Slashdot Mirror


French Parliament Fights iPod and iTunes

f00lforb00l writes "According to an article in New York Times, the French parliament is considering legislation which would require that the iPod also be able to use music from services other than the iTunes Store." From the article: "The outcome of the debate, which began as an update to French copyright law, is far from clear. But taken to one logical conclusion, amendments to the copyright bill could lead Apple, the market leader, to leave the French music business, said Jonathan Arber, a research analyst in London at the technology consultancy Ovum. 'My gut feeling is that Apple will simply pull out of France if these amendments get through,' Mr. Arber said. 'Weighed against breaking their business model for all markets, it doesn't make sense for Apple to continue operating with the iPod and iTunes in France.'" Update: 03/17 15:46 GMT by Z : A previous story covering this topic may also be of interest to you. Sorry, folks.

8 of 323 comments (clear)

  1. It should be noted here.... by tpgp · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It should be noted here that Apple have allready pulled the ipod from france due to decibel limits.

    However, Apple almost immediately surrendered, limiting the decibels with a firmware update so they could get the French market back again.

    --
    My pics.
  2. Interesting ... by Bazzalisk · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Except that the iPod can already play files purchased from other music stores.

    Any music store that sells in DRM-free mp3 format is completely compatible with the iPod.

    What you mean that the stores won't sell in anything other than locked microsoft formats? How is that Apple's fault?

    --
    James P. Barrett
  3. Re:um iPod already does by MustardMan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    EXACTLY - if sellers were willing to actually TRUST the people who purchase their music, instead of forcing DRM down their throats, this wouldn't be an issue. Apple's DRM is slightly less obtrusive than others out there, but DRM sucks, period. ANYONE could sell mp3s or non-drm'ed AAC files and they would play on the ipod just fine. The only music I've EVER purchased in digital format was from the band Manowar, which sells un-drm'ed mp3s directly from its website.

  4. Re:Gee, that could be expensive.. by Alex+P+Keaton+in+da · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Call me a jackass, but if Apple pulls out of France, can't people still easily get iPods and iTunes? I mean, with the EU, goods move fairly freely (I think) across borders, and people move between countries often. Traveling from France to a neighboring nation isn't like trying to get the 2000 miles from the tip of Florida to Canada. So won't the French, who want an iPod, just roll through the Chunnel, and buy one?
    And iTunes works with all music formats except the MS, so loading the things would be fairly easy....

    --
    And All I Ask is a Tall Ship And a Star to Steer Her By
  5. What this law says by Yvanhoe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    1) Interoperability must be assured by the providers and reverse-engineering toward this goal is authorized. (Article 7.)

    2) A publisher/editor can force an artist to accept that his/her creation will be published with DRMs. ("vivendi" amendment, actually, four different amendments)

    As you see, we have fucked up politicians here too. I would say we have slightly less corruption from the lobbies but far more incompetence.

    --
    The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
  6. Re:Vive le differance! by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful
    People have a choose (sic) what to purchase and if they like being locked into an overpriced, overhyped, fragile product with expensive proprietary replacement parts then they have every right.

    Most people don't see it as being locked in. They see it as actually getting what they wanted out of the device.

    I've known several people who just couldn't figure out how to muddle through ripping their own CDs, or fighting wth an MP3 player that they just couldn't figure out, and which either had no control software, or crappy stuff. They weren't interested in figuring out how to download through peer-to-peer, and weren't interested in pirating music.

    For those people, what they're paying for is a working user experience that does what they want. They're not interested in the geek perspective of "I could buy an MP3 player cheaper, and I'll be l337 cuz I got no DRM". They couldn't care less about ogg-freaking-vorbis and how it's unencumbered. They don't want to know about the formats of music, the bitrates, or the technical issues about which lossy compression is theoretically better. They want to hear music and not arm-wrestle with technology to get it.

    You don't like the iPod? Fine, don't buy one. What Apple does is an exceptional job at is giving people a good user experience that you generally don't have to muddle with. You may pay a premium for it compared to a DIY solution, but if you can't DIY, the cost is worth it. Because saving $50 to find out you can't make it work, is not actually a savings. I knew several people who returned other players after Christmas to get an iPod variant.

    I play my iPod shuffle 4-6 hours a day at work. I find the iTunes software to be amazingly easy and uncluttered. Sure, I rip my own MP3s from CD, so I'm not stuck with their proprietary format. I'm thinking of buying a larger iPod, or a second shuffle to keep more data with me music with me for longer trips.

    The fact of the matter is, for those people who find it provides real value, the iPod family and iTunes are a good set of products. That's why they're so successful. They're not successful because they're hyped -- they're hyped because they're successful and people want them.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  7. surrendering a country is bad... by Lakedemon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well...I'm french, so take what I have to say with a grain of salt.

    My opinion is that pulling out of the france market :

    1) is a serious blow : 2% of a market where you are the world leader must represent an awfull lot of money. The kind of money that would make sales/marketing people salivate.

    2) Surrendering a country means, letting the competition gain a foothold/strong position where you (ipod/itunes) had a near-monopoly.
    Do you think, you could re-enter the market at a later point ?

    3) Brand recognition. If you stop selling ipod/itunes songs in france, will the french still think of Apple as cool ? Mmmh, maybee, maybee not...

    4) You'll have to open the ipod anyway....a few people (I did) are buying alternative mp3 player because thay want to play open formats, have more interoperability...People won't like the fact that the music they bought can't be played on other places than their ipod (they just don't realize it yet).
    Despite looks, a product that can't do half what the concurence does, can't be that cool...

    5) would be funny to see what the EU would do about it (Yet, I'm still waiting to see what the EU does to microsoft...I fancy seeing microsoft have to pay a million $ a day till it behaves, it would be fun and a good lesson for others (rich people/corporations shouldn't be above rules)).

    And I strongly feel too that :

    Though they had a good start and people everywhere loves their product, I highly doubt that Apple will remain the uncontested leader in selling mp3 players/mp3 songs. Other big players/corporations (sony, microsoft, the music industry...) are interested in a (big) share of the juicy market and, one way of the other, they'll get what they want.

    When the hipe around the ipod dies, what next ?
    There is always a next big thing, you know :D

    Just my 0.02 euros

  8. Re:Before you make up your mind... by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My opinion would be no different. It's ridiculous and stupid of the French to force a company to make its product interoperate with other products just for the hell of it. A company has every right to sell a product, then sell a product or service that works with that product. What, is France going to force Microsoft to sell Office for Linux now? Or Halo 2 for the Gamecube? Does HBO now have to air "The Sopranos" on Fox? Does Sony have to sell XBox 360 games?

    If Apple was actually abusing its monopoly the way Microsoft did in the 90s--e.g., punishing retailers who sold competing products like with Microsoft's coercive OEM deals--then this would have merit. But Apple hasn't done that (and doesn't need to, they're #1 fair and square). You're totally free to buy a competing product and service.

    This is just the French hating Apple for being yet another American company taking over their precious little square of culture on the planet.

    --
    "Sufferin' succotash."