for those who speak French, this article relates that Steve Jobs justifies DRMs as a way to protect Apple from the power of Microsoft!
Considering that Apple has stated on various occasions
1) that they're will aware that the DRM can and will be circumvented, and that no copy protection is entirely effective,
2) that they would have rather used MP3, without any DRM,
3) that restrictions weren't their choice to make,
I'm not sure what your point is. It really is quite simple: Apple had to negotiate. Either add DRM, or get no songs. Now, customers have to negotiate again: either accept DRM, or get no songs.
Like it or not, that's the very contract you are signing.
...but there is no way that i will defend Apple and its DRM system. if i want to listen to my songs on my PSP, i must be able to do it.
Woah Olivier, slow down for 5 secs. If you really want to play your iTMS music on your PSP, Apple has already provided you with the tools required. You simply burn the music to CD, and then rip it to your PSP. Apple has always defended the consumer's rights against the big music labels, which is why they insisted on the ability to burn CDs from iTMS purchases.
Quote:
for those who speak French, this article relates that Steve Jobs justifies DRMs as a way to protect Apple from the power of Microsoft!
I wouldn't trust everything that Le Figaro says in this article. Note that they completely miss the CD burning ability of iTMS purchases, and also note that they give no direct quote from Steve Jobs claiming that FairPlay DRM was designed to protect Apple from Microsoft. As far as I know (and I follow all things Apple pretty closely), Jobs has never said any such thing. Le Figaro made that one up I think...
PS: Une petite correction: "Frenchy" ne se dit pas en anglais - c'est un bel exemple de franglais... dit plutot "French", ou si tu veux utiliser un language un peu plus familier, je te propose "frog" :-)
[B]It's amazing how some people can be against this law, since it's so obviously in their own personal interest.
Are you blinded by chauvinism? Patriottism? Or does the mere fact that politics are driven by opportunism and powerplay keep you from seeing that this time, it's in your own advantage as a consumer?
The question is rather why not *all* governments force all companies *all* content from *all* hardware.
iPods, PSPs X-Boxes - they're all really huge copyright dongles. Geez doesn't anyone see how you pay premium prices for PSP games because the hardware is a loss leader? We're only *lucky* that Apple lets us pay fair prices for their music, but for how long would they think they need to do that?
Is it too amazing to think some of us understand the business model and prefer it? The cost of entry to purchasing an XBox 360, PS3, and PSP would be higher than most consumers would be willing to pay. That would mean that these markets would likely go away as a $700 console in the age of $400 PCs isn't likely to fly. iPods I presume are sold at a profit.
Folks can (more or less) afford a XBox 360 at the current price point and rent and trade/buy used games. The traditional business model where MS makes money on a 360 sale it seems less likely.
[quote]
Well, they can. Easily. Laughingly. iTunes is profitable, iPod is profitable. And their each the best the planet has to offer in it's category. That's the difference with content/hardware combinations Sony and Microsoft have to offer.
[QUOTE]
Arguably they are best in class because of the integration they can assume from a software/hardware perspective. Just like console games vs PC games.
It's amazing how some people can be against this law, since it's so obviously in their own personal interest.
...
I know that some people think that you have to protect innovation by allowing companies to make economical use of it.
By keeping their music prices low and their iPod prices realistically high, they have made sure that they remain competitive while the market conditions are going to change.
DRM doesn't protect innovation, the media companies want it in the vain hope of protecting their market, which usually features anything but innovation. For the large part, the only group that thinks DRM is helpful is the media producers, and I'm pretty sure that is delusion on their part. Muckrovision, CSS, UnFairPlay are all minor hinderances to copyright infringement.
I'm pretty surprised that an indidual believes that the iTunes pricing is low. I'm sure the music oligopoly likes to think it is low, but going higher is only going to encourage copyright infringement by demanding prices that is much higher than much of the market will accept.
The whole point here is that you do not have to buy your content from the iTMS. People are acting like iTunes and the iPod are non functional without iTMS content.
Muckrovision, CSS, UnFairPlay are all minor hinderances to copyright infringement.
An otherwise insightful post is shattered to pieces with the entirely unnecessary, childish alteration of words. The only thing missing was "Micro$oft" or "Crapple".
