with it's
technology or services, as no government has any right to tell a
private company what it can and cannot do. That's Communism,
and that helps nobody in the end. (Soviet Union fell apart with
the Warsaw Pact nations, and China's migrating towards
Capitalism).
Lastly, I already know enough to have my iTunes' files and my
iPod, so a law like this is moot, espcially since I live in America.
get authorization to play the music as such?
Actual reality dictates, though, that tech. has caught up with
music, and it's time to just give it away free. The "artists" may
not like it, but who really cares? I don't. Most people I know
don't. Like a nother poster wrote, he knows plenty of people
who buy a physical CD and rips the music. And I've seen person
after person use LimeWire to get whatever song they want,
copyrights and RIAA be damned.
I think France is onto something here. Somebody had to talk the
first step.
So Apple will lose money on iPod sales, but already being the #1
in sales, it doesn't matter anymore. Just be a brand now, like JVC
or Panasonic is for VCRs and DVD players.
People who bought other device will be happy to know maybe
their device can play iTunes stuff, and perhaps iTunes can then
just be a web music portal, allowing the user to download a
song for a buck if they don't want the whole album, or, again,
the user can just copy the song from LimeWire or something.
Since I know most albums are filler songs, and only two to four
songs are singles, I'd rather pay $4 over $10 or $20 for the
album. And if I think another type of player is better than iPod,
then I'd rather use it, this concept behind the French law is
great. Apple still get's my $4 for four songs, and I get to use the
device I want.
But, as stated, if Apple wants to raise the price, to say, $2, then
$8 is pretty close to $10 at Wal-Mart, so I'd just do that instead
and buy the disc.
However, France has no right to tell Apple what to do with it's
technology or services, as no government has any right to tell a
private company what it can and cannot do. That's Communism,
and that helps nobody in the end. (Soviet Union fell apart with
the Warsaw Pact nations, and China's migrating towards
Capitalism).
Lastly, I already know enough to have my iTunes' files and my
iPod, so a law like this is moot, espcially since I live in America.
won't play in my DVD player, so give me DVD's of the movies I
already paid for". They knew when the bought the songs that they
wouldn't play on anything else. WHY in every single article do they
fail to say that ALL of these songs can be burned to CD, You don't
have to own an iPod to USE iTunes, or even BUY music and enjoy it
outside of your computer. They fail to say that you can burn these
albums and songs for a reason...
won't play in my DVD player, so give me DVD's of the movies I
already paid for". They knew when the bought the songs that they
wouldn't play on anything else. WHY in every single article do they
fail to say that ALL of these songs can be burned to CD, You don't
have to own an iPod to USE iTunes, or even BUY music and enjoy it
outside of your computer. They fail to say that you can burn these
albums and songs for a reason...
France, they will need to develop a new DRM that passes Label
muster that can be shared with their competitors. New music
sold on iTMS in France would be encoded in the new DRM and
will only play on iPods sold in France. There. Now no one can
patent that process.
French customers with old iPods that can no longer play new
iTunes music can petition the government for redress in
whatever fashion they choose. Might I suggest you avoid
trashing national treasures, burning cars, or blocking highways
with tractors, and try voting instead?
France, they will need to develop a new DRM that passes Label
muster that can be shared with their competitors. New music
sold on iTMS in France would be encoded in the new DRM and
will only play on iPods sold in France. There. Now no one can
patent that process.
French customers with old iPods that can no longer play new
iTunes music can petition the government for redress in
whatever fashion they choose. Might I suggest you avoid
trashing national treasures, burning cars, or blocking highways
with tractors, and try voting instead?
Now when they turn the tables and start breaking up the MONOPOLY that is Apple and IPOD, everyone's crying foul saying it's not right, and *AMAZING* some of you are saying "Microsoft should have told the EU to 'go away' (paraphrased)" so they wouldn't go after Apple.
Well, you can't have it both ways... Face it, Microsoft was the easy target, now Apple is feeling the pinch. Apple IS a monopoly in one market, just like Microsoft is in another.
Stop crying... it's only business.
Now when they turn the tables and start breaking up the MONOPOLY that is Apple and IPOD, everyone's crying foul saying it's not right, and *AMAZING* some of you are saying "Microsoft should have told the EU to 'go away' (paraphrased)" so they wouldn't go after Apple.
Well, you can't have it both ways... Face it, Microsoft was the easy target, now Apple is feeling the pinch. Apple IS a monopoly in one market, just like Microsoft is in another.
Stop crying... it's only business.
"French."
I didn't realize the French were Marxists...
"French."
I didn't realize the French were Marxists...