Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

iPhone Business Model Hits a Snag in France

Posted by Zonk on Sat Oct 06, 2007 04:33 PM
from the open-is-as-open-does dept.
Serhei writes "It seems like the iPhone might not be released in France by this holiday season, since French requires by law that all cell phones sold there must be obtainable in an unlocked version. Apple will not be able to do so, since it has launched with a 5-year exclusivity agreement with AT&T. That deal will probably require exclusivity worldwide to avoid grey-market imports. (In return for this agreement Apple receives a large share of AT&T's monthly revenues from iPhone subscribers.) If the iPhone falls through in France, the country can join Belgium and a potentially long list of other countries with unlocking laws, whose Apple fans will have to make do with other, less Apple-y phones. Note that there is currently no mention of the iPhone on the Apple France page."
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived.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.
  • Good news! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by OdinOdin_ (266277) on Saturday October 06 2007, @04:38PM (#20882685)
    This is excellent, it means those EU countries which won't accept iPhone will have to churn out something thats a whole lot better, this is good news for consumers!
    • Re: (Score:2, Redundant)

      I am sure that Apple are in legal hot waters in the entire E.U. It is my understanding that tying the sale of one product (the iPhone) to another (a mobile phone contract) is illegal anywhere in the E.U. Probably why phone unlocking is common place in the E.U. You can get around it to some extent if the phone is being subsidised by the mobile phone company. However by all accounts this is not the case with the iPhone.
      • Re:Good news! (Score:4, Informative)

        by Richard_at_work (517087) <[moc.liamg] [ta] [ecirpdrahcir]> on Saturday October 06 2007, @05:30PM (#20883093)
        You understand wrong - there is no EU wide law making the tying of products illegal, otherwise the entire mobile market in the UK would have been in deep shit years ago.
        • Re:Good news! (Score:5, Informative)

          by anticypher (48312) <anticypherNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Saturday October 06 2007, @09:19PM (#20884467) Homepage
          There are no EU wide laws. There are directives, from which countries create their own versions as laws that meet local customs, historical precedent, and local lobbying/corruption influence.

          There are strong anti-tying directives, to keep the american-style business model (microsoft, walmart) from damaging the economy here. France has consumer protection laws at least as strong as those in Germany, and most countries here have varying levels of enforcement. The UK has some of the weakest consumer protection laws, and with OfCom, no enforcement whatsoever.

          I've been hearing more iPhone rumors this week, the biggest is T-Mobile has put their rollout plans on hold because they could not show the regulator the required unlocking function or unlocked phones. O2 in the UK is safe, because even though they will be violating laws there, the fines will be years down the road and only then a tiny percentage of the profits made.

          There are no other populous countries in Europe where the iPhone could be sold without an unlocked version. Apple has really shot themselves in the head with this move. By locking themselves out of the largest GSM market in the world, they can't hope to achieve any kind of marketshare.

          the AC
            • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

              Spoken like a true American who doesn't have a clue about European law. Give me one example of the EU forcing a good product out of the market. Give me the definition of a 'good' product, and tell me what that has to do with the issue at hand.
              You think you have a good phone selection? We can use any phone we want on any network we want. We have locked phones too of course, but the providers are required to unlock them if the contract with the customer has expired and the customer asks for it. This is to ens
            • Re:Good news! (Score:4, Insightful)

              by BorgDrone (64343) on Sunday October 07 2007, @04:08AM (#20886333) Homepage

              Because they limited the ability of business to make money on a product;

              Nokia doesn't seem to have a problem making a profit selling unlocked phones, neither does SonyEricsson, Samsung, LG, HTC etc. Apple could have sold way more phones if it had been available worldwide, unlocked and without a plan, just like e.g. the iPod.

              And they should have released in Europe first, by the time the iPhone was released in the US, it was high-tech for the US market, but not so much for the EU market. by the time it arrives in Europe, it's outdated. Sure it has a nice user interface, but it misses a lot of the features people expect, like UMTS or HSDPA.
              • amen! (Score:3, Interesting)

                You know the iPhone will remain only EDGE noy 3G in Europe. Outdated is putting it mildly.

                It'll be sweet if he EU has Nokia's clone first. Nokia's clone might not have quite as slick a user interface. But I'll bet al the Nokia lovers prefer it. And there's no doubt it'll have way way more features.

            • Normally I would agree on most things with respect to competition being better in the US. HOWEVER, with respect to cellular phones the US has its head up its own arse. The telcos in the US just don't get it, and neither does the government. Year after year the US is behind the world's market and why? Simple because of point 1.

