Virgin Accuses Apple of Abusing Monopoly 394
worm eater writes "The Register reports that VirginMega (Virgin Group's online music venture in France) is asking the French antitrust authorities to force Apple to license the FairPlay DRM. If France agrees with Virgin, will this be a blessing in disguise for Apple, making their DRM format the defacto standard, or will it be the downfall of the mighty iTunes Music Store?"
This Raises An Excellent Question (Score:5, Interesting)
This raises and excellent question: Is Apple a:
A) Technology (I.P.) Company
or
B) Hardware Company
or
C) Service Company
Apple started as A & B and has dabbled in C, but IMS is solidy B & C. With their deals with Motorola (iPod tech in phones) and HP (own brand of iPod) they further A & C. If FairPlay becomes the defacto standard this places them squarely in the A camp again, which actually benefits Motorola and HP, among others who make hardware for them. Will Apple ever allow the Mac line to be made outside the company again, as it was in the Jean Louis Gassée days?
While it all looks rosy for Apple, I can plainly see now how both Sony and Microsoft want to plough into this market, so they can get it all wrong, make people mad (ATRAC3? I thought it said 8 Track!) (my mPod has been 0wn3d!) and lose lots of money.
Re:This Raises An Excellent Question (Score:5, Insightful)
If said RECORD LABEL wants the monopoly to end, they should maybe consider the (literally) hundreds of companies willing to get into the online music distribution business. After all, a RECORD LABEL would have the power to license songs to any other business they choose.
This is absurd. If Apple has a monopoly, it's because the RECORD LABELS gave it to them. This is called playing both sides against the middle.
Re:This Raises An Excellent Question (Score:5, Informative)
Re:This Raises An Excellent Question (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:This Raises An Excellent Question (Score:5, Interesting)
When Apple licensed clones of their computers, it was intended to broaden the MacOS userbase. What happened instead was the MacOS userbase remained the same size, and Apple lost money to the clonemakers. Thus they soon rescinded the licenses and went back to doing what they always did.
Doubtless this is part of the reason Apple's reluctant to license FairPlay. As long as they control both it and the iPod hardware, they can keep the iPod/iTunes experience Insanely Great(TM) and make more money to boot. But until the iPod and iTMS actually reach monopoly levels of domination, licensing FairPlay would just decrease the quality of that experience without increasing Apple's marketshare.
Re:This Raises An Excellent Question (Score:5, Interesting)
Indeed, and the reason for this is that the cloners were very limited in what they were allowed to do. They weren't allowed to design their own motherboards, for example, but rather had to buy them from Apple. The rest of their design had to be approved by Apple.
So it is not surprising they failed to grow the Mac userbase, since Apple would only let them produce machines that were essentially exactly the same as Apple's Macs. One of the cloners (Power Computing, I believe) showed off at trade shows a couple prototypes, including a cool laptop back when Apple didn't have any cool PPC laptops, that would have taken the Mac to new markets, and begged Apple to allow them to sell them, but Apple said no.
Re:This Raises An Excellent Question (Score:3, Informative)
To this day, I still regard the Power Tower Pro as the best Mac ever produced.
That is to say... (Score:5, Interesting)
Second: let's just look at this for a second. One of the StarMax machines included a custom-made PCI card with ethernet and something else (video? SCSI?) on it. The drivers were from Motorola. When the next version of the Mac OS came out, the card simply stopped working because of the way they'd written the drivers. Apple was called over the next week by hundreds of irate StarMax owners.
But I'm sure that if they had just been able to design their own motherboards, everything would have just worked fine and there wouldn't have been any problems with compatibility or anything.
As for the idea that the PowerTowers were the end-all and be-all of Mac-hood, only two things to say. One: they were cheaply made. Things broke. Hardware failed. The case was a generic PC case with flimsy drive-bay doors with plastic fittings that broke off under the slightest bit of pressure. The actual basic design was nice, but the execution *sucked*. And two, especially at that year's MacWorld Expo, PowerComputing sold significantly below cost, because they wanted to entice as many people away from buying a high-end Mac and into their camp. When Apple had really hired people on to cover the low-end while they tried to get the high-end business. Now, you can decide that this was a slimy thing for Apple to do, to try to get someone to shore up their weaknesses rather than steal their best customers. And that's a valid point of view, I suppose. But when it turned around and Apple saw a whole lot of lost sales to people who otherwise would have definitely been buying the highest-end Mac kit, they got miffed.
