No. it's a matter of legal process. They can only go after the party that has the contract with the consumer.
The point of that is to only enforce a law and not necessarily protect consumers.
Quote:
DVD DRM was cracked 8 years ago. It's only still there for DMCA purposes.
That doesn't matter its still illegal. The movie industry is consistent with having copy protection on DVD's and DRM on digital downloads. While the music industry is not consistent with this at all.
No. it's a matter of legal process. They can only go after the party that has the contract with the consumer. It's got nothing to do with protecting EU companies. Norway aren't even in the EU.
So, you seem to be claiming that this is the only legal process under which the Norwegians can address the overarching problem - DRM and interoperability? While I freely admit I don't know Norwegian law I would find it astonishing that this is the only legal theory under which they could address the DRM/interoperability issue. The action MAY be a valid one (although as stated in other threads I don't believe so) but I highly doubt it is the only legal avenue open to them. I always believe in the creativity of the legal mind It seems reasonable that if they wanted to pursue the record companies on this issue they could find a theory under which to do so.
So, you seem to be claiming that this is the only legal process under which the Norwegians can address the overarching problem - DRM and interoperability? While I freely admit I don't know Norwegian law I would find it astonishing that this is the only legal theory under which they could address the DRM/interoperability issue. The action MAY be a valid one (although as stated in other threads I don't believe so) but I highly doubt it is the only legal avenue open to them. I always believe in the creativity of the legal mind It seems reasonable that if they wanted to pursue the record companies on this issue they could find a theory under which to do so.
Yes. As I've said over and over again in a couple of threads now. This is about CONSUMER LAW and it's CONSUMERS who are protesting, not governments or businesses. As such, the only bit of the process they can protest about is their rights as consumers in the contract between the consumer and the retailer (Apple, MSN.no....).
That's how most European countries have their laws set up.
So calling the Norwegian Consumer Council spokesman stupid for not going after the record companies is in itself stupid. They've a specific case with a finely defined contract to argue against.
The point of that is to only enforce a law and not necessarily protect consumers.
Well, no, not really.
The laws are in place to protect consumers, or at least that's what they're supposed to do. So, in theory enforcing the laws, protects the consumer.
Of course, there's plenty of laws that if enforced are pretty stupid, like being able to marry your horse in Utah, but this isn't Utah, and the law isn't that silly.
DVD DRM was cracked 8 years ago. It's only still there for DMCA purposes.
The ripping of a DVD isn't the illegal part, it's the decrypting for copying that may be considered illegal. I do have legal pressed DVDs that aren't encrypted. Even without the encryption, it's still illegal to redistribute without the owner's permission.
The laws are in place to protect consumers, or at least that's what they're supposed to do. So, in theory enforcing the laws, protects the consumer.
Apple has done nothing to unfairly stifle competition against iPod or iTunes. Anyone is free to develop mp3 players and download services that rival iPod/iTunes. Consumers are free to choose to buy those products instead of iPod/iTunes. iTunes has dominated the download market because it has beat its competition in a fair market. Apple's only crime is not in sharing its technology with others which the government has no right to force it to do.
Forcing Apple to share with its competition does not protect consumers as much as it helps companies that did not have the vision or imagination to compete against Apple.
Apple has done nothing to unfairly stifle competition against iPod or iTunes. Anyone is free to develop mp3 players and download services that rival iPod/iTunes. Consumers are free to choose to buy those products instead of iPod/iTunes. iTunes has dominated the download market because it has beat its competition in a fair market. Apple's only crime is not in sharing its technology with others which the government has no right to force it to do.
Forcing Apple to share with its competition does not protect consumers as much as it helps companies that did not have the vision or imagination to compete against Apple.
It's not about consumer choice or competition in the marketplace.
It's about consumer restrictions placed on a purchase by Apple (even if Apple say the record companies made them do it) which the Norwegian Consumer Ombudsman is saying are too restrictive and also breaks some laws, notably changing of rights AFTER a purchase has concluded.
Imagine if Apple were a plumber that only guaranteed their plumbing would work on the last Friday of every month and they were allowed to come round and switch your water off every week. And that at any point in the next 100 years they could come round and swap your hot for cold water. This was all in the small print in your invoice but you failed to read it because you're used to expecting plumbing to work 24 hours a day and nobody reads the small print. You'd probably object that those restrictions are unfair wouldn't you. If I argued there were other plumbers you could have chosen from, that still doesn't make it fair. In the opinion of the Norwegian Consumer Ombudsman, Apple's restrictions are unfair. It doesn't matter that there are other music companies or players as it's all about the contract of sale between Apple and a consumer. Removing those restrictions coincidentally opens up the market to competition of course but it is coincidental to the legal argument.
