PJ: Apple more likely to drop out of France than open iPod and iTunes

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 53
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,502member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ChevalierMalFet

    Aegis, that's some bass ackward logic. Not only do the politicians likely not care which way is more efficient or feasible; There's a smaller chance in hell that they know.



    "So let me get this straight. This doohicky connects to this blinking doohicky that talks to this doohicky...Uh hum... Say... this is technical talk isn't it? ... Yes sir." -CISCO.
  • Reply 42 of 53
    Quote:

    Originally posted by mdriftmeyer

    "So let me get this straight. This doohicky connects to this blinking doohicky that talks to this doohicky...Uh hum... Say... this is technical talk isn't it? ... Yes sir." -CISCO.



    Exactly. I'm actually somewhat amazed we suffer to allow politicians legislate on topics they have no competency in; and really not strictly computer technology matters. Somehow we manage to have the equivalent of the middle manager whose only profession is "managing" on the assumption he doesn't need to know the implications of what he is managing making laws.



    We should require they take a one year intensive course under their state (or in this case country) university's professors before they are allowed to provide input on professional matters.



    In our own country we have been hurt by this, economically and socially. Clinton/Gore's admin did horrible things to the automotive and networking industries, and The whole Katrina situation springs to mind in the Republican camp.
  • Reply 43 of 53
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,089member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Mr. H

    The awful analogy you've used notwithstanding, that's not what the bill is about (as far as I can tell. I could be wrong). It's about forcing you to licence your DRM scheme to people. It is not about forcing people to licence it from you.



    i.e., if this bill comes to pass, people will not be forced to licence FairPlay from Apple. But Apple will be forced to licence it to anyone who wants to use it. Big difference.




    You might be right. But we don't know this yet. If I own a player that doesn't play a certain DRm, I might have a reason to sue.



    Whatever they end up with, I would hope that there would be some date that an item would have to be manufactured after, for the law to affect it.
  • Reply 44 of 53
    aegisdesignaegisdesign Posts: 2,914member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Mr. H

    The awful analogy you've used notwithstanding, that's not what the bill is about (as far as I can tell. I could be wrong). It's about forcing you to licence your DRM scheme to people. It is not about forcing people to licence it from you.



    Come on, I didn't use cars in the analogy. ;-)



    I'm not sure you're right still. This seems to be consumer led so either way, a device manufacturer or a content provider is going to be in the firing line when a consumer asks why the file they've downloaded won't play on their player.



    Quote:

    Originally posted by Mr. H

    i.e., if this bill comes to pass, people will not be forced to licence FairPlay from Apple. But Apple will be forced to licence it to anyone who wants to use it. Big difference.



    Q: And why will people want to licence FairPlay?



    A: because consumers demand it.



    If consumers demand they want my Eiffel Tower encrypted content then presumably someone somewhere is by law required to allow access to that content.



    After my Eiffel Tower DRM, I intend to print passcodes on eggs and hide them in boxes in Giant Casino supermarché.



    Next every carton of pomme frites (that's freedom fries to you USAians) will come with a free song.
  • Reply 45 of 53
    I really doubt it is consumer driven. To get this kind of government response it is much more likely that businesses have gotten together and complained that they are not able to license FairPlay; it could even be the French music distributors wanting to run their own stores for all we know.



    I suspect the French equivalent of the RIAA is lobbying fairly heavily against this; and even if they aren't it may not be that Apple has a choice re pulling out of France, the change in service provided may break their distribution contracts to the point where they simply can't sell tunes in France.
  • Reply 46 of 53
    strobestrobe Posts: 369member
    Option #2:



    Sure, I'll license fairplay...

    imagehttp://www.ctgilles.net/images/picta...on_dollars.jpg" border="0" alt="" />

    For 100 billion euros!



    Then the politicians will complain this isn't a 'fair' price, only proving once again they have no friggin clue when it comes to property, economics, business, or reality in general.



    BTW, I just read an article on France's current woes which I found kind of relevant:

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/moseley/moseley12.html

    Ah France. Always in search of a political solution.



    (not that the USA is essentially any different since the New Deal. The main reason we don't have their problems is due to a mostly unregulated temp market)
  • Reply 47 of 53
    aegisdesignaegisdesign Posts: 2,914member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ChevalierMalFet

    I really doubt it is consumer driven.



    Not what I meant. The introduction of the law may have other drivers but once it's in, it'll be consumers who create demand for interoperability.
  • Reply 48 of 53
    aegisdesignaegisdesign Posts: 2,914member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by strobe

    Then the politicians will complain this isn't a 'fair' price, only proving once again they have no friggin clue when it comes to property, economics, business, or reality in general.



    The law states that you're not allowed to charge for providing tech docs and the API beyond a nominal admin charge. ie. cost of postage, a stamp and the paper it's printed on. There is no licensing. You give it up for free or else you're taken to court.
  • Reply 49 of 53
    strobestrobe Posts: 369member
    Sigh.



    Stupid positivist law system.
  • Reply 50 of 53
    So, essentially, the French government is telling Macrovision, Apple, Microsoft, etc., to relinquish their property to state control. I don't see any of them strong enough to survive in the French market with those rules in place. The government is essentially applying leverage at the wrong fulcrum. It's the content creation industries that are applying these pressures, not the technology firms.



    Again, I'd love to see DRM interoperability evaporate, but I fail to see, even given compliance, this would benefit customers beyond the ability to buy iPod knockoffs.
  • Reply 51 of 53
    strobestrobe Posts: 369member
  • Reply 52 of 53
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,089member
    This may go to the French Constitutional Court. But, it isn't even law yet. So it may change.



    I've also read that the parts of the law that might affect Apple are minor, and might not even make it.
  • Reply 53 of 53
    Very interesting notes from HardMac. It seems the story is quite different than what has been reported so far.
Sign In or Register to comment.