I would've too. And having worked on a number of Mac clones back then, as a techie, I have to say that none of them were engineered even as well as the PM8500. Which in and of itself was one of the most bone-headed piece of engineering as I have ever seen in all my days.
But at least it was STURDY bone-headed engineering.
-fred
Re:That is to say... (Score:3, Interesting)
>that has gotta be the coolest OldWorld Mac I've ever seen.
I am willing to bet that you are thinking of the design of the 8600. Which was quite similar to the design of the beige tower G3.
It was prettier, it was smoother, it was nicer on the outside. On the inside, it was beautifully designed, and it and the 9600 were the beginning of the 'opens easily, folds out, and everythin
Re:This Raises An Excellent Question (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't disagree with this statement. But I've started to feel that Apple IS missing an opportunity here. I see the question as two-fold: "Will licensing Fairplay lessen Apple's current dominance in the Music market? and Will licensing Fairplay seal AAC and Fairplay as the format and DRM standards for the current music wars?
I don't believe that licensing Fairplay would lessen Apple's current dominance that much. The Mac OS license issue was a different ballgame. It seemed everyone but the high paid business people all agreed that it would sucker punch Apple sales. More importantly, it sucker punched hardware sales which are Apple's bread and butter. Unless you own the market or are a smalltime vendor there just is much money to be made in OS sales.
But for iTMS the hardware is the iPod, and licensing Fairplay will ensure the iPods dominance as a MP3 player for years. I see this as a good thing. People will still use iTunes and iTMS because of the ease of use and tight integration with the iPod. Those who won't probably aren't using iTMS currently, but also DON'T have an iPod. If they purchased an iPod, the likelihood is that they would eventually start purchasing from iTMS. It means Apple has to keep on its toes about the music store features, functions, and all around user experience, but the iPod would dominate for at least another 2-5yrs.
While this first issue is VERY IMPORTANT. I think the second question is JUST AS, if not MORE SO important for Apple, especially at this juncture.
Will licensing Fairplay seal AAC and Fairplay as the format and DRM standards for the current music wars?
Licensing Fairplay before Microsoft hits the music scene would be good for Apple, because currently a lot of people are looking for Microsoft and businesses using Microsoft technologies to save them from Apple. Who knows what the likelihood of success of a Microsoft music store would be? I don't. But I can say, that even if it failed completely (less likely), it still gives Microsoft the ability to promote Windows Media DRM as the de-facto delivery standard, which does nothing but contribute to the future decline of iPod sales.
Imagine if RealNetworks, Napster, and OD2 started offering iPod compatible offerings. That would push iPod sales. But also satisfy a number of people's needs for compatibility. Many of those people who want Apple to support WMV would just shut-up, because they don't care about wmv, they care about playing their music on their mp3 player. (It wouldn't satisfy the
I think the time is coming for Apple to license Fairplay. I don't want
i am a bigger dork than you! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:This Raises An Excellent Question (Score:5, Insightful)
No, they never will. At least they won't if they value their company, their products, their income, and the people who support all that. The Apple clone market was a resounding fuckup. That idiot CEO should be flogged for what he did. He caused an absolute nightmare for support. People didn't call Epson or Umax for tech support. Oh no. They saw the Apple logo and called Apple for support. The Umax and Epson clones were the worst of the lot. At an Apple Service Center I worked at we had racks of dead Epson and Umax clones. They couldn't be fixed. The companies refused to honor the warranties. They were POSs. DayStar and Power Computing did a pretty damned good job of making clones (especially the SMP DayStar boxes) but that still didn't fix the support issue. The Radius machines were also junk. The clone "experiment" was far and away a horrible fuckup that we all should hope never happens again.
And it wasn't Jean that licensed the OS and CHRP platform to the cloners. It was Spindler.
Re:This Raises An Excellent Question (Score:5, Funny)
Dunno, FairPlay seems more like S&M to me.
really a virgin? Re:This Raises An Excellent Quest (Score:3, Funny)
that'll teach 'em.
