French council strikes down parts of 'iPod law'
The French Constitutional Council has declared major aspects of the so-called iPod law unconstitutional, undermining some controversial aspects of the legislation, the New York Times is reporting.
According to the report, the council has highlighted fundamental protections for intellectual property in such a way that it puts Apple's iTunes music service at less risk to the new law.
In a 12-page legal finding release Thursday, the council "made frequent reference to the 1789 Declaration on Human Rights and concluded that the iPod law violated the constitutional protections of property."
Specifically, the Times said the council eliminated reduced fines for file sharing and said companies could not be forced, without compensation, to make music sold online compatible with competitor's devices.
Although approved by the French Senate and National Assembly last month, the iPod law was reportedly brought for review by the council following the demand of more than 100 members of the National Assembly. The review is said to be one of the final steps before the law is promulgated.
France's government may now decide whether to implement the altered legislation or once again bring it before the French Parliament.
While the council's review emphasizes the need for compensation, it's only a slight win for Apple, as the more critical principle of forced interoperability remains in place, according to the Times.
According to the report, the council has highlighted fundamental protections for intellectual property in such a way that it puts Apple's iTunes music service at less risk to the new law.
In a 12-page legal finding release Thursday, the council "made frequent reference to the 1789 Declaration on Human Rights and concluded that the iPod law violated the constitutional protections of property."
Specifically, the Times said the council eliminated reduced fines for file sharing and said companies could not be forced, without compensation, to make music sold online compatible with competitor's devices.
Although approved by the French Senate and National Assembly last month, the iPod law was reportedly brought for review by the council following the demand of more than 100 members of the National Assembly. The review is said to be one of the final steps before the law is promulgated.
France's government may now decide whether to implement the altered legislation or once again bring it before the French Parliament.
While the council's review emphasizes the need for compensation, it's only a slight win for Apple, as the more critical principle of forced interoperability remains in place, according to the Times.
Comments
let's hope Norway and Sweden do the same thing.
Originally posted by AppleInsider
Specifically, the Times said the council eliminated reduced fines for file sharing...
Does that mean no fines at all remain, or does it mean going back to bigger fines?
Originally posted by wayland.ind
Vive la France!
let's hope Norway and Sweden do the same thing.
That depends on what you mean. One of the issues raised in the Scandinavian cases is that Apple reserved the right to change the terms of sale after the sale without negotiation, notice or compensation.
Originally posted by JeffDM
That depends on what you mean. One of the issues raised in the Scandinavian cases is that Apple reserved the right to change the terms of sale after the sale without negotiation, notice or compensation.
Sadly enough, that remains legal in many places, even though most people aren't aware of it. All that is needed is the "small type" in a contract to say that the company may alter some, or any parts, of the agreement without notifying the other party. As long as you agree to the contract, you are stuck.
Does everyone read the entire contract for everything they buy, rent, or lease?
No? I didn't think so.
Originally posted by skatman
Who gives a shit about french panzies!
I think you meant "pansies", but still...
Originally posted by SpamSandwich
I think you meant "pansies", but still...
French panzies are miniture copies of old German tanks.
Originally posted by melgross
Does everyone read the entire contract for everything they buy, rent, or lease?
No? I didn't think so.
And obviously you're not supposed to. When every patch of WoW includes an entire re-release of the contract without any markups as to what may have changed, it's obvious they don't expect you to read it.
I think some sort of law requiring certain things of the license, such as its availability in a plaintext file, the in-app display of it being resizable, availability of a diff from the previously agreed-upon version, and a "plain English" version of any EULA should be a requirement in order for it to be enforceable.
Originally posted by Booga
And obviously you're not supposed to. When every patch of WoW includes an entire re-release of the contract without any markups as to what may have changed, it's obvious they don't expect you to read it.
I think some sort of law requiring certain things of the license, such as its availability in a plaintext file, the in-app display of it being resizable, availability of a diff from the previously agreed-upon version, and a "plain English" version of any EULA should be a requirement in order for it to be enforceable.
The plain english thing was popular, for a while. The problem was that it was too easily mis-interpreted. Law can't be properly expressed in "plain english" sadly. Or in any other language, simply.