              Europe, and not just the EU got this one right. They understood that to grow the pie you need to be open and allow choice. You need to allow people to choose whatever phone, and plan t
            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              The consumer protection laws are meant to foster innovation and encourage competition. This kind of phone/provider tying is bad for competition and probably does a lot to keep phone prices artificially high. It's got little if anything to do with "socialism".

              BTW, it's Apple's choice not to enter the European marketplace, not the EU's choice. There's no reason why they couldn't play by the same rules other providers are. Well, except they might have locked themselves in with AT&T.

              Also, while TFS mentions
          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            Except as any mac fanboy will tell you the iphone is not subsidised.

            UK law is similar - an unsubidised phone must be unlocked and with a subsidised phone if you buy your way out of the contract they must provide an unlock code (http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/archive/Oftel/consumer/advice/faqs/mobfaq3.htm)

            A number of people are ready to challenge the apple policy in the UK once the iphone is launched there.
        • Regarding new firmware bricking an unlocked iphone - tampering is the wrong word. You may have modified it, altered it or changed it. Tamper implies a level of deception or inappropriate behaviour. The phone is your property, and is not even subject to a carrier subsidy. When you unlock it, you are not tampering with it. You are modifying it. In actuality, you are *repairing* it. Having it locked to one carrier is brain damage. You are simply correcting the brain damage.

          I am aware of an effort under
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      good news for consumers!

      No, it means they can't get a product they want. It doesn't mean that they can get the product on different terms than the rest of the world can.

      -jcr
      • Re:Good news! (Score:5, Insightful)

        by timmarhy (659436) on Saturday October 06 2007, @06:36PM (#20883517)
        what are you dense or something? apple isn't holding france to ransom over the iphone, apple is missing out on sales in france. you have the issue back to front my friend.
    • There are many phones that are available in Europe which still don't seem to have seen the light of day in the States. We're not short of choices. Now I'm not sure what particular iPhone capability is seen as being the world beater (I'm one of those old, boring people who just uses my telephone to talk to people....) but I feel that there is still plenty here to make iPhone much harder to sell than perhaps it is in the US.
          • by Dion (10186) on Sunday October 07 2007, @09:04AM (#20887605) Homepage
            I'm sorry you have become so turned against the idea that governments can be on the side of the people.

            A free market is not a goal in itself, just like unlimited freedom of citizens isn't a good idea either.

            It's a good idea to limit the citizens freedom to commit murder, just like it's a good idea to limit the freedom of companies to pollute and corrupt the marketplace.

            Businesses cannot be allowed to rule the marketplace without oversight as it's very profitable for the monopolist to corrupt the market and keep other competitors out, this leads to less competition and less choice for the consumers.

            Even if a company cannot get a monopoly it can still enter into price fixing agreements and again the market and customers lose.

            There are tons of situations where companies just don't do the right thing and the market forces are too weak to steer them straight.

            Saying that any regulation is always worse than no regulation is naive in the extreme.

            Our laws enable us to use any phone on any network and it allows us to change operators easily without changing phones, that has led to very low prices and a wide selection of phones, saying that it's worse to have more competition and lower prices at the cost of a little regulation sounds downright silly.

            A government isn't totalitarian just because it regulates a market, it's a much bigger problem if it started passing laws governing what citizens could do in the privacy of their own home.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Look at the German page, you'll see that T-Mobile is the exclusive carrier there.
    • by Divebus (860563) on Saturday October 06 2007, @04:46PM (#20882745)
      See? We should have let the Germans keep France.
    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Look at the German page, you'll see that T-Mobile is the exclusive carrier there.

      Yes, but the German version will be locked to T-Mobile Germany, so this is no competing product to AT&T in the US. But if an unlocked version would officially available in France, nothing would stop people from reimporting them to the US and using it there, without the control of AT&T. So the (not world wide but US) exclusive deal of AT&T with Apple might prevent Apple from offering an (official) unlocked version anywhere.

    • The summary is a bit off on that point. But I imagine Apple will still hold out, with Orange, for the best deal they can leverage.
  • by Divebus (860563) on Saturday October 06 2007, @04:43PM (#20882719)
    Exclusivity deals with a sub-desirable carrier is working against Apple but "Designed in the USA" is probably hurting them worse in France. Next.
    • by moosesocks (264553) on Saturday October 06 2007, @07:29PM (#20883869) Homepage
      Oh come now. Although I don't want this to turn into a political flamewar, France doesn't have any sort of pervasive hatred toward Americans.