An otherwise insightful post is shattered to pieces with the entirely unnecessary, childish alteration of words. The only thing missing was "Micro$oft" or "Crapple".
Hey, I didn't make the original name such that it contradicts its actual function such that they are inherent lies within themselves.
Someone asked a good question earlier: why hasn't France forced interoperability between PlayStation, Xbox and Nintendo games? The answer: there are no French competitors in gaming!
It's not about protecting the consumer with liberte, egalite et fraternite, but giving French companies who are getting trounced in the marketplace some business that they have not otherwise earned.
One big lie (by omission) that has plagued virtually all of the coverage I've seen is that ALL MP3 players play ALL MP3 files. They imply that the only thing you can play on iPods is material you purchase from iTMS. The iPod also plays AAC (unprotected or Fairplay-DRM'd), WAV and AIFF. I believe some of the other generics also play unprotected AAC files.
The only people who can fix this are French consumers. These are the people who put Apple in its envious position they are in. They didn't flock to the iPod/iTMS solution because they are extreme Americo-philes, but because it was the best solution they could find.
If the law passes it would be bye bye iTMS France. It only exist as a way for Apple to sell iPods. Simple as that.
You know... this statement has gotten me thinking...
Maybe the iTMS is doing something 'less than above board'. Apple / Steve and others at Apple have gone on record a number of times to say something along the lines of 'iTMS only exist as a way for Apple to sell iPods and they derive little to no profit from the individual sale of the songs themselves.'
In most markets wouldn't that be considered 'dumping'?
You know, like in the RAM market when a company (or entire country) sells their RAM at cost (or even below cost) to make things impossibly tough for other RAM makers to either, enter the market or maintain their presence in the market.
Maybe I'm way outta line but it sure seems like the same thing to me...
How could anyone else ever compete with iTMS / iPod combo when:
- The studios want the same cut per song from everyone (or close to it)
- The cost to distribute the song is pretty close to the same
- Apple adds close to ZERO markup to the song
- iTMS makes most other competing services look too expensive
This is ridiculous! People aren't forced to sue iTunes! If they want interoperability, they can use something else.
I support the French here 1000%, The market has been fucked by DRM, music has always "just worked" untill now.
Examples:
1: A sony cassette tape can play in an RCA deck, an RCA records tape could play in a sony deck.
2: Records came in three flavors, 33, 45, and 78 RPM, many record players can vary the playspeed to accomedate any record, or the player can be modded to do so.
Name one valid reason why I cant play iTunes unfairplay tracks in Windows Media center/creative Zen/Dell DJ, or Play?,forsure?!? WMA in itunes/iPod other than tech companys feeding off of media company monopoly abuse.
It's amazing how some people can be against this law, since it's so obviously in their own personal interest.
You missed some parts in the law currently in progress : no more personal copy of a DVD allowed (and god I love to make Divx from my children DVD so I can keep them on my laptop and have them at hand on travel. The reason is officially the fight against illegal copy BUT we still have to pay for the tax that was asked for by media content industry to alleviate financial loss due to illegal copies of DVDs/CDs . Now, we now those losses were only lack of increase of the market but according to the new law :
- I still have to pay for all recordable media (DVDs, HDs, CDs and hardware using them like MP3 players) while I use them for professional purposes
- I can't no more keep a copy of my legally purchased CDs and DVDs
- I can't use softwares like VLC or many other apps beacuse they ? according to the law ? allow for distribution of digital content under copyright. I an even wondering if a simple e-mail client or browser can be encompassed in this category.
Don't be fooled by the part on DRM interroperability : the law ask for more interoperability for the end user in a liberal stance but still increase the grip of major entertainment company on their content, forbidding to copy it for any personal use? The law is to fight piracy by keeping the content under the wing of its producers but the consumer has still to pay for ? imaginary ? ? money loss from piracy at the same time and legal download is at risk at the same time : GREAT MOVE ! What I see is a law mixing very opposite positions but ending in weaker choice for the end users while the content industry that has all its wishes granted?
? DRM interroperability = weakens web stores whose prices agreed on by content producer don't allow for rentability on the sole selling of music files?
? No private copy allowed = end user can no more keep the content he paid for in a way ensuring its safety and allowing choice about the hardware to play it. If you scratches your DVD : you gonnay buy a new one?
