Slashdot Mirror
EU May Force iTunes Store To Accept Returns
Sweet Harmony writes "ArsTechnica is reporting that the European Union may soon require online music stores to accept returns. A review of European consumer protection laws has highlighted online sales of 'digital content services' as an area where existing consumer protection laws need to be harmonized. 'The EC would like to standardize cooling-off periods along with other aspects of the EU's consumer protection laws. One of the issues being considered is whether the rules on consumer sales should apply to 'digital content services' like music.'"
Poor Britney.
Yay! Now I can get 10,000 songs without having to spend $9,999 dollars!
Oh wait
Viable Slashdot alternatives: https://pipedot.org/ and http://soylentnews.org/
Most stores wont allow you to return the goods unless they are faulty. Maybe you could say DRM is a fault....
TFA talks about the The Norwegian Consumer Ombudsman, then goes on to say "Many other EU member countries". Norway is, however, in the EEA so may implements much EU regulation anyway, but get your facts right, please. /rant
back on topic, this is a good thing, just because I buy something online doesn't mean I should have lees consumer protection than if I buy it physically.
If I have nothing to hide, you have no reason to search me
This would be good for people like myself who accidentally bought "I Wanna Fuck You" by Noreaga & Scarlett instead of the Akwon and Snoop Dog version. It would be nice to get the money refunded, and they can gladly take that song back.
"Study your math, kids. Key to the universe." -The Archangel Gabriel
Sure, people could use this to rip off music companies, but the same deal applies to just about any sale or service. Why should music get a special deal because it is digital?
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Why not just mandate a "preview" where you can hear a prominent 30 second clip (e.g. melody or chorus or some such). Then say "if you decide to buy, you agree there is no return" in big bold letters. I don't know if itunes already does this (I think it does, so forgive the ignorance) but that should quash any problems.
In the grand scheme of things, if there are drm'ed files that are corrupt that's another issue. But if you just blindly buy a dozen tracks without knowing a thing about them you assume the risk. Not like you can "uncopy" or "unhear" them.
Just like movie theaters, I know at the AMC it was policy that if you left upto 30 mins in a movie you could get a full refund. After that you're screwed. I actually made use of that policy during the movie "Any Given Sunday" [or whatever it's called, that stupid football movie]. I walked out after 15 mins and got my money back.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
How do you return DOWNLOADED MUSIC?!?!?!? To return something usually means you give that thing back and no longer posess it in exchange for a refund, store credit, or replacement item. How do you return a digital file? It's not like they can check to see if you have it anymore. Even if you delete the file, it can be recovered. You will always have that file unless all your digital media has been confiscated upon "return".
Meh, $10 says that they put something in there like "if you play/burn this song you can't return it", just like the no-returns on open software/CD rules that exist already.
What's the best Linux utility to get around iTunes DRM? (Just curious.)
Once upon a time I worked on the projects TypeOnCall and SoftwareDispatch. The problem with returns where no physical media changes hands is tricky because the brick and morter way you get some physical media back, where electronic media you have no evidence the consumer has completely removed the item from their system. Introducing this policy would likely force an online store into the position of requiring audit of the end users systems to ensure removal. You can't stop someone from copying something and returning it, but there is value is in the doc, jewel case, or whatever. Take that away, and DRM gets a whole lot more incentive.
/\/\icro/\/\uncher
Isn't it about any online music retailer, DRM or not?
Hint: the answer isn't "because iTunes is the most popular store". When Microsoft was targeted for doing things like offering refunds for unused Windows licenses, Microsoft is mentioned explicitly because it is the only one engaged in that behavior.
So why is only "iTunes" mentioned in stories like these when in fact most (if not all - I haven't checked) also likely have similar practices?
I know it sounds stupid, just like this 'return of downloaded files' idea. Exactly what constitutes a return in this case? Should the return be made in exactly the same bits (impossible) or equivalent of the bits? If it is the equivalent, then do these bits have to be in the same order, or can the customer just return Ax1s and Bx0s? The whole thing is stupid, which makes this question stupid just like it is supposed to be. But hey, it's coming from a government, how could it be anything but stupid?
You can't handle the truth.
From experience I've found that it's much harder to return anything in Europe than it is in the US, the countries I've been to anyway. Regardless, even in the US, stores wont except returns for music and software if the package has been opened for obvious reasons.
How does someone even go about returning downloaded music? Unless the seller starts tracking what music you're playing and whether it's legal I don't see how this could possibly work. As much as I want to see the music industry get hit I can't say this is entirely fair, not without a way of ensuring song has been truly returned.
