Slashdot Mirror
EU Plans To Make Apple, Adobe and Others Open Up
FlorianMueller writes "After pursuing Microsoft and Intel, European Commission Vice-President Neelie Kroes is now preparing an initiative that could have an even greater impact on the IT industry: a European interoperability law that will affect not only companies found dominant in a market but all 'significant' players. In a recent interview, Mrs. Kroes mentioned Apple. Nokia, RIM and Adobe would be other examples. All significant market players would have to provide access to interfaces and data formats, with pricing constraints considered 'likely' by the commissioner. Her objective: 'Any kind of IT product should be able to communicate with any type of service in the future.' The process may take a few years, but key decisions on the substance of the bill may already be made later this year."
Apple is the single largest abuser of open technology, standards, formats and platforms. To create anything for any of their platforms, you need to use Apple tools, Apple hardware and pay Apple. It's not even technical limits on the hardware, but all artifical barriers created by Apple.
I have no idea why Microsoft always gets yelled at because other third parties don't implement their support fully, but Apple gets a free pass on it.
The great thing about the "Any kind of IT product should be able to communicate with any type of service in the future." is that it can also mean that Apple needs to open iPhone and iPad for third party developers not just via their App Store, but fully without jailbreaking.
This is great news for independent developers or hobbyist.
How is Apple an "abuser" of open technology? Their open technology was licensed under the BSD license which explicitly allows the type of stuff Apple is doing. If you don't like it then use the GPL or another license that has copyleft when you license your OSS.
You do realize that you don't have to use Apple products don't you? The main way to open up competition is to kill software patents and weaken copyrights.
When government fucks with free markets, the customer loses, always.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
So now cell phones will be the size of buildings so that they can support the massive array of antena and dishes so they can comunicate across the full radio spectrum. Still, it will be interesting having a cell phone that supports microwave OC3 communication.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
"Any kind of IT product should be able to communicate with any type of service in the future."
What does that even mean?
Don't take life so seriously. No one makes it out alive.
When the government starts dictating requirements and the price, we're all screwed.
Do the various "services" have to be able to communicate with any kind of "IT product"?
I haven't asked the commissioner but even without doing so I have no doubt that she meant this both ways. Interoperability goes both ways. The only problem is that obviously some companies in the industry want it as a one-way street: others have to open up, they stay closed. I can't imagine a piece of legislation would be one-way. Even if some companies tried to lobby for one-way rules, I don't think they'd get very far.
What's more likely is that the rules may only apply to certain segments of the diverse IT market. But again, within the scope of the rules I can't imagine there would be anything other than quid pro quo, give and take on equal terms.
if you don't know what it means, its probably something that you don't know much about?
SURELY NOT!!!!!
Can you imagine how much inertia an Apple & MS embargo would bring for FOSS? So yes, proprietary software vendors, get out of the EU ASAP please ;)
The Mac has a good degree of openness. However, that doesn't seem to be Apple's strategic direction. The
idea that the "platform of the future" could be something that's entirely under Steve's thumb is probably
an idea that doesn't sit well int he EU. It might have even been the thing that triggered this idea.
Between Adobe and Apple, I could see why EU regulators might want to stop the madness.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Why is the parent post modded troll? I'm sorry, but "troll" is not a substitute for "holds an opinion opposite to me".
The parent is entirely factually correct, and is talking about the very heart and idea of OSS: if you release something under the BSD licence, anyone can use it. If you release something under the GPL, anyone can use it as long as they follow the licence. So, when Apple uses BSD and GPL code, somehow it is "abuse"? Come on! You are either for the idea of OSS, or you are against it. You *cannot* be "oh, well, I love OSS, but Apple is not allowed to use any BSD code and get rich off it! That's just not allowed, but other companies can use BSD code since it is open source."
This also doesn't address the benefits the OSS community has seen from Apple. Far from being an "abuser" Apple has contributed an enormous amount to OSS - isn't that one of the benefits of a large entity getting involved in the community: provision of resources? Companies like IBM, Apple, Red Hat, Mozilla Foundation are promoting open source. You can't turn around and say "I don't like Apple, so they are abusing OSS!"
If you really hate them that much, write your own OSS code and release it under a modified BSD licence that permits anyone except Apple to use it.
I find it so interesting that Anonymous Coward constantly appears to have no concept of the difference between a government-enforced monopoly and a property right.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
I wonder which companies will run the calculations and decide that they will lose more profits opening up than they would by simply leaving the European market. While this sounds nice, companies who do a smaller percentage of business in Europe than they do elsewhere may decide it is worth it to keep their code locked. After all, no one will be able to implement interoperability exclusively in the EU, the US + rest of the world will get it too.
"Going to war without the French is like going deer hunting without your accordion." ~General Norman Schwarzkopf
This is true - it is clear that Apple would like you to use an iPhone, with a Mac, with an iPad for the lounge etc, but it does not force you if you want to leave by using totally awkward and non-open formats.
If you want out of Outlook, you are in for a world of hurt - the .pst is a pain in the ass. If you want out of Mail.app, you just take your .mbox files to a new client on a new OS.