      Yes. France disagreed with the U.S. about Iraq (and yes, even though their reasons for doing so weren't the most honorable, it's fairly safe to say at this point that they were on the "right" side of the debate). However, this was a criticism of a matter of foreign politics and policy, and not some sort of personal vendetta against the entire population of America (especially those evil industrial design firms in California!)

      It was the US who took the issue way too far. Even though it was a joke, serving "freedom fries" in the senate cafeteria was terribly crass.

      Surprise! The world does not hate Americans by default. Most of them don't approve of what the government's doing, but neither do 70% of Americans these days.
    • by AHumbleOpinion (546848) on Saturday October 06 2007, @11:18PM (#20885035) Homepage
      "Designed in the USA" is probably hurting them worse in France.

      Actually Apple is popular in France, major executives have been French.

      You might also check up on current events, when French and German citizens got to vote the results turned out a bit different than what the mass media wanted to portray. Candidates friendly to the US won.

      When I was in Paris last year I was treated very well. Even though my French language skills are nearly non-existent. Disagreeing with a government's policy decision does not translate into a population hating companies or citizens.
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          Oh please!

          The anti-French sentiments in the US that appeared after France refused to join the war on terror in Irak was one big mistake. The French president said at the time "We just want to prevent a friend from making a big mistake".

          Now that most people in the US came to the same conclusion as the French president (albeit a bit late) that Irak was one big mistake, this anti-French attitude can be reduced to nothing more than a troll from the US government. Too bad you fell for it.

          However, the same can b
            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              Where is that picture on which Donald Rumsfeld shakes hands with Sadam Housein? Oh, here it is! [oilempire.us]
              By the way, that picture, taken out of its original context is just as much a troll as what you posted.

              My point still stands. You know what the first victim is in every war.
  • something is missing (Score:5, Informative)

    by microcars (708223) on Saturday October 06 2007, @04:44PM (#20882725) Homepage
    I find it very hard to believe that Apple Legal did not see this coming.

    also- from the link, the "5 year exclusivity agreement with AT&T" is only for US Distribution.
    • by Tim C (15259) on Saturday October 06 2007, @04:58PM (#20882855)
      from the link, the "5 year exclusivity agreement with AT&T" is only for US Distribution.

      Yes, hence the comment about grey-market imports. It's unlikely that AT&T would be happy with the iPhone being sold unlocked in any country, as those unlocked phones could then be imported into the US, despite the exclusivity agreement.

      No, it wouldn't be as easy as if the iPhone was available unlocked in the US, and yes there are ways to unlock an iPhone, but that's not the point. If I were at AT&T and negotiated the deal, I'd have made damn sure that Apple were bound not to sell the iPhone unlocked anywhere, to make it that bit harder to obtain an unlocked one. Remember, you don't have to make it impossible, just hard or risky enough that that people can't be bothered.
  • US legality (Score:3, Informative)

    by jshriverWVU (810740) on Saturday October 06 2007, @04:46PM (#20882755)
    Wasn't there a case this year and a law passed where phone could legally be unlocked by the consumer. Cell phones and printers [wired.com]
  • by mark-t (151149) <markt@@@lynx...bc...ca> on Saturday October 06 2007, @04:52PM (#20882803) Journal
    But couldn't Apple have just prevented this whole mess if they had charged like $1500 for the iPhone, and offered a $750 mail-in rebate for purchasers who signed a 5-year contract with AT&T?
  • errors in summary (Score:5, Informative)

    by venicebeach (702856) on Saturday October 06 2007, @05:12PM (#20882969) Homepage Journal
    This has nothing to do with AT&T.

    Apple has already announced an exclusive deal in France with Orange (France telecom), and it's this deal that is in danger because of the law. Apple is partnered with T-mobile in Germany and O2 in Britain, so this really isn't about any worldwide exclusivity for AT&T.

    AppleInsider's report on this situation. [appleinsider.com]
    • by v1 (525388) on Saturday October 06 2007, @05:43PM (#20883165) Homepage Journal
      That's actually a very good idea for them. The big argument right now is that Apple can't release an unlocked phone in another market due to grey market import of unlocked phones. Soooo, release it locked by another carrier in a new market. In this way the two markets do not compete, and yet consumers in both markets can obtain and use the product.

      This is probably Apple's original plan. A year from now we are very likely to see the iPhone for sale in 1/2 dozen markets, each locked to a single provider in that market.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        That's actually a very good idea for them. The big argument right now is that Apple can't release an unlocked phone in another market due to grey market import of unlocked phones. Soooo, release it locked by another carrier in a new market.