? Taxes on recordable media : use of DVD-RW/HD/flash memory based hardware (DivX recorders, MP3 players, computers, flash memory / hd based phones, palmtops?) is now flowing money to the french content industry, from people using piracy or not while making at the same time alternatives to the locked CD/DVD player system more expensive and thus less attractive to the end user.
? punishment for promoting and distributing software allowing (in a very unprecized way) for distribution and sharing of copyright content is so hight that many software companies will think twice before pushing a product that in a not-thought-of-yet way COULD allow for the sharing of digital copyrighted content.
And you still think this law will benefit the user ? Funny.
DaveGee: If you want to compete only against iTMS with a music store, you'll have a hard time because Apple isn't aiming for outrageous profits (see ringtones and over-the-air music sales), and because Apple now has economies of scale (which they didn't always have). But if you recognize that content is part of the system for the player, you'll sell a player and you can compete there. Apple still aims for its 20%+ margins on iPods, although now its economies of scale there will work against you.
Apple recognized that easy access to content was key to selling the player. Content is not only songs, but audiobooks, podcasts, and now videos (trailers, music videos, TV shows, etc). Everyone knows that you can't sell game consoles without also having great games ready to be sold. And that you can't sell HD-DVD/Blu-ray players without also having movies on disks ready to be sold. Apple understood that this is no different.
Finally, eMusic seems to be doing relatively well as a music store selling MP3 songs that play on the iPod.
I would also expect that the agreements between the music stores and the record labels probably include details about what rights are granted to users and what players they can officially use.
One point I'm not sure about is if this law bans the ability to RIP and Burn a copy of a CD you purchased. If this is the case, I don't see why anyone would want the law passed.
I see this getting tied up in the courts, at least it would in the US. I don't know who has to be involved for a system to be open. If Apple pulled out is everyone then automatically OK since all other systems would be Plays For Sure?
Name one valid reason why I cant play iTunes unfairplay tracks in Windows Media center/creative Zen/Dell DJ, or Play?,forsure?!? WMA in itunes/iPod other than tech companys feeding off of media company monopoly abuse. [/B]
Because media content companies asked prices so high to the web based music store selling their stuff that those systems can't be profitable unless you sell other stuff along (be it Windows, OS X, >MP3 players, ringtones etc).
If Apple music is readable on any other player, iPod marketshare will dive, user experience will become a mess (how know how many times CD burning is allowed, how many computers can play the file etc) and every minor player that will negociate weakly with majors and agree on very restrictive DRM but with lower prices will be followed by the other players and thus the market will go toward reducing the options available to a user of DRMed content.
Also, in this case, the content industry will surely become the dominant player since they fixes prices AND DRM standard?
For those who didn't uderstood : the french law don't ask for less DRM? but for less profitability to the download music stores. And all the law is directed toward a better control of this nascent market by the entertainment industry.
And you can bet Apple and other web players would have be very very pleased to avoid the DRM constraint altogether if they had the choice?
This is very stupid. Content on iTunes (not sure about video) can be put on any device in the following manner...
assuming of course that you have a copy of iTunes and the computer you purchased the music with onhand (think 10-20 years down the road).
and stephane, thanks for the clairification on the law. i'm certainly not so naive as to believe the motivation behind the law is to actually protect consumer rights.
Apple / Steve and others at Apple have gone on record a number of times to say something along the lines of 'iTMS only exist as a way for Apple to sell iPods and they derive little to no profit from the individual sale of the songs themselves.'
In most markets wouldn't that be considered 'dumping'?
No.
Dumping is (usually) an existing monopoly selling below cost with the intent to drive other competitors out of business.
This is very stupid. Content on iTunes (not sure about video) can be put on any device in the following manner...
1- If not already set, go to Prefs and set Advanced->Importing->Import Using: to MP3 Encoder
2- Right-Click or Ctrl-Click on the song you bought... Choose 'Convert to MP3'
3- Copy anywhere you'd like - to any device - no CD needed
Not if the file you are trying to convert is "Fairplayed". Also, even if you could do that with DRMed content, there would be significant quality loss.
Comments
Originally posted by olive_
for those who speak French, this article relates that Steve Jobs justifies DRMs as a way to protect Apple from the power of Microsoft!
