Perspective: Learning from the French iTunes legislation

France recently flirted with strict interoperability mandates between online music services. Yet, like a storyline to a classic French love story, what started as a promising courtship has devolved into a complex spat with hurt feelings all around.

It all started a few months ago when French National Assembly passed a bill that, simply put, required a song bought off the French iTunes Music Store to be playable on any device.

Many French legislators and consumer groups found this necessary because, if you really love, say, Serge Gainsbourg and buy one of his tracks off iTunes, you can listen to it only on your iPod, iTunes or an iTunes-burned CD. This means that if you get a phone that plays music, you can't play your iTunes track there. Or, if the iPod goes the way of the Pet Rock, then that Gainsbourg tune you own will be under lock and broken key forever.

The French bill would impact all online music stores, but with Apple Computer's dominance in the market, the company was clearly the target. Apple threatened to shut down its French iTunes store before submitting to such a rule.

However, after much debate, the legislation was significantly modified and the version that passed Friday says that the labels and artists providing music to the music services can waive the interoperability mandate if they so choose. A new layer of bureaucracy in France will mediate this process.

Legislating a technological moving target is an inexact process that is bound to become as dated as bell-bottoms.

Apple still isn't happy with the current legislation language and may yet leave France. Even if it does stay, the company could presumably relegate the music of those who demand interoperability to virtual back shelves of the iTunes music store. The end result will be regulations that create a state-sponsored battle of leverage between labels and online services and more bureaucracy. Oh, and Gainsburg's "Les Incorruptibles" probably still won't play on your phone.

Sacre Bleu! It doesn't have to be this way.

First, legislating a technological moving target is an inexact process that is bound to become as dated as bell-bottoms. What is a dominant platform today could become a distant memory tomorrow. Consider CompuServe or AOL's strength in the 1990s and where they are now.

Plus, there may well be a technological solution to the confusing swirl of multiple devices and incompatible rights formats. This solution would do what the French originally wanted to do--and much more--without the snapshot-in-time regulation. It would create a market-based rights system that authenticates individuals--not devices--and allows consumers to use content that they own on any device.

Moreover, this rights system would be available for anyone to use. No mediating bureaucracy needed. That means that anyone putting a film, song or photo online could create rules for the distribution of their content. And, with the further explosion of participatory mediums like YouTube, photo-sharing sites and personal blogs, this becomes a big deal.

A number of companies--including Sun Microsystems--and individual programmers have begun collaborating on a content rights project called Open Media Commons. The hope is to create a digital rights management (DRM) system that fairly balances the rights of content creators and interests of those who purchase that content.

Predictably, some will say that all DRM is evil. Even though it is simplistic, this perspective does elicit sympathy. After all, DRM has (wrongly) been used surreptitiously and DRM, to date, has largely been used to create confusing rules for consumers on how they can use content that they own. Again, this was the first scene of the French epic.

But fade to reality and you'll see that some forms of DRM will be inevitable. Even if the content industry won't require DRM directly, governments may. Recently, there have been numerous pieces of congressional legislation that have (unwisely) mandated DRM.

Therefore, we want to work with others to create a viable alternative to device-based DRM and create a transparent, open, yet secure system. The focus will not be to lock down content. Rather, it will be to provide a personal content key for individuals to use what they own across all devices.

This is especially important when you consider that music is just the first of countless examples of content that people will access online. Having a content rights system that gives you access to your Shakira album while on vacation is nice. Having a content rights system that allows a doctor in ER to securely review your electronic health record is essential.

Let's hope that the world learns from France's attempts to thread the DRM needle through regulation and instead focuses on systems that put power in the hands of consumers. Know that, for now, consumers may be justifiably quite content to use the substantial iTunes service with their treasured iPod. But when consumers are given a choice between an open platform that resembles the Web more than it does CompuServe, we think they could soon be saying au revoir to closed systems without the help of politicians.

Biography
Tom Jacobs is Sun Microsystems' director of engineering, Sun Labs.

More Perspectives

[Thrudheim]

Overall, I like the approach

but he exaggerates the limitations of Fairplay DRM a bit. He
says, "if you really love, say, Serge Gainsbourg and buy one of
his tracks off of iTunes, you can listen to it only on your iPod,
iTunes or an iTunes-burned CD." Only those things, eh?

