Slashdot Mirror
Norway Outlaws iTunes
haddieman notes that while many people are getting more and more annoyed at DRM, Norway actually did something about it. The PC World article explains: "Good intentions, questionable execution. European legislators have been giving DRM considerable attention for a while, but Norway has actually gone so far as to declare that Apple's iTunes store is illegal under Norwegian law.
The crux of the issue is that the Fairplay DRM that is at the heart of the iTunes/iPod universe doesn't work with anything else, meaning that if you want access to the cast iTunes library, you have to buy an iPod."
Now, when are they going to outlaw all the other DRM-infested music stores? If "Fairplay" is unfair, then so is "PlaysForSure!"
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
When will they outlaw razor blades that only fit one razor?
While I despise DRM, this is purest bullshit.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
haddieman notes that while many people are getting more and more annoyed at DRM, Norway actually did something about it.
It sounds like they've decided it's either Norway or the Highway.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
Richard Stallman recently spoke at my university about the dangers of software patents. After his lecture I went up to him and asked how he felt if a user wants to put DRM on his or her computer under their own free will(such as iTunes). He said that he felt users should have the right to put whatever they want on their computers as long as they have the option to take it off. While iTunes you can pull off your computer if you buy music from it you can not play it after removing iTunes so I'm not sure what his position would be on that. But is Norway violating users rights by not letting them use DRM?
Bah! If I want to play Wii games, I have to buy a Wii. Outlaw the Wii.
If iTunes is illegal, only criminals with have iTunes.
Libertarian Leaning Political Discussion Forum.
While I don't agree with DRM, and don't support it (financially), why does the government need to regulate a vendor that has lock-in features, when other companies do the same thing?
.. unless your MS and can't even get that right!
--
Plays For Sure
Kenya Kenya Kenyaaaaa....
What about all those applications that you can only use on one chipset/operating system? I could've sued game developes years ago for not making a mac version of their games, therefore forcing me to spend my money on PC, because I like to game. And what about those proprietary file formats? I should be able to open whatever file I want with whatever program and have it work! Although I agree that I should have the ability to play my iTunes music on whatever I want, I'm not sure making it illegal to limit proprietary files to a certain proprietary device sets a good precedence.
If you want to play a region #X DVD, you have to buy a region #X DVD player.
Songs purchased via iTunes can not *only* be played on an iPod, they can also be played on any Mac or PC, and also some Motorola cell phones. Only on an iPod? Right.
What about DVDs, protected WMV files, etc?
... that goes around those restrictions. If Itunes is targetted, why should they skip other types of DRM?
For playing a DVD, you need to buy a licensed DVD player. For protected WMV files, you need Windows Media Player running on Windows.
That's of course forgetting tools like DeCSS, Playfair,
Gaaa!
Norway == socialists == doubleplus good
DRM == doubleplus ungood
iTunes == Apple == doubleplus good
Norway outlaws iTunes? What is a good gay socialist Mac user going to do? What is the right side to be on?
Ok, trolling is fun and all, but seriously.
I think it's a load. People have the right to be stupid. Without that as Right 0 no other "Right" can be read as anything other than "You have the Right to ____ unless we, the anointed elite, think decide your exercise of it is dumb." It's why the 1st Amendment is safe so long as -both- Noam Chomsky and StormFront were free to rant and rave but didn't survive John McCain & Russ Feingold.
I'd never buy from the iTunes store because I think the deal offered is one sided, shortsighted and stupid. But I'll defend Steve's Right to try to sell it and your Right to freely enter into a license agreement with him.
Democrat delenda est
If it were a Microsoft product being banned most of you would be saying they deserve it and shouting about how its about time someone was doing something about Microsoft.
I agree with Norway's stance 100% here. Not being able to move an open format to other machines is apple forcing people to use their hardware. In their PCs this isn't a problem because they do not have market power. However in MP3's/Players they have market power and they are using it to force people to buy their hardware. This is similar to when Microsoft was forcing companies to sell their OS or when they forced users to use their web browser. The only reason it was illegal was because Microsoft had market power.
And there is a big difference between computer software and MP3's. Other platforms already support playing MP3's with PC software migrating a piece a software between platforms takes a lot of work and is not a feasible restriction to place on companies.
Norway is attempting to make Apple change their stance on this issue and I think other countries should join.
Only in Kenya can you see lions.
Isn't that a bit like how, if you want access to the music available on Compact Discs, you have to buy a CD player?
Furthermore, music purchased from the iTunes store does not require an iPod - it only requires iTunes which is available for free on both Macs and Windows machines. iTunes allows you to burn your purchased music to a CD so you can listen on myriad other devices. The only thing it limits is the portable devices you can play the purchased music on in its native format.
I think it wouldn't be hard at all for Apple to make a case and sue the Norwegian government for damages and lost revenue (if such a thing is allowed there).
From a quick Google search:
Experience Nokia Nseries multimedia smartphones, featuring exclusive content from cutting-edge designers, artists and generally mobile people.
It's not so much that you need an iPod to enjoy your itunes purchases, but that you are locked into future hardware purchases from Apple
If you buy many albums from the iTunes sture you can enjoy them and all is rosy. Then two years later the battery on your iPod has died, so you look at what's available. You think there are some nice offerings from creative or sandisk but, trouble is, you can't listen to any of your existing purchases. Your locked to Apple.
It's well boyond time that other players were allowed to license Fairplay, and that other music providers be allowed to sell Fairplay encoded tracks.
How long before windows vista's SUPER DRM is banded?
There's a solid technical reason why Wii games only run on a Wii. Technical incompatibility of DRM-locked music, however, is a purely artificially imposed barrier to interoperability. It's gratuitous incompatibility.
Imagine that every car manufacturer operated a chain of gas stations. All cars could run on the same fuel, but every brand of car had a bizarrely shaped fuel intake that would only accept the corresponding bizarrely shaped nozzle. You could only fill up a Toyota at a Toyota gas station, a Ford and a Ford station, etc.
Further, if you dared to try to create adapter for universal fueling, you'd be thrown in jail and fined tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars for violating the laws the big car companies paid politicians all around the world to pass, to protect there little lock-in schemes.
You could either go along with such BS, and happily sing the tune the car companies want you to sing ("If you don't like it, you can don't have to buy a car! No one's forcing you! Just by a bicycle and shut up already!"), or you could cheer along the efforts to end protected for deliberately imposed incompatibility and improve things for consumers instead.
So they're going to ban people from buying licensed music? It's one thing to question copyright and DRM it's another to not leave people with any option but illegal downloads.
What I found interesting about this article is that it seems to advocate one choice is better than no choice, and implies Norway is harming its citizens and consumers by depriving them of a monopoly.
This tends to be the self serving argument monopolists use when justifying their actions. "By enhancing the user experience by bundling a product the user experience is enhanced. Depriving them of our monopolistic business model harms them."
In my view, choice is never bad. Competition is good. Apple won their market share by out-innovating the rest of the pack. But history is full of examples of the stagnation occurs once a market is consolidated. So I think other players should be allowed to work with iTunes.
If I buy a song from Sony or Microsoft, it wont work on the ipod. That is textbook anti-competitive behavior.
What the hell is Norway's problem? This is the same as only being able to fit Swiffer brand pads into the Swiffer mop. If you don't like the idea, don't buy the friggin' product. Has anyone noticed how difficult it is to get WMP to work with an iPod? Where are the country-wide bans for that one? This is the kind of reaction I'd expect from a pre-teen, not from a European country!
Where's the "haha" tag for this story?
Why didn't they outlaw copyright??
What?
Maybe they should be bought by the Pirate Neighbours.
Until they release versions of their software that works with OS X and Linux? If software is written to only work on 90% of the PC's out there(wintel), like iTunes with the iPod, then shouldn't the software manufacturers be forced to release working verions on other operating systems?
Prof. Farnsworth - "Oh a lesson in not changing history from Mr I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!"
This is how we conduct business in the US. If you don't like it, read between the DRM lines.
If the problem is you can't play music you bought on i-tunes without the i-tunes, hasn't norway just made it worse by making it illegal to play the songs you bought off of i-tunes. Think about it, everyone in Norway with an i-pod will now not be legally be allowed to play the music they rightfully bought. Which is worse?
On DRM: In the real world, who has been inconvenienced by DRM? Anyone? Here's your chance to step up to plate and bleed your tale of woe. How many CDs couldn't you rip? How many computers were you unable to stream or copy or authorize playback for your purchased DRM'd songs?
On the iPod: The article seems to suggest that if I don't own an iPod, I don't have access to the iTunes store library. Well, I don't own an iPod, and I have access to whatever I wish on the iTunes store. In fact, iTunes is, by a wide margin, the most compatible, interoperable music store on the internet today. For one thing, it works with both Macs and PCs, which account for pretty much the entire consumer-based computer market. The fact is no other online music store can make the same boast. Not Microsoft, not Yahoo, not Napster, Sony...and on and on.
You're so right on! I second your comment and I say down with stupid fascist nonsense. Let people live as they may, choosing what they may. Communist/fascist/dictator crap is so last century.
-> Sometimes, you just gotta break free from the shackles of proprietary code.
There's a big difference between forcing a software company to expend the enormous effort that would be required to make a piece of software run on multiple OSes, and telling a music distributor that they shouldn't gratuitously add artificially imposed incompatibility.