The Norwegian Consumer Council (not the Ombudsman) was right today to welcome Jobs' call for abolishing DRM but still persist with the call to fine Apple for infringing on consumer rights. As they pointed out again, it's not about being able to play other people's songs on the iPod, it's being able to play iTunes purchases on other players.
This is about CONSUMER LAW and it's CONSUMERS who are protesting, not governments or businesses
where and who are all these protesters? i see no marchers down city streets waving placards, nor daily articles in the local broadsheet about the evils of iTS and DRM, not even online protests (of high or even any profile, at least) against apple/iTS.
Quote:
I have to ask, why aren't American consumer bodies complaining too? Do you just let American business walk all over you?
i am not american, but why would i want to protest? what great wrong is being inflicted upon me? if i don't like something i don't buy it. if i so choose, i can buy an iPod and not use any iTS content at all - there is no-one twisting my arm to buy content from iTS. but it so happens that it is convenient to sample and buy a track here or there (before i go off to buy the cd) and i know that i'll only be able to play it on an iPod etc etc. no big deal at all, nothing to scream blue bloody murder about.
Totally agree. But that doesn't make Norway's argument any less valid.
Merely irrelavent and misdirected. Those terms are not inconsistent with 'valid'. I think that's the point trying to be made over an over.
And I have to agree with sennen, why would I complain about being given more choice, which is what Apple has accomplished, within the restrictions imposed by the record companies. I haven't lost anything, just gained.
where and who are all these protesters? i see no marchers down city streets waving placards, nor daily articles in the local broadsheet about the evils of iTS and DRM, not even online protests (of high or even any profile, at least) against apple/iTS.
They're the Norwegian Consumer Council, a consumer body in France called UFC Que Choisir and a German federation of consumer bodies called Verbraucher. Similar bodies in Sweden, Finland and the Netherlands have also joined in. Those are all just regular joe public consumer bodies.
They've then been validated to some extent by the Norwegian Consumer Ombudsman (who's a government appointed but independent body) who has the power to threaten fines and/or legal action in Norway.
There HAVE been people marching up and down the streets with placards but if you've not spotted those (unlikely) then try Google.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sennen
i am not american, but why would i want to protest? what great wrong is being inflicted upon me? if i don't like something i don't buy it. if i so choose, i can buy an iPod and not use any iTS content at all - there is no-one twisting my arm to buy content from iTS. but it so happens that it is convenient to sample and buy a track here or there (before i go off to buy the cd) and i know that i'll only be able to play it on an iPod etc etc. no big deal at all, nothing to scream blue bloody murder about.
Sigh. Does anyone read what I write before spouting the same shite again? Once more, it's not about choice or competition or the iPod, it's about the restrictions in the contract of sale between a consumer and Apple when you purchase an iTunes track from their store.
Quote:
Originally Posted by physguy
And I have to agree with sennen, why would I complain about being given more choice, which is what Apple has accomplished, within the restrictions imposed by the record companies. I haven't lost anything, just gained.
Sigh. Does anyone read what I write before spouting the same shite again? Once more, it's not about choice or competition or the iPod, it's about the restrictions in the contract of sale between a consumer and Apple when you purchase an iTunes track from their store.
it's not shite, it is common sense. if you don't like the terms and conditions of a contract, don't enter into it. if the iTS is breaking the law in norway, then these consumer groups should be trying to close the norwegian store. but obviously they want to have their cake and eat it too... mmm, cake....
They're the Norwegian Consumer Council, a consumer body in France called UFC Que Choisir and a German federation of consumer bodies called Verbraucher. Similar bodies in Sweden, Finland and the Netherlands have also joined in. Those are all just regular joe public consumer bodies.
Well these bodies don't want a free market where products compete on their own merits. If they feel Apple is offering an unfair deal they could encourage people to stop buying iTS products. But obviously most consumers in Norway don't feel iTS is an unfair deal.
Quote:
it's about the restrictions in the contract of sale between a consumer and Apple when you purchase an iTunes track from their store.
