France Considers Anti-DRM 'iPod Law'
Asklepius M.D. writes "According to the Washington Post, France is contemplating legislation designed to 'to force compatibility between digital songs and the different machines that play them.' Known colloquially as the 'iPod bill', it is opposed by Apple, the Business Software Alliance, and others who refer to it as 'state-sponsored piracy.' Two versions of the bill have already passed France's Senate and National Assembly. From the article: 'Under the proposed law, Apple Computer Inc., Sony Corp., Dell Inc. and other companies could have to reveal trade secrets of their software so that their songs can play on competitors' devices.'"
I despise DRM more. So, goodie for France!
This would be extremely good for consumers. As a consumer I'd love for a law like that in my country. Obviously it sucks for companies like Apple.
but... i admire france for this
;-)
i feel like i have to go take a shower after saying that...
hey! i just said something very un-french
all is well again
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
People keep toeing Apple's party line that this is anti-DRM. It's not at all. It's anti-proprietary DRM.
You can have DRM, you just have to tell other industry players how to interoperate with it.
This is like saying the DVD Consortium is anti-DRM, because multiple companies belong.
"Under the proposed law, Apple Computer Inc., Sony Corp., Dell Inc. and other companies could have to reveal trade secrets of their software so that their songs can play on competitors' devices." ... reveal trade secrets or come up with an agreed upon standard so that any song can be played anywhere else, similar to how CDs can be played on and brand CD players. In the latter case, there'd be no trade secrets to reveal.
Hmm, how about the unprotected mp3 format? Nah, that's too simple.
Respect the laws of physics, for the laws of physics have no respect for you.
This is great news!
In countries, like Norway, where I live, where DRM is not protected by law, this will allow hardware and software to support every format they want to. If it passes, of course. Vive la France!
...how this is good for France, since the businesses will just pack up and leave.
Karma Schmarma
The bills have already been altered in such a way that not only will Apple NOT be hurt by the bill but will most likely benefit in the long run. The French public was so infuriated by the changes in the bill that they have already had public demonstrations protesting the French governments bending to big business. Do a little DD before posting such nonsense. This is OLD news.
If General Lafayette and French Foreign Legion handn't helped George Washington and the Continental Army during the Revolution, we'd all be speaking English right now.
This may only serve to help the record labels.
Consider that Apple was able to keep the price of singles down to $.99 in the last round of negotiations. If the record labels could have cut off Apple without losing the iPod market (which they couldn't because Fairplay is closed), they would have (and only sold to retailers willing to sell out their customers).
With a large marketshare behind them Apple was able to leverage buying power for its customers and drive down price. Other examples of this include Wal-Mart or CostCo.
OMG - what's the problem here. It's just like France to step in to regulate the market and punish businesses simply because they make too great a product.
You have a merchant selling proprietary content for a proprietary device. If you don't like the model, just buy from someone else. It's really not that complicated. That's what capitalism is all about and why much of the IT world is rapidly moving towards open standards.
Next thing you know, France will force all the telcos to make sure all the ringtones and video games I download to my phone can run on all the other little phones. It's ridiculous!!
(Ok, Apple's iPod policy pisses me off too, but I have a CHOICE. Apple has always been extremely proprietary and controlling which is the main reason their stuff works so well).
Fears of revealing trade secrets?
Does this not go against the most fundamental rule of designing good encryption and good security systems? That is to say, expose the inner-workings of the system to public scrutiny? Or are they afraid that this could open up their devices to competitors?
DRM. Is it about protecting music, or is it about preventing competition?
There's one thing that I don't understand. How can there be "state-sponsored copyright infrigment" if the copyright itself is state-granted?
I know, that this might be shocking for some people, but copyright isn't a natural law. It is the state (mandated by the people) that sets the terms and conditions of copyright and if some author doesn't like it he can take his toys and go home.
Robert
Bastard Operator From 193.219.28.162
The Stationers had a goverment sponsered publishing monopoly starting
in 1557 and lasting 137 years.
Of course this led to suppression and censorship.
So when the United States was founded, publishing monopolies were to be limited if not eleimitated entirely. The compromise was a 14 year copyright once renewable by 14 years by the author. The copyright purpose was explicitly to promote advancement.
Fast forward to now. Corporations have been given the rights of persons. Government granted publishing monopolies (copyrights) have being extened to be 120 years. And the most control and profit from these monopolies goes not to the original authors, but the media companies (the modern Stationers).
DRM attempts to go beyond any government limits, and establish complete control of publishing media.
Oh, and gaming consoles. I could save money buying just buying one console but games from everyone.
Ok, I went overboard, but it's fun to imagine.
Do you honestly think that someone else won't fill the void?
That's the beauty of a properly functioning free market. DRM, abusive terms of copyright, and poor patent practices all attempt to break the free market. But it has survived in the past, and will continue to in the future.
Apple doesn't want to lose the French market, and they don't want to play fair with their competitors. Too bad. The French government giveth them rights, and taketh them away, as it suits the interests of the French.
Remember that what's inside of you doesn't matter because nobody can see it.
It's funny how no one has mentioned Microsoft, MTV, and the Urge! brand fit into this.
Talk about lockout.
I understand France's position on this but people still have a choice.
With Urge!, you only have 1 way and 1 OS to comply.
And when did MTV only require IE now to view their video content?
if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
First off, opening DRM so different music players can interoperate with these DRMed files has NOTHING to do with piracy. Having said that, I thought piracy, at least in this digital age, meant the illegal copying, trading, selling, "stealing," etc of digital information (bits). The concept of "State Sponsored" piracy just seems to be a huge oxymoron. If the state were actually saying that these are legal activities, wouldn't it cease to really be piracy? The fact that corporations are accusing governments of this kind of stuff makes my head spin. I thought the government was suppose to define what was illegal, and not corporations. Oh wait...
"To lead the people, you must walk behind them"
Except that Apple doesn't need them to do anything. This is France trying to pass a law that makes iTunes illegal. If anyone is being blackmailed, it's Apple.
You got to that part before me, but you left out the now well known fact that DRM doesnt stop piracy, only competition... so really it's more like "state sponsored enforcement of a truly free marketplace"
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!