Or am I missing something?
My karma's going to go to hell for this, but here's an interesting thought.
This "return" concept is entirely impossible without DRM.
This is funny, because some of those EU countries are also demanding that the music be un-DRM'd. At least with DRM, you can in theory handle returns in a sane manner (invalidate the license on the music), while for MP3 files, it's much more difficult. One way around this *might* be to finger print the MP3s, and keep a database of what you're allowed to play. Hackable? Yes, but so is everything else.
Of course, some compromise could probably negate most of the negative impacts, such as limiting the number of returns per year, and only giving in-store credit.
It seems like the Europeans, either don't get it or just like picking on American companies rather then their own. The people they need to legisleate are the music companies. Legislate how they can license music for download, then once companies like Apple are in a position to change how they do business turn the screws on them. By targeting Apple and asking them to do more then they can, they are just forcing them out of the business. If you want apple to change, give them that power.
As far as I can figure out, the only way to do this is to assign a subkey to each track you buy, under your master key, so that if you return it, the subkey can be revoked from your chain. This will also require that the chain be somewhere you can't edit, like in TPM somewhere, so you can't back it up and overwrite it later. And yes, it would require an extensive re-working of the current FairPlay system to do this.
Surely they meant to say "cooling off" not cooling offer.
A cooling offer sounds more like an M&A gone bad or a real estate deal that sits around too long.
Personally, I think this is kinda fair-ish. If you're going to pretend that digital files are scarce objects, then you have to accept all the responsibilities of selling scarce objects in a retail marketplace, and that means accepting returns.
If, however, they were to do away with copy protection entirely, thereby dropping the scarce object fiction, then they could provably make the argument to a technically unsophisticated crowd (politicians) that "returns" are impossible. Under such circumstances, I think we could let music vendors slide on returns.
So: If you sell with copy protection, you have to accept returns. If you sell without copy protection, then you don't have to accept returns. Seem fair? Fair-ish?
One side-effect of this might be that you couldn't return music CDs, since they can be freely copied.
Schwab
Editor, A1-AAA AmeriCaptions
The same will likely also apply to software if this goes ahead. Don't like it or it does not do what you expect? Sell it, or return it. Sure MS etc might make that very hard, but some companies do allow it. Many countries do have comsumer guarantees that support the customer and in that will make it harder for companies not to take back merchandise.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
"EU May Force iTunes Store to Accept Returns"
Or they "may" not. Let me know when this is actually a fact not just speculation.
The pursuit of absolute tolerance leads to the most rigorous and ludicrous intolerance. - REX MURPHY
The reworking to get it technically able to rescind keys has nothing to do with opening it up. In fact it could also be an argument against it, when taken with remarks Jobs has made, about the contracts requiring quick fixes for any exploits of the system.
If they have to open it up to other vendors, someone out there is bound to have a faulty implementation that can be exploited to keep "free" music, and since it will be another vendor, they may not be able to force them to fix it in the necessary timeframe.
If anything, this looks like they want to shut down ALL downloaded music sales that are NOT DRMed. You try revoking an eMusic MP3, for example. Unless, of course, they only make iTMS adhere to this requirement.
It's called a bittorrent client.
That's an interesting way to look at it. Are you also entitled to a refund of a movie ticket if you didn't enjoy it? What about a concert?
This is a bit absurd. Traditionally, a "cooling off" period has applied to large purchases that someone might have second thoughts about. It is intended to protect consumers from slick, high pressure sales tactics. Its to help little old ladies who wake up in the morning and realize they bought a timeshare condo in Mexico just because the nice man told them to. Rarely does anyone bolt upright at 02:00 and scream, "WTF was I thinking? I HATE Justin Timberlake! AHHHHH. Good thing I have that 7 day cooling off period to come to my sense and get my money back." It's not a concept that translates well to mundane, daily purchases. There is no cooling off period for cheeseburgers, beer, or *shudder* condoms. There certainly shouldn't be a cooling off period for digital goods, because whatever your take on DRM, you have to admit that pretty much nobody is honest enough to be trusted to erase all traces of a downloaded song they wanted to return due to having "cooled off".
Life needs more saving throws.
If i upload songs without a reciept can I get store credit?
So it would obviously not apply to Ogg Vorbis or MP3 music files because these are not tied to specific devices.
