Slashdot Mirror


iPhone Business Model Hits a Snag in France

Serhei writes "It seems like the iPhone might not be released in France by this holiday season, since French requires by law that all cell phones sold there must be obtainable in an unlocked version. Apple will not be able to do so, since it has launched with a 5-year exclusivity agreement with AT&T. That deal will probably require exclusivity worldwide to avoid grey-market imports. (In return for this agreement Apple receives a large share of AT&T's monthly revenues from iPhone subscribers.) If the iPhone falls through in France, the country can join Belgium and a potentially long list of other countries with unlocking laws, whose Apple fans will have to make do with other, less Apple-y phones. Note that there is currently no mention of the iPhone on the Apple France page."

15 of 332 comments (clear)

  1. Good news! by OdinOdin_ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is excellent, it means those EU countries which won't accept iPhone will have to churn out something thats a whole lot better, this is good news for consumers!

    1. Re:Good news! by timmarhy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      what are you dense or something? apple isn't holding france to ransom over the iphone, apple is missing out on sales in france. you have the issue back to front my friend.

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    2. Re:Good news! by anticypher · · Score: 5, Informative

      There are no EU wide laws. There are directives, from which countries create their own versions as laws that meet local customs, historical precedent, and local lobbying/corruption influence.

      There are strong anti-tying directives, to keep the american-style business model (microsoft, walmart) from damaging the economy here. France has consumer protection laws at least as strong as those in Germany, and most countries here have varying levels of enforcement. The UK has some of the weakest consumer protection laws, and with OfCom, no enforcement whatsoever.

      I've been hearing more iPhone rumors this week, the biggest is T-Mobile has put their rollout plans on hold because they could not show the regulator the required unlocking function or unlocked phones. O2 in the UK is safe, because even though they will be violating laws there, the fines will be years down the road and only then a tiny percentage of the profits made.

      There are no other populous countries in Europe where the iPhone could be sold without an unlocked version. Apple has really shot themselves in the head with this move. By locking themselves out of the largest GSM market in the world, they can't hope to achieve any kind of marketshare.

      the AC

      --
      Hemos is like...sci-fi fans;he thinks technology is cool, but he hasn't bothered to understand the science it's based on
  2. something is missing by microcars · · Score: 4, Informative

    I find it very hard to believe that Apple Legal did not see this coming.

    also- from the link, the "5 year exclusivity agreement with AT&T" is only for US Distribution.

    --
    I like microcars
    1. Re:something is missing by Tim+C · · Score: 4, Insightful

      from the link, the "5 year exclusivity agreement with AT&T" is only for US Distribution.

      Yes, hence the comment about grey-market imports. It's unlikely that AT&T would be happy with the iPhone being sold unlocked in any country, as those unlocked phones could then be imported into the US, despite the exclusivity agreement.

      No, it wouldn't be as easy as if the iPhone was available unlocked in the US, and yes there are ways to unlock an iPhone, but that's not the point. If I were at AT&T and negotiated the deal, I'd have made damn sure that Apple were bound not to sell the iPhone unlocked anywhere, to make it that bit harder to obtain an unlocked one. Remember, you don't have to make it impossible, just hard or risky enough that that people can't be bothered.

  3. Re:No worldwide exclusivity by Divebus · · Score: 5, Funny

    See? We should have let the Germans keep France.

    --

    Most of the stuff on /. won't survive first contact with facts.
  4. Correct me if I'm wrong here.... by mark-t · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But couldn't Apple have just prevented this whole mess if they had charged like $1500 for the iPhone, and offered a $750 mail-in rebate for purchasers who signed a 5-year contract with AT&T?

  5. Re:The iPhone will be known as Steve's Folly by jcr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In the end, the iPhone has turned out to be a real disaster.

    It sold a million units in 75 days. How can I make my next product a "disaster" like that?

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  6. errors in summary by venicebeach · · Score: 5, Informative

    This has nothing to do with AT&T.

    Apple has already announced an exclusive deal in France with Orange (France telecom), and it's this deal that is in danger because of the law. Apple is partnered with T-mobile in Germany and O2 in Britain, so this really isn't about any worldwide exclusivity for AT&T.

    AppleInsider's report on this situation.

  7. France? Heh. by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 4, Funny

    I bet the French even mandate that you use Arabic numerals on all cell phones. ;-)

    --
    This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
  8. Re:Exclusivity - bleh by moosesocks · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Oh come now. Although I don't want this to turn into a political flamewar, France doesn't have any sort of pervasive hatred toward Americans.

    Yes. France disagreed with the U.S. about Iraq (and yes, even though their reasons for doing so weren't the most honorable, it's fairly safe to say at this point that they were on the "right" side of the debate). However, this was a criticism of a matter of foreign politics and policy, and not some sort of personal vendetta against the entire population of America (especially those evil industrial design firms in California!)

    It was the US who took the issue way too far. Even though it was a joke, serving "freedom fries" in the senate cafeteria was terribly crass.

    Surprise! The world does not hate Americans by default. Most of them don't approve of what the government's doing, but neither do 70% of Americans these days.

    --
    -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
  9. Actually Apple is popular in France by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Designed in the USA" is probably hurting them worse in France.

    Actually Apple is popular in France, major executives have been French.

    You might also check up on current events, when French and German citizens got to vote the results turned out a bit different than what the mass media wanted to portray. Candidates friendly to the US won.

    When I was in Paris last year I was treated very well. Even though my French language skills are nearly non-existent. Disagreeing with a government's policy decision does not translate into a population hating companies or citizens.

  10. a note: iPhone uses an ordinary SIM, in a slot by Gary+W.+Longsine · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm not really sure why this myth continues to propagate. iPhone has a SIM slot. iPhone has a SIM slot. It's visible on the top of the phone, with a tiny pin hole. Inserting a pin or paper clip ejects the SIM card from the slot. You can use this SIM in any other GSM phone.

    --
    If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
  11. Re:No worldwide exclusivity by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 4, Interesting

    No it won't.. German consumer law is one of the strongest in the EU. You think it'll stay locked for long?

    And a product sold in one country of the EU is available in every country of the EU (common market rules) so everyone will be able to buy one.

  12. Re:You have got to be kidding... by Dion · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm sorry you have become so turned against the idea that governments can be on the side of the people.

    A free market is not a goal in itself, just like unlimited freedom of citizens isn't a good idea either.

    It's a good idea to limit the citizens freedom to commit murder, just like it's a good idea to limit the freedom of companies to pollute and corrupt the marketplace.

    Businesses cannot be allowed to rule the marketplace without oversight as it's very profitable for the monopolist to corrupt the market and keep other competitors out, this leads to less competition and less choice for the consumers.

    Even if a company cannot get a monopoly it can still enter into price fixing agreements and again the market and customers lose.

    There are tons of situations where companies just don't do the right thing and the market forces are too weak to steer them straight.

    Saying that any regulation is always worse than no regulation is naive in the extreme.

    Our laws enable us to use any phone on any network and it allows us to change operators easily without changing phones, that has led to very low prices and a wide selection of phones, saying that it's worse to have more competition and lower prices at the cost of a little regulation sounds downright silly.

    A government isn't totalitarian just because it regulates a market, it's a much bigger problem if it started passing laws governing what citizens could do in the privacy of their own home.

    --
    -- To dream a dream is grand, but to live it is divine. -- Leto ][