Norway did not "Outlaw iTunes". They outlawed iTunes Music Store. There's a big fucking difference, and on /. of all places the editors should know the difference.
republican form of government
a socialist "Worker's Paradise"
I don't see how Sony benefits from shutting Linux users out. As for Microsoft, that is anti-competitive behavior too, and I would like to see it prosecuted. But the EU is already pursuing a case with Microsoft, so Norway probably doesn't doesnt want to spend the money(Anti-trust suits can be very expensive).
Now why do you suppose it takes the EU's members to challenge what US companies are doing? Why is it that US government bodies aren't acknowleding the problems with current business practices? Why is it that while both the EU and the US has gone after Microsoft for the same criminal charges, only the EU is willing to back its convictions?
The questions are leading, of course... draw the conclusions I intend.
I just tried your "menu:advanced" recommendation. iTunes tells me that protected files cannot be converted to other formats.
I also think that if you burn and rip to get it in as mp3, you lose the ID3 tags, but I don't feel like verifying that right now.
QT Fair Use and another program I don't recall converted everything to mp3s quite nicely though, as I just switched from an ancient iPod to a Creative Vision
Ok, if the DRM prevented them from being able to change the media into another format, I guess I could see the point of this. But the fact that you can burn the stuff to a CD as many times as you want, I don't see how anyone is forced to use an iPod for music from ITMS. In fact, I bet there are more people with CD players than iPods. As others have pointed out, razor blade makers, video game consoles, etc are far more "locked down" than music from ITMS. Hell, why not sue microsoft for making IE, outlook, etc only work on windows? Sirius and XM radio music can only be played on stuff made by them. Where do they draw the line?
today is spelling optional day.
So the problem is that Apple won't let competitors to use the software they developed and paid for
No, that's not the problem. Nobody is telling Apple to allow competitors to encrypt their songs using fairplay. What Norway is telling Apple is that songs that are encrypted with fairplay should be playable on devices other than the ipod.
and the relationships they fostered with the Norwegian labels, both indie and the RIAA, nor share the revenue from that process and iPods sales with companies that don't have Apple's best interests in mind?
What does this have to do with anything?
Are you in favour of regulations that forces Sears to haul around merchandise from JC Penney without compensation as well?
Yet another poor attempt at an analogy. Nobody is asking Apple to sell anybody else's merchandise, what the hell are you talking about?
I hate analogies but here's one that's a little more apt: Remember when the discman was the defacto portable player? Now imagine that all CDs released by SONY were only playable on their discman as opposed to all audio players.
What have they done wrong, except become popular?
They are trying to lock iTunes consumers into their products, which screws both its music player competitors AND consumers.
Why do some people think that Apple's shit doesn't stink?
First you let WIPO mandate making it illegal to reverse-engineer DRM formats and then you notice "Oh, businesses use it to lock up market". Well, duh!
The biggest problem I see with this, is that is wasn't Apple who wanted the DRM in the first place. It was the music industry. Now that the iPod and iTunes has taken off, all the also-rans are crying. I'm sure Apple is loving the outcome, but again it wasn't them requesting the DRM scheme. And from what I can gather FairPlay is a little less evil than PlayForSure.
And to be quite honest, I'm sick and tired of not being able to sync my phone, manage MS-SQL databases, dealing with Banks that require IE for online banking, etc.
Apple offered a solution that works, and it works on all platforms. So the only draw-back is that your locked in to using an iPod?!?! Hell, the have 3 versions of the damn thing, there's a gazillion accessories for it, so what's the problem?
MicroSoft, Sony, Dell, HP, Verizon, Bank of America, etc. doesn't seem to give a rats as about me, and I get to hear "Well it was your choice" all the time. Suck it up Norway, if you don't like the business model, don't buy the damn thing.
The real Sig captains the Northwestern. This one captains
> republican form of government
I'll assume you either are not an American or a product of our government schools. If you would haev googled it I wouldn't have to educate you.... but you can find that phrase at Article IV Section 2:
"Section 4. The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence."
If you are American and if you possess even a smidgen of curiosity about the country your mighty forebearers gave you, you might want to go read The Federalist Papers, wherein some of the people who designed our form of government explain in language that would be shocking to see in today's political discourse for it's bluntness, express their utter disdain for the idea of democracy.
Democrat delenda est
Obviously I must be a moron then, because when I tried that this message popped up:
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
I don't like DRM in general so I don't buy music that has DRM. I've never bought a song off of iTunes, yet I legally own all the music I want. Do the people responsible for this not realize they can get their music elsewhere? It almost sounds like a bunch of people bought a bunch of songs off iTunes and didn't realize until afterwards they needed an iPod (or a Windows or Mac PC, or to burn and rerip, or whatever) to listen to them and they got angry.
1 (short ton / firkin) = 89.1432354 slugs / keg
Fairplay is not a bad DRM scheme, it allows unlimited CD-burning (officially more than any so called Copy Protected Disc). The cost, maximum 20 for a CD-burner and a CDRW if you don't already have them. And just to be precise, Norway is not part of EU.
I'm sure that, although Sony might want all operating systems to be able to play the media, it would only be interested in supporting Sony brand hardware players.
See, here's the real problem: no matter what DRM system you might propose, you're never going to get around the fact that DRM is inherently designed to be excluding and restrictive! If it doesn't prevent anybody from playing the file it isn't really DRM, now is it?
Therefore, I'll repeat yet again what I've always said: the only "good" DRM is no DRM at all.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
This headline (and the one at PC World) is quite misleading. Norway has not outlawed ITMS. It has simply been found that ITMS is not following the law in Norway. This means that ITMS has always been illegal. You can blame Apple for not checking the law in the market they were entering (or checking, but deciding that the law doesn't apply to them).
Consumer protection laws can sometimes be a big pill for corporations to swallow, but if Norway is anything like Denmark, which is quite likely, they usually end up having to follow the rules, rather than getting the rules changed to suit them.
lol this article made my day.
Support your local school shooter, give them your firearms.
iTunes came after the iPod, as an accessory service to the iPod and nothing more. Why should an iPod accessory have to work with other players? (HINT: It does, you can burn the tracks to a CD and re-rip them in a format usable on any player, though with some loss in quality.)
Allow me to rephrase that: HD-DVD content with the HDCP bit set came after HDCP-enabled HDTV sets, as an accessory to HDCP-enabled HDTV sets and nothing more. Why should an accessory for HDCP-enabled HDTV sets have to work with other sets? (HINT: It does, you can watch it on your existing set, though with some loss in quality.)
And, again: McDonalds hamburgers came after the trash can, as an accessory to the trash can. Why should an acccessory for a trash can have to work with anything else? (HINT: It does, you can eat it and still live your life, though with some loss in quality.)
Okay, so I threw that last one in for a luagh. I could have (and perhaps should have?) given a longer list of, perhaps less obvious, examples, but I feel it's better to let you post them in reply to this; it may help my karma. Or not.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
I Thought PlayFurSur didn't work on the ALMIGHTY Zune?
,WAV files.
FairPlay DRM is Monopoly protection, pure and simple -
buy all the itunes you want, they only play on iPods,
but still, you can burn Audio CDs from them - and play that on any CD player,
so there is a loophole big enough to drive a truck through.
Now iTunes -the software- is not unfair,
because you can sure enough buy all the CDs you want,
and encode them as 320 kbps MP3s, or even
So iTunes isn't a monopoly product, but the iTunes Store - that might be a different story,,,
It would be so much better if Apple sold iTunes songs as DRM Apple Lossless files,
at least then when you burn them to CD's they wouldn't sound so muddy and flat.
It'd be a longshot, but maybe they could extend that to their practices regarding OS X and their hardware? Repackaging it in a desired format with spare parts gets you in trouble these days if you sell it, much less the hardware binding. They'd not need to ban OS X, just remove the restrictions on interoperability and hardware use.
Of course, fanboi's will come far and wide to dispute this- but not all of us like their products in "Ivory Tower" white as a majority, in non-ATX forms, or even the architecture they bless. I'll take a clone or a custom built machine, and run whatever, however - economics be damned.
Hopefully at least the iTMS ban holds up and works.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
By your logic, the new MS Zune's DRM is fine because Zune-Zunestore-ZuneDRM is a closed system. MS isn't leveraging anyone with Zune DRM--hey, MS may even lose playsforsure licenses over it. Zunes will succeed or fail on their own merits (or lack thereof).
I'm not saying that what Norway is doing to Apple is fair. I do think Norway is out to get Apple. I'm saying that this might not be the best line for protest.
There is a fine line between recklessness and courage... -- Paul McCartney
So will Norway ban Vista or Zune? Or HDMI for that matter? Seems rather selective. If Europe really wants to do something brave they could require a DRM free version of Vista instead of just no media player.
What's good for the goose? Let's make it illegal to have closed Siemens and Nokia phones so that any phone will work with each carriers network. Seems reasonable.
Excluding minor territories, Norway is the wealthiest country on earth.
From CIA - The World Factbook https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/
GNP per capita of Norway is $46000. For comparison, USA is down a way at $37000.
Otherwise, Norway is similar to Oregon in size and population.
So Apple might feel this more than the size of the country alone would imply.
don't cut it off www.mgmbill.org
And you can put that M$ platform on so many different PCs (and Mac) that there is still a choice. That is what it seems Norway has a problem with here.
Since your "solution" doesn't work with protected AAC files, having your head up your arse must also make your brain shrink.
