Apple sued over not supporting microsoft DRM

GEC: Discuss gaming, computers and electronics and venture into the bizarre world of STGODs.

Moderator: Thanas

bilateralrope
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5972
Joined: 2005-06-25 06:50pm
Location: New Zealand

Apple sued over not supporting microsoft DRM

Post by bilateralrope »

Link one
Apple sued over supposed iTunes monopoly, being mean to Microsoft

Posted Jan 4th 2008 4:14PM by Nilay Patel
Filed under: Portable Audio, Portable Video

Apple's been hit with antitrust lawsuits over the dominance of the iPod / iTunes system before, but there's a new case brewing down California way that argues not that Apple has illegally tied the iPod to iTunes, but that Apple has abused its dominant market position by not supporting WMA. That's right, we've come full circle -- Apple is now being accused of locking Microsoft out of the market. The case, brought by San Diego attorney Stacie Somers, claims that since Apple disables the WMA functionality of the PortalPlayer chip inside many iPods, it's shipping "crippleware," and that it's doing so deliberately to abuse its position as the market leader. Of course, unprotected WMA files import into iTunes on Windows just fine, so this is really a DRM compatibility issue -- and given Apple's official position on DRM and the fact that Microsoft's own Zunes don't exactly play nice with all the flavors of WMA DRM, this suit could be over sooner than expected.

Disclaimer: Although this post was written by an attorney, it is not meant as legal advice or analysis, and should not be taken as such.
Link Two
Antitrust Lawsuit Charges Apple With Monopolizing Online Music

The complaint takes issue with Apple's refusal to support the Windows Media Audio format.

By Thomas Claburn
InformationWeek
January 3, 2008 03:02 PM

An antitrust lawsuit filed against Apple on Dec. 31 charges the company with maintaining an illegal monopoly on the digital music market.

Plaintiff Stacie Somers, represented by attorneys Craig Briskin and Steven Skalet of Mehri & Skalet PLLC, Alreen Haeggquist of Haeggquist Law Group, and Helen Zeldes, alleges that Apple dominates the market for online video, online music, and digital music players and that its dominance constitutes a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. The attorneys are seeking to have their lawsuit certified as a class action.

"Apple has engaged in tying and monopolizing behavior, placing unneeded and unjustifiable technological restrictions on its most popular products in an effort to restrict consumer choice, and to restrain what little remains of its competition in the digital music markets," the complaint states. "Apple's CEO Steve Jobs had himself compared Apple's digital music dominance to Microsoft's personal computer operating system dominance, calling Apple's Music Store 'the Microsoft of music stores' in a meeting with financial analysts."

After years of government scrutiny, Microsoft was found to be exercising illegal monopoly power in late 1999. Some of its obligations under the settlement the company reached with the Department of Justice have expired; others remain.

The complaint against Apple claims that the company controls 75% of the online video market, 83% of the online music market, more than 90% of the hard-drive based music player market, and 70% of the Flash-based music player market.

A spokesperson for Apple said the company does not comment on pending litigation.

The complaint takes issue with Apple's refusal to support the Windows Media Audio format. "Apple's iPod is alone among mass-market Digital Music Players in not supporting the WMA format," it states, noting that America Online, Wal-Mart, Napster, MusicMatch, Best Buy, Yahoo Music, FYE Download Zone, and Virgin Digital all support protected WMA files.

This is based on the proposition that music companies "are generally unwilling to license their music for online sale except in protected formats." Such assertions look increasingly tenuous as unprotected music becomes more widely available through legitimate channels. Amazon.com, for example, claims to offer "Earth's biggest selection of a la carte DRM-free MP3 music downloads with more than 2.9 million songs from over 33,000 record labels." A week ago, Amazon said that Warner Music Group would make its artists' songs available in the unprotected MP3 format. EMI last year also began offering unprotected music online. And that's to say nothing of Web sites like Amie Street that have been offering unprotected music from independent artists for even longer.

Apple, for its part, might reasonably claim it doesn't want to license WMA from Microsoft, a cost the complaint speculates is unlikely to exceed $800,000, or 3 cents per iPod sold in 2005.

