Slashdot Log In
Norway Outlaws iTunes
Posted by
CowboyNeal
on Thu Jan 25, 2007 10:37 PM
from the run-out-of-town dept.
from the run-out-of-town dept.
haddieman notes that while many people are getting more and more annoyed at DRM, Norway actually did something about it. The PC World article explains: "Good intentions, questionable execution. European legislators have been giving DRM considerable attention for a while, but Norway has actually gone so far as to declare that Apple's iTunes store is illegal under Norwegian law.
The crux of the issue is that the Fairplay DRM that is at the heart of the iTunes/iPod universe doesn't work with anything else, meaning that if you want access to the cast iTunes library, you have to buy an iPod."
Related Stories
[+]
"DVD Jon" Reverse Engineers FairPlay 299 comments
breun writes to bring us up to date on the doings of Jon Lech Johansen, known as "DVD Jon" after he cracked CSS encryption at the age of 15. As reported by GigaOM's Liz Gannes, Johansen has now reverse-engineered Apple's FairPlay DRM — but not to crack it. Instead Johansen's company, DoubleTwist Ventures, wants to license the tech to media companies shut out by Apple from playing their content on the iPod. And, soon, on the iTV. Johansen could end up selling a lot of hardware for Apple.
[+]
Apple To Play Fairer With FairPlay? 153 comments
NewbieMonster writes "According to tech.co.uk, Apple is about to license its Fairplay DRM to Made for iPod accessory manufacturers. It's reported that Apple will also allow streaming of protected AAC content via USB. Could this signal a move to allowing other music players to access and play ITMS content?" From the article: "The expected announcements could signal a move on Apple's part to take some of the sting out of its Fairplay DRM which has come in for a great deal of criticism over recent months. It may also be a way of keeping Made For iPod makers onside, as the draw of the Microsoft Zune becomes stronger." Anyone noticed the draw of the Microsoft Zune becoming stronger?
This discussion has been archived.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.
Good! (Score:5, Interesting)
Now, when are they going to outlaw all the other DRM-infested music stores? If "Fairplay" is unfair, then so is "PlaysForSure!"
Re:Good! (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Good! (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Good! (Score:5, Funny)
You can use the Nano, the Shuffle, the Mini, the Photo, the Video, etc. And not just Apple iPod's, but Hp iPod's too. Not to mention bot PC's and Mac's, which Plays4Sure can't. What is specific about that?
Parent
Re:Good! (Score:5, Insightful)
What's stopping a competing company from making aftermarket ECUs? Nothing, I suspect. Ford hasn't done anything to stop third parties from making parts that fit in a Ford, nor have they done anything to stop competing auto companies from making cars that accept Ford parts.
Apple, OTOH, has done exactly that.
One purpose of FairPlay is to appease the record company. The other purpose, which is arguably more important, is to enforce lock-in between iPod and iTunes. This promotes the iPod by (1) tying the most popular, best-known music store to a single line of players, and (2) encouraging iPod users to build up a library of songs that will become practically useless if they switch brands, effectively threatening iPod owners to keep buying Apple (except those who get all their music by ripping CDs rather than from iTMS).
Parent
Re:Good! (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Norwegian Consumer Council goes after MS too (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Good! (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Good! (Score:5, Insightful)
See, they have this nation over there called Norway, bunch of Democratic Socialists, and the people that live there, they have all sorts of gadgets and music distribution networks and formats and whatnot, and they think that it sucks when all these different companies decide to screw the end user and try to make them pay over and over to listen to the same bunch of songs by the same bunch of retired or dead musicians, or force them to buy their hardware upgrade from the same company so they don't lose their music library.
So they made it illegal to do that to people.
You can talk all you want about the value of these business relationships and the investments and monopolies till you're blue in the face, but it's really kind of irrelevant. The Norwegians decided that these sorts of arrangements amount to unfair business practices, so unless Apple wants to play by their rules, it appears Apple is free to go peddle their shit somewhere else.
Parent
Re:Good! (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Good! (Score:5, Insightful)
While I wonder the same thing, the Zune store is currently only available in the US.
Parent
Re:Good! (Score:5, Insightful)
Since when?! DRMed CDs, DVDs, HD-DVDs, BluRays... they play on a multitude of different devices, from different companies. Windows doesn't limit what hardware you can run it on, and all the other 3rd party software that only runs on Windows? Well that's the people who write the software's decision.
Norway has outlawed iTunes because you don't have the choice of what hardware from what company to listen to it on. It's Apples' players only.
Parent
Re:Good! (Score:5, Insightful)
Really? Since when? Does 'Monopoly Suit' mean 'pass' in your world?
Hell, most of the developing world is
Meanwhile, Apple's 80% market share of iPod/iTunes zombies notwithstanding, it's the only DRM maker that doesn't license out its format. It's not the former that's got Norway up in arms, it's the latter.