"1) Buy song on iTunes ...
2) Drop it in a playlist
3) Menu: File => Burn Playlist to Disk
4) Import
5) Profit!"
Sure, burn 128kbps AAC to a CD, then rip it again (eta: 30+ minutes) and encode to FLAC so I can have the worst of both files (or to MP3 and leave my ears bleeding), just so I can play it in something that doesn't make me want to dismember puppies or people who suggest burning and re-ripping lossy formats. Why wouldn't I just give the money to the CD manufacturers in the first place and actually get something worthwhile for my money? Chances are the CD will cost less anyway because they're not sold by a single vendor with 90% of the market.
"I'm sorry, this is only a problem for morons"
Oh, well, your harsh words now surely have me convinced.
...or force them to buy their hardware upgrade from the same company so they don't lose their music library. (emphasis mine).
Please explain to all of us how apple does this?
This space left intentionally blank.
This is being spun as if it's an anti-DRM move, when it looks more like the opposite to me.
As things are now, the dominance of Apple's iPod, and their exclusive ability to produce DRMed tracks for it, gives them a lot of leverage with a music industry obsessed with DRM. But if you think for a second, you'll notice that the music industry is obsessed by DRM as a means of control, which they loose when Apple leverages hordes of iPod users to keep music prices low.
The obvious solution for the music industry (so obvious that even the big labels are reportedly mulling it over now) is to just release your tracks without DRM, and tell Apple what to go do with themselves when their licensee to sell your music expires. But that means you loose the control you feel you gain via DRM at the same time you destroy whatever leverage over you Apple gains via DRM.
But if you can get the government to force Apple to license their DRM to all comers, then you can maintain your control via DRM, while still destroying Apple's control over DRM. And that's not all, you can even reduce Apple's still dangerously high market share by putting them in a situation where every other player on the market is going to license both Fairplay and Microsoft's DRM, forcing Apple to either pay Microsoft a cut of every iPod sale to get their DRM and compete (in which case MS may well make more money off iPod sales than their own players due to sheer numbers!), or be the only player on the market that can't handle every form of DRMed music.
This legislation not only saves DRM by undermining everyone but the big labels control of it, it also undermines the only force in digital music that is pressing for low prices (because they make their real money on players anyway, and thus benefit from higher adoption more than from high prices) by forcing them to subsidize their own competition to remain competitive.
How the hell is that pro-consumer?
If they want to protect their people from DRM, they should outlaw *all* DRM, not just force their licensing terms on Apple's.
"The worst tyrannies were the ones where a governance required its own logic on every embedded node." - Vernor Vinge
This isn't as much about DRM, or iTunes as you think, and far more about a growing attitude in Europe about companies that try to force a consumer into exclusively using their systems.
Now before you call go off in a huff about how evil Microsoft is and this being somehow all their fault and poor little Apple having no choice but to do what they did in order to survive, or worse give me the BS arguement about how the record companies forced them to do this... *too late*... here's the real point, and yes this is just the begining of companies that are about to get hit with this and I doubt Norway is the last, you'll likely see most of Northern Europe and France follow quickly. Don't be suprised if you see the entire EU take a position on this issue within the year.
What are you buying when you buy music from iTunes? Am I buying an accessory for my iPod or am I buying music and videos? Well, I'm buying music and videos. I'm not buying a DRM that's for certain...and giving it a pretty name like Fairplay is about as convincing as calling it the "Patriot Act".
By buying from a specific site, I can't give up my right to use what I bought simpy because of the mode I choose to purchase it in. If I buy a DVD from the local store, the store can't tell me that I can only use my DVD on a specific player, namely theirs. If I walk into a record store, the record store own can't tell me, "Oh you can only play this CD on my companies CD player." We went through this back in the days of record players, anyone else know why they called it an RCA 45? instead of a 45?
So that's what's really going on. We, Europe and America, as a whole need to start figuring out what we are and are not buying, what rights as a consumer we have, and is it fair or legal for a company to require you to use their hardware to play music or videos that would, in any other media, be free to use from one device to another.
In the end that's what the DRM battle, and Apple's iTunes, and Microsoft's Zune is about. (I'm leaving Play for Sure out of this on purpose, even my cell phone supports Play for Sure) What rights do consumers have, and what rights are artists entitled to?
What I find interesting about all this DRM and and format AAC vs MP3 vs WMA batttling is that very few companies have realized that throwing in more DRM is actually causing their music sales to flatline. Recently, there was an article on CNET and also on here concerning record sales over the last few years (Record as in music, not specifically CD's or Vinyl). DRM has in fact had NO impact on the revenue that companies are recovering. They were actually under the impression that all the DRM stuff would help eliminate piracy and they would make more money, but the reality, there's making exactly the same as what they were making in the heydays of Napter, and true MP3 players. Funny huh?
In short, it comes down to another Us vs Them and who gets to control it all. Apple? Microsoft? RIAA, MPAA? or the consumers?
There is an EU standards group (search for EICTA on this page) that mandates that in order to be able to advertise HD-Ready or HD-capable that the device support another closed standard DRM called HDCP. So if Fairplay is illegal, then so should HDCP be. It denies the fair-use rights that make up half their argument. So that particular standards group seems to be advocating illegal activity in a EU member state.
And not to be the first certainly or the last I'd guess, but from Mac or PC I can use the iTunes store. Ijust need to use iTunes to buy the songs. At that point I can burn the songs to a CD (converts to a higher standard with minimal if any loss in quality, obviously can't take 128Kbit protected AAC and convert it to CD and get better quality, but if the sample rate matches it won't reduce the quality). Then take the CD which now has no DRM and do what you want with it. Rip it back to AAC at the same bitrate as the source and compare it. I'd love to see a group comparision that is double blind pick out the re-ripped versus the original. Maybe, just maybe some golden ear could, but not the folks who play their music for multiple hours per day at over 110dB. Also one could do a quantitative analysis of the original and the re-ripped by doing a laboratory comparision. The analog stage of reproduction will, I would bet but can't guarantee, add more noise and distorion on the average computer speaker setup or portable media player. So Apple does not prevent one from using iTunes purchased music on other player. It just doesn't.
And there are still methods to strip the protection. (Hint: quicktime and its Windows counterpart both allow insertion of custom processing at various stages in the audio train) Just not in widespread use. Make them explicitly legal in Norway if they want to protect fair use. Better than outlawing iTunes and turning people to other DRMful music sources that are more restrictive and have less of a library to draw on, or to pirate operations that deprive artists and labels (though actually somewhat incorrect as some studies show piracy increases purchases and revenue to legitimate music suppliers).
- Tjp
I am in wallow with my inner money grubbing capitalistic pig. ... Oink!
The summary would have one believe that, effective immediately, iTMS is unusable in Norway. What really happened was that Norway declared iTMS illegal and told them to fix if by October 1 or they'd face fine or have iTMS shut down in Norway.
People in Norway can still use the music store. This isn't Norway preventing the user from doing anything, but rather Norway threatening action against Apple if they don't open up Fairplay to other players.
... for Norwegian iTMS users. All of the iTMS users I've talked to just absolutely love it, obviously. For a lot of people, iTMS a great way to explore and discover new music, which is the hardest thing about being a music fan. It's also cheaper than CDs. But I guess the Norwegian government feels they need to protect their citizens from themselves.
I'm convinced that the only people who are "getting more and more annoyed at DRM" are the Cory Doctorowites who have never purchased music on-line and refuse to use iTMS or similar services on principal alone. The reality is, for the few people who are actually concerned about backing up their music, backups are as easy with iTMS-purchased music as anything else. Indeed, iTunes nags you to burn backups of your purchases. Of course, most people are not concerned with backups, since most music only has a popular shelf life of a few years. I have a box full of old hair-metal cassettes and scratched CDs that I can't listen to anymore. Since I'm no longer a fan of Motley Crue, Slaughter, and Skid Row, it's hardly the calamity that the anti-DRM mob would make it out to be.
It's very easy to remove the DRM from iTMS purchases. If there was ever popular movement to migrate away from iTunes/iPod it would happen; the software has already been written. But as it stands, there is no such movement.
ENDUT! HOCH HECH!
Well, Apple has been pretty forthcoming in regards to iTMS. It exists simply to drive iPod sales.
Now, I don't own an iPod yet, but I would bet that any music or video you buy there would work in iTunes on a mac or a PC. If that is the case, it's pretty apparent you aren't required to buy an iPod to use the service or the content.
Granted you can't take it portable on a player of your choice, but that was never promised or advertised.
I don't like DRM, but it seems to me that they're going about this the wrong way. Force them through legislation to license the DRM to other companies if they want, but don't make the existing product 'illegal'.
Even people that believe in pre-destiny look both ways before crossing the street.
OK... Apple uses a locked proprietary file format that only runs on their hardware, so that's why their DRM is wrong. Fine.
.xls. ,wma) that run only on their software (Word, Excel, Windows Media Player). If it weren't for the Mac versions of MS Office and Windows Media Player, they would only run on one operating system. Zune Music Store DRM files run only with one software (Windows Media Player) on one operating system (Windows), and one set of hardware (Zune music players).
Microsoft has proprietary file formats (.doc,
If Norway bans iTunes, but not MS Office, Windows Media Player, and the Zune Music Store, then they're goddamn hypocrites, pure and simple. The fact that the Zune has 2% of the market is a non sequitur.