But the complaint goes beyond software licensing politics and charges Apple with deliberately designing its iPod hardware to be incompatible with WMA. One of the third-party components in iPods, the Portal Player System-On-A-Chip, supports WMA, according to the complaint. "Apple, however, deliberately designed the iPod's software so that it would only play a single protected digital format, Apple's FairPlay-modified AAC format," the complaint states. "Deliberately disabling a desirable feature of a computer product is known as 'crippling' a product, and software that does this is known as 'crippleware.' "

Attorneys for the plaintiff did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The filing claims that the SigmalTel STMP3550 chip in Apple's iPod Shuffles also supports WMA but that "Apple's crippleware operating system software prevents the iPod Shuffle from playing WMA files."

As for the injury to consumers, the complaint says that Apple's pricing is "monopolistic, excessive, and arbitrary," citing how a wholesale $5.52 price difference between 1-Gbyte ($4.15) and 4-Gbyte ($9.67) NAND flash memory modules results in a $100 retail price difference between 1-Gbyte iPod Nano and a 4-Gbyte Nano.

To buttress its antitrust claims under U.S. law, the complaint points to the fact that European antitrust authorities have taken issue with the way Apple operates its iPod and iTunes Music Store ecosystem.
I find it a bit odd that this lawsuit is brought up now when Sony BG is the only major label using DRM, and even they have plans to drop it.
User avatar
Zablorg
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1864
Joined: 2007-09-27 05:16am

Post by Zablorg »

How the hell can you be sued for making a better program? :lol:
Jupiter Oak Evolution!
User avatar
Xisiqomelir
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1757
Joined: 2003-01-16 09:27am
Location: Valuetown
Contact:

Post by Xisiqomelir »

Zablorg wrote:How the hell can you be sued for making a better program? :lol:
It is better not to enquire too deeply into the minds of the M$ and its shills, paid and unpaid. There lie dark and twisted places best not thought of.
User avatar
The Kernel
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7438
Joined: 2003-09-17 02:31am
Location: Kweh?!

Post by The Kernel »

It amazes me how people instantly resort to anti-Microsoft bashing the instant they are brought up in pretty much any conversation. ESPECIALLY given that I don't see a single mention of Microsoft bankrolling this litigation, although that certainly wouldn't invalidate it even if they did.

Realistically, it's pretty much expected that someone would try this, although I'm surprised that it isn't a lawsuit to force Apple to license their DRM scheme instead of supporting others. I guess that the reverse makes sense too though given the ubiquity of iPods.

I'm frankly shocked that the tech community gives Apple a pass on these practices and that everyone seems to think anti-competative behavior is perfectly okay just because it is fucking Apple engaging in it (oh no, they couldn't possibly be evil could they?). Let's review shall we?

1) Apple's iTunes store sales are predominately in a format which cannot be read by other MP3 players on the market.

2) iPods do not play any other DRM music files aside from their own FairPlay AAC standard.

3) iTunes does not sync with most non-ipod players on the market. This is a more minor point, but I'll get back to why this is important in a second.

Apple presses their dominance of the market by keeping the giant circle of hardware/software/content tied to their own solution. iPod/iTunes/iTunes Music Store all work to support this dominance by locking users into this self serving circle.

Now naturally I'll give Apple some credit here, they are pushing for DRM free music. However, the damage is mostly done at this point, and it's a lot easier to open something up AFTER you have used it to achieve dominance in the market. Also, the vast majority of sales are still DRM tunes, and it is likely to stay that way for the foreseeable future. Still, I'll give some credit to Apple for pushing this initiative.

