Guess what? You have still failed to demonstrate this is true. How is buying a song on iTunes and being able to play it on any device that supports AAC worse for the consumer than only being able to play that file on an iPod?
How is it better than buying the song elsewhere for the multiple players you want to play it on???
A number of people have posted in this thread that it's "Apple v the EU" in this argument....... Norway isn't even a member of the EU.
Technically, you are right. Norwegians, as I recall, rejected their government's move to join the EU. But that is splitting hairs. While "Europe", "EU", and "Euro-zone" are technically a little bit different from each other in composition, they are largely joined at the hip politically, historically, and culturally. It is not a strecth to conflate "Norway" and "EU" -- Norwegians would gladly admit that.
That notwithstanding, the first sentence of the AI article that started this thread says: "France, Germany, and the Netherlands are all teaming up with Norway to pressure Apple......." The three first-mentioned countries are all members of the EU, thereby proving the (practical) point.
I do believe that this will become an EU-wide issue in the near future, and this is not the last we will hear of it. It is not (quite) there yet, but it will soon be.
I fail to see how anyone can be of the position that DRM is a good thing for consumers be they idealistic Europeans or xenophobic American capitalistic lackeys.
Because it enabled the most successful legal dowload store to be set up?
Personally, I think the solution that Apple should offer is to put other music stores DRM schemes on the iPod. NOT open it up but Apple put on the DRM schemes. This would address the basic issue of a 'closed' system - Buy an iPod use it anywhere with any download opportunity (including theft). If Itunes is the problem then this gives other stores the opportunity to compete for the installed base of iPods which they need to be able to sell enought songs to flourish. While this addresses the issues raised (which are false in any case) I don't think this will satisfy the implied hidden reasons for the legal actions because this would, of course, not hurt Apple in the least.
Guess what? You have still failed to demonstrate this is true. How is buying a song on iTunes and being able to play it on any device that supports AAC worse for the consumer that only being able to play that file on an iPod?
One of two things , either a stricter Fairplay DRM on music bought in the iTMS to prevent "piracy" which will reduce the number of music players ( iPods and non iPods) you can transfer your songs to or increase the price of each song ( and force Apple and other mp3 players in following Microsoft ) in order to cover the perceived lost of income from pirated songs. I can also think of another one , how about every song you and I bought from the Itunes Store suddenly becomes defective on a Sandisk mp3 player or a Creative mp3 player . Guess who gets the blame for that especially when the same song was transferred to an iPod , it works perfectly ?
But if Apple is able to get all the record companies to sign off selling songs without Fairplay DRM and all the other mp3 players are willing to use ACC , then your theoretical problem is solved. But as for now,the best way to transfer a song to a non-iPod player is to burn your songs to a CD and import them to your player.
How is it better than buying the song elsewhere for the multiple players you want to play it on???
I will answer, but not before pointing out that that is beside the point. Even if it isn't better than buying elsewhere, it doesn't make Apple licensing FairPlay bad for the consumer.
In answer to your question, I shall ask another: can you name a music download store with the same (or larger) catalogue as iTunes that sells songs that can be played on an iPod and W810i? (Without me having to re-encode the songs that I download)
That notwithstanding, the first sentence of the AI article that started this thread says: "France, Germany, and the Netherlands are all teaming up with Norway to pressure Apple......." The three first-mentioned countries are all members of the EU, thereby proving the (practical) point.
But the countries aren't teaming up at all. Consumer bodies inside these countries are teaming up would be accurate. The AI piece is overstating the case.
In no way whatsoever are the countries through their governments teaming up.
Some of these aren't even legit consumer bodies and are simply grass roots protest groups.
Make Apple open iTunes and it will have to increase the price of the songs sold. That I don't want but I am sure will happen if Euro makes Apple Open up. Why sell songs to rivals when the barely break even on the song.(without the iPod sale)
I will answer, but not before pointing out that that is beside the point. Even if it isn't better than buying elsewhere, it doesn't make Apple licensing FairPlay bad for the consumer.
In answer to your question, I shall ask another: can you name a music download store with the same (or larger) catalogue as iTunes that sells songs that can be played on an iPod and W810i? (Without me having to re-encode the songs that I download)
1) First point is irrelavant. Good for the consumer is only one part of the equation. Free cars are good for the consumer but doesn't mean companies should be forced to offer them. The question is are the current actions of the Company unfair to the consumer in any meaninful way. I believe they are not hence my assertion that the undelying motivations for these actions are not as presented.