This space left intentionally blank.
Why don't you read the article?
if i buy all my music from iTunes, then when i decide to get a new mp3 player, i cannot buy anything but another iPod if i want my iTunes downloaded music to work on it. bypassing fairplay does not count as an option.
i spent five minutes thinking and all i got was this crappy sig
Okay. You are using iPod-iTunesmanager-iTunesStore.
Your iPod dies. Perhaps there was an accident; perhaps the battery died and you couldn't find a replacement, or the mini crowbar required to install the replacement.
The tracks that you loaded into iTunes from your computer's CD player can go into any portable music player whatsoever, or at least any that take AACs.
The tracks you got from the iTunes store, however, will only work in iPods as-is because they carry Fairplay. Removing the Fairplay creates trouble, esp. given that CD burners sometimes produce coasters. It also costs metadata--and you do not want to discover, when you are restoring DRM-less trax to your system, that you no longer remember the name of a song you like or who recorded it.
So, it's simplest to just buy another iPod if you have iTunes Store trax...
There is a fine line between recklessness and courage... -- Paul McCartney
You do not have to have in iPod to use songs purchased from iTunes. You can use a Mac or a Windows PC. You only need an iPod if you want to use the songs on a small portable player.
Hey, is Microsoft Office illegal since Office is required to open .ppt, .doc, .mdb, or .xls files?
If you don't like iTunes - don't buy music from it. I think the choice is pretty clear. iTunes is a complementary thing for iPod. They were designed for one another. If someone doesn't like it - you don't have to use it. Buy a player from another vendor, use another vendor's software and another vendor's music store. It's a free market, you know. It's not like someone is holding a pistol at the back of your head, forcing you to buy music from iTunes.
No iPod is necessary. Just get iTunes (free), buy songs, burn to CD. No more DRM. Except for the ostensible loss of quality (I say that because I cannot detect it), I cannot see how the DRM is an obstacle. Inconvenient, ill-conceived, irritating -- yes. Insurmountable -- no.
Every rule has an exception (except this one).
What really happened is that the consumer ombudsman stated that FairPlay was, in his opinion, illegal. The ombudsman is not a court, nor a judge, nor a legislature. The easiest comparison to make is that he's like an attorney general, but rather than advise the govt, he advises consumers, and acts on their behalf, subjectively. The most he can do is recommend a prosecution to the director of prosecutions, but his opinion is not, repeat not law. TFA is stupid and badly researched.
Cuban trade embargo.
i spent five minutes thinking and all i got was this crappy sig
As much as I hate DRM, I absolutely loathe bumbling idiot politicians who come up with these kinds of laws because they want to look like they're "embracing technology and taking a proactive stance on cyber-issues" or whatever. I can understand and accept government standards for essentials like drinking water, utilities, food, etc. But how in the hell can anyone justify the government butting into the MP3 player market? If Apple was the world's only source of MP3s and MP3 players, they *might* have a leg to stand on. But they aren't, so they don't, end of story.
Why should Apple be forced to provide service to competitors? Should HD-DVDs be forced to play in Blu-ray players? Should Sony be forced to allow its PS2 games to play on the Nintendo Wii? Should Ford be forced to make vehicle parts for Toyota?
What a load of crap. NOBODY IS FORCING ANYBODY TO BUY MUSIC FROM THE ITUNES STORE. Case closed.
"Sufferin' succotash."
More governments should react to market corruption and perversion.
freedom must extend to our culture, or real life won't be affordable
So does that mean that Zune and Sony's Atrak and WMA are also banned? All of those only play on one brand of machine or operating system.
Well what about software that only runs on one operating system? After Ipods can run other operating system sso it's not the ipod that is doing the lock-in it's the operating system on the ipod.
By that reasoning all windows software is windows only and must be banned.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
I bought a copy of "Destroy All Humans 2" for my PlayStation. It won't play in my XBox. Microsoft says I have to buy another copy for the XBox.
I invented an interesting technology. My business partners all insist on using it. Now the government has noticed, and insists I provide it to non-partners and competitors on an equal basis to my partners.
"'Once a long, long time ago, when I was a little boy, another little boy, equally young and foolish, and I formed a club. Just the two of us. Since we had a club, we had to have rules...and the first rule we passed--unanimously, I should add--was that henceforth we would always call our mothers, 'Crosspatch.' Silly, of course...but we were very young. Mr. Kung, can you deduce the outcome of that rule?'
'I won't guess, Dr. Harshaw.'
'I tried to implement our 'Crosspatch' decision once. Once was enough and it saved my chum from making the same mistake. All it got me was my bottom well warmed with a peach switch. And that was the end of the 'Crosspatch' decision.'
-- Robert A Heinlein, Stranger in a Strange Land
Congratulations, Norway, on your "Crosspatch Decision"
if i rip all my cd's to mp3 so they can be played on mac or pc, then who cares about drm?
i refuse to by tunes from the itunes store that can't be read by my car cd player.
so screw apple's drm; it doesn't affect my ipod usage.
Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
"because iTunes isn't stopping anyone from buying Sony's music in other formats, on CD, or from another online music store."
True, but iTunes does stop Sony's music players from using the iTunes store. That is the problem for Norway--not the iPod, the iTunes Store.
(Moves to ban Sony players/music stores over ATRAC to be mulled over later.)
There is a fine line between recklessness and courage... -- Paul McCartney
I don't get what point you're trying to make? Seems to me that downloading a 128kbps AAC was dumb to begin with. If you want to be the idiot and buy something DRM'd, restricted, sub-par quality, go right ahead! I don't think Apple is really out to scam any one out there, so I don't think government should get involved. If you want to be unrestricted, just buy the damn CD. If you want (for whatever reason) the convenience or whatever of the Apple (or any other online) system, go for it, it's your money. Hell, pay extra for the ringtone while you're at it. Me, I'd rather just vote with my wallet and not play into the RIAA's game.
Regardless, the Norwegian government needs to either go after the RIAA or get the fuck out of regulating a legitimate business. As far as I know, ALL DRM would be illegal under their new guidelines. They're just lawyer crazy now, out suing the most successful one. Instead, they should just encourage (or allow) their citizens to rip their own CDs if they choose. Banning the iTunes store makes no sense at all.
I'm just watching BBC World, where a guy called Torgeir Waterhouse from the Norwegian Consumer Council talks about this. When asked about competitors like Microsoft and the Zune, he said they are all illegal under Norwegian law. They only went after iTunes first because it's largest.
It's called monopolistic tying. Apple is arguably using music DRM to enforce its monopoly position in another market (ipods). This is the same tactic that got MS into trouble - tying MS explorer to windows against Netscape. I don't know much in the way of details but the same thing may be a problem for apple in the US... http://www.boingboing.net/2007/01/03/apple_sued_fo r_itune.html
The iTunes music store was one of the first, but it's not the only online music store to come along. Numerous companies have attempted their own failed ventures into this frontier, all using one in a handful of mutually-exclusive DRM technologies.
Buying music online is generally a bad idea. At best, it's a convenience with instant gratification. At worst, you'll need to repurchase whatever you buy. Anywhere you buy music online (legally), you are being locked into a content protection scheme. If it's not FairPlay then it's probably Plays For Sure.
When you actually purchase the CD and spend 5 minutes encoding it, you get better audio quality and a backup that will last longer than a CD-R. You also have physical proof of ownership, album art you'll probably never look at, and something that can be returned if it's terrible.
For starters, Gillette don't have much of a choice since there is no standard format for razer blades.
Look up Safety Razor in either the single or double edge variety. Then hunt for as many brands of compatible blades as you possibly can. You can choose stainless steel, high carbon steel, hardened and polished or not, extra sharp or extra strong, etc.
Enjoy. There is a standard format if you wish. It's just like they would like MP3 to just go away as an obsolete format that nobody uses anymore. As soon as they can crush MP3's, support for it on the players will slowly vanish... Hopefully the rejection of DRM will keep MP3 the most popular format for some time to come.
Gillette is doing the "ours is better than the open format" and they hope it will die. It is long from dead. Many devices from box cutters to art supplies to paint scrapers to medical prep tools to shavers use the blades much to Gillette's dismay. They pretend there is no standard format and hope to crowd it off the market as obsolete.
The truth shall set you free!
You know, it is really sad that the vast majority of the comments that I have read here are defending Apple, and in the vein of, "iTMS is an accessory service, so it's okay. The Norwegian government are morons, et al.."
The simple fact of the matter is, if I purchase a product, whether it be a song, a movie, or a damn lawnmower, I damn well expect that copy of that song, or that copy of that movie, or that lawnmower, to be mine. This means that I sure as hell better be able to use it exactly as I want to use it. In the case of the lawnmower, if I find out after my purchase that I can only use it to cut my own lawn, and no one else's, and the only gas available to run it must be purchased from the same company that I originally bought the mower from, I'm going to be pissed. That is vendor lock-in, plain and simple.
Burning the music to a CD and then ripping it to an unencumbered mp3 format is not an acceptable solution. No matter how simple that may be for most of us, it is still jumping through hoops to be able to do something that I should have been able to do in the first place. Not to mention the fact that not everyone is technologically inclined at all, and so for them it is even more of a time consuming, frustrating procedure. Maybe if I could send Apple a bill for my time and the CD that I wasted it would be a bit redeeming, but I shouldn't have to go through that either.
