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.'"
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.
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".
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?
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.
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.
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?
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.