2) Don't understand the point regarding size of catalogue. If it doesn't exist that's an business opportunity, not a problem. Second, I don't understand the instance on not re-encoding. MOST music on iPod (by far at least judging by the people I know) are re-encoding songs from a CD. Must not be a high barrier to use.
Its called choice. Sort of proves the point - there is plenty of choice.
Not really since it's a strawman. The fact you can choose to buy music elsewhere is irrelevant.
The argument the Norwegian ombudsmen is making is that music bought from the iTunes music store should not be restricted to playing only on Apple hardware/software. There's a further issue in Norway in that once a sale has been completed, the terms of that sale aren't allowed to change, so for instance when Apple changed the number of places you could play a song from 5 to 3 (IIRC) it should not have applied to songs already in your library.
Seems fair enough to me. At no other point in the music industry's recent history has this kind of restriction applied and I don't see why it should still apply. Most consumers would probably be of the same opinion.
Obviously it requires one of three things.
1) Apple to licence Fairplay
2) Apple and everyone else to use a common open DRM scheme
Guess what? You have still failed to demonstrate this is true. How is buying a song on iTunes and being able to play it on any device that supports AAC worse for the consumer than only being able to play that file on an iPod?
Because an anemic Apple won't innovate. Trash its iPod sales and you've lost a lot of revenue.
Geez...don't want DRM then don't buy any DRM products that you feel are too encumbering.
Let Europe posture. If it comes down to it shut them off from the iTunes Store entirely and implement whatever "open" DRM the Europeans come up with for the iTunes software and iPod.
I doubt our esteemed European friends would let something as transparent as licensing for $500/unit fly. But if they did sure thing.
2) Don't understand the point regarding size of catalogue.
I can't use a competing store if it doesn't have the songs I want.
Quote:
Originally Posted by physguy
Second, I don't understand the instance on not re-encoding.
If the store uses a lowish bit-rate lossy format not supported by the iPod (e.g. 128 kbps WMA), I don't want to re-compress that with AAC, as this will result in additional quality loss, and 128 kbps WMA is only just borderline acceptable quality-wise. De-compressing to AIFF/WAV preserves quality but uses too much space.
So, if there's a competitor store out there selling the same music as iTunes but using high bit-rate (at least 192) mp3 or some lossless codec, and operates in the U.K., please tell me about it.
Make Apple open iTunes and it will have to increase the price of the songs sold. That I don't want but I am sure will happen if Euro makes Apple Open up. Why sell songs to rivals when the barely break even on the song.(without the iPod sale)
Actually, the reverse and despite what Apple has said, they far from break even. It's low margin sure, but profitable.
There are a few companies that work with no DRM and lower prices. Firstly, the music and technology industries are spending millions on developing DRM. Just stop doing it and you've extra profit.
Next, lower the prices and make it so easy to get legally bought music that it becomes more convenient than pirating.
Apple should immediately pull out of Norway, to show France and Germany in concrete terms what will happen if they follow the same path.
And when customers go the iTunes Store Norway have a big banner with the phone number of their local member of parliament to call if they want it reopened.
Because an anemic Apple won't innovate. Trash its iPod sales and you've lost a lot of revenue.
I hardly think that the iPod is the best-selling portable player because iTunes Store is the most popular music-download site. More the other way around.
Most people fill their portable music players from their own CD collection, source of online music is a tertiary consideration after:
1.) Quality of the hardware and
2.) Quality of the music management software (as distinct from download store).
Since the iPod is the leader in terms of 1.) and iTunes the leader in terms of 2.), the iPod became the most popular portable music player. The iTunes Store became the most popular download store off the back of that.
In short, I highly doubt that licensing FairPlay would result in a trashing of iPod sales, or even for that matter have a measurable effect on them.
music like any other "art" really shouldnt be about how much money they can make. drm is just furthering the industry aspect of music and not the creativity or actual love for the music. not to sound like a damn hippie...
But the countries aren't teaming up at all. Consumer bodies inside these countries are teaming up would be accurate. The AI piece is overstating the case.
Who else but "consumer bodies" would team up in a case such as this? Certainly not Departments of Labor. Nor Ministries of Transportation. Nor Departments of Defense.