I find it very saddening that the majority of Slashdotters will, at the drop of a hat, change their stance on a subject as important as this one just because they have some sort of love affair with Apple. Newsflash, guys: Corporations (yes, even Google), no matter what you may think, care more about making money than doing the "right thing". If you guys haven't figured that out by now, then there really is nothing that I can say that will bring you around.
I just wanted to get that off of my chest. It just kind of reaffirmed my belief that people only feel strongly about an issue when it is convenient to do so. Carry on in your defense of Apple, but realize that you are the definition of a hypocrit when you do so.
"We may face a scorched and lifeless earth, but they're accountable to their shareholders first."
WMA can be licensed for all kinds of devices, and I suspect that Sony would be overjoyed to license the file format.
Zune--probably, but the 3 people who own one haven't made much of a fuss yet.
If you want to legally purchase downloadable music, no-one is forcing you to use iTunes. There are many other services. Consequently no-one is forcing you to use an iPod to listen to said music.
Should auto manufacturers be outlawed because they use parts that are specific to their cars?
I think not. I...think...not.
Do You Experiment?
I bet secretly, Apple is looking forward to this. Why you say??? Easy. Apple doesn't want DRM, never did. Remember RIP, Burn, Play???? DRM was forced upon Apple (and all the other music stores btw) and Apple created their own, which has ways around it (if you are willing to work).
.... MP3s only on iTMS Norway. No DRM what-so-ever.
The solution Apple will offer is this
There is no Licence Free DRM, and if I were Apple, I would complain about having to license Plays For Sure from Microsoft, my main competitor. In fact, I would insist that ALL music stores sell MP3s since that is the ONLY universal music format (sorry Og fans).
The *IAA crowd will then have to defend DRM, which is proprietary by its nature (someone has to pay a licence to someone else).
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
It's not really about the fact that the files physically can only be played back on an iPod. It's about iTunes general licensing rules which are incompatible with Norwegian law. The *license* say you can only play the files on an iPod and that's illegal. Under Norwegian law you have the right to do whatever you want with the things you buy as long as it don't violate other laws (like opening your DVD for personal use etc). So Apple can continue to have the physical limitations on their files but the have to rewrite their licensing terms so that the users can do what ever they want with the files they have legally bought.
Thanks for posting that. I love that discussion went on for two hours and twenty four minutes before somebody pointed out that the submission was entirely false.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Protect Consumer Choice... By Restricting Consumers Options!!!
Sir, you've just lost this debate.
Anyway, you have absolutely no idea what totalitarianism means. Please, read up on history before you piss on the millions who suffered and died in Gulag.
Ignore this sig
You can still listen to those tracks in iTunes. You haven't lost the ability to listen to them. Hell you can authorize 4 of your friends to listen to them as well. And those tracks will work on any iPod.
Norway isn't in the European Union. I'm pretty sure Apple would lobby pretty strongly to get its way in the EU, but Norway, and the Norwegian market being pretty small, I don't think Apple thinks its worth it, and would rather lose that market.
In essence, as a Mac and iPod user, I don't like this, but in principle it should apply to everybody, including Microsoft's Zune, which isn't even compatible with Microsoft's own Plays For Sure brand, and that name is terribly ironic.
Still, I don't really care. If I can't listen to music because of DRM, then I'll make my own or go and watch a Bach recital or something (until Microsoft/Sony/RIAA or whatever make playing music in public illegal unless you pay them for it)
Whoosh!!!
They took choice away from their citizens. Am I supposed to applaud or something? This whole "iTunes is the mostest evil DRM evar!" is all just a chimera.
The article should have read: "Norway Outlaws Capitalism."
Yet it's the states on the socialized, collectivist end of the spectrum which are the more prosperous and attractive places to live here in the Union. Indeed, the Scandinavian countries tend to rank highly in those quality-of-life lists that consistently place the U.S. roughly between Canada and continental Europe. I wonder if it's a matter of taste—i.e., would you, in particular, rather live in Mississippi than in California? Would the requirement to subsidize your fellow citizens' healthcare detract so significantly from the freedoms thereby gained, such as a slight gain in your putative freedom from communicable disease, so as to completely negate their advantage?
comma
Every windowsOS device that runs quicktime plays apple fairplay drm. for example an OQO is a pocket itunes playing device. What do they mean fairlplay only plays on ipods. Conversely you don't have to buy fairplay music to play it on your ipod. You can buy or load MP3s.
So I don't get it. You can play itunes/fairplay on tonnes of devices not made by apple. and you don't have to buy itunes software.
Moreover here's a hypothetical. Suppose the itunes software had two buttons on it. One button was marked "load my ipod with some music I bought at the itunes store" and the other button was marked "load my non-apple music player with some music I bought at the itunes music store".
Would that satisfy the norweigans? well itunes already has those features, just the buttons are marked differently. The second button is marked "convert my itunes music to something my non-apple player can play".
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
".....Removing the Fairplay creates trouble, esp. given that CD burners sometimes produce coasters....."
What bullshit. Apple keep in ITunes a playlist of purchased Music. Select it - pop in media - burn. Now copy where you want - complete with track names.
It Just Works. Are you a troll? Have you tried this?
Another slant. I have 400 CD's - my house burns down. What recourse do I have? Nada? Of course. Am I bleating? No. Shit happens.
With Apple, you can back up your iTunes on 5 computers with out stripping the DRM and unlimited if you first burn to a CD.
DRM sucks but Apple DRM sucks least.
Go bitch at the record companies who demanded DRM without making the effort to make DRM interoperate.
If I had mod points I'd give them to you. I wonder if windows and quicktime will run on a gumstix computer.
Has anyone pointed out yet that what may be good for Norway may be anathema to the remainder of the world? It may be more easy for Norway to defy DRM because they're in general not the not the major pirates of digital media.
I have burned CDs with iTunes. No coasters so far, but no track names either--I had to add them back in. ("Track 01" doesn't cut it.)
The iTunes terms of service claims that you can only burn any given playlist 7 times. I don't know how that affects the Purchased Music playlist--I've never done it that directly.
You can back up the 400 CDs into iTunes. (Probably Windows Media Player or MusicMATCH Jukebox as well, but iTunes is what I use.) You can burn CDs of the tracks you transferred (esp. from iTunes), or load them into personal music players. You can back up CDs.
It is probable that Fairplay is, objectively, better than any other musical DRM. But how do we tell that to Norway?
There is a fine line between recklessness and courage... -- Paul McCartney
Does Apple doesn't really give a damn about this at this point? They don't make squat off the music store anyway. They make all their money off the iPod. It's the record industry that gets affected here -- it's just one less way for the record industry to make money off by selling music to this wild new breed of people who use these crazy new devices called digital music players -- people who are going to get that music on their iPod one way or another. Maybe this will actually be good for Apple. Maybe it gives them more bargaining leverage with the music industry.
Several posters have suggested other monopolies that compare to Apples iPod, but halfway decent counter-posts have cast doubt on the examples still leaving Apple as the only perpetrator of the kind of monopoly Norway abhors. The examples that compare to Apples monopoly issue in Norway are those involving the large soft drink companies. Try putting Pepsi in a Coke machine. You can't. And, further, we've all heard and read about colleges making exclusive deals with Coke or Pepsi to be the exclusive provider of said soft drink makers product to those campuses often to the disdane of the losing soft drink makers fans. Movie theaters also contract with sole providers of soft drinks, popcorn and candy manufacturers. The deals are allowed because the purchasing entity is willfully entering the contract; not limited by the lack of competition of another similar product on the market. These deals also get around those that argue that with other products, the razor blade example above comes to mind, have other choices to fill brand name vendors handles with knock-off blades; therefore getting around any monopoly issues. The examples in posts above just doesn't apply. The Coke-only/on my campus/in my favorite theater/ is the exact example that applies in Apples case. So, as much as I dislike DRM, Norway is on the wrong side of precedent. Apple can choose to be the one and only one stuff their brand of can in their iPod. While a few countries may follow, I doubt this will cause a landslide of imitators as most will realize the same thing - letting Pepsi or Coke race to the bottom for exclusive vendor pricing - is good for everyone. And after a while, Norway will probably too.
Music is not. You shouldn't have to keep re-purchasing music, no matter how much Apple and the music companies want you to.
For many years there have been music stores that used Microsoft Windows software. In order to play the music bought in these stores Microsoft Windows was and still is required, you cannot even simply burn an audio cd! Microsoft never got charged for that so why Apple now using the exact same principle, where is the logic? I appreciate the work these organisations do, but they are missing the point here and should adress the music industry requiring DRM and not shoot the messenger!!
If Apple wants Norway's business, it has to PlayFair. ;)
Here a company offers a product that has restricted use, it only is compatible with certain other products and technologies. Consumers that buy these products of restricted use know the limitations, and still want to buy these products. Why should the consumer ombudsman interfere with this?
Yes, it would be better for the consumers in general if the products were not restricted. But it should not be illegal or forbidden to sell these restricted products. If somebody wants to sell such products and there are people who want to buy them, let them do it.
Anyone can (and everyone but Apple does) license PlaysForSure from Microsoft. That's all that's being asked for.
Well, I'd say iTunes is getting more attention than any other DRM system because iTunes is the largest. It's similar to criticism of Microsoft, McDonald's or Wal-Mart. They are the largest, so their problems that are common throughout the industry are magnified and villified much more than anyone else's. It's rare you hear of Target not having unionized employees or low pay, but it's similar to Wal-Mart.
