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.'"

Comments

Aiee

[romland]

Poor Britney.

Norway's not in the EU

[VJ42]

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.

Re:Norway's not in the EU

[Lithdren]

Agreed. Consumers need to be protected, virtually no matter what it is you're buying.

Here in the US of A, many of those protections have been stripped, and you can see what is beginning to happen over here.

Misclick

[Talisman]

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.

Why not?

[EmbeddedJanitor]

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?

Re:Why not?

[StarvingSE]

Because there is no physical product here, you are paying to copy some bits to your hard drive. This is what makes sales of digital content a fuzzy area. Usually you can only return an opened product if it is faulty. A digital download is never faulty. If you want to claim that you never listened to the song, how can the company tell, and how can they ensure that the file is deleted after you return it? You can't return software or music on physical media if it has been opened, why should it be any different for a download? I'd say most companies say that if you choose to download the file, it is considered "opened."

Re:Why not?

[vadim_t]

Sure a digital download can be faulty. It can be a recording of a really bad quality, a corrupted file, several minutes of silence, the wrong song altogether, or have DRM attached that prevents you from playing it. There are probably other modes of failure that didn't come to my mind.

Re:Why not?

[krbvroc1]

What makes this different is that the seller wrapped their product in DRM. The whole justification for DRM was to lock up the content to protect 'their rights'. If you wish to return a product, the DRM can be used to revoke your rights, effectively relinquishing your ownership. A return requirement makes perfect sense for DRM'd items. The problem is the sellers want to have it both ways--selling their DRM version, but not providing returns--a lose lose for consumers.

Tip ...

[tomstdenis]

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

Why is this about "iTunes"?

[daveschroeder]

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?

Re:Returns

[CaptainZapp]

In most EU countries there are special provisions (thus cooling off) for catalogue -, internet and housedoor sales.

You can step back from the sale and return the item within a specified time period. Depending on country: 7 - 14 days.

Maybe like this?

[EasyT]

I would imagine Apple would de-authorize that song for all your computers and prevent you from re-authorizing it. The "evil of DRM" would allow for this service to comsumers I think.

Or am I missing something?

Re:Maybe like this?

[chill]

Thus mandating DRM-only digital purchases. What a wonderful option.

How about setting a $ threshold (I can't be bothered to look up the Euro symbol right now) for the "cooling off period". "Oh my God! I really can't afford this 52\" HDTV" is one thing. "Oh my God! I spent $2.98 on music!" isn't on the same scale. Suck it up and take the loss.

DRM

[p0tat03]

My karma's going to go to hell for this, but here's an interesting thought.

This "return" concept is entirely impossible without DRM.

DRM'd if you do, DRM'd if you don't?

[abes]

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.

Re:Returns

[ePhil_One]

return any online purchase within 7 working days, no need to give a reason, and get your money back. Shipping costs are yours, but that's all.

Welcome to the Itunes Euro. All songs .01 Euros with a .98 Euro delivery charge

Re:Returns

[falcon5768]

opened CD cases

Which is a interesting thing here. In a system designed to let you preview the music before buying, where the delivery method it's self is like opening a CD case, how can you have one set of rules for physical items and one for virtual.

Re:Just one problem...

[truthsearch]

How do you return DOWNLOADED MUSIC?!?!?!?

I hear the Zune switches modes from squirt to suck.

Can't Be Done Without Copy Protection

[ewhac]

The only way a "return" on a digital artifact could work is if it was verifiably deleted. It is, of course, impossible to do this, but the only framework within which you can even pretend it's possible is a draconian copy protection ("DRM") regime.

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

"May"

[Jerry Rivers]

"EU May Force iTunes Store to Accept Returns"

Or they "may" not. Let me know when this is actually a fact not just speculation.

Do you have to upload the song back?

[doroshjt]

If i upload songs without a reciept can I get store credit?

Re:You are not buying bits, you're buying enjoymen

[Clazzy]

What about prostitutes?

Re:You are not buying bits, you're buying enjoymen

[AusIV]

I agree. Using that logic, you could return anything you don't like, whether or not it's really defective. It completely absolves the customer of any accountability for doing research prior to making a purchase.

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.

Re:Awesome.

[put_the_cat_out]

If you paid $9,999 for 10,000 songs, then you were overcharged!

At current $0.99 per song pricing, 10,000 songs would cost $9,900