Re:This Raises An Excellent Question (Score:5, Informative)
You are wrong on your other two points too. iPod isn't what I'd call a niche, and record stores still sell orders of magnitude more than online music sites.
Am I missing something? (Score:5, Interesting)
How exactly would this be a blessing in disguise? Wouldn't it just open the door to more iTunes-compatible players to compete with? Or does Apple stand to make a pretty penny by licensing FairPlay to the world?
Re:Am I missing something? (Score:5, Insightful)
Is it in players?
Is it in content?
Is it in distribution?
See, with players they're already licensing the iPod to HP and Motorola.
In content they already have indies as well as major bands.
In distribution they have iTMS for Windows, Mac, and soon Motorola.
If they license Fairplay, that means other people's content is allowed on the network; it also means other people can create their own networks, and it means other people can create their own players!
However if Apple licenses FP in such a way to generate network effects... I would expect Apple to license FP for other players, and maintain control over content and distribution!
Re:Am I missing something? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Am I missing something? (Score:5, Insightful)
you must be new here. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:you must be new here. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:you must be new here. (Score:3, Interesting)
This isn't 2000 anymore.
Re:Am I missing something? (Score:4, Insightful)
Right now there is plenty of competition in the player market. Many players have the same storage capacities as the Ipod, and are cheaper than the ipod.
The storage of the ipod has nothing to do with the profits!
The design of the ipod (and itunes) has everything to do with the profits.
Re:Am I missing something? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Am I missing something? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Am I missing something? (Score:2, Insightful)
To me it looks like they're making money, and maybe people should stop ranting about what Apple should do and look at what's working.
Re:Am I missing something? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Am I missing something? (Score:5, Insightful)
jobs is probably very aware that mac clones nearly killed apple. that's why he killed them when he was brought back on board.
however, with the iPod having lots more share of its market than the macintosh, i think apple has less to worry about if they can get a decent sum from fairplay.
if they can't make a lot of money by licensing fairplay, they do have a lot to lose. itms won't be selling to ipods exclusively anymore, and itms doesn't have the same high margin as the ipod.
Re:Am I missing something? (Score:3, Insightful)
Think back about two decades. Apple had come cool tech and wanted to keep it all for themselves. Microsoft had recently acquired some tech that wasn't nearly as cool or groundbreaking as Apple's BUT they let the other children play with it.
Look at where those two companies are today. Both are going strong, but the one who shared with the other children is in a much stronger position.
LK
Holy! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Holy! (Score:2)
IE-only shoppe (Score:5, Informative)
Pour surfer sur ce site nous vous recommandons d'utiliser Internet Explorer comme navigateur.
Looks like they don't want you using anything but IE to access their rather shitty site. Going in with IE, I can tell you it doesn't seem like there are any Windows-only features there that would justify not accepting other browsers; just doubtless lazy web design. Good example of a site to quote when somebody asks you for a major site that is incompatible with non-IE browsers.
...translation (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:IE-only shoppe (Score:5, Insightful)
The site apparently isn't Windows only -- on a Mac running FireFox and Safari, I get:
Pour surfer sur ce site depuis un Mac vous devez utiliser Internet Explorer 5.2 et supérieur, comme navigateur.
IE has to be one of the absolute worst browsers available for Mac OS X. It's slow, looks terrible, and was the very first thing I deleted from my PowerBook.
The truly galling part is they recommend I use IE 5.2 or better. And I am -- FireFox is better.
So let me get this straight. They don't support Apple Mac OS X users using the default OS X browser (Safari), but they want access to Apple's DRM technology Apple originally created to service the same people who use OS X and Safari. Uh-huh.
Methinks VirginMega needs to fix their own support for Apple before they worry about Apple supporting them.
Yaz.
Re:IE-only shoppe (Score:5, Insightful)
Terrible advice IMHO. The more that other browsers identify as IE, the less likely these lazy designers will ever catch a clue. Do the world a favor and send them an e-mail explaining why you won't be back instead. It might not get through to them, but acquiescing definitely won't.
Just my 40% of a nickel...
Re:IE-only shoppe (Score:3, Funny)
accessability documentation &co and asking them to make sure that anyone they hire has xyz skills (e.g. CSS).