Anyway, iTunes did't get to market leader because of monopoly or chance. iTunes is market leader because it's easy to use, the product is an elegant design, and iTunes has a policy of DRM that is agreeable to the entities that legally own the content, allowing the largest selection of legal downloads. This, combined with clever marketing, allowed the iPod to rocket to the top.
My point is that DRM in itself is not evil. It's when DRM interferes with the user experience. In a market economy such as the United States, a content owner has the right to distribute the content as they please as long as it's not ilegal, in the sense it becomes fraud, false advertising or some other crime. If DRM was truly a consumer nightmare, the demand would decrease to the point of bankrupting Apple. Users would choose "open" sources of music. OK, I can see the point that "open" sources of music don't exist, since the RIAA owns most all content. However, you could choose "indie" music much like you choose Linux over Microsoft Windows. Most indie music is open because it's becoming established.
If I'm not mistaken, Norway is a socialist or near-socialist economy (or maybe that's Sweden, but I think the countries' economies are similar). Sure, the government has the power to say iTunes is illegal much like China can tell its citizenry that it can't read democratic blogs, but that's interfering with our style of economy. I think Norway is going the wrong way here. Of course it sounds like "a stand against the tyrannical RIAA and evil DRM" to anti-copyright activists, but the fact is it's nothing more than limiting user choice, far more than iTunes ever did. iTunes gives users a choice, namely thousands of songs.
There's absolutely nothing stopping Apple from supporting PlaysForSure on iPods.
I know I'm late with this one, but for the record, I have used the iTunes Music Store to purchase music in the part two years, but only got my first iPod this past Christmas (2006). And, as many have pointed out, I can play my purchased music on other players provided I don't mind first burning the music to CD (which, once I have purchased an album, I do as a matter of course).
Any fool can talk, but it takes a wise man to listen.
Say you have a reasonably sizeable music collection, several hundred albums. Are you really suggesting that it's reasonable to buy several spindles of blank cds and spend weeks manually burning and reripping (with fidelity loss) your entire collection?
It's not so much that they're restricting how people buy new music, but that they're locking in their existing customers. Someone who already has purchased iTunes music can't then go buy a non-Apple music player.
s/transferring/transcoding/
There is a difference. You lose quality in the process. That's why Apple allows it.
A house divided against itself cannot stand.
First and foremost, Norway is not a member of the European Union. It'd be like me bitching about how Mexican and US law are the same. Get a clue. Secondly, how many of the alternatives you mention do you think are available in Norway? If you actually bothered looking up half of the things you bitch about, you might notice that the world outside the US is actually slightly different from it (although they have been working hard to make everybody like them. For example by constantly trying to exercise US law in countries that are not US, like Sweden).
In order to not be a posturing Slashdot moron, you really should try to look up the basics on the stuff you are about to bitch about.
ps. No, I'm not Norwegian.
I was referring to the tags not the tracks themselves. The tags will transfer to the transcoded songs. There will be no perceptible loss in quality in the words that make up the artist and title of each song.
According to the above posts, Norway is pissed that iTMS's DRM locks you into Apple hardware, and is therefore illegal (nevermind that iTMS songs do play on any Mac and Windows computer via the iTunes app).
But what about video game consoles? If one wants to play "Gears of War", one is locked into Microsoft's Xbox 360 hardware. Same for any console wrt games exclusive to that console. Is Norway going to outlaw video game consoles as well?
-- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
So Apple provides a service to complement the hardware that it sells? I'm not sure how this is unreasonable. It's not a whole lot different from Sky providing digital sky+ funkyness that requires a Sky Digibox to view (with it's own hardware rental fee).
You could argue that there's some kind of monopoly issue and I wouldn't disagree but that doesn't look like what Norway has suggested.
Good to know this ain't Norway.
I really don't like music that's only in one format, but just for that reason I DON'T BUY FROM ITUNES.
But to think that there are people who WANTED to buy iTunes, because they LIKED it. Maybe to them it simply was the best way in the world to buy music!
Crazy fucks, to prohibit these people from just buying whatever harmless thing (music!!) they want!
All of this done, in the name of the people...
To carry those tunes on a portable device it is only necessary to have a CD burner, and follow these steps:
- Burn tracks onto CD from iTunes (iTunes lets you do this).
- Either use recorded CD into your portable CD player, or
- Rip tracks from CD using iTunes or similar package, and save as
- Transfer ripped tracks to your favourite MP3 player.
Provided this is all done for *personal use only* it would seem to be covered by fair use. However IANAL, so you freedom may vary.
OK, so exactly what position do DVD-Jon have in the Norwegian government? :-)
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
So the iPhone will work with all carriers as well?
I don't like Linux. This doesn't make me a troll.
They outlaw iTunes or the iTunes story?
The header seems be a bit confusing.
So if I am in Norway, and I don't want to buy DRM music, but I still for some reason like to use iTunes for playing music, I can't do that?
ITunes will not convert iTMS purchased tracks to mp3. that feature only works for tracks ripped from CD to AAC
I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
....and so will others as it's a simple case of forcibly getting the users to buy the software. iPod should be more user friendly with its terms on iTunes as it will help in also increasing the sales of the particular product before any other company in the same product line will get something which the users are really looking for; hampering the flow of iPod's in the market.
No, you don't. You can play iTunes Store tracks using free iTunes software (or is it illegal too, because you have to buy Mac OS X/Windows to run it?)
Frankly, if the powers that be just left well enough alone, we wouldn't have much of this going on. I bought MP3 players years ago as hardware devices, and still have them. Then Apple gets on the scene, and then all the rest of them with the damned DRM managed devices.
I think that if Apple did away with their DRM in their product, I would still buy it hands down as the quality is still well known and even their 128 bit format is as good as MP3's 160 bit! I don't know why that is, but just that fact alone would make me continue to use it and patronize iTunes music store.
The whole root reason for all of this is the Music industry trying to crack down on sites such as then; Napster, and all the free sharing going on around the Internet. Its draconian and on the virge of "throwing the baby out with the bathwater".
The whole premise of MP3 is NOT going to go away because its a fabulous means of carrying a lot of content with you in a small amount of space. I plan on using my iPod in my car and around my neck like many others. I would like it a whole lot better if I didn't have to deal with DRM clouding up my sound.
All content in this message is copyright (c) 2008. All rights reserved. RIAA is prohibited here.
So now it's i-llegal?
While I'm myself an iPod user and what you could call a Complete Mac Zealot(tm), I think Norway's decision is good, and should be followed by other EU countries, and, ultimately, the US. DRM is a PITA and, if things don't change fast, limit the growth of the online music market instead of promoting it. Too bad Apple (which has the loosest DRM around) gets the blame, but that's what you get for controlling around 80% of the market of online music sales. As a sidenote, some French retailers (FNAC.com and VirginMusic France IIRC) have started switching some of their sales to plain MP3. Now that I'm not a student anymore and actually have an income (yay!), the only thing holding me back from buying on iTunes is DRM.
Hello! I'm a disaster waiting to happen!
To make this easier for you fools, I have capped some of the words that are important so you can pay notice to it.
#1: Apples DRM locks the songs to one portable product, this means that if your Ipod breaks down, you have to buy another one to have access to your playlist. You CAN NOT buy a creative, you CAN NOT buy a Zune (you wouldn't anyway, but thats not the point), you CAN NOT buy a Apacer or whatever, and STILL BE ABLE to play the songs you have downloaded.
This is VERY DIFFRENT from the fact that you can't run windows games on your linux or mac machines, because there we are talking about hardware restrictions and fundamental diffrenses in the architecture. The next person who thinks this is a point I am going to beat with a clue hammer.
#2: Apple is the biggest player(like participant) on the market and of course you target them first. This is for a few reasons, like hoping to get a domino effect, and besides since they are the biggest, they are the BIGGEST VIOLATERS, and when someone massacres a whole population you don't put all your resources on investigating Mrs. Jensens stolen garden gnome.
#3:"Thon utelukker ikke at forbrukerombudet vil gå til tilsvarende skritt dersom de blir gjort oppmerksomme på at andre aktører i markedet praktiserer samme type produktlåsing som Apple. Dette vil blant annet gjelde Microsofts Zune når denne blir lansert i Norge."
"Thon does not exclude that the consumers council vil take the same measures if they learn of any other players on the marked practisising the same type of drm that Apple does. This will also go for the Microfts Zune when this is released in Norway."
If you still don't get it or talk down to Norwegians again, I will take my fyrd to my longship, find you, and split your head with my axe.
so why are people complaining? If you bought music from the iTunes music store...then u bought it KNOWING that it only works on an iPod. There are no tricks or schemes here. And if a person doesnt know this...then they shouldnt be making purchases online due to a general incompetence for doing research before giving away money.
No one forced you to buy an iPod either. Im sure there are many people that buy music on iTunes but dont have an iPod. Does norway really find it just that these people now qualify as criminals for downloading music to their computers to listen to on home stereos?
Norway and the rest of the european countries need to stop being a bunch of babies and focus on the real baddies....the record industry. Its as useless as detectives going after miniscule drug peddlers on the streets when they should be targetting the big kahunas like Tony Montana that sit over in equador, cuba, etc. and this is coming from an american living in germany. Target the real problem....DRM backers!!! not the middleman that has been forced to leverage it
To all the people claiming that this is good because iTunes forces the end user to play their music on Apple-created hardware, can you please explain to me when Apple started building the PC on which I listen to my iTunes music because I must have missed that. Last time I checked, iTunes was a free music player on both the Mac and PC, but hey, I must be living in a cave and missed something, right?