The App Store though, is a whole different ball game. The only thing I can see the EU being able to enforce is the ability to install third party apps without using the store, if the iOS ecosystem grows too large.
I don;t think they have to worry about Apple on the desktop - they are already in a similar position to a fully OSS OS, albeit with some patented formats as their open formats of choice (such as AAC, H.264 etc).
The government shouldn't force a company to support certain standards by making other formats illegal, what they should do is impose certain open formats/standards on government IT operations, and then companies can choose whether or not to support those standards, and then as a result of that support be able to sell their product to the government.
Governments are generally large enough customers that by adopting something internally, it will create a significant incentive for the market to follow.
One time I threw a brick at a duck.
It's hilarious how many see this as an "attack on free market".
Let me run a few facts down through your skulls:
1. There is no free market for IT goods referred to in the statement. The market that exists is heavily controlled and regulated, essentially being a monopoly market on per-product basis, or interconnected market where vendor uses monopoly control over one aspect of the market to openly destroy freeness in another market.
2. Neelie Kroes is probably the most pro-free market person you will find in EU. It's more of her life's philosophy then just a law enforcement on some level.
3. Suggestions include OPENING the CLOSED MARKET, to make it... that's right, more OPEN!
So do share, in what way is this "evil EU abusing US companies by closing free market"? I can see this being "good EU abusing evil US companies who like to close market to competition by forcing them to actually compete", but to actually claim the exact opposite, you have to either be ignorant, stupid, or have a deep vested interest in status quo.
Well, I don't know what you mean by open. Do you mean open as in people can buy the license and even get the source? (e.g. H.264). Then I guess we live in an open world. Just as a comparison, here is the list of open formats on Windows:
.pst (open) .pst (open) .docx, .xlsx, etc. (open) .NET (open)
Audio: WMA (open)
Video: WMV (open)
Mail:
Address book:
Office apps:
OS API:
OS API: Win32 (open, shared source)
OS core: NT (open, shared source)
Hell, why stop there? Everything is open if you can buy it! Did you know that Google's search engine is also open? You just need to afford to buy Google Inc.
It's at best disingenuous to call a patent-encumbered file format "open". Yes, it is open insofar as it is documented, and if the designers decided to withhold licenses, could *eventually* be implemented by someone to get your data out of it, but that's not open in the same way as, for example, JPEG baseline is open. The difference is that the JPEG folks started out trying to create an open standard, whereas the H.264 folks started out trying to develop a proprietary codec, then opened up only the minimum amount they could get away with and still get adoption.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
When the alternative is living under the thumb of our corporate overlords, yeah that sounds pretty nice actually.
No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
However poorly the EU words words it, I think, what they are trying to avoid is lock-in. i.e. iPhone = Apple app store ONLY, or iPhone = ATT service ONLY. I know the iPhone is carried on many carriers across the EU; it's just an example. They are trying to prevent a single purchase from locking customers into a single supply chain / company, essentially negating other competing services.
Wow, this sounds like _such_ a way to foster innovation, amirite? Hey, Innovaco, you can't invent a new mechanism to do that, we have this other one everyone else has been using for the last 10 years!
Your point is ridiculous.
I would gladly mod you as troll but : A. you would instantly get moded back up by any Apple fanboy cruising and B. It's so much more fun to respond.
So, young one, what part of this article did you not understand (i.e. read) ?
Because NOBODY ever said anything about the formats or software projects that Apple USES to implement its crazy shit closed business model.
The fact that Apple relies heavily on FLOSS as core elements of its software solutions, or that it uses and supports formats that can be used by others if they pay (that's apparently what Open means to you...) is agreed upon by everybody. And By the way were Apple using only closed proprietary software the EU commission couldn't do SHIT about it because that's a perfectly valid and legal business decision.
What the EU can do is kick Apple's ass for LOCKING customers into an eco system where competition is flawed by malpractice like what we called Vente liée (I never could find the correct translation for this sorry)
Basically, it's OK to use whatever components you see fit in your product, but it is not OK to build a business model which is primarily about getting people into your eco system with very attractive products and then squezzing every last drop of blood from them with crap.
There are laws that protects customers from that in the EU and in the US, and when the US governement has dealt with their other concernes (i.e. never) and when they grow the ball to go after a major company that has so much public support (i.e. again NEVER) maybe you'll see this happenning.
What's great about the EU Commission is it's not a government, so they don't care about public support, they are about the law and protecting the consumer and competition
what sucks about the EU is we don't have a government so we don't have fiscal, monetary or economic federal governance, and when we are in deep shit nobody is here with all the powers to make the good choices but that's another debate.
It is not OK for to use their advantage in any given market to flaw the competition they have with other companies on another market. Form the exact same reasons that Microsoft had to get rid of IE.
And the DRM formats that iTunes supports? Are they open? (substitute Media player for iTunes if you wish)
How about letting an enterprising app developer create a JVM for the iPhone? So that others can create simple Java games and tools?
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!