How do you figure. Ogg vorbis must be the least interoperable format in existence, playing only on amost immeasurably small number of players. MP3 only plays on players whose companies have paid the Fraunhoffer folks for a liscence so it's not interopeable unless of course you are want to force people to use an unliscenced player (e.g. Linux).So the question is, when do we draw the line and say that something should work for most folks. As it stands, there are many pure MP3 Players and an even greater number of AAC/MP3 players. Surely the number of AAC players is sufficient to say the expectation of operability is very high.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Nice. I think we've found the middle step. Sign me up!
A digital download is never faulty.
True, but the original file sometimes is. I've bought several faulty audiobooks from iTunes in the past. In each case, I told them about the problem via the handy web form, and after a while of them not listening and just sending the same faulty file to me again, they eventually listened to what I was saying and gave me the money back. So sometimes a downloaded file can be faulty, and they already give the consumer their money back.
How can they ensure that the file is deleted after you return it?
As far as I know, they don't. The files still seem to work, but I'm honest so I delete them pretty quickly anyway.
Interesting... Here in the US we allow a 3 day cooling off period for purchases in the home. Originally this was due to get around high-pressure sales tactics (Ma'am, buy this vacuum NOW and we'll throw in the attachments for free. I have to go though, so there's no time to think or call the hubbie. My manager said I only the special running today!)
g _off.shtml to the rule, there's no internet exception. I wonder how well you could apply this rule to an internet purchase if you claim that you followed a "high-pressure banner ad" and bought everything you could before prices went up.
If you read through the exceptions http://www.consumeraction.gov/caw_shopping_coolin
What about prostitutes?
If we can hit that bull's-eye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards... Checkmate.
Don't be a twat. There's more than one news site on the web. They often report on the same stories, as those stories are considered to be news. While some sites compete to be first, others simply post the news and give us a place to discuss it.
nm
I'm not aware of one. Most of the tools I know of to remove iTunes DRM need you have iTunes on the machine, and need for that machine be authorized to play the target file. In otherwords, they need iTunes to actually unlock it, then they just copy the unlocked content into a new file.
Since there is no iTunes for linux, this technique can't work.
If there is something that does the trick for linux, I too would love to know about it.
If a movie is bad, I still pay for it. If I should be upset with anyone, it's whoever suggested I see it in the first place, not the movie theatre. If there were kids crying through an entire R-rated movie because someone didn't want to pay for a baby-sitter and the theatre didn't want to kick them out, I might ask for a refund. If it happens again, I probably won't return to that theatre.
If I buy a piece of software and it doesn't do what I want, I'm stuck with it. For example, if I bought a music editor, I couldn't return it because it doesn't edit photos. If it doesn't do what it advertised I might look for a refund.
If I buy music from iTunes and don't like that I can't play it on Linux, I have the choice of burning and ripping, finding an illegal alternative method of removing the DRM, or forgetting about the music. If I buy a song from iTunes and it won't play on my iPod, I'd pursue a refund.
In short, company's should only have to provide what they tell you they're selling you. If they misrepresent the product, you should be able to get your money back. If you don't do anything to make sure you know what you're buying, I have no pity.
Why should digital music be different than any other kind of music. After enough playing, doesn't it wear the sharp edges off of all those 1's?
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Are you also entitled to a refund of a movie ticket if you didn't enjoy it?
Most theatres will refund your money if you leave within the first 10-15 minutes. I don't know about you, but it usually doesn't take me that long to figure out if a movie is trash.
What is the obvious reason?
The only one I can think of is that they don't want to have to give your money back when they realize their product is sub-standard.
It can't be the piracy thing, because why would you bother purchasing a copy and returning it to pirate music/software when you can just download it with the DRM already bypassed. It's interesting that they've gotten you to think that their bullshit lies about return policies are "obvious" though.
Imagine trying to return Turbo Tax after April 15. For most people, the shelf life of that product ends then.
In the UK, that is technically possible, at least if say, the movie was bad quality, or something went wrong at some point, I'm not sure about getting a refund if you don't like it, but I've heard that its been done and worked.
The one time I've had cause to complain about an iTMS purchase I got a refund within 24hrs. That was an Audible product too - no-one told 'em that Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is supposed to be in stereo. So I still have their crappy mono version, got my money back and bought the CDs off play.com instead.
It applies to Sales of Goods for sure, but how do you return a Service that has already been rendered ?
And also is digital bits really a "Good" ?
Digital download is "Information". Can you return Information ? You can return the Media if there is one. But in this case there is no Media.