Sorry, but this is a crock. I don't see Norway outlawing things like the Wii, 360, and PS3 even though all three systems have exclusive games that are licensed to Nintendo/MS/Sony that are only playable on the applicable game system. Sure, lots of games are playable on several of the systems but there are also many games only playable on one system. If it's evil for Apple, is it not evil for Nintendo, MS, and Sony?
A crock of crap law that should be shot down.
http://www.forbrukerombudet.no/index.gan?id=110370 79&subid=0
:)
its a must read for everyone! it explains everything
Thanks for the reply, I've just sent my order to classicshaving.com for a "Hefty Classic" safety razor & some platinum coated blades.
I have been suspect of the whole razor industry for a while, as I have found any industry that needs to advertise that much has some serious issues. Their marketing corps have a pretty hard job, I mean how would you try to convince people that they need a razor that uses 5 blades simultaneously & requires a battery for vibration.
I experimented with the strait razor, but wielding that particular munition requires a real investment in training. I never even thought of looking for a safe razor that still embodied some of the characteristics of the dangerous razor.
Again, thanks for posting that. You have most likely changed the way I live, albeit in a small way.
cheers!
The parent post is spot-on. Why limit your freedom to buy proprietary formats of music?
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
It seems to me that people are focusing on itunes and not the ipod. The real thing what's-his-name is selling is the hardware, not the software. Everybody's so interested in the openess of the software they forget that he's a hardware guy first, and snazzy software second (that's why he has macs made (relatively) inhouse). There are no real analogues coming to mind but. . .Analogouly, would Sony have to open up it's blu-ray format if they let, say nintendo, play the blu-ray on their wii? Nope. They wouldn't get sued by those european countries (despite the hefty PS3 pricetag). The problem is that people are so seduced by the sheer volume of itunes store income that they forget that itunes was designed to work with ipods . . . oh and your personal computer.
The outcome of any serious research can only be to make two questions grow where only one grew before. - Thorstein
Well, it is obvious to me that a device designed by an American company (regardless of where it was actually manufactured) should carry with it the force of American law regardless of the country in which it was sold or the nationality of the purchaser.
It is an egregious burden to force American companies to know and understand the rules of a bunch of countries that don't even speak English all of the time.
[This message brought to you by Echelon and the Committe to Reelect the President]
-- I browse at +5 with stripped sigs
Norway is asking Apple to license out their technology to other companies, just like Microsoft already does with PlayForSure.
This discussion is interesting, because it illustrates the difference between two different groups of /. users, who are usually allied.
First, there is the freedom crowd. They of course cheer on Norway, as this decision will increase competition between music stores and makers of portable music players, by cutting the tie between the dominating player in both groups.
Second, there is the cool technology crowd. They hate the decision, because Apple is "the good master", providing us with all kind of cool technology. And come up with all kind of objections, that really only make sense to a true believer.
The Good Master meme is well integrated in our culture, think about how many fairy tales are about the good king versus the bad king, rather than about the peasants maybe being able to do without a king in the first place. The Apple worship (and the Microsoft demonising) draw directly on that archetype.
Usually the crowds are aligned, because Microsoft is usually the dominating player, systematically abusing their desktop monopoly in order to expand into other areas. They have been convicted for that many times. And at the same time their technology, while not a sucky as it used to be, is still very boring.
Damn it!! When is this crap going to stop? You can play it on ANY WINDOWS PC, and quite a few others, but I say Windows PCs because that covers 90% of everything out there, which is greater than the iPod's market share of the downloadable music business. And you CAN burn a playlist to CD and rip it to anything you want, effectively stripping off the DRM. What's the problem????
You may not like what this guy said, but his points are both insightful and informative - you CAN get songs out of iTunes and if you have some other kind of music player, don't buy tunes from iTunes. I guess his moron comment hit a nerve.
Fairplay: Monopoly.
PlaysForSure: Oligopoly.
So, iPod + iTunes is "illegal" despite the fact that:
* iTunes lets me choose between Mac or PC,
* I can use iTunes with non-Apple media players,
* I can buy songs from other stores than the iT(M)S to load onto my iPod (eMusic, etc.),
whilst, in the mean-time, WMA-based stores:
* force me to use Windows,
* force me to use MSIE,
* sell stuff that will not work on my iPod?
Before anyone starts throwing rocks at Apple, they should look at M$ and its lackeys. These companies had their chance, complete with a good head-start to establish a market presence, had offerings that were in the eyes of "experts" preferable to Apple's... and yet, the People(tm) chose the iPod.
This whole anti-Apple/iTMS/iPod reaction is just complete bollocks. I would not be surprised that if someone started digging into these lawsuits and whatnot, he/she would end up finding the shadow of Bill behind this. If you can't win on merit alone, if you can't win by "cutting off the oxygen supply" of you competitor, if you can't buy them out... Initiate a "grassroot effort" to hurt them.
Really. If it was so bad that it would not benefit consumers, why not let the market kick it out? I understand - DRM = evil, but this is silly.
There is always a larger price for letting your government set business standards. Today, they outlaw something that you consider bad, tomorrow they outlaw something they consider bad. Slippery slopes.
up in arms over Apples 80% share in digital music. I mean c'mon Microsoft get a pass for operating systems 90% for most cases in most countries, but oh, yeah iTunes needs to be illegal because Apple has a large market share.
you missed the point. it's not their market share, it's that the songs purchased can only be played on one kind of device. If Microsoft packaged other people's programs and attached DRM to them so that they only ran on the "Microsoft pcPod" then you'd have something here. lucky for us, MS does't sell other people's programs (unless you count the licenses they have/had for things like defrag and hyperterm) and they also don't attach DRM to the programs they do sell. This allows "windows compatable" systems like WINE and ReactOS to run Microsofts own software legaly and without buying a Windows license. But because of Apples DRM, no 3rd party can legaly make a player for the content sold via iTunes, this is the problem, not the market share.
- Disclaimer: Information in this post deemed reliable but not guaranteed.
By this reasoning, no one can create a new music format because everyone won't be able to play it on existing machines, even if they also gave you a way to convert it so that most machine could play it anyways.
When the CD came out, everyone had to go by a special device to play them.
Yeah, DRM sucks, but this is a very bad line of reasoning to fight it.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
When the government outlaws iTunes. Only criminals will have iTunes.
I'm completely against DRM in each, every, and all forms. But I must say that the Norwegian reasoning is bogus. That musics purchased from iTunes cannot be directly played on any portable device other than an iPod is of course true, but that it cannot be played on other devices at all isn't true. For instance, it can be played on most, if not all, PCs and Macs, from servers to desktops to notebooks to tablet ones. There are millions and millions and millions of "devices" out there able to play iTunes purchased music. It's of course bulkier than an iPod, but it's by no means an "ZOMG, there's no alternative!!!1!!11ONE!!" situation. Not to mention the fact that by doing some clicks the iTunes software will also allow you to hear this music on millions and millions and millions of additional devices, namely: HD/BD/DVD players, video-game consoles, and vehicle / portable / desktop / couch / whatever standard CD players.
Where this law not dumb enough for these reasons alone, it goes further still, because by prohibiting the iTunes Music Store they're ipso facto forbidding all Norwegian iPod owners from accessing their main source of music, effectively doing for them, on its own, what it says Apple is doing for them. Talk about irony.
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
It will be interesting to see the legal basis of the Norwegian decision. Can Gillette not sell its razor bladed that are linked specifically to its shavers? Can Cannon not sell copy cartridges that are tied specifically with its laser printers and copiers? Does the Norwegian law mean that one may not patent a computer security system? Ultimately, it is up the movie and music companies to stand up for the iTunes store because it is one of the few ways to protect their IP.
.... with the topic at hand that you should be modded off topic.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
... that implies that the Norwegian Ombusdman is an idiot, has been debunked elsewhere on this thread.
Summarizing, they went after Apple only to set an example for all the other companies to take heed and act responsibly.
In synthesis, it is perfectly reasonable to expect that all music players should be able to play music bought in any store. If companies don't sit dow and sort out the mess, they will find themselves more and more in the crosshairs of regulators and consumer rights' advocates.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
I surrender immediately to the Norwegian law (giving another reason to you mac/patriotic fanboys to hate me :)
... is not innovation.
It is called lock in.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Good riddance to bad rubbish ...
:-P
Who needs them anyway??? Apple is doing a pretty good job (IMHO) of conforming to the crazy rules of the friggin RIAA and MPAA. The iPod/iTunes DRM is pretty lenient compared to some. If they don't want to buy an iPod, then let them buy a Zune or whatever and see how much they enjoy those devices and associated DRM's.
Ahh. Well thank you for clearing that up! How did I not realize I could play fairplay protected songs on a $1600 device with a 3-Hour battery. Obviously, the iPod is not the only one. Oh! Oh! And what about the motorola ROKR? Eh? Now there is another portable alternative for me.
So thank you. Thank you for enlightening us all. I'll go and buy myself a ROKR. Right after I send a letter to Norway's ombudsman and a donation to Apple Europe to support them in the good fight.