The consumer does not need government protection from iTS restrictions. That's what the free market is for. If iTS restrictions are unreasonable people are free to not use the service. Its up to other companies to offer a better deal than Apple offers. That would force Apple to open its restrictions.
They're the Norwegian Consumer Council, a consumer body in France called UFC Que Choisir and a German federation of consumer bodies called Verbraucher. Similar bodies in Sweden, Finland and the Netherlands have also joined in. Those are all just regular joe public consumer bodies.
They've then been validated to some extent by the Norwegian Consumer Ombudsman (who's a government appointed but independent body) who has the power to threaten fines and/or legal action in Norway.
There HAVE been people marching up and down the streets with placards but if you've not spotted those (unlikely) then try Google.
Sigh. Does anyone read what I write before spouting the same shite again? Once more, it's not about choice or competition or the iPod, it's about the restrictions in the contract of sale between a consumer and Apple when you purchase an iTunes track from their store.
Sigh. See above.
Oh sigh sigh sigh. The only problem here is the you refuse to believe that anyone could read what you've written and disagree with it. I haven't read many responses at all that are not at all inconsisitent with what you've written, they simply disagree. It OK to disagree, wouldn't you agree???
it's not shite, it is common sense. if you don't like the terms and conditions of a contract, don't enter into it. if the iTS is breaking the law in norway, then these consumer groups should be trying to close the norwegian store. but obviously they want to have their cake and eat it too... mmm, cake....
They aren't trying to close the store, they're trying to make Apple obey the law. It's not necessary to close retailers down if you can persuade them to change their ways.
That's how ombudsmen and regulators work in any industry. They fine the law breakers until they comply after enough warning. In Apple's case they have until March to say what they'll do and till October to do it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell
Well these bodies don't want a free market where products compete on their own merits. If they feel Apple is offering an unfair deal they could encourage people to stop buying iTS products. But obviously most consumers in Norway don't feel iTS is an unfair deal.
No that's exactly what they want. They want music to be able to be played on any player no matter where you bought it without overly restrictive rights management so that you're free to use any player and other companies are free to participate in a market otherwise dominated by one closed system. They ARE encouraging people to stop buying iTMS products until this is corrected. 22 songs on average on an iPod capable of 1000 (Jobs' figures) is FAR from a ringing endorsement of the deal iTMS gives consumers so I've no idea how you can 'obviously' speak for most consumers in Norway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell
The consumer does not need government protection from iTS restrictions. That's what the free market is for. If iTS restrictions are unreasonable people are free to not use the service. Its up to other companies to offer a better deal than Apple offers. That would force Apple to open its restrictions.
The free market isn't an answer for everything, that's why there are laws. And of course, this is Norway, not America, so it has a completely different political, cultural and societal make-up. Frankly, Americans telling Norwegians how to run their country is patronising and completely none of their business. But if Apple wants to operate in Norway, then abiding by their laws is a given.
They aren't trying to close the store, they're trying to make Apple obey the law. It's not necessary to close retailers down if you can persuade them to change their ways.
But that is exactly the point that people are trying to make, it is NOT Apple that has to be persuaded or change their ways, as addressed in the letter from Jobs, its the record companies. That's why this effort is misdirected, even if valid. Apples only reasonable choice in the scenario is to shut down given what is put forth in the letter.
Oh sigh sigh sigh. The only problem here is the you refuse to believe that anyone could read what you've written and disagree with it. I haven't read many responses at all that are not at all inconsisitent with what you've written, they simply disagree. It OK to disagree, wouldn't you agree???
I'm trying to point out the FACTS of the legal position the Norwegian Consumer Council are taking with Apple but you, sennen and TenoBell keep bringing it back to opinion rather than paying any attention to what the Norwegian Consumer Council are complaining about.
I'm not stating MY opinion, I'm stating THEIR opinion which only relates to a very specific breach of consumer contract law. You're welcome to disagree with them of course but do try and stick to their points.
Comments
DVD's always had DRM.
DVD DRM was cracked 8 years ago. It's only still there for DMCA purposes.
No. it's a matter of legal process. They can only go after the party that has the contract with the consumer.
The point of that is to only enforce a law and not necessarily protect consumers.
DVD DRM was cracked 8 years ago. It's only still there for DMCA purposes.
That doesn't matter its still illegal. The movie industry is consistent with having copy protection on DVD's and DRM on digital downloads. While the music industry is not consistent with this at all.
