There's no reason why I shouldn't be able to play my iTunes music or movies on any device I want I.e. Kindle Fire, Smart TV, etc because it's my music not Apple's.
Slam dunk case. I've been wanting this to go to trial for years.
Agreed. If you had taken more time to think this out you would not come off looking like an idiot troll and realized that this case has no legs since you should know (by now anyway) that you can play your music on any device you want - just export it to any type you want. ;-)
This suit by its very time in the courts has proven the accusers wrong -- the only winners here are the lawyers if they can drag it out and get someone to pay -- being a class action suit I have to think the original A-hole that brought the suit negotiated with a firm to do it on contingency fee (i.e., nothing out of plaintiffs pocket) so those being sued carry the weight of their attorney's fee's.
pazuzu you say: "it's my music not Apple's" is half correct but not the way you think. Apple is a licensed distributor (from record companies and artists). Apple does not own the complete rights to the music. You have the right as a consumer to purchase the right to have fair use of a (single use) copy of said art for your own personal fair and reasonable use. (You are allowed to have it on multiple devices that you own but cannot play it as warm up at a ballgame or concert or as dance music at a bar.) The music is not yours (i.e., you cannot sell copies and collect a royalty) most of it is owned by record companies, or original artist more so lately, or others that bought the catalog as an investment (e.g., Michael J. bought Beatles, Paul bought Beatles back). Selling the rights to the music to the record labels was often the only way to get a contract with the bigs in the day along with getting a pennies on the dollar royalty -- now artist have an outlet that allows them to take a chance with self promotion and distribution or iTunes, Amazon, etc..., to come out on the big $$ side (e.g., AC/DC, Metallica, Pink Floyd's album only policy come to mind).
I should sue the DVD industry for making me use a DVD player to play MY movies. I should be able to play my DVDs on an 8mm projector if I want to. They are my movies.
For so many reasons. If nothing else, tripling the $350M figure that the plaintiff pulled out of thin air to sound impressive makes no sense. Actual damages are likely to be zero, but theoretically they could be even higher than a $1B (if the jurors are wasted).
Slam dunk troll with another stupid comment. You want to complain, talk to the record labels or movie studios who are the ones deciding whether your content can be moved freely from device to device.
That's true. He needs to read the terms and agreements as it relates to using iTunes. Apple is under no obligation to support other devices with tracks purchased from iTunes. It did have an obligation to the record companies.
It's MY content- I paid for it. It's not Apple's and should not be be frozen to an Apple device. It's not that difficult to comprehend.
I should sue the DVD industry for making me use a DVD player to play MY movies. I should be able to play my DVDs on an 8mm projector if I want to. They are my movies.
Again you can play it on ANY DVD player not just a Sony.
Again - NOT a brain twister.
You paid for a LICENSE to consume that content. And you agreed to the terms of that license when you forked over your dough for it.
Wake up, please.
And those terms were unreasonable and monopolistic. Next?
This is the reason people hate and leave Apple - not overpriced products (which I disagree with) but being trapped by the content they paid for. Excellent mouse trap but bad for the consumer.
That's true. He needs to read the terms and agreements as it relates to using iTunes. Apple is under no obligation to support other devices with tracks purchased from iTunes. It did have an obligation to the record companies.
It's MY content- I paid for it. It's not Apple's and should not be be frozen to an Apple device. It's not that difficult to comprehend.
It is not your content.
You purchased the right to use content not to own it. A search with the simple "iTunes content use" phrase on Google gave me more on how to copy you content from Apple devices, Windows, etc. to damn near anything including Kindle, Android, MP3 players, CDs, DVDs, etc...
If you have old content purchased (roughly 2009 and earlier) see this WIRED article to remove the DRM.
Alleged problem solved! No suit (or even coat & tie) required.
Comments
'This case should have been settled way back in 2025' said future reader
Absolutely.
There's no reason why I shouldn't be able to play my iTunes music or movies on any device I want I.e. Kindle Fire, Smart TV, etc because it's my music not Apple's.