I try not to mention things like 'firefox' or 'linux' in these emails unless it is a particular problem, just industry standards.
iPod needs WMA (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:iPod needs WMA (Score:2)
Especially since iTunes will transcode unprotected WMA... Not the BEST solution, but it is a solution.
Re:iPod needs WMA (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:iPod needs WMA (Score:3, Insightful)
Now what benifit would Apple see by helping Microsoft gain total dominance in the music format wars?
We're in the very fortunate position right now where the dominant music format has no digital rights management built into it (MP3), and where Apple's own format has fairly low restriction DRM built into it, and where there are other formats (ATRAC3, WMA) in competition.
But give Microsoft too much sway by making their format the ubequitous one and they'll be the ones in control. And we've already seen what
Re:iPod needs WMA (Score:3, Informative)
Re:iPod needs WMA (Score:5, Informative)
Slight correction: iTunes is able to transcode WMA on Windows. iTunes on Mac OS X has no such capability.
Yaz.
Heh (Score:3, Funny)
Wouldn't this be good for users too? (Score:3, Insightful)
What is Apple dominant in? (Score:5, Insightful)
But "dominant" is not really applcable yet. Are they dominant in music sales overall? No way. Are they dominant in being able to play music you buy online? Not even that is true, since the percentage of PC's is so much larger than Macs.
Perhaps at some distant point, when online music sales erally exceed physical CD sales (if ever?) then Apple might be called "dominant". In this case it's like a black hole calling the kettle black.
There is even an out if they REALLY want to sell music that can play on an iPod - MP3. Just because that format lacks technological features they would like, does that really give them cause to proclaim Apple is a monopoly that should be forced to share?
It will be interesting to see what the courts make of it.
Re:What is Apple dominant in? (Score:5, Insightful)
You're right on track. If I start a company in a new industry and instantly get 100% market share, does that give new entrants the right to sue me for not licensing my technology? Hell no! Virgin doesn't quite seem to get that just because Apple is the most popular, it hasn't done anything really nasty/illegal to be there.
Sounds like Virgin doesn't really want to compete in this market. It just wants a big chunk of it handed to them.
Re:What is Apple dominant in? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:What is Apple dominant in? (Score:5, Insightful)
Make it the standard (Score:5, Insightful)
Or just burn to CD and re-encode, but who wants to waste cd's and time doing that?
There are also already plugins for Winamp that will play both
Re:Make it the standard (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Make it the standard (Score:3, Interesting)
semi-OT: I got rid of my (legal) mp3s recently cos all they did was make backups a pain and I like to encode in FLAC via Grip now, and play back with XMMS and CrossFade. Having all my CDs as mp3 seemed great until I realised I really only listen to a couple on a regular basis.
What do they whine for? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What do they whine for? (Score:3, Insightful)
In general, when you find yourself saying this, you may need to reconsider the issue. They may be fools, but it's more likely that they have a different, potentially valid, opinion on something. If you think they're stupid, odds are good that they may have a point you have missed.
In this case, Virgin (the record store) and Virgin (the record label) are different companies; the record label was spun off some years ago.
Even b
It might not change much... (Score:5, Interesting)
...at least for now. Unless Virgin can offer a music buying experience that works as seamlessly with the iPod as Apple's - since it's clear that they're trying to sell their tunes to iPod owners - then they'll still be missing the point. I suspect what most people dig most about the iTunes store is integration and ease of use. They aren't terribly concerned about file formats and rights managements schemes. Sure, some are - plenty here on Slashdot, for instance - but I doubt the average person is too concerned by that.
Plus, Apple's the cool music company right now. I just saw someone on the street this morning walking with her nice custom-made iPod purse which still clearly had an Apple logo on it, so you knew it was an iPod in there, and that she dug Apple. I suspect she'd use the iTunes store (except I'm in Canada, alas).
But then, I may be underestimating the tech literacy of the average person. I'd be glad if that were the case.
Pay?!? (Score:3, Funny)
Smithers: But sir, won't we lose our exclusivity?
Burns: Smithers, you bumbling idiot. They may be able to license our DRM, but they'll pay, ooohh, yes, they'll pay...