No. it's a matter of legal process. They can only go after the party that has the contract with the consumer. It's got nothing to do with protecting EU companies. Norway aren't even in the EU.
So, you seem to be claiming that this is the only legal process under which the Norwegians can address the overarching problem - DRM and interoperability? While I freely admit I don't know Norwegian law I would find it astonishing that this is the only legal theory under which they could address the DRM/interoperability issue. The action MAY be a valid one (although as stated in other threads I don't believe so) but I highly doubt it is the only legal avenue open to them. I always believe in the creativity of the legal mind
So, you seem to be claiming that this is the only legal process under which the Norwegians can address the overarching problem - DRM and interoperability? While I freely admit I don't know Norwegian law I would find it astonishing that this is the only legal theory under which they could address the DRM/interoperability issue. The action MAY be a valid one (although as stated in other threads I don't believe so) but I highly doubt it is the only legal avenue open to them. I always believe in the creativity of the legal mind
Yes. As I've said over and over again in a couple of threads now. This is about CONSUMER LAW and it's CONSUMERS who are protesting, not governments or businesses. As such, the only bit of the process they can protest about is their rights as consumers in the contract between the consumer and the retailer (Apple, MSN.no....).
That's how most European countries have their laws set up.
So calling the Norwegian Consumer Council spokesman stupid for not going after the record companies is in itself stupid. They've a specific case with a finely defined contract to argue against.
The point of that is to only enforce a law and not necessarily protect consumers.
Well, no, not really.
The laws are in place to protect consumers, or at least that's what they're supposed to do. So, in theory enforcing the laws, protects the consumer.
Of course, there's plenty of laws that if enforced are pretty stupid, like being able to marry your horse in Utah, but this isn't Utah, and the law isn't that silly.
DVD DRM was cracked 8 years ago. It's only still there for DMCA purposes.
The ripping of a DVD isn't the illegal part, it's the decrypting for copying that may be considered illegal. I do have legal pressed DVDs that aren't encrypted. Even without the encryption, it's still illegal to redistribute without the owner's permission.
The laws are in place to protect consumers, or at least that's what they're supposed to do. So, in theory enforcing the laws, protects the consumer.
Apple has done nothing to unfairly stifle competition against iPod or iTunes. Anyone is free to develop mp3 players and download services that rival iPod/iTunes. Consumers are free to choose to buy those products instead of iPod/iTunes. iTunes has dominated the download market because it has beat its competition in a fair market. Apple's only crime is not in sharing its technology with others which the government has no right to force it to do.
Forcing Apple to share with its competition does not protect consumers as much as it helps companies that did not have the vision or imagination to compete against Apple.
Apple has done nothing to unfairly stifle competition against iPod or iTunes. Anyone is free to develop mp3 players and download services that rival iPod/iTunes. Consumers are free to choose to buy those products instead of iPod/iTunes. iTunes has dominated the download market because it has beat its competition in a fair market. Apple's only crime is not in sharing its technology with others which the government has no right to force it to do.
Forcing Apple to share with its competition does not protect consumers as much as it helps companies that did not have the vision or imagination to compete against Apple.
It's not about consumer choice or competition in the marketplace.
It's about consumer restrictions placed on a purchase by Apple (even if Apple say the record companies made them do it) which the Norwegian Consumer Ombudsman is saying are too restrictive and also breaks some laws, notably changing of rights AFTER a purchase has concluded.
Imagine if Apple were a plumber that only guaranteed their plumbing would work on the last Friday of every month and they were allowed to come round and switch your water off every week. And that at any point in the next 100 years they could come round and swap your hot for cold water. This was all in the small print in your invoice but you failed to read it because you're used to expecting plumbing to work 24 hours a day and nobody reads the small print. You'd probably object that those restrictions are unfair wouldn't you. If I argued there were other plumbers you could have chosen from, that still doesn't make it fair. In the opinion of the Norwegian Consumer Ombudsman, Apple's restrictions are unfair. It doesn't matter that there are other music companies or players as it's all about the contract of sale between Apple and a consumer. Removing those restrictions coincidentally opens up the market to competition of course but it is coincidental to the legal argument.
The Norwegian Consumer Council (not the Ombudsman) was right today to welcome Jobs' call for abolishing DRM but still persist with the call to fine Apple for infringing on consumer rights. As they pointed out again, it's not about being able to play other people's songs on the iPod, it's being able to play iTunes purchases on other players.