        I don't see how this solves the problem brought up by this article. Apple can't just sell the phone locked to another provider, French law says it has to be available with NO provider as well, even if they do a partnership. If that happens a load of those unlocked Apple i

  • by suv4x4 (956391) on Saturday October 06 2007, @05:24PM (#20883057)
    Only months from now, the other companies competing on the cellphone market will release their brand new iPhone clones (Nokia, looking at you).

    What is the iPhone? It's just a phone with nice easy interface on a large touchscreen. It's not terribly hard to copy, nor is it illegal.

    If Apple decided not to sell in France and other countries because it can't have 100% exclusivity with one provider, the other companies will fill their niche just fine. The only loser is Apple themselves.
  • by zuki (845560) on Saturday October 06 2007, @05:50PM (#20883219) Journal
    ...what are the terms of the deal that made Apple so giddy about 'locking in' with AT&T for FIVE YEARS!!!

    The argument is that Apple obviously has legal counsel who foresaw all of these problems (risk of class action, being made illegal in certain countries, etc...)
    Yet they do not have any problem doing this for what (in hardware evolution time) is several lives long, and they are basically risking everything on this gamble.

    What could it be that made the pot so sweet that they went with this deal on a debut product?

    And on the opposite side of the coin, what could have been so incredibly bad about offering the phone unlocked with a SIM card slot
    that they, -who pride themselves in public for being so 'open'- did not see that as a viable option?

    Do they act so arrogant that they don't even want to please all of the international travelers who swap SIM cards
    every time they arrive in a new country? Someone, please drop some science on us. As it is, it makes no logical sense.

    (Oh yeah, and BTW Steve, if you happen to read this, just email me the 411 directly...! KTHXBYE)

    Z.
  • You'd think (Score:3, Insightful)

    by FranTaylor (164577) on Saturday October 06 2007, @05:59PM (#20883283)
    With all the corporate-induced environmental disasters, wars, etc. in the world, that people would find something more important to get excited about than the terms and conditions for a cell phone.
  • What? (Score:3, Funny)

    by sebastianboethius (457437) on Saturday October 06 2007, @06:17PM (#20883407)
    If i were to meet steve jobs right now i would slap him.
    • by jcr (53032) <jcr@mac. c o m> on Saturday October 06 2007, @04:59PM (#20882857) Journal
      In the end, the iPhone has turned out to be a real disaster.

      It sold a million units in 75 days. How can I make my next product a "disaster" like that?

      -jcr

      • With a potential of several billion phones, I'd sat not that good. But then again, a lot of people will always buy new stuff, and of course all the Apple fanbois. It will be more interesting to see the sales figures over the first few years and then form a more valid opinion than based on the first 75 days.
        Personally, I was interested in the iPhone, but I'm an old fox, so I decided to wait and see and right now, I will never buy one. I don't like the way Apple and AT&T did this, nor do I like what is c
          • Before I started using iPhone, I thought that the lack of 3G was a minor disappointment in the design. After using it a few months, I realized that I'm in a WiFi hotspot so often that I really don't miss 3G. The applications perform well enough over EDGE to use them when I need to do that, which isn't very often. Sure, 3G would be great, and I'll be excited when the iPhone 3G happens, but the lack of this feature really is a simple design trade-off right now, and I get a better battery life in the curren
            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              WiFi is nice, if you're in a large city with many open APs and lax laws. Which means that in 90% of everywhere it's retty useless because you're either not in a city with a sufficiently large concentration of APs, the APs aren't open (note that pretty much all manufacturers have switched to using encryption as the default setting) or using someone else's AP without permission is illegal (e.g. in Germany you can be slapped with a number of charges, however they only really stick if the network had at least W
    • by erroneus (253617) on Saturday October 06 2007, @05:26PM (#20883069) Homepage
      It's not a disaster yet. I have at least two users at the office with iPhone and they are 'in love' with them for the moment. One even converted to Mac in the process. They are "forgiving" of all the shortcomings encountered thus far. Somehow the "coolness" outweighs the negatives for the moment.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      They made their mistakes long ago with Apple III/Lisa and/or other lines and have done nothing but win consumers over since then.

      ...With the IIvx, and the Newton, and the clone licensing program, and the Performa line, and the PowerBook 5300, and... ;)

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      Even though the iPhone is by far the most popular smart phone, it has the cheapest device plans. Treo users can choose carriers but they always pay much more.

      You are dead wrong.

      Sprint's unlimited Power Vision (3G) service is $15/mo for regular joes. We won't even mention the SERO plans that start at $30/mo for 500 minutes, unlimited data, unlimited SMS & MMS, unlimited mobile-to-mobile, and free nights/weekends starting at 7.

      AT&Tingular charges $20/mo for unlimited data with 200 SMS/MMS messages.

      Now