Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

EU Countries Call Out iTunes DRM

Posted by Zonk on Tue Jan 23, 2007 01:38 PM
from the cue-the-gunfight-music dept.
seriouslywtf writes "Europe is upping the pressure on Apple to open up its restrictive DRM that ties iTunes to the iPod. Norway ruled last year that the iPod-iTunes tie-in was unreasonable and gave Apple a deadline to make a change to its policies, but was unsatisfied with the response they got. Now France and Germany have joined forces with Norway, making it a lot harder for Apple to just walk away from those markets. From the article: 'France's consumer lobby group, UFC-Que Choisir, and Germany's Verbraucherzentrale are now part of the European effort to push Apple into an open DRM system, with more countries considering joining the group. However, the company has been under some fire over the last year due to those restrictions, first with France and then Denmark looking to open up restrictive DRM schemes (including, but not limited to iTunes) ... Norwegian consumer groups were unimpressed by Apple's response. Norway has now given Apple a new deadline of September of this year to change its policies, and the pressure on Apple will likely grow in the months leading up to the deadline.'"
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] News: Jobs Favors DRM-Free Music Distribution 755 comments
Another anonymous reader tips an essay by Steve Jobs on the Apple site about DRM, iTunes, and the iPod. Perhaps it was prompted by the uncomfortable pressure the EU has been putting on Apple to open up the iPod. Jobs places the blame for the existence and continuing reliance on DRM squarely on the music companies. Quoting: "Much of the concern over DRM systems has arisen in European countries. Perhaps those unhappy with the current situation should redirect their energies towards persuading the music companies to sell their music DRM-free. For Europeans, two and a half of the big four music companies are located right in their backyard. The largest, Universal, is 100% owned by Vivendi, a French company. EMI is a British company, and Sony BMG is 50% owned by Bertelsmann, a German company. Convincing them to license their music to Apple and others DRM-free will create a truly interoperable music marketplace. Apple will embrace this wholeheartedly."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by Kenja (541830) on Tuesday January 23 2007, @01:44PM (#17725626)
    Without the hardware tie in there's realy no incentive for Apple to keep running iTunes. Its the iPod & iTv sales that make them money.
        • To buy a song from iTunes and play it, you must have the iTunes music manager on your computer. You don't need the iPod; you only need a computer that can run the iTunes manager. You do need the iTunes music manager if you intend to play or burn the purchased trax without breaking the DMCA because only it will remove the Fairplay.
            • by davester666 (731373) on Tuesday January 23 2007, @04:17PM (#17727870) Journal
              Apple is locking out other hardware makers from being able to play music purchased from iTunes.

              Uh, no. This should be changed to: "Apple is locking out other hardware makers from being able to play music purchased from iTunes with no extra effort ."

              Right now, you can buy music from iTunes, burn them to a CD or a CD-RW, then rip them in whatever format you want and that your musicplayer supports. Now, it's a hassle for consumers to go through this process [someone did write a script on the Mac to automatically do this process using a CD-RW], but it certainly works.

              Where exactly should the line be drawn? Should iTunes re-encode to wmv [bleh]? Or should Apple be forced to license their DRM for other manufacturers to include in their devices? Then does iTunes [the app] also need to be forced to directly support all these other devices [because it would be a hassle for consumers to use another app to sync their device after buying through iTunes]? Or does it have to be totally licensed, so other's can also 'vend' iTunes DRM'ed music as well [possibly with iTunes needing to also support these other music stores]?

              But I am in agreement that changing the contract terms after the sale and using British laws should be fixed.
              • by gutnor (872759) on Tuesday January 23 2007, @07:23PM (#17730358)
                "Apple is locking out other hardware makers from being able to play music purchased from iTunes with no extra effort ."

                The "no extra effort" is very important. You could always uses Netscape with Windows instead of IE with a little extra effort.
                In this case a heavy iTunes/iPod uses can have his entire collection in iTunes. If that's the case in order to use another player than the iPod the user need to burn its entire collection.

                That would too bad for the user (and a common business practice) but when you reach a certain importance on a market, authorities can blame you for this "extra effort". They must do it for a monopoly, but they can also do it to achieve specific goals.

                I think the EU (at least France and Germany ) has in mind to force portability of various DRM to open the market ( concurrency on product features instead of compatibility matrix ) In that case they go for the biggest player first and others will follow.

                How Apple will do that? EU says nothing as far as I know. But if Apple doesn't comply they will simply follow Microsoft path: they will be fined millions euro per day until they release the complete documentation and keys of their DRM.

  • Bout time. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by elcid73 (599126) on Tuesday January 23 2007, @01:47PM (#17725672) Homepage
    Apple, I'll still choose to buy music from you because you continue to offer the most seemless system for music management. Just don't force me to do it. You made a good system, just trust in it.
  • by sdo1 (213835) on Tuesday January 23 2007, @01:48PM (#17725698) Journal
    What a great country I live in. Here we have legislators in the pockets of media companies proposing laws that would require DRM [arstechnica.com], but in Europe, the legislators (apparantly acting on behalf of the populus, which is what I thought the "of the people, by the people, and for the people" US government is SUPPOSED to do) are rightly saying that DRM is unfair to the people.