Again, in your quest to be "technically" correct, you are, IMHO, missing the larger point: That the iTunes/DRM issue is going to become much larger..... whether his happens in what is defined as "Europe", or "EU", or "Euro-zone" or whatever one might call the broad geographical grouping on the other side of the Atlantic is less the issue.
Comments
Guess what? You have still failed to demonstrate this is true. How is buying a song on iTunes and being able to play it on any device that supports AAC worse for the consumer than only being able to play that file on an iPod?
How is it better than buying the song elsewhere for the multiple players you want to play it on???
A number of people have posted in this thread that it's "Apple v the EU" in this argument....... Norway isn't even a member of the EU.
Technically, you are right. Norwegians, as I recall, rejected their government's move to join the EU. But that is splitting hairs. While "Europe", "EU", and "Euro-zone" are technically a little bit different from each other in composition, they are largely joined at the hip politically, historically, and culturally. It is not a strecth to conflate "Norway" and "EU" -- Norwegians would gladly admit that.
That notwithstanding, the first sentence of the AI article that started this thread says: "France, Germany, and the Netherlands are all teaming up with Norway to pressure Apple......." The three first-mentioned countries are all members of the EU, thereby proving the (practical) point.
I do believe that this will become an EU-wide issue in the near future, and this is not the last we will hear of it. It is not (quite) there yet, but it will soon be.
I fail to see how anyone can be of the position that DRM is a good thing for consumers be they idealistic Europeans or xenophobic American capitalistic lackeys.
Because it enabled the most successful legal dowload store to be set up?
Because it enabled the most successful legal dowload store to be set up?
ABSOLUTELY!!! Fair DRM changed the game.
Because it enabled the most successful legal dowload store to be set up?
It still hasn't exactly set the world alight though. Most people still buy CDs or download illegally.
Guess what? You have still failed to demonstrate this is true. How is buying a song on iTunes and being able to play it on any device that supports AAC worse for the consumer that only being able to play that file on an iPod?
One of two things , either a stricter Fairplay DRM on music bought in the iTMS to prevent "piracy" which will reduce the number of music players ( iPods and non iPods) you can transfer your songs to or increase the price of each song ( and force Apple and other mp3 players in following Microsoft ) in order to cover the perceived lost of income from pirated songs. I can also think of another one , how about every song you and I bought from the Itunes Store suddenly becomes defective on a Sandisk mp3 player or a Creative mp3 player . Guess who gets the blame for that especially when the same song was transferred to an iPod , it works perfectly ?
But if Apple is able to get all the record companies to sign off selling songs without Fairplay DRM and all the other mp3 players are willing to use ACC , then your theoretical problem is solved. But as for now,the best way to transfer a song to a non-iPod player is to burn your songs to a CD and import them to your player.
How is it better than buying the song elsewhere for the multiple players you want to play it on???
I will answer, but not before pointing out that that is beside the point. Even if it isn't better than buying elsewhere, it doesn't make Apple licensing FairPlay bad for the consumer.
In answer to your question, I shall ask another: can you name a music download store with the same (or larger) catalogue as iTunes that sells songs that can be played on an iPod and W810i? (Without me having to re-encode the songs that I download)
It still hasn't exactly set the world alight though. Most people still buy CDs or download illegally.
1) CD's - because they're better quality
2) illegally - because they're free
Its called choice. Sort of proves the point - there is plenty of choice.
That notwithstanding, the first sentence of the AI article that started this thread says: "France, Germany, and the Netherlands are all teaming up with Norway to pressure Apple......." The three first-mentioned countries are all members of the EU, thereby proving the (practical) point.
But the countries aren't teaming up at all. Consumer bodies inside these countries are teaming up would be accurate. The AI piece is overstating the case.
In no way whatsoever are the countries through their governments teaming up.
Some of these aren't even legit consumer bodies and are simply grass roots protest groups.
I will answer, but not before pointing out that that is beside the point. Even if it isn't better than buying elsewhere, it doesn't make Apple licensing FairPlay bad for the consumer.
In answer to your question, I shall ask another: can you name a music download store with the same (or larger) catalogue as iTunes that sells songs that can be played on an iPod and W810i? (Without me having to re-encode the songs that I download)
1) First point is irrelavant. Good for the consumer is only one part of the equation. Free cars are good for the consumer but doesn't mean companies should be forced to offer them. The question is are the current actions of the Company unfair to the consumer in any meaninful way. I believe they are not hence my assertion that the undelying motivations for these actions are not as presented.