Slam dunk case. I've been wanting this to go to trial for years.
Agreed. If you had taken more time to think this out you would not come off looking like an idiot troll and realized that this case has no legs since you should know (by now anyway) that you can play your music on any device you want - just export it to any type you want. ;-)
This suit by its very time in the courts has proven the accusers wrong -- the only winners here are the lawyers if they can drag it out and get someone to pay -- being a class action suit I have to think the original A-hole that brought the suit negotiated with a firm to do it on contingency fee (i.e., nothing out of plaintiffs pocket) so those being sued carry the weight of their attorney's fee's.
pazuzu you say: "it's my music not Apple's" is half correct but not the way you think. Apple is a licensed distributor (from record companies and artists). Apple does not own the complete rights to the music. You have the right as a consumer to purchase the right to have fair use of a (single use) copy of said art for your own personal fair and reasonable use. (You are allowed to have it on multiple devices that you own but cannot play it as warm up at a ballgame or concert or as dance music at a bar.) The music is not yours (i.e., you cannot sell copies and collect a royalty) most of it is owned by record companies, or original artist more so lately, or others that bought the catalog as an investment (e.g., Michael J. bought Beatles, Paul bought Beatles back). Selling the rights to the music to the record labels was often the only way to get a contract with the bigs in the day along with getting a pennies on the dollar royalty -- now artist have an outlet that allows them to take a chance with self promotion and distribution or iTunes, Amazon, etc..., to come out on the big $$ side (e.g., AC/DC, Metallica, Pink Floyd's album only policy come to mind).
So you, like the people responsible, are ignorant of anything relevant to the case.
What search monopoly? They don’t have one.
Bullshit!
For so many reasons. If nothing else, tripling the $350M figure that the plaintiff pulled out of thin air to sound impressive makes no sense. Actual damages are likely to be zero, but theoretically they could be even higher than a $1B (if the jurors are wasted).
It's MY content- I paid for it. It's not Apple's and should not be be frozen to an Apple device. It's not that difficult to comprehend.
Again you can play it on ANY DVD player not just a Sony.
Again - NOT a brain twister.
The law said otherwise.
Yeah, so, maybe go after the people responsible for DRM rather than Apple.
The copyright law says it is NOT you content either.
No - really?
We're talking eContent being compatible on other eDevices. Quite a simple concept actually.
Bad law.
It's MY content- I paid for it.
Bzzzzzzt.
You paid for a LICENSE to consume that content. And you agreed to the terms of that license when you forked over your dough for it.
Wake up, please.
And those terms were unreasonable and monopolistic. Next?
This is the reason people hate and leave Apple - not overpriced products (which I disagree with) but being trapped by the content they paid for. Excellent mouse trap but bad for the consumer.
Gotta agree. Apple’s not responsible for it, though.
Quote:
That's true. He needs to read the terms and agreements as it relates to using iTunes. Apple is under no obligation to support other devices with tracks purchased from iTunes. It did have an obligation to the record companies.
It's MY content- I paid for it. It's not Apple's and should not be be frozen to an Apple device. It's not that difficult to comprehend.
It is not your content.
You purchased the right to use content not to own it. A search with the simple "iTunes content use" phrase on Google gave me more on how to copy you content from Apple devices, Windows, etc. to damn near anything including Kindle, Android, MP3 players, CDs, DVDs, etc...
If you have old content purchased (roughly 2009 and earlier) see this WIRED article to remove the DRM.
Alleged problem solved! No suit (or even coat & tie) required.
:-p
"but it wasn't a monopoly"
I concur, given that consumers could - and can - still buy physical music at the time.
Regardless, this is win, win, win for the attorneys.
Not to mention the fact that the main competitor for iTunes was Napster. Apple beat free, folks!
And those terms were unreasonable and monopolistic.
So why did you agree to them when you made your purchase? You had alternatives.
You're just looking to blame someone else for your own ignorance.
“Something something, more money than sense” – Android users