Considering that Apple has stated on various occasions
1) that they're will aware that the DRM can and will be circumvented, and that no copy protection is entirely effective,
2) that they would have rather used MP3, without any DRM,
3) that restrictions weren't their choice to make,
I'm not sure what your point is. It really is quite simple: Apple had to negotiate. Either add DRM, or get no songs. Now, customers have to negotiate again: either accept DRM, or get no songs.
Like it or not, that's the very contract you are signing.
Originally posted by olive_
...but there is no way that i will defend Apple and its DRM system. if i want to listen to my songs on my PSP, i must be able to do it.
Woah Olivier, slow down for 5 secs. If you really want to play your iTMS music on your PSP, Apple has already provided you with the tools required. You simply burn the music to CD, and then rip it to your PSP. Apple has always defended the consumer's rights against the big music labels, which is why they insisted on the ability to burn CDs from iTMS purchases.
for those who speak French, this article relates that Steve Jobs justifies DRMs as a way to protect Apple from the power of Microsoft!
http://www.lefigaro.fr/france/200603..._francais.html
I wouldn't trust everything that Le Figaro says in this article. Note that they completely miss the CD burning ability of iTMS purchases, and also note that they give no direct quote from Steve Jobs claiming that FairPlay DRM was designed to protect Apple from Microsoft. As far as I know (and I follow all things Apple pretty closely), Jobs has never said any such thing. Le Figaro made that one up I think...
PS: Une petite correction: "Frenchy" ne se dit pas en anglais - c'est un bel exemple de franglais... dit plutot "French", ou si tu veux utiliser un language un peu plus familier, je te propose "frog" :-)
Originally posted by Doxxic
[B]It's amazing how some people can be against this law, since it's so obviously in their own personal interest.
Are you blinded by chauvinism? Patriottism? Or does the mere fact that politics are driven by opportunism and powerplay keep you from seeing that this time, it's in your own advantage as a consumer?
The question is rather why not *all* governments force all companies *all* content from *all* hardware.
iPods, PSPs X-Boxes - they're all really huge copyright dongles. Geez doesn't anyone see how you pay premium prices for PSP games because the hardware is a loss leader? We're only *lucky* that Apple lets us pay fair prices for their music, but for how long would they think they need to do that?
Is it too amazing to think some of us understand the business model and prefer it? The cost of entry to purchasing an XBox 360, PS3, and PSP would be higher than most consumers would be willing to pay. That would mean that these markets would likely go away as a $700 console in the age of $400 PCs isn't likely to fly. iPods I presume are sold at a profit.
Folks can (more or less) afford a XBox 360 at the current price point and rent and trade/buy used games. The traditional business model where MS makes money on a 360 sale it seems less likely.
[quote]
Well, they can. Easily. Laughingly. iTunes is profitable, iPod is profitable. And their each the best the planet has to offer in it's category. That's the difference with content/hardware combinations Sony and Microsoft have to offer.
[QUOTE]
Arguably they are best in class because of the integration they can assume from a software/hardware perspective. Just like console games vs PC games.
Vinea
Originally posted by Doxxic
It's amazing how some people can be against this law, since it's so obviously in their own personal interest.
...
I know that some people think that you have to protect innovation by allowing companies to make economical use of it.
By keeping their music prices low and their iPod prices realistically high, they have made sure that they remain competitive while the market conditions are going to change.
DRM doesn't protect innovation, the media companies want it in the vain hope of protecting their market, which usually features anything but innovation. For the large part, the only group that thinks DRM is helpful is the media producers, and I'm pretty sure that is delusion on their part. Muckrovision, CSS, UnFairPlay are all minor hinderances to copyright infringement.
I'm pretty surprised that an indidual believes that the iTunes pricing is low. I'm sure the music oligopoly likes to think it is low, but going higher is only going to encourage copyright infringement by demanding prices that is much higher than much of the market will accept.
Originally posted by JeffDM
Muckrovision, CSS, UnFairPlay are all minor hinderances to copyright infringement.
An otherwise insightful post is shattered to pieces with the entirely unnecessary, childish alteration of words. The only thing missing was "Micro$oft" or "Crapple".
Originally posted by Chucker
An otherwise insightful post is shattered to pieces with the entirely unnecessary, childish alteration of words. The only thing missing was "Micro$oft" or "Crapple".