1) never would have let EUCD get passed to begin with
2) would work towards undoing EUCD right about freaking now.
Without EUCD, the encryption in DRM could easily and legally be circumvented by any consumer, making this a non-issue.
That is what consumer rights groups should be working towards. Pull away from the root of the problem.
Yes, I know. Norway isn't part of the EU, so EUCD doesn't affect them. But most of the countries being talked about are indeed EU members.
I'll give you some "bullshit", aegis. If the European consumer rights groups and governments truly cared to get DRM problems out of the way, they
1) never would have let EUCD get passed to begin with
2) would work towards undoing EUCD right about freaking now.
Without EUCD, the encryption in DRM could easily and legally be circumvented by any consumer, making this a non-issue.
That is what consumer rights groups should be working towards. Pull away from the root of the problem.
Yes, I know. Norway isn't part of the EU, so EUCD doesn't affect them. But most of the countries being talked about are indeed EU members.
Totally agree. But that doesn't make Norway's argument any less valid.
This is about CONSUMER LAW and it's CONSUMERS who are protesting, not governments or businesses
where and who are all these protesters? i see no marchers down city streets waving placards, nor daily articles in the local broadsheet about the evils of iTS and DRM, not even online protests (of high or even any profile, at least) against apple/iTS.
I have to ask, why aren't American consumer bodies complaining too? Do you just let American business walk all over you?
i am not american, but why would i want to protest? what great wrong is being inflicted upon me? if i don't like something i don't buy it. if i so choose, i can buy an iPod and not use any iTS content at all - there is no-one twisting my arm to buy content from iTS. but it so happens that it is convenient to sample and buy a track here or there (before i go off to buy the cd) and i know that i'll only be able to play it on an iPod etc etc. no big deal at all, nothing to scream blue bloody murder about.
sennen
Totally agree. But that doesn't make Norway's argument any less valid.
Merely irrelavent and misdirected. Those terms are not inconsistent with 'valid'. I think that's the point trying to be made over an over.
And I have to agree with sennen, why would I complain about being given more choice, which is what Apple has accomplished, within the restrictions imposed by the record companies. I haven't lost anything, just gained.
where and who are all these protesters? i see no marchers down city streets waving placards, nor daily articles in the local broadsheet about the evils of iTS and DRM, not even online protests (of high or even any profile, at least) against apple/iTS.
They're the Norwegian Consumer Council, a consumer body in France called UFC Que Choisir and a German federation of consumer bodies called Verbraucher. Similar bodies in Sweden, Finland and the Netherlands have also joined in. Those are all just regular joe public consumer bodies.
They've then been validated to some extent by the Norwegian Consumer Ombudsman (who's a government appointed but independent body) who has the power to threaten fines and/or legal action in Norway.
There HAVE been people marching up and down the streets with placards but if you've not spotted those (unlikely) then try Google.
i am not american, but why would i want to protest? what great wrong is being inflicted upon me? if i don't like something i don't buy it. if i so choose, i can buy an iPod and not use any iTS content at all - there is no-one twisting my arm to buy content from iTS. but it so happens that it is convenient to sample and buy a track here or there (before i go off to buy the cd) and i know that i'll only be able to play it on an iPod etc etc. no big deal at all, nothing to scream blue bloody murder about.
Sigh. Does anyone read what I write before spouting the same shite again? Once more, it's not about choice or competition or the iPod, it's about the restrictions in the contract of sale between a consumer and Apple when you purchase an iTunes track from their store.
And I have to agree with sennen, why would I complain about being given more choice, which is what Apple has accomplished, within the restrictions imposed by the record companies. I haven't lost anything, just gained.
Sigh. See above.
Sigh. Does anyone read what I write before spouting the same shite again? Once more, it's not about choice or competition or the iPod, it's about the restrictions in the contract of sale between a consumer and Apple when you purchase an iTunes track from their store.
it's not shite, it is common sense. if you don't like the terms and conditions of a contract, don't enter into it. if the iTS is breaking the law in norway, then these consumer groups should be trying to close the norwegian store. but obviously they want to have their cake and eat it too... mmm, cake....
They're the Norwegian Consumer Council, a consumer body in France called UFC Que Choisir and a German federation of consumer bodies called Verbraucher. Similar bodies in Sweden, Finland and the Netherlands have also joined in. Those are all just regular joe public consumer bodies.