2) Don't understand the point regarding size of catalogue. If it doesn't exist that's an business opportunity, not a problem. Second, I don't understand the instance on not re-encoding. MOST music on iPod (by far at least judging by the people I know) are re-encoding songs from a CD. Must not be a high barrier to use.
Its called choice. Sort of proves the point - there is plenty of choice.
Not really since it's a strawman. The fact you can choose to buy music elsewhere is irrelevant.
The argument the Norwegian ombudsmen is making is that music bought from the iTunes music store should not be restricted to playing only on Apple hardware/software. There's a further issue in Norway in that once a sale has been completed, the terms of that sale aren't allowed to change, so for instance when Apple changed the number of places you could play a song from 5 to 3 (IIRC) it should not have applied to songs already in your library.
Seems fair enough to me. At no other point in the music industry's recent history has this kind of restriction applied and I don't see why it should still apply. Most consumers would probably be of the same opinion.
Obviously it requires one of three things.
1) Apple to licence Fairplay
2) Apple and everyone else to use a common open DRM scheme
3) Getting rid of DRM
It will happen eventually.
Guess what? You have still failed to demonstrate this is true. How is buying a song on iTunes and being able to play it on any device that supports AAC worse for the consumer than only being able to play that file on an iPod?
Because an anemic Apple won't innovate. Trash its iPod sales and you've lost a lot of revenue.
Geez...don't want DRM then don't buy any DRM products that you feel are too encumbering.
Let Europe posture. If it comes down to it shut them off from the iTunes Store entirely and implement whatever "open" DRM the Europeans come up with for the iTunes software and iPod.
I doubt our esteemed European friends would let something as transparent as licensing for $500/unit fly. But if they did sure thing.
Vinea
2) Don't understand the point regarding size of catalogue.
I can't use a competing store if it doesn't have the songs I want.
Second, I don't understand the instance on not re-encoding.
If the store uses a lowish bit-rate lossy format not supported by the iPod (e.g. 128 kbps WMA), I don't want to re-compress that with AAC, as this will result in additional quality loss, and 128 kbps WMA is only just borderline acceptable quality-wise. De-compressing to AIFF/WAV preserves quality but uses too much space.
So, if there's a competitor store out there selling the same music as iTunes but using high bit-rate (at least 192) mp3 or some lossless codec, and operates in the U.K., please tell me about it.
Make Apple open iTunes and it will have to increase the price of the songs sold. That I don't want but I am sure will happen if Euro makes Apple Open up. Why sell songs to rivals when the barely break even on the song.(without the iPod sale)
Actually, the reverse and despite what Apple has said, they far from break even. It's low margin sure, but profitable.
There are a few companies that work with no DRM and lower prices. Firstly, the music and technology industries are spending millions on developing DRM. Just stop doing it and you've extra profit.
Next, lower the prices and make it so easy to get legally bought music that it becomes more convenient than pirating.
This is the direction that Streamburst are using. Read http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070119-8657.html
Early days yet but I'm sure many industry figures are watching.
And when customers go the iTunes Store Norway have a big banner with the phone number of their local member of parliament to call if they want it reopened.
Because an anemic Apple won't innovate. Trash its iPod sales and you've lost a lot of revenue.
I hardly think that the iPod is the best-selling portable player because iTunes Store is the most popular music-download site. More the other way around.
Most people fill their portable music players from their own CD collection, source of online music is a tertiary consideration after:
1.) Quality of the hardware and
2.) Quality of the music management software (as distinct from download store).
Since the iPod is the leader in terms of 1.) and iTunes the leader in terms of 2.), the iPod became the most popular portable music player. The iTunes Store became the most popular download store off the back of that.
In short, I highly doubt that licensing FairPlay would result in a trashing of iPod sales, or even for that matter have a measurable effect on them.
But the countries aren't teaming up at all. Consumer bodies inside these countries are teaming up would be accurate. The AI piece is overstating the case.
Who else but "consumer bodies" would team up in a case such as this? Certainly not Departments of Labor. Nor Ministries of Transportation. Nor Departments of Defense.
Again, in your quest to be "technically" correct, you are, IMHO, missing the larger point: That the iTunes/DRM issue is going to become much larger..... whether his happens in what is defined as "Europe", or "EU", or "Euro-zone" or whatever one might call the broad geographical grouping on the other side of the Atlantic is less the issue.