And supporting WMA isn't about supporting Microsoft; it's a very popular standard for other online music stores that aren't the iTunes store. It would be the next logical choice to support at this point, of course Apple has no reason to do so (despite pretty much every other MP3 player on the market supporting it) because it would only open up competition on the music store landscape and Apple loves their lock-in of users to the iPod/iTunes/iTMS combo.
User avatar
Losonti Tokash
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2916
Joined: 2004-09-29 03:02pm

Post by Losonti Tokash »

Zablorg wrote:How the hell can you be sued for making a better program? :lol:
By what standard is iTunes a better program? It is a resource hog, runs shit in the background even when you close it, and freezes all the fucking time. Short of Realplayer it's quite possibly the worst media program I have ever used and if I wasn't forced to use it by Apple I'd have uninstalled it a long time ago.
User avatar
General Zod
Never Shuts Up
Posts: 29205
Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
Location: The Clearance Rack
Contact:

Post by General Zod »

Losonti Tokash wrote: By what standard is iTunes a better program? It is a resource hog, runs shit in the background even when you close it, and freezes all the fucking time. Short of Realplayer it's quite possibly the worst media program I have ever used and if I wasn't forced to use it by Apple I'd have uninstalled it a long time ago.
What kind of computer do you have that it's lagging all the time? On anything made within the last year or two the latest build of iTunes doesn't really hog all that much resources.

Though as far as the article goes, the one thing I am amused at is that nobody's bothered calling Apple on their anti-competitive DRM scheme until they were wildly popular and profitable. Apparently it's a-okay to be anti-competitive until you're a household name.
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
User avatar
Zac Naloen
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5488
Joined: 2003-07-24 04:32pm
Location: United Kingdom

Post by Zac Naloen »

General Zod wrote:
Losonti Tokash wrote: By what standard is iTunes a better program? It is a resource hog, runs shit in the background even when you close it, and freezes all the fucking time. Short of Realplayer it's quite possibly the worst media program I have ever used and if I wasn't forced to use it by Apple I'd have uninstalled it a long time ago.
What kind of computer do you have that it's lagging all the time? On anything made within the last year or two the latest build of iTunes doesn't really hog all that much resources.

Though as far as the article goes, the one thing I am amused at is that nobody's bothered calling Apple on their anti-competitive DRM scheme until they were wildly popular and profitable. Apparently it's a-okay to be anti-competitive until you're a household name.
Installing Itunes increases boot-up time on any machine I've used noticeably, no matter how new it is.
Image
Member of the Unremarkables
Just because you're god, it doesn't mean you can treat people that way : - My girlfriend
Evil Brit Conspiracy - Insignificant guy
User avatar
General Zod
Never Shuts Up
Posts: 29205
Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
Location: The Clearance Rack
Contact:

Post by General Zod »

Zac Naloen wrote:
Installing Itunes increases boot-up time on any machine I've used noticeably, no matter how new it is.
Why not just make it so iTunes doesn't load from boot? That's how I've got mine configured.
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
User avatar
Zac Naloen
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5488
Joined: 2003-07-24 04:32pm
Location: United Kingdom

Post by Zac Naloen »

General Zod wrote:
Zac Naloen wrote:
Installing Itunes increases boot-up time on any machine I've used noticeably, no matter how new it is.
Why not just make it so iTunes doesn't load from boot? That's how I've got mine configured.
Because people wouldn't know how to do this, which is why I raised the point.

I don't use Itunes, I don't have an iPod so I have no reason to and I actually prefer media player 11 as a piece of software.
Image
Member of the Unremarkables
Just because you're god, it doesn't mean you can treat people that way : - My girlfriend
Evil Brit Conspiracy - Insignificant guy
User avatar
General Zod
Never Shuts Up
Posts: 29205
Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
Location: The Clearance Rack
Contact:

Post by General Zod »

Zac Naloen wrote:
Because people wouldn't know how to do this, which is why I raised the point.

I don't use Itunes, I don't have an iPod so I have no reason to and I actually prefer media player 11 as a piece of software.
I don't see how the fact that some people are too stupid to use a common feature is a good argument against iTunes when iTunes is designed to be incredibly user-friendly. (Compared to WMP's hideous interface).
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
User avatar
Stark
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 36169
Joined: 2002-07-03 09:56pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Post by Stark »