The same way you steal it.
I'm glad to see that E.U. came down in favor of consumer rights when so many other bands seem to be supporting DRM.
Actually, if there wasn't a caveat in the EULA against returning opened copies of Turbo Tax, people could do their taxes in twenty four hours and return the product well before April 15. Then, they got their taxes done for free. In fact, due to piracy of their product, Intuit, may be phasing out the desktop based Turbo Tax in favor of Turbo Tax Online. This is a good idea and is relatively easy to implement as broadband becomes more and more prevalent. For those that lack access to broadband, why not use a DRM scheme with the desktop version Turbo Tax? If Turbo Tax does not meet the end user's need then simply revoke the DRM license, rendering the software unuseable. This will prevent people from using what they do not want to pay for.
Thanks, you've allowed me to realize that hot coffee coming out of my nose hurts.... too funny
I got nothin'
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but there are a lot of people out there who are complete morons and a lot of people out there who are dishonest. In fact, these two groups overlap in a significant way.
Saying that It can't be the piracy thing is ridiculous, because a lot of the morons wouldn't be able to figure out how to download files over P2P. And saying that returns are only because their product is sub-standard is equally foolish, as a lot of dishonest folks out there would be happy to buy a CD, rip it, and then return it for a full refund.
Do you have a solution other than refusing refunds that takes both these classes of people into account?
Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
Do I need to upload the file back to iTunes?
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Please tell me where I can return opened software (and I do mean return, not exchang.)
Do You Experiment?
I completely agree. Moreso, iTunes has already gone to lengths to let you sample the songs/movies prior to the purchase so it's really your own fault if you can't tell it's the wrong song after listening to a 30-second clip of it. This is a vast improvement, in my opinion, over brick and mortar stores. It would be ridiculous for iTunes to accept returns and increase their overhead dealing with it for what would most likely be the result of people buying songs just to burn to CD and "return" the download.
Online music stores should only be held accountable for a corrupt of faulty transmission of the file. The area where I could see the consumer being protected more is in retention of the files. Since they are selling a license to download the file, I should be able to redownload it if anything happens to my system. It would add very little overhead (I would imagine) to their system, but protect a lot of people from a random hard drive crash, etc. I would even be willing to pay an extra fee per year (like $10) for them to "keep a copy" of my downloads on their server to redownload in the event something happened.
thepiratebay.com+azureus.sourceforge.net+www.gnome .org/projects/rhythmbox
Why would you return a non-DRM'd MP3 file. You can't just say "I don't like the song" likely to only reson you could return it is because it is corrupted or has some technical error. So you send it back a "proof" and they then sed yu the same track but non-defective. just like with an opened CD all they will do is give you the same CD title in exchange.
Most theaters I know of will refund your ticket price or give you a free pass if you have any problem with a movie, yes. They make the money off popcorn and soda, so keeping customers happy to return to that cinema (as long as they aren't being jerks about it like complaining every day to see a new movie) is more important to them than beefing attendance numbers from misleading advertising.
Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
You SO dont understand the nature of full EU membership and the simple EEA-agreement. I am a Norwegian lawyer and I have studied this subject at Uni. If you only knew how deeply connected we are to EFTA - and not the EU! It is in fact the EFTA countries that have the actual agreement with the EU. Norway routes everything through the EFTA system and the EFTA court where it belongs. Because the EU did not want non-members to work within their institutions. The EEA is very limited in scope compared to the full legislation for members nations of the EU. Not to mention the requirement to join the common currency.
We are not the quickest to implement EU directives any longer - in fact we have been slacking. The Schengen agreement is not part of the EU framework. The United Kingdom and Ireland are the only ones that are not signatories to the agreement and convention. Every other member state is now party to the agreement or in the process of ratifying it.
Caveat Emptor
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
I thought it was:
"I'd rather have a free bottle in front of me than a pre-frontal lobotomy"
As the headline of TFA states, this is about online music sales. What is specifically about iTunes is the Norwegian case where iTunes have been accused of breaking existing law. The law is the same for Apple as for any other online music store. The Consumer Council of Norway had recieved complaints about iTunes and brought the case to the consumer ombudsman.
There are no Apple-only laws and no grand conspiracy against Apple. "because iTunes is the most popular store" actually is part of the explanation though. The Consumer Council has stated that they filed the complaint against Apple first since iTunes is largest and most popular.