    Is this a great country, or what?

    Sigh.

    -S

    • by Experiment 626 (698257) on Tuesday January 23 2007, @02:28PM (#17726390)

      ...but in Europe, the legislators ... are rightly saying that DRM is unfair to the people.

      They are? It sounds to me like they are just trying to make digital music player makers, distributors, etc. license each others' DRM schemes to increase DRM interoperability. If they were saying that "DRM is unfair to the people", they could just ban it. That would also address both of their complaints (iTunes songs don't play on non-iPods, iPods don't play DRM-encumbered songs bought elsewhere) as people would use the MP3 format for songs, and it plays on everything.

      • by rbarreira (836272) on Tuesday January 23 2007, @02:41PM (#17726614) Homepage
        DRM is in its infancy and it's going to take awhile to get right.

        In which get right means what? To be even more restrictive? Do you see that or you just have a lot of good faith in the companies and lobbies pushing for DRM?

        On the whole I'd rather be here than anywhere else.

        Enjoy it, and pray for the next DRM schemes not to be much worse. Personally, I'd rather have a government which cleans garbage which is bad for the consumers off of the market.
  • Why Apple? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by kevinbr (689680) on Tuesday January 23 2007, @01:49PM (#17725716)
    Surely it is the job of the RIAA/Record labels to define an open DRM standard. After all they are the ones who demand DRM. Apple did not demand DRM on their own. Of course DRM suits Apple to tie users lightly into the iPod.

    In any case, no user is actually tied - just burn a playlist on to a CD and copy the MP3's to any device.

    Should Wallmart be forced to allow K-Mart to sell goods via the Wallmart checkout systems?

  • Translation: (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Hawthorne01 (575586) on Tuesday January 23 2007, @01:51PM (#17725754)
    "You're being too successful. Please stop."

    Look, I loathe DRM as much as the next guy, but Apple's not using their market dominance to smack around, say, Microsoft from making a run at them. Microsoft is doing a FINE job all by themselves at lousing up their attempts to dethrone Apple. :-)

    Ergo, this is just market forces at work. The market has spoken, and people prefer the iPod and iTunes to the competition. Until there's good evidence that iTunes prevents someone from, say, playing a WMA file on Windows or the like, Apple's in the clear on this. Let them have their success, and stop monkeying with the system.
  • Wrong solution (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TheRaven64 (641858) on Tuesday January 23 2007, @01:52PM (#17725770) Homepage Journal

    DRM, by definition, causes vendor lock-in. If DRM schemes were licensed under a fair and non-discriminatory policy then they would not work, because anyone who wanted to get around them would be able to get the specification. You could even legally create an open source application which did all of the rights checking inside #ifdefs so if someone defined the IGNORE_DRM symbol then they could compile a version that decrypted the DRM'd content but didn't apply any restrictions. This wouldn't even be illegal, since they would be distributing the version that respected the DRM and end users would be applying the modification.

    The correct solution, then, is not for lawmakers to go after Apple, but for them to go after DRM in general. Except on books [pingwales.co.uk], where it makes perfect sense.

    • Re:Wrong solution (Score:5, Interesting)

      by modeless (978411) on Tuesday January 23 2007, @04:06PM (#17727758) Journal
      There is no need for lawmakers to "go after" DRM; it is only necessary for them to stop protecting it. It's ironic: these countries are "calling" for Apple to make it possible to play iTunes files on other hardware, when software to enable this already exists. It's called myFairTunes6. If it was simply made legal, then problem solved!

      Imagine a country in which it was legal to make and even sell software/hardware for the explicit purpose of breaking DRM for interoperability purposes. Software companies could openly employ DRM-breakers like DVD Jon and muslix64. You could go to the store and buy a copy of DeCSS or BackupHDDVD or myFairTunes6, only with user-friendly interfaces developed by paid coders. With the full resources of a completely legal software/hardware company at the disposal of DRM-breakers, it is quite obvious that *no* form of DRM would stand a chance.
  • Or what? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Jerry Rivers (881171) on Tuesday January 23 2007, @02:08PM (#17726072)
    "Norway has now given Apple a new deadline of September of this year to change its policies...."

    Or else they will send a letter to Apple telling them how upset they are.
  • by Jumperalex (185007) on Tuesday January 23 2007, @02:09PM (#17726096)
    Without getting into the "correctness" of the EU's position ("just don't buy it" speaks loudly to me) I fail to see the issue here.