General Zod wrote:Though as far as the article goes, the one thing I am amused at is that nobody's bothered calling Apple on their anti-competitive DRM scheme until they were wildly popular and profitable. Apparently it's a-okay to be anti-competitive until you're a household name.
Remember, the reality that Apple had to make contractual concessions to get the broad base of media support they did is irrelevant. Just like how iPhones are 'limited' to AT&T, when Apple had to strongarm AT&T into changing heaps of shit at their end to make features work, so you wouldn't get full functionality with another carrier anyway. :lol:

Saying WMP11 UI is better than iTunes when it's clearly iTunes inspired is amusing. It ALSO sits in the background, did you know that? It's just more Microsoft 'our shit launches fast but everyone else's doesn't', like IE. Saying nobody considers Apple's activities with DRM objectionable is either ignorant or dishonest: many people, like me, know and simply don't care. Oh damn, I can't play WMA on my iPod! That's caused problems for me exactly zero times, I should complain about it.
User avatar
Praxis
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6012
Joined: 2002-12-22 04:02pm
Contact:

Post by Praxis »

Losonti Tokash wrote:
Zablorg wrote:How the hell can you be sued for making a better program? :lol:
By what standard is iTunes a better program? It is a resource hog, runs shit in the background even when you close it, and freezes all the fucking time. Short of Realplayer it's quite possibly the worst media program I have ever used and if I wasn't forced to use it by Apple I'd have uninstalled it a long time ago.
Never had it freeze on Windows or Mac, and the Mac version is certainly not a resource hog (no idea about the Mac one).

Regardless, the lawsuit is not about the application, it's about the supported file formats. And it's just plain stupid; Microsoft doesn't support their own DRM, remember?

(Zune doesn't play the PlaysForSure DRM for WMA that every other non-Apple music store uses but instead uses a special Zune DRM).

And none of the other players support Apple's DRM.

Everyone's proprietary, Apple is just getting singled out because iTunes is bigger/better. And yes, iTunes IS better; not the application, but the store. They have more content than any other online music or video store in existence.
User avatar
Praxis
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6012
Joined: 2002-12-22 04:02pm
Contact:

Post by Praxis »

The Kernel wrote: I'm frankly shocked that the tech community gives Apple a pass on these practices and that everyone seems to think anti-competative behavior is perfectly okay just because it is fucking Apple engaging in it (oh no, they couldn't possibly be evil could they?). Let's review shall we?
Let's.
1) Apple's iTunes store sales are predominately in a format which cannot be read by other MP3 players on the market.
Microsoft's Zune store sales are predominately in a format which cannot be read by other MP3 players on the market as well.
2) iPods do not play any other DRM music files aside from their own FairPlay AAC standard.
Zunes do not play any other DRM music files aside from their own Zune WMDRM 9.1 standard.

Creative Zens do not play any other DRM music files aside from Microsoft's "PlaysForSure" DRM (not the same as the Zune's).

Ironically, you can buy music off of the MSN Music Store and it will play on a Zen buy not a Zune.
3) iTunes does not sync with most non-ipod players on the market. This is a more minor point, but I'll get back to why this is important in a second.
The Zune's software not only does not sync with any non-Zune, but does not even run on the Mac platform.
Apple presses their dominance of the market by keeping the giant circle of hardware/software/content tied to their own solution. iPod/iTunes/iTunes Music Store all work to support this dominance by locking users into this self serving circle.
Honestly, this is the fault of the studios, not Apple; Apple's original contract with the studios stated that they could not sell the music without DRM and the moment DRM keys were cracked Apple had to quickly update it with new keys or the studios could pull their music. It makes sense for Apple to keep it close to the chest.

Further, Apple provided a way to get out of it by allowing one to burn iTunes music purchases to CD anyway.
And supporting WMA isn't about supporting Microsoft; it's a very popular standard for other online music stores that aren't the iTunes store. It would be the next logical choice to support at this point, of course Apple has no reason to do so (despite pretty much every other MP3 player on the market supporting it) because it would only open up competition on the music store landscape and Apple loves their lock-in of users to the iPod/iTunes/iTMS combo.
Yet Microsoft themselves don't even support the PlaysForSure DRM format that other online music stores use!

If you're talking about the unprotected, DRM-free WMA format, iTunes autoconverts the tracks for you (default to AAC but the user can specify MP3) when you import them.