Hey, I didn't make the original name such that it contradicts its actual function such that they are inherent lies within themselves.
Originally posted by JeffDM
Hey, I didn't make the original name such that it contradicts its actual function.
So write "Apple's DRM" and "unfortunately the parent company of InstallShield" instead.
Originally posted by Chucker
So write "Apple's DRM" and "unfortunately the parent company of InstallShield" instead.
Good idea. Seriously.
Someone asked a good question earlier: why hasn't France forced interoperability between PlayStation, Xbox and Nintendo games? The answer: there are no French competitors in gaming!
It's not about protecting the consumer with liberte, egalite et fraternite, but giving French companies who are getting trounced in the marketplace some business that they have not otherwise earned.
One big lie (by omission) that has plagued virtually all of the coverage I've seen is that ALL MP3 players play ALL MP3 files. They imply that the only thing you can play on iPods is material you purchase from iTMS. The iPod also plays AAC (unprotected or Fairplay-DRM'd), WAV and AIFF. I believe some of the other generics also play unprotected AAC files.
The only people who can fix this are French consumers. These are the people who put Apple in its envious position they are in. They didn't flock to the iPod/iTMS solution because they are extreme Americo-philes, but because it was the best solution they could find.
Originally posted by Anders
If the law passes it would be bye bye iTMS France. It only exist as a way for Apple to sell iPods. Simple as that.
You know... this statement has gotten me thinking...
Maybe the iTMS is doing something 'less than above board'. Apple / Steve and others at Apple have gone on record a number of times to say something along the lines of 'iTMS only exist as a way for Apple to sell iPods and they derive little to no profit from the individual sale of the songs themselves.'
In most markets wouldn't that be considered 'dumping'?
You know, like in the RAM market when a company (or entire country) sells their RAM at cost (or even below cost) to make things impossibly tough for other RAM makers to either, enter the market or maintain their presence in the market.
Maybe I'm way outta line but it sure seems like the same thing to me...
How could anyone else ever compete with iTMS / iPod combo when:
- The studios want the same cut per song from everyone (or close to it)
- The cost to distribute the song is pretty close to the same
- Apple adds close to ZERO markup to the song
- iTMS makes most other competing services look too expensive
- iTMS music only works with iPods (and iTunes)
Dave
Originally posted by dansgil
This is ridiculous! People aren't forced to sue iTunes! If they want interoperability, they can use something else.
I support the French here 1000%, The market has been fucked by DRM, music has always "just worked" untill now.
Examples:
1: A sony cassette tape can play in an RCA deck, an RCA records tape could play in a sony deck.
2: Records came in three flavors, 33, 45, and 78 RPM, many record players can vary the playspeed to accomedate any record, or the player can be modded to do so.
Name one valid reason why I cant play iTunes unfairplay tracks in Windows Media center/creative Zen/Dell DJ, or Play?,forsure?!? WMA in itunes/iPod other than tech companys feeding off of media company monopoly abuse.
Originally posted by Doxxic
It's amazing how some people can be against this law, since it's so obviously in their own personal interest.
You missed some parts in the law currently in progress : no more personal copy of a DVD allowed (and god I love to make Divx from my children DVD so I can keep them on my laptop and have them at hand on travel. The reason is officially the fight against illegal copy BUT we still have to pay for the tax that was asked for by media content industry to alleviate financial loss due to illegal copies of DVDs/CDs . Now, we now those losses were only lack of increase of the market but according to the new law :
- I still have to pay for all recordable media (DVDs, HDs, CDs and hardware using them like MP3 players) while I use them for professional purposes
- I can't no more keep a copy of my legally purchased CDs and DVDs
- I can't use softwares like VLC or many other apps beacuse they ? according to the law ? allow for distribution of digital content under copyright. I an even wondering if a simple e-mail client or browser can be encompassed in this category.
Don't be fooled by the part on DRM interroperability : the law ask for more interoperability for the end user in a liberal stance but still increase the grip of major entertainment company on their content, forbidding to copy it for any personal use? The law is to fight piracy by keeping the content under the wing of its producers but the consumer has still to pay for ? imaginary ? ? money loss from piracy at the same time and legal download is at risk at the same time : GREAT MOVE ! What I see is a law mixing very opposite positions but ending in weaker choice for the end users while the content industry that has all its wishes granted?