I don't get Apple's reluctance to do this (Score:2)
Re:I don't get Apple's reluctance to do this (Score:4, Interesting)
Same can be said about iTunes. Just because Apple isn't opening iTMS today doesn't mean they don't have plans to do so in the near future. Everyone just needs to chill out a bit and be patient. Apple is probably biding their time again and tweaking iTunes into a better service until they're ready to take on the market.
Bad thing. (Score:3, Interesting)
hm... (Score:3, Insightful)
There are a dozen online music stores. There are several dozens of portable music players. There are a half-dozen DRM solutions. Apple does not have anything even closely resembling a monopoly in any of these areas.
Talk about abusing Monopoly. (Score:2)
Apple caves (Score:4, Insightful)
Seriously, though, what's preventing Virgin from selling songs that play on an iPod? The copyright holders. Is that Apple's fault?
Oh, the irony (Score:4, Funny)
...of a music company accusing anyone of being an unfair monopoly. And, just to double your irony goodness...accusing Apple.
Bur Apple doesn't *own* FairPlay! (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Bur Apple doesn't *own* FairPlay! (Score:3, Interesting)
wow... that is interesting... I wish I had mod point for you but it looks like other will take care of that.
Im very intersted in this. It seems odd that people would keep bitching at apple to open their standard when it isnt even theirs to open... you would think that one of these companies would have noticed that by now.
Re:Bur Apple doesn't *own* FairPlay! (Score:5, Informative)
T'would be an excellent point, sir, were it only true.
VeriDisc's FairPlay and Apple's FairPlay are not the same thing. Apple's version was indeed developed in-house, as a custom QuickTime-compatible DRM wrapper.
Why do you think Real is browbeating Apple these days over 'opening' the iPod, when they could have otherwise just gone to VeriDisc and bought a license?
Re:Bur Apple doesn't *own* FairPlay! (Score:3, Informative)
Scope is way too narrow... (Score:5, Insightful)
They do have competitors, and those competitors are obliged to compete. If they can't, tough.
Actually... (Score:3, Interesting)
So before you start spouting off on it not being a monopoly, let's see your numbers on Frenc
It's obvious (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:It's obvious (Score:4, Informative)
Also, the point isn't that FairPlay is driving sales of the iPod, but that Apple controls the total user experience of the iPod. It controls:
1) The UI & hardware of the iPod
2) The loading of music, playlist creation, etc. on the computer you use to interface with the iPod via iTunes
3) The online purchasing of music for use on your iPod
Apple, as they usually do, wants to have total control over all of those factors. It's the same damned thing they do with their OS & Hardware combo and their retail experience. They want to control everything, not because they're control freaks, but because "if you want it done right, do it yourself".
This Is Nuts. (Score:5, Insightful)
Virgin is just plain wrong. Forcing Apple to open FairPlay would be a miscarige of justice, there is no good reason to do it other than to stick it to Apple because other companies are mad they aren't as successfull.
Re:This Is Nuts. (Score:3, Interesting)
Virgin Tech Guy: "We can't do that sir."
Virgin Manager: "Why not?"
Virgin Tech Guy: "The only protected format that runs on them is Apple's Fairplay AAC."
Virgin Manager: "I thought they were MP3 players".
Virgin Tech Guy: "If we sell MP3's, people can copy them wherever they like".
Virgin Manager: "Screw that. Apple's format is the only protected one on iPod?"
Virgin Tech Guy: "Yup."
Virgin Manager: "So they have a
Re:This Is Nuts. (Score:4, Insightful)
Can I buy a portable player that isn't an iPod that can play the DRM'd iTunes AAC files?
No?
Well, then, sounds like they're using their strength in one market to sell product in another.
Re:This Is Nuts. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:A distinction... (Score:3, Insightful)
A double-edged sword.. (Score:3, Funny)
If you can't compete... (Score:3, Funny)
Apple's Digital Hub (Score:4, Interesting)
Not what I expected... (Score:3, Funny)
Considering the title, I was expecting something like this:
Ok, I'll stop now.
Apple A Monopoly? (Score:3, Funny)
by extension? (Score:5, Interesting)
Ok, so, say for instance, a compay makes software that runs on only one platform. The software is an incredible hit and fuels the sale of this platform. Other companies want this killer app on their platform. Do they have a right to force the original company to make the software for their platforms?