    Instead of forcing Apple/et al to open up their standards, simply make it legal to break that very DRM if it isn't open. You will very quickly see applications for sale to do it (come out from the shadows) and the Apples of the world will be motivated to change to an open standard.
  • mhhmm (Score:4, Insightful)

    by jm.one (655706) on Tuesday January 23 2007, @02:11PM (#17726124)
    1. Norway is not part of the EU. 2. I cant see how actually an EU country is doing something here.. only organizations that work in this countries.... Conclusion: Catchy but wrong title
    • by D4rk Fx (862399) on Tuesday January 23 2007, @01:49PM (#17725710) Homepage
      Am I missing something here?
      Yes you are. The only place that can put DRM in the songs that will play on the iPod, is iTunes. Other places want to be able to put DRM in their songs, and have them be compatible with the iPod. Apple is essentially locking people into buying from iTunes if they want to buy music from big record labels online. Yes, there are alternatives to buying DRM'ed, but their legality is still not confirmed.
        • by VJ42 (860241) on Tuesday January 23 2007, @02:05PM (#17726012)
          It's not the EU The title is misleading, Norway isn't even part of the EU! France and Germany, as sovreign nations, are following Norway's example. It dosn't appear to be anything to do with the EU at all.
          • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 23 2007, @03:10PM (#17727094)
            France and Germany, as sovreign nations, are following Norway's example.

            One might add, that - at least for the German side - it is not "Germany" (or the German government), but the "Verbraucherzentrale", which is a non-profit organization with task to support consumers. They are (partly) sponsored by the German state(s), but they are not a state organisation, ie this is not a political decision.
    • by a16 (783096) on Tuesday January 23 2007, @01:53PM (#17725792)

      If you don't like the iPod, don't buy one.

      If you don't like iTunes and Apple's DRM scheme, don't buy from the Apple music store.


      I like my iPod. I own an iPod.

      I don't like the iTunes music store. I'd quite like to try out some of these subscription services, ignoring the DRM aspect (which I'm addressing now) I quite like the idea of paying "rent" to have access to a huge music library. And if someone did the same for films I'd like that too, I'd happily pay a fairly big monthly fee to the music and movie people to get unlimited digital viewing of whatever they produce.

      What these countries are trying to do is let you use any music player with any music store, and vice versa, and hopefully get rid of the extra DRM problems created by all of this in the mean time. And it doesn't seem to be exclusive to iTunes, it applies to everyone. I'm certainly hoping for these kind of changes, more choice is nver a bad thing.
    • by argoff (142580) * on Tuesday January 23 2007, @02:49PM (#17726740)
      Am I missing something here?


      YES! You see, the music industry has this greedy scheme: Get DRM on all devices and then slowly close the door on all free formats. The only problem is that Apple decided to screw the screwers. They put DRM on iTunes that only they could use in addition non DRM formats to ensure wide distribution and seize the marketplace.

      Now the RIAA and the copyright cartel have a huge problem. If they beat down on Apple, then Apple may just say "well screw you, we'll just disable any DRM and all music will be free" - ruining their plan to close the doors. However, if they don't beat down on Apple, then Apple will be the DRM master, also runining their greedy plans to be the DRM masters themselves.

      The RIAA and the music industry are like the Mexican Army. You see, the Mexican Army (mid 1800) had better equiptment, more men, and better training than the US Army, but the US Army was albe to waltz in and kick ass because none of the Mexican generals trusted each other enough to work together. That's why the western half of America today belongs to the US and not Mexico. Well the same is true with DRM, they will kill each other before they will help their peers at their expense.
      • by imsabbel (611519) on Tuesday January 23 2007, @02:06PM (#17726032)
        I hope you are sarcastic...

        That easily takes 15 minutes per cd (burning and ripping), and results in quality loss (as 128kbit AAC is good enough, but re-ripping to another format is a bit much).
        The time aspect alone makes this route prohibitive...
      • by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve (949321) on Tuesday January 23 2007, @02:07PM (#17726038)
        You said:
        I own music that I bought from iTunes.
        and:
        I paid for that music, it's mine

        Actually, one of the problems with DRMed media is that the record and movie companies don't view that you have bought anything. They view it that you have rented it for play on one specific device, which means that if you want an iTunes purchase to play on, say, Zune, you need to buy it again for Zune.
        • by MartinG (52587) on Tuesday January 23 2007, @02:30PM (#17726426) Homepage Journal
          That's not a good analogy at all.

          There is a good reason why screws are and drill bits are available in different sizes. Some jobs warrant larger screws (shelves that carry more weight, etc.)

          Typically the user will decide the size required and drill a hole and buy a screw to match. The user _wants_ differing sizes sometimes.

          Now, what is the reason I would _want_ to pay for some music that only works on a subset of playback machines? Or want to pay for a music player that didn't play any of my existing collection?

          The people making screws in different sizes are not deliberately limiting what the user can do with them. It's the nature of them that creates a limit. Conversely, the nature of digital data is that it can easily be copied to other devices. It takes interference from the manufacturer to create artificial limitations. This is where the problems lies.
      • by elcid73 (599126) on Tuesday January 23 2007, @02:02PM (#17725952) Homepage
        Or realize it but don't care. Last time I brought this up I got blasted by Slashdot because people seem to think that just because I don't want golden, infinite access to every track purchased since I was 5 years old that that somehow means I have horrible taste in music. Slashdot group thing seems to completely neglect the fact that a dollar for a track is worth it (to me) to get a good amount of use in a very convenient manner (where convenient means: purchase, sync, correct meta-data, no virus, searching, ethical dilemas,etc...) ...but if tomorrow I lose the song, I'm not going to miss out considerably. If I really like and want to keep something- I'd just go buy the whole CD. Or... just get over it. That 99cents is the price I pay for "easy"