Norway Says Apple's FairPlay DRM Isn't So Fair
from the crowbar-as-a-business-tool dept
Last year, the Norwegian Consumer Council filed some complaints about the terms of service of the iTunes Music Store. The council was unhappy with Apple's response, and pressed on, and now the country's consumer ombudsman says that the DRM used on ITMS purchases is illegal, because it doesn't allow playback on any music players other than iPods. The ombudsman has given Apple three choices: it can license its FairPlay DRM to anybody that wants it, it can work with other companies to create an open DRM standard, or it can simply abandon DRM altogether. This sounds pretty similar to what French politicians had envisioned last year, when the parliament approved a law forcing Apple to open up. Apple's reaction was that it would probably just stop selling music in France, and eventually the law was rendered relatively toothless. It's not yet clear what the final outcome of this ruling will be, but once again, this provides Apple and the record labels with an opportunity to experiment with DRM-free sales and see how it effects their businesses. There's no upside of DRM for consumers, despite what industry groups say, so you'd be hard pressed to argue that its inclusion helps sales in any way. With signs emerging that some of the labels are rethinking DRM, this decision in Norway could provide the impetus for them to abandon DRM there, and hopefully realize they've got more to gain by doing so than they have to lose by hanging on to it.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
The longest journey begins...
France tried to do something and it didnt work out. Norway appears to be taking a stab at it this time. I really don't think this will force Apple into any postion it doesn't want to be in but I think this could be a step in the direction of getting rid of DRM.
One big reason DRM hasn't been done away with is that there hasn't been a large enough body of people to stand up to the music industry. It's gonna take a lot more than the government of a moderately sized nation to force a change. Now if the people and governments of France, Italy, England, Ireland, Scotland, Gernamy, Spain, and vast majority of the EU took a stand then something may happen. But until a large scale anti-DRM effort is mustered then big business will just continue to try buying the law.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DRM...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: iTunes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
yeah me too
7.0 is my version. i believe it's there on the latest one.
Shrug
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
wrong
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
(i.e., anyone think the Ombudsman claims are a bit more toothless than he purports?)
Also, back in June he claimed that other companies were doing the same and that he wasn't targeting Apple, that other complaints against other companies would follow?
Where are they? In 6 months all we get is the SAME complaint against Apple ONLY!
The addition of France and Germany to the Norwegian consumer groups complaint is toothless. Unlike in Norway where there is allegedly some connection between the Ombudsman and the judicial system, these are just independent consumer groups. In fact, the French group already initiated an antitrust claim early last year which has gone nowhere. I would imagine an actual law suit would have more weight than adding your name to a complaint. (i.e. The French group already played a stronger card a year ago. The result: no progress in their case and a toothless law that hasn't changed France.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Apple and DRM
My point is, this is not Apple's decision. It is up to the record labels. Apple can not (yet?) act unilaterally to rid the world of DRM. Even if it is ultimately in everyone's best interest.
Apple will probably just stop selling iTunes content in Norway. People there can still have their iPods, right? And Apple makes no money off of iTunes downloads anyway. So who loses in this? Only the recording industry and the Norwegian consumer who wanted to use iTunes, I think.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Personally, I think the WTO should be dissolved so that the markets can take care of themselves: allow the consumers to make the decisions. Most people think that some law-making body should intervene in these scenarios and I agree that if such a body exists (it does), it should actually do -something-.
In the meantime, the only way to really send the message to Apple is to get enough people dumping iTunes and looking for alternative music sources. A country the size of Norway may not be able to accomplish this (I'm rather surprised that France cannot make a dent), but an international effort would likely be more successful.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Clueless
Apple created the ITMS to augment iPod sales. Not the other way around.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The problem is: no solution creates this idealized scenario. PFS is still only supported on some devices, even if it is widely licensed, and it does not work on Macs and Linux at all. Real is open to licensing, but they've had very little success. Zune is entirely restricted in the same way as the Apple model.
Forcing any (and so far Norway and others are focusing on Apple despite their claims to the contrary) and all of these DRM providers to openly license their DRM would only create "some" compatibility while at the same time introducing some technological degradation (PFS has been admitted by Microsoft to be problematic)... So the result would be GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION to get only partial improvement (would all stores and all device manufacturers be FORCED to license all DRMs?) which actually impinges FAIR TRADE to benefit FAIR USE (I don't know why fair use of media content is getting confused with Fair Trade) marginally and potentially hold back the development of the market when alternatives already exist (CDs, eMusic, allofmp3) and transferability is possible (via burning CDs).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm suing Napster, Yahoo, and Microsoft!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
More likely...
While such a move might cannibalise some iPod sales, many a company has realized that it's better to cannibalise your own sales than let some other company do it.
And since dropping DRM altogether is not Apple's choice to make, this is really their only viable option.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They have plenty of options. There is little reason to believe this could actually result in judicial or legislative interference yet. And if that does occur, Apple can simply pull out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: More likely.
Second, while it has the potential to cannibalise pod sales, it's unlikely to do so, as those likely to buy ipods will still buy ipods. Look at how HP failed to sell their own Apple-licensed pods. While I have no doubt that it may allow some media players to enroach upon Apple's territory, they already do so, and this way allows Apple to make a profit (smaller to be sure, but still a profit) in the process.
In short, FairPlay could become (for better or worse) the "Windows" of the media player market.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not likely...
That would be exceedingly nice for Apple. But I am not sure how many of their competitors would want to assist Apple with such an enterprise. This just so they might sell a few more MP3 players.
It does not make sense for Apple to license FairPlay because nobody would want it and it would not fix the real problem - other players cannot sync with iTunes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: More likely.
So? It solves the Norwegian problem, as one of the solutions is simply that they "allow" it to be licensed. The fact that no one takes them up on it isn't Apple's fault...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So? Why would Apple care about someone else's "problem"?
"Second, while it has the potential to cannibalise pod sales, it's unlikely to do so, as those likely to buy ipods will still buy ipods."
That's your claim. The simple fact is: it can't help.
"In short, FairPlay could become (for better or worse) the "Windows" of the media player market."
It is anyways without the flaws of PFS.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
backwards
You've got it backwards, they're saying that music bought from the ITS can't be played on other music players, which, strictly speaking, is true. One has to burn them onto a Cd and re-rip them back as mp3's to do that.
France tried it by passing a law, this won't work any better.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: backwards
[ link to this | view in chronology ]