The iTunes-burned CD is of course playable on any CD player,
so that can hardly be called limited. It can be re-imported with
no DRM into one's format of choice (use a lossless one to avoid
further degradation of sound quality) and uploaded it to any
device or music player software of choice. Granted, burning to
CD is a hassle, but many people do it anyway just for backups or
use in a car.

Playing it "only on iTunes" of course means it can be played on
any five computers. Again, not much of a limitation and wrong
if you've re-imported from CD.

Overall, though, a person-based approach to DRM sounds much
better then a device-based approach, and it would be nice to see
a standard DRM format that is not controlled by a company (like
Apple or Microsoft). I just think he makes Fairplay sound more
draconian than it really is in order to make the case for this
alternative.

[Thomas, David]

Dear Tom ...

This is your quote:
"... because, if you really love, say, Serge Gainsbourg and buy
one of his tracks off of iTunes, you can listen to it only on your
iPod, iTunes or an iTunes-burned CD. This means that if you get
a phone that plays music, you can't play your iTunes track
there."

If you can burn a CD, it means you can import, and play, your
music ANYWHERE, ANYHOW, YOU WANT!

There simply isn't any argument.

[skeptik]

Yeah, it could work...

But you're a clutz for suggesting this is a workable solution.
This solution depends on two things:
1.That you will continue to be able to burn CDs.
2.That the CDs will continue to allow re-ripping.
Both things could be ended by iTunes tomorrow, and while there would be consumer backlash, there is also business/financial incentive for them to do so.

Your solution is a hack and like all hacks, guarantees nothing in the big picture.

[jbelkin]

Not the Entire Truth ...

First, thanks to Apple - only online music DRM can be LEGALLY converted to a DRM-FREE format - not movies, or books. So, compatibility with BILLIONS of playback devices is built in (including trasnferring to WMA devices in two steps!).

The legislation was actually launched NOT by consumers but by VENDI UNIVERSAL MUSIC. Strange, don't you think? What was their motovation?

To cripple iTunes because Apple got too powerful?

Do they want us to go back to CD's because they can hide the sales easier?

Because the DRM was not controled by a French company?

You really need to learn ALL the details behind the situation before presuming from a few thousand miles away.

iTunes/iPod works fine as it stands now. You as a conusmer can use iTunes for FREE without ever buying an ipod. You cna even buy tracks and listen on your computer - no ipod necessary.

Or conversely, you can buy an ipod and NEVER have to buy a track from itunes. You can buy mp3's (DRM-free) from up to 25 online stores or you can buy CD's and convert yourself.

Unlike many other computer choices, Apple gives you latitude to choose from many choices. They do offer a convenience with DRM ... a DRM the record companies DEMANDED and now steathly, want to wreck?

The question YOU should be asking is what was the real motivation of the record labels?

[skeptik]

but why

Why would I, the consumer, care about the labels or Apple? I care about protecting and ensuring future use for the the content I purchase.
All your excuses and conspiracy theory don't do a thing for me in that regard.

[MadKiwi]

Stop Peddling Misconceptions

When you "buy" music on line, or on CD or however you get you do not OWN the music, you have purchased a licence to use it. That licence may be very broad or may be restrictive, it may be partly prescribed by local law, irrespective, you do not OWN the music. The sooner that people recognise this the sooner we can actually have a proper debate on the whole digital rights issue. As lone as people think they OWN the music they buy, the debate will be partly based on a false assumption.

[skeptik]

Renting the right to listen?

Then I should not be penalized if the copy I have is lost and I need another. It should be free because I don't own the copy, I own the right to listen, independent of the copy I have in my possession.

For me, this rental idea is why I don't pay for any music downloads. I don't rent anything. I own or I forgo. People who care longterm about their music realize letting a corporation control and manage your content is a very risky proposition.

[FredJones34]

Thank goodness for France

They put the freedom back in freedom french fries.

At least someone is going to stand up for the consumer.

Why should I have to:
1  dload
2  burn
3 - reimport
4  convert
5  export

The song I bought if I want to use it on another device?

Even with my poor math skills, that's about 3 steps too many for me. What if I have 20 songs, 200, 2,000?

You can argue approx. 383 million different ways about DRM but one thing is certain  to date, no DRM discussion ever looks out for the consumer and his/her rights.

It's nice to see a government is thinking for the little guys every now and then.

Vive the Freedom (aka. France).