Parent
Re:Good! (Score:5, Insightful)
Impossible. Firstly - do you know how many combinations that is? Just with VBR files, you have each different value for the lower bitrate AND upper bitrate bounds, multiply by each of the quality bias values, multiply by stereo (joint vs seperate) options, multiply by frequency options (44100, 48000)... THEN you could just drop or raise the volume of the whole track by 1%, and get completely different codes for each of those combo's... then 2%... or increase the bass by 1%... in the end, you're probably talking about so many different values, that you'd get hash colisions with a file that isn't that copyrighted material, which would prove the whole system flawed.
Secondly - you'd have to publish (in some form or another) all of those codes to show you created them.
So no, it's not funny at all that they haven't tried it.
Parent
Apple has a choice (Score:5, Funny)
It sounds like they've decided it's either Norway or the Highway.
Forget Norway!! (Score:5, Funny)
Heads exploding (Score:5, Insightful)
Norway == socialists == doubleplus good
DRM == doubleplus ungood
iTunes == Apple == doubleplus good
Norway outlaws iTunes? What is a good gay socialist Mac user going to do? What is the right side to be on?
Ok, trolling is fun and all, but seriously.
I think it's a load. People have the right to be stupid. Without that as Right 0 no other "Right" can be read as anything other than "You have the Right to ____ unless we, the anointed elite, think decide your exercise of it is dumb." It's why the 1st Amendment is safe so long as -both- Noam Chomsky and StormFront were free to rant and rave but didn't survive John McCain & Russ Feingold.
I'd never buy from the iTunes store because I think the deal offered is one sided, shortsighted and stupid. But I'll defend Steve's Right to try to sell it and your Right to freely enter into a license agreement with him.
Not so much that you need an iPod to listen (Score:5, Insightful)
If you buy many albums from the iTunes sture you can enjoy them and all is rosy. Then two years later the battery on your iPod has died, so you look at what's available. You think there are some nice offerings from creative or sandisk but, trouble is, you can't listen to any of your existing purchases. Your locked to Apple.
It's well boyond time that other players were allowed to license Fairplay, and that other music providers be allowed to sell Fairplay encoded tracks.
One choice better than no choice? (Score:5, Interesting)
This tends to be the self serving argument monopolists use when justifying their actions. "By enhancing the user experience by bundling a product the user experience is enhanced. Depriving them of our monopolistic business model harms them."
In my view, choice is never bad. Competition is good. Apple won their market share by out-innovating the rest of the pack. But history is full of examples of the stagnation occurs once a market is consolidated. So I think other players should be allowed to work with iTunes.
Re:My Talk With Richard Stallman About This (Score:5, Insightful)
"Not letting them use DRM" would be a Hell of a lot better than what Norway's actually doing, which is giving Microsoft's "PlaysForSure" DRM (which is just as proprietary!) preferential treatment.
Parent
Re:My Talk With Richard Stallman About This (Score:5, Insightful)
Really? Then show me where I can get a software player not made by Microsoft capable of playing PlaysForSure Media! In particular, show me where I can get one that works on operating systems other than Windows!
The only "fair" regulations would be ones that outlaw DRM entirely. To do what they've actually done -- especially when done in the name of "protecting consumers" -- is a farce!
Parent
Re:And... (Score:5, Informative)
Also, when you are in a dominant position as an online music store, you kind of have advantages over all of the competition, so what they're doing is more related to what Microsoft did with Internet Explorer.
Last but not least, you must remember that newly formed laws on computer software cannot be compared to the laws of items.
Parent
Gratuitous incompatibility (Score:5, Insightful)
Imagine that every car manufacturer operated a chain of gas stations. All cars could run on the same fuel, but every brand of car had a bizarrely shaped fuel intake that would only accept the corresponding bizarrely shaped nozzle. You could only fill up a Toyota at a Toyota gas station, a Ford and a Ford station, etc.
Further, if you dared to try to create adapter for universal fueling, you'd be thrown in jail and fined tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars for violating the laws the big car companies paid politicians all around the world to pass, to protect there little lock-in schemes.
You could either go along with such BS, and happily sing the tune the car companies want you to sing ("If you don't like it, you can don't have to buy a car! No one's forcing you! Just by a bicycle and shut up already!"), or you could cheer along the efforts to end protected for deliberately imposed incompatibility and improve things for consumers instead.
Parent
Re:Gratuitous incompatibility (Score:5, Insightful)
The thing that irritates me the most about DRM is that it's illegal to circumvent. I have no problem with companies choosing to use DRM, and I have no problem with companies pursuing pirates in court. But when the DRM limits legitimate uses of the media and customers are stripping the DRM solely so they can use it on another platform, I have a problem with legal action being taken against them. Granted, if the DMCA didn't protect DRM there would be commercial investments dedicated to fighting DRM and it wouldn't last long at all, but I still don't feel consumers ought to have to worry about using their media the way they want to.
Parent
Re:Oh, F'ing please (Score:5, Informative)
Obviously I must be a moron then, because when I tried that this message popped up:
Parent