BestBuy in CT. I have returned AoE III for Mac since it can't run on my iBook G4. The store clerk accepted my reason and gave me an option of Store Credit or Refund. I took credit since i plunked for AoM for Mac.
That was 2 months back. Depends on which clerk you approach and how nice you are to her.
"Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
Speaking for germany there are three different laws that apply:
* catalog and online sales return
There is a right to return anything within 14 days. This shall compensate for often aggressive and misleading sales tactics, illsuive product descriptions, etc. The package needs to be unopened. In the case of services (as opposed to goods) contracts can be cancelled but the part of the service that has been used allready needs to be paid. (e.g. cancelling a phone contract after 14 days requires payment of half a month).
* return of damaged goods
Within 2 years after purchase you can return goods that were defective at purchase. Within the first 6 month the seller needs to proof that the good was flawless when sold. For music this could include the quality of the recording, defective DRM, content not as advertised, etc.
* voiding a contract because of misapprehension
If you clicked on the wrong song. (Say, your finger slipped, or you wanted another song with the same title) there was no binding contract enacted. The goods can be returned. You are not required to pay the price, but you must pay for the actual expenses of the seller. (Usually shipping cost)
The statutory requirement for returns of items is 10 working days. However, contracts and agreements have 28 days cooling off and, since you agree to a contract when you buy music, you should get 28 days.
NOTE: Music CD's cannot be licensed because that would likewise need 28 days no-fuss return policy.
your complaints make NO SENSE:
"do they have to be the same bits" well never get the same bits they sent in the first place, so you can't say this.
"do they have to be in the same order" TCP can produce an out of order datastream.
you just seem to hate the idea gubment can interfere with business screwing customers.
One TV episode I downloaded from Unbox was the wrong episode. I complained and asked them to authorize me to download the right one or return my money. They refused, but sometime along the way, fixed the download on their site. Luckily, Unbox, unlike iTMS, lets you redownload the same episode as many times as you want, so I got to download the right one even though their customer service didn't help me any.
Long story short, you can receive a faulty digital download and should have the right to get a replacement.
Actually, isn't this a great opportunity for legislation requiring all goods sold using DRM to allow returns? If you have DRM, you should be able to implement a return policy.
If you have not yet purchased the music, do so with SharpMusique under
GNU/Linux; the iTumes Music Store leaves the DRM wrapper up to the client, and
SharpMusique just doesn't add one.
If you have already purchased the music, various programs exist to strip off
the DRM wrapper and leave you with an AAC file; these programs need the
decryption keys from your iTunes installation. Note that many of these
programs do not support the DRM used in the newest versions of iTunes, and the
iTunes Music Store refuses to allow old versions of iTunes if you have ever
used a new version, so avoid using newer versions of iTunes than you have
already used.
You can also directly play the DRMed files using VideoLAN, which uses the same
approach as the programs designed to strip off the DRM.
Interestingly, Mars confectioners have produced a new bar called the "Delight" which actually comes with a money back guaruntee.
Yes, you only get a cheque for 63p and although they've made it easy to claim, it's still more effort to go through than most people will bother with (including cashing said cheque), but the offer is there (within 28 days!).
So, theatre, cinema or prostitues may well day offer a money back guaruntee. When was the last time you walked out of a brothel and thought "now if only I could get those two hours of my life back".
Hang on, I meant cinema...
Stokey
Natsu gusa-ya, Tsuwamono domo-ga, Yume no ato
Buying things takes time and effort.
Returning things takes time and effort.
Your scenario of people abusing the system only really applies to students or unemployed people for whom time has very little value. For those of us who actually work for a living, wasting time is not something to do sistematically.
Thus, if researching to find a movie one likes before buying it takes less time than a cycle of multiple buying a movie and then returning it over and over until one finds a movie one likes, then people will go for the research option.
For years now, consumer rights protection here in Europe gives us the right to return an item if were not satisfied with it and yet, your scenario has never come to be.
It turns out that the vast majority of people around here doesn't engage in impulsive buying followed by returning of items. Instead people mostly return items if they feel that it's not what it was advertised to be or that it is not suitable to one's purpose (for example, a video cable with the wrong plug for your PVR).
The end result of this is that misleading advertising is much rarer (since the result of misleading advertising is a lot of returns) and product-manufacturers/retailers put a lot more effort in making sure that people get the right product (eg, the right cable) without need for a return and replacement.
As with most social things, it's the second level effects (beter advertising, beter upfront service) instead of the first level ones (people returning products) that are the real reason for a law.