Ladies and gentleman, I submit to you for consideration what I think would be a great addition to the growing library of Slashdot-cliches:
"Don't forget about the OQO!".
The more inconvenient and intrusive DRM is, the harder it is for people to accept DRM. By refusing to license Fairplay, Apple is keeping the DRM market splintered between it and Microsoft's Janus instead of simply taking that market over. And by keeping the DRM landscape splintered, Apple is keeping DRM in people's minds and keeping Microsoft's much stronger DRM from getting a foothold in the market.
how about the previous note about zune retitled to "U.S outlaws zune"?
I'm hardly a fan of Apple's "cool technology". I hate the iPod's stupid click-wheel and the only reason I have a Mac is because I can't run OS X on a Thinkpad... and every new version of OS X has had more stupid technology jammed in with the good UNIX core. And I'll probably get modded down for saying this... I usually do.
Anything that makes DRM more convenient and less obtrusive, whether it's Apple opening up Fairplay or adopting Microsoft's Janus, makes DRM more acceptable to hoi polloi. If Norway gets their way it will hasten the day when you can't get most popular music without DRM *at all*.
There is no difference at all between locking music files to an iPod and locking video game software to a specific console.
It'd be pretty cool if you could legally play PlayStation games on your Nintendo product. There could be legal third party emulators, converters and multi-consoles.
I'm glad Norway is doing the morally right thing, and I wish America the corporate whore would follow suit.
Which is why they don't have a problem with the device itself: just the store that sells content that locks you in to getting one.
...because "hacker" sounds way sexier than "code drone."
I want to send email, I have to use a computer or phone device. Why cant I send email with my hat, for example. This is wrong - all things should be able to be done by all things. Wait - there is a message coming in on my sausages.....
Two points: How about buying a ROKR then. And my main point was this. Apple is not stopping anyone from implementing a player since they provide itunes players that run on windows. If all the implementation suck then is that apple's faults.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Let's ban Apple so that Microsoft can come with their format which was hamstrung by Apple's popularity and actually hand over another monopoly to them. Norwegians should weep. Sure, Microsoft let others use PlaysForSure (NoItDoesn't! (TM)), and they went their own way with the Zune. I mean. Microsoft is having a problem with their monopoly, lets give them a hand.
This is such a suboptimal solution to the perceived problem.
There's no explicit mention of that anywhere in iTunes. Sure, it's probably buried somewhere in the EULA, but no one reads those. Apple doesn't market to knowledgeable consumers; it targets the neophyte, and exploits them. There's absolutely no justification for not licensing FairPlay, or for not supporting PlaysForSure, it's pure greed. That isn't acceptable behavior, and it's well within the scope of government to smack them for it.
Didn't you hear about the 50% increase in Zune users? :-)
I like you. This is especially for you and others like us - check out our own Steve on youtube!!
OMG!! Did he just say THAT?? Isn't he just the bestest and the greatest evar??
Theoretically, a company's success depends on them satisfying their customers. Apple's success with the iPod and iTunes indicates they are doing so. Maybe Apple would get more customers by licensing FairPlay or OS X, but should it be illegal *not* to do so?
The only legal recourse I see that makes sense is if consumers could convincingly claim that they purchased music from the iTunes Store without ample information about the music's portability to other devices.
This issue is fraught with irony. On the one hand, I think Steve Jobs saw how Microsoft was treated after being convicted of antitrust violations and decided that if no one was willing to punish Microsoft for its behavior, there was no point in trying to play fair.
On the other hand, I see little grounds for accusing Apple of not playing fair in this case. The iPod and iTunes assumed dominance in tandem; one monopoly was not leveraged to create another. (Unless, of course, you want to claim that the Mac-only monopoly on the original iPod brought Windows users to their knees.)
If AppleTV takes over home media distribution, then perhaps an antitrust claim would be warranted, but not now.
1 - Appease the RIAA.
2 - Prevent Microsoft from controlling all media and further tying users to Windows with Windows Media.
3 - (Once iPods became so popular) Use newly-gained leverage against the RIAA to maintain a successful pricing model.
4 - Encourage lock-in.
I think 1 and 2 were intentional, whereas 3 and 4 were accidental and due to the unexpectedly overwhelming success of the iPod. I also think that besides promoting lock-in, not licensing FairPlay also promotes the seamless experience Apple has routinely striven for (and largely achieved) with the Mac -- and will likely strive for with the iPhone.
Funny how the market didn't care so much the first time (Mac) but did the second (iPod).
Plays4Sure only supports Windows. iPod supports both.
There is a huge difference between coding games for multiple platforms and encoding music in a file format that multiple media players can read. Microsoft released WMA and WMV for a wide array of audio and audio/video players. Why can't Apple? The difference is that unlike consoles, most songs are available on all stores. You are not forced to choose based on the content available. The only people without a choice are mac users but that is not the fault of Apple. MSFT chose to discontinue the development of WMP and they never intended on bring store and DRM support to Mac OS X.
Apple does not have to license if they do not want to. You are free to choose either an iPod, a Playsforsure device or a Zune if you are a windows user as Microsoft chose to lock out Mac users from the market. This lockout is part of the impetuous to the creation of the iPod in the first place. Apple wanted to provide its mac users with mac os alternative to the window only window media ecosystem. I think MSFT was foolish for not trying to maximize their potential market in the first place.
I don't think you get that Apple makes most of it's music profit on iPod sales rather than music. They knew from the start that it would take a long time for sale of music to brake even let alone show a profit. For this reason, they do not have an incentive to license to others. MSFT is about long term profits and domination while Apple is interested in creating useful products and making a nice profit on them.
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
For one thing, that way you're reencoding and losing quality, and for the other it simpy isn't practical in volume; precisely where it matters the most.
You have the right to demand and unlock code for your cell phone. The network is legally obligated to provide it. Whether they like it or not.
Apple does not have any right to a profit. If they lose money, tough shit, that's business.
Getting off topic, the troll does have a point. Federalism is designed to let different states be different. The fact that I desire universal health care does not mean that everyone should have to go along with it. Perhaps everyone would be better off if we had a limited federal government with increased powers to the states. That way, people in Mississippi can get back to executing homosexuals and the rest of us can forget they exist. In fact the so-called "socialist" states usually end up paying more in federal income tax than they receive. At the end of the day, it is the red states that sponge off of the blue ones when it comes to federal tax money. How's that for personal responsibility?
Power to the states means that people like James Inhofe and Trent Lott have less say in my life. I don't have any say in who backwater hicks elect to Congress. What I can do is minimize the influence their decisions have on me.
It's not lack of DRM that lessens the number of trax in Yahoo!'s library: some of their songs have no DRM, but most of their songs are still Playsforsure. (Very unfortunately.) They have quite a few trax from major labels.
The Yahoo! store has lower selection because fewer people shop there. (Odds are they don't have as good arrangements with the indie labels, either.)
There is a fine line between recklessness and courage... -- Paul McCartney
Its all the same for the mobile phone manufacturers if they lock the phones or not. They have to do it because carriers demand it. Carriers will do everything they can to keep you as their customers. One solution could be making it illegal to sell contracts and phones bundled.
Until recently, I had two (well, actually more, but to keep it simple) choices: I could buy a song at a CD store, or I could buy it cheaper via iTunes, if I were willing to accept a few restrictions.
Suddenly, I no longer have the option of buying it cheaper while accepting some restrictions.
Thank you very much the government of my beloved country.
-- Rolf Lindgren, cand.psychol
There's no technical reason there needs to be a loss of quality.
Here's your easy solution; most norwegians aren't actually socialists, there's only about 17% outright socialists however a good portion (something close to 30%) can be called social-democrats.
Last election more norwegians voted non-socialist than socialist (still it was basically 50-50 if you include social-democrats and some small fry as socialist) but because of the way seats get distributed the "socialist" coalition ended up with more seats. You know roughly the same kind of stuff that makes the US media talk about civil war when it happens over there... in contrast here in Norway all the non-socialists were happy that the "socialist" coalition got a chance to prove how awful they would be, which they have done to great effect.
As a result Fremskrittspartiet will increase their gains next election as well. Think of them as "Republican light", in recent times usually the second largest party after Arbeiderpartiet (in turn a social-democrat "labour" party trying to survive on illusions of past glories, something which is especially funny when you know that most "labourers" in Norway now vote Fremskrittspartiet instead).
p.s. the only people who still vote "socialist" in Norway are:
1. those blind enough not to understand anything from living next door to the Soviet Union (the usual bunch of loudmouth idiots)
2. those young enough not to know how it was to be living next door to the Soviet Union (luckily most youngsters aren't deluded by socialist utopias or fools gold)
3. those that simply vote the same as their parents did before them (far too many, many of which are getting fairly old)
4. fascists who prefer red over brown (rapidly dying out due to old age although one can find the occasional young Stalin wannabe seemingly stuck in a personal sixties time-warp)
In general group 1 and 4 would be easily identifiable and recognized as socialist to the rest of the world.
If I were Apple I would just license their DRM for 100 billion dollars. :-)
It's not Apple's problem if other companies can't afford the license
Of course, everyone forgets, before it even gets to an iPod, the iTunes purchased music can be burnt to a CD making it playable on any CD Player, then re-imported as an mp3 loosing all DRM stuff, and making it playable on ANY MP3 player.
Apple can safely ignore these stupid threats, because countries like Norway have NO legs to stand on in this matter.