Well these bodies don't want a free market where products compete on their own merits. If they feel Apple is offering an unfair deal they could encourage people to stop buying iTS products. But obviously most consumers in Norway don't feel iTS is an unfair deal.
it's about the restrictions in the contract of sale between a consumer and Apple when you purchase an iTunes track from their store.
The consumer does not need government protection from iTS restrictions. That's what the free market is for. If iTS restrictions are unreasonable people are free to not use the service. Its up to other companies to offer a better deal than Apple offers. That would force Apple to open its restrictions.
They're the Norwegian Consumer Council, a consumer body in France called UFC Que Choisir and a German federation of consumer bodies called Verbraucher. Similar bodies in Sweden, Finland and the Netherlands have also joined in. Those are all just regular joe public consumer bodies.
They've then been validated to some extent by the Norwegian Consumer Ombudsman (who's a government appointed but independent body) who has the power to threaten fines and/or legal action in Norway.
There HAVE been people marching up and down the streets with placards but if you've not spotted those (unlikely) then try Google.
Sigh. Does anyone read what I write before spouting the same shite again? Once more, it's not about choice or competition or the iPod, it's about the restrictions in the contract of sale between a consumer and Apple when you purchase an iTunes track from their store.
Sigh. See above.
Oh sigh sigh sigh. The only problem here is the you refuse to believe that anyone could read what you've written and disagree with it. I haven't read many responses at all that are not at all inconsisitent with what you've written, they simply disagree. It OK to disagree, wouldn't you agree???
it's not shite, it is common sense. if you don't like the terms and conditions of a contract, don't enter into it. if the iTS is breaking the law in norway, then these consumer groups should be trying to close the norwegian store. but obviously they want to have their cake and eat it too... mmm, cake....
They aren't trying to close the store, they're trying to make Apple obey the law. It's not necessary to close retailers down if you can persuade them to change their ways.
That's how ombudsmen and regulators work in any industry. They fine the law breakers until they comply after enough warning. In Apple's case they have until March to say what they'll do and till October to do it.
Well these bodies don't want a free market where products compete on their own merits. If they feel Apple is offering an unfair deal they could encourage people to stop buying iTS products. But obviously most consumers in Norway don't feel iTS is an unfair deal.
No that's exactly what they want. They want music to be able to be played on any player no matter where you bought it without overly restrictive rights management so that you're free to use any player and other companies are free to participate in a market otherwise dominated by one closed system. They ARE encouraging people to stop buying iTMS products until this is corrected. 22 songs on average on an iPod capable of 1000 (Jobs' figures) is FAR from a ringing endorsement of the deal iTMS gives consumers so I've no idea how you can 'obviously' speak for most consumers in Norway.
The consumer does not need government protection from iTS restrictions. That's what the free market is for. If iTS restrictions are unreasonable people are free to not use the service. Its up to other companies to offer a better deal than Apple offers. That would force Apple to open its restrictions.
The free market isn't an answer for everything, that's why there are laws. And of course, this is Norway, not America, so it has a completely different political, cultural and societal make-up. Frankly, Americans telling Norwegians how to run their country is patronising and completely none of their business. But if Apple wants to operate in Norway, then abiding by their laws is a given.
They aren't trying to close the store, they're trying to make Apple obey the law. It's not necessary to close retailers down if you can persuade them to change their ways.
But that is exactly the point that people are trying to make, it is NOT Apple that has to be persuaded or change their ways, as addressed in the letter from Jobs, its the record companies. That's why this effort is misdirected, even if valid. Apples only reasonable choice in the scenario is to shut down given what is put forth in the letter.
Oh sigh sigh sigh. The only problem here is the you refuse to believe that anyone could read what you've written and disagree with it. I haven't read many responses at all that are not at all inconsisitent with what you've written, they simply disagree. It OK to disagree, wouldn't you agree???
I'm trying to point out the FACTS of the legal position the Norwegian Consumer Council are taking with Apple but you, sennen and TenoBell keep bringing it back to opinion rather than paying any attention to what the Norwegian Consumer Council are complaining about.
Here's their press release...
http://forbrukerportalen.no/Artikler/2006/1138119849.71
Here's their complaint... (PDF)
http://forbrukerportalen.no/filearch...ic%20Store.pdf
Please read.
I'm not stating MY opinion, I'm stating THEIR opinion which only relates to a very specific breach of consumer contract law. You're welcome to disagree with them of course but do try and stick to their points.