? DRM interroperability = weakens web stores whose prices agreed on by content producer don't allow for rentability on the sole selling of music files?
? No private copy allowed = end user can no more keep the content he paid for in a way ensuring its safety and allowing choice about the hardware to play it. If you scratches your DVD : you gonnay buy a new one?
? Taxes on recordable media : use of DVD-RW/HD/flash memory based hardware (DivX recorders, MP3 players, computers, flash memory / hd based phones, palmtops?) is now flowing money to the french content industry, from people using piracy or not while making at the same time alternatives to the locked CD/DVD player system more expensive and thus less attractive to the end user.
? punishment for promoting and distributing software allowing (in a very unprecized way) for distribution and sharing of copyright content is so hight that many software companies will think twice before pushing a product that in a not-thought-of-yet way COULD allow for the sharing of digital copyrighted content.
And you still think this law will benefit the user ? Funny.
Apple recognized that easy access to content was key to selling the player. Content is not only songs, but audiobooks, podcasts, and now videos (trailers, music videos, TV shows, etc). Everyone knows that you can't sell game consoles without also having great games ready to be sold. And that you can't sell HD-DVD/Blu-ray players without also having movies on disks ready to be sold. Apple understood that this is no different.
Finally, eMusic seems to be doing relatively well as a music store selling MP3 songs that play on the iPod.
One point I'm not sure about is if this law bans the ability to RIP and Burn a copy of a CD you purchased. If this is the case, I don't see why anyone would want the law passed.
I see this getting tied up in the courts, at least it would in the US. I don't know who has to be involved for a system to be open. If Apple pulled out is everyone then automatically OK since all other systems would be Plays For Sure?
1- If not already set, go to Prefs and set Advanced->Importing->Import Using: to MP3 Encoder
2- Right-Click or Ctrl-Click on the song you bought... Choose 'Convert to MP3'
3- Copy anywhere you'd like - to any device - no CD needed
Originally posted by a_greer
Name one valid reason why I cant play iTunes unfairplay tracks in Windows Media center/creative Zen/Dell DJ, or Play?,forsure?!? WMA in itunes/iPod other than tech companys feeding off of media company monopoly abuse. [/B]
Because media content companies asked prices so high to the web based music store selling their stuff that those systems can't be profitable unless you sell other stuff along (be it Windows, OS X, >MP3 players, ringtones etc).
If Apple music is readable on any other player, iPod marketshare will dive, user experience will become a mess (how know how many times CD burning is allowed, how many computers can play the file etc) and every minor player that will negociate weakly with majors and agree on very restrictive DRM but with lower prices will be followed by the other players and thus the market will go toward reducing the options available to a user of DRMed content.
Also, in this case, the content industry will surely become the dominant player since they fixes prices AND DRM standard?
For those who didn't uderstood : the french law don't ask for less DRM? but for less profitability to the download music stores. And all the law is directed toward a better control of this nascent market by the entertainment industry.
And you can bet Apple and other web players would have be very very pleased to avoid the DRM constraint altogether if they had the choice?
Originally posted by JohnnyKrz
This is very stupid. Content on iTunes (not sure about video) can be put on any device in the following manner...
assuming of course that you have a copy of iTunes and the computer you purchased the music with onhand (think 10-20 years down the road).
and stephane, thanks for the clairification on the law. i'm certainly not so naive as to believe the motivation behind the law is to actually protect consumer rights.
Originally posted by DaveGee
Apple / Steve and others at Apple have gone on record a number of times to say something along the lines of 'iTMS only exist as a way for Apple to sell iPods and they derive little to no profit from the individual sale of the songs themselves.'
In most markets wouldn't that be considered 'dumping'?
No.
Dumping is (usually) an existing monopoly selling below cost with the intent to drive other competitors out of business.
Originally posted by JohnnyKrz
This is very stupid. Content on iTunes (not sure about video) can be put on any device in the following manner...
1- If not already set, go to Prefs and set Advanced->Importing->Import Using: to MP3 Encoder
2- Right-Click or Ctrl-Click on the song you bought... Choose 'Convert to MP3'
3- Copy anywhere you'd like - to any device - no CD needed
Not if the file you are trying to convert is "Fairplayed". Also, even if you could do that with DRMed content, there would be significant quality loss.