Draw your own conclusions, but my opinion is thusly: hells freakin' no. Say my company makes software for Apple hardware (and by extension OSX) and it's so freakin' incredible that everyone goes out and buys OSX. No on, but _no one_ has the right to force me to port my app to their platform. It's _my_ software.
I see a similar thing here: Apple has this "app" (AAC wrapped in FairPlay) and it works on the iPod. Apple hasn't stopped anyone from writing other "apps" for the iPod (within the specs of the iPod, of course, just like you'd have to write hardware specific stuff for PPC), but it shouldn't be forced to license that "app" to anyone else.
Now, it _may_ be really good for them to let other people use FairPlay, but I don't feel I have the information I need to make that call.
I must be missing something.? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I must be missing something.? (Score:3, Insightful)
the whole point of NOT using mp3s is to restrict people to when/where/how they can use their purchase.
Re:I must be missing something.? (Score:3, Insightful)
Well I realize that, but I don't understand how Apple refusing to share their particular DRM scheme hurts Virgin in any way since you can play *any* mp3 on an iPod, no matter where you get it. So I don't understand how specifically Apple is hurting Virgin's business. I mean, Virgin can still start up an online music store to sell me music and I'll be ab
Re:I must be missing something.? (Score:3, Insightful)
Virgin (nor any other big lable) will not sell non-drm music.
If their DRM music can't be played on the iPod they lose out on millions of potential customers.
VirginMega?!? (Score:5, Funny)
I bet the French government will back Virgin just 'cause Apple's DRM wasn't programmed in French or something.
Future of My iTunes... (Score:3, Insightful)
I bought about seven songs, then decided that the hassle factor (burning songs to CD, then converting to MP3 or OGG for my portable device) was too high. If they become the standard, then I'll give up completely on downloadable music, and stick to buying CDs from non-RIAA labels.
Gotta go - my high horse has the munchies.
The answer is NEITHER (Score:5, Insightful)
What it WILL be, is a perfect reason for Virgin to buy up Real -- who recently reverse-engineered FairPlay -- as a new outlet for Virgin's catalogue, bypassing Apple.
Muddy the DRM waters till it goes away ... (Score:4, Interesting)
The bigger the DRM mess becomes, the less likely it is to survive.
It's absolutely not right that we're buying file formats instead of content. Anything that muddies the DRM waters, as they currently exist, works for me.
A double edged sword (Score:4, Insightful)
What could have been... (Score:3, Funny)
Here's the question I find interesting (Score:4, Funny)
I don't care if it is good for Apple... (Score:3, Insightful)
Intellectual Property (Score:3, Insightful)
Interface patents create natural monopolies (Score:4, Insightful)
Interface patents do the same thing. It allows a company on one side of that interface to monopolize the sale of the software or hardware on the other side of the interface.
This comes up a lot, expecially when people attempt to use the DMCA to protect their right to do these things.
Interfaces are essentially a language. It has already been tested in court that you can't patent a language, simply because you need to release it into the public domain for it to be useful. Interfaces are a little different - you don't have to release them into the public domain for them to be useful, but you do have to do so if you aren't attempting to hold a monopoly on both ends of its use.
Re:Interface patents create natural monopolies (Score:3, Interesting)
Is the first item music from iTMS? But you do not need to purchase an iPod to play that music. Any computer with the free iTunes software installed will do.
And lastly:
Thanks for getting back to me (Score:3, Informative)
Exactly my point. It is very far from clear cut which is why you can't call it a "monopolistic tactic" without major qualifications and equivications. Two further counterpoints. One, last I heard, one in three mp3 players sold was an iPod. Apple might currently be the most successful player, but it is wrong to claim that they have anything approaching a monopoly position (yet. I'll concede that it could happen.). Second, they're not shutting out the record indust
The real question is... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:SJ is kind of a hypocrite (Score:3, Insightful)
Its good for apples business to keep fairplay locked away.
Re:I sent this to there wabmeister! (Score:3, Interesting)
well it is vaguely shaped like a powerbook... and the ones from 1.5 years ago had screens that attach like that (the Ti books not the Al books) but year... the parent is an idiot, if that is a powerbook it was painted black and had a new cover put on the back!