It seems odd to criticize Apple for not supporting PlaysForSure when Microsoft themselves don't.
User avatar
Hamel
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3842
Joined: 2003-02-06 10:34am
Contact:

Post by Hamel »

General Zod wrote:
Losonti Tokash wrote: By what standard is iTunes a better program? It is a resource hog, runs shit in the background even when you close it, and freezes all the fucking time. Short of Realplayer it's quite possibly the worst media program I have ever used and if I wasn't forced to use it by Apple I'd have uninstalled it a long time ago.
What kind of computer do you have that it's lagging all the time? On anything made within the last year or two the latest build of iTunes doesn't really hog all that much resources.

Though as far as the article goes, the one thing I am amused at is that nobody's bothered calling Apple on their anti-competitive DRM scheme until they were wildly popular and profitable. Apparently it's a-okay to be anti-competitive until you're a household name.
At times Itunes is slower 'n dirt on my Vista machine. Coverflow runs smoother on my Ipod Touch! This should not be happening on a C2D/8800GTS/2GB computer. Didn't run that smoothly when I was running XP either.
"Right now we can tell you a report was filed by the family of a 12 year old boy yesterday afternoon alleging Mr. Michael Jackson of criminal activity. A search warrant has been filed and that search is currently taking place. Mr. Jackson has not been charged with any crime. We cannot specifically address the content of the police report as it is confidential information at the present time, however, we can confirm that Mr. Jackson forced the boy to listen to the Howard Stern show and watch the movie Private Parts over and over again."
User avatar
The Kernel
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7438
Joined: 2003-09-17 02:31am
Location: Kweh?!

Post by The Kernel »

Praxis wrote: Microsoft's Zune store sales are predominately in a format which cannot be read by other MP3 players on the market as well.
Ahhh Praxis, leave it up to you to bring up a total red herring about Microsoft. What exactly does that have to do with this?
Zunes do not play any other DRM music files aside from their own Zune WMDRM 9.1 standard.
Once again, a red herring about Microsoft. You are incredibly predictable.

The Zune's software not only does not sync with any non-Zune, but does not even run on the Mac platform.
Repeat the above.
Honestly, this is the fault of the studios, not Apple; Apple's original contract with the studios stated that they could not sell the music without DRM and the moment DRM keys were cracked Apple had to quickly update it with new keys or the studios could pull their music. It makes sense for Apple to keep it close to the chest.

Further, Apple provided a way to get out of it by allowing one to burn iTunes music purchases to CD anyway.
Morality doesn't enter into it. Apple continues to benefit from the lock in to their three-way solution.

And no where did I say shipping DRM free music was the only way to go. There are plenty of open DRM standards out there, and Apple could also easily license their own scheme.
Yet Microsoft themselves don't even support the PlaysForSure DRM format that other online music stores use!
Once again, giant red herring about Microsoft.
If you're talking about the unprotected, DRM-free WMA format, iTunes autoconverts the tracks for you (default to AAC but the user can specify MP3) when you import them.

It seems odd to criticize Apple for not supporting PlaysForSure when Microsoft themselves don't.
Why the fuck should I bother criticizing Microsoft? What the hell does a third rate player in this business have to do with anything? If Microsoft was leading the market with Apple's numbers, I WOULD be coming down on them about it, but they aren't so there are really small potatoes.

Is this your debating strategy? Bring up red herrings about totally unrelated companies that you have a gripe against?
User avatar
Praxis
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6012
Joined: 2002-12-22 04:02pm
Contact:

Post by Praxis »

The Kernel wrote:
Praxis wrote: Microsoft's Zune store sales are predominately in a format which cannot be read by other MP3 players on the market as well.
Ahhh Praxis, leave it up to you to bring up a total red herring about Microsoft. What exactly does that have to do with this?
My entire point is that when every single player in the market does the exact same thing, why does Apple deserve any special criticism?

Did you read your own post? You proclaim that the entire tech industry gives Apple a pass on it because "they're Apple". No. The entire tech industry lets Apple pass on it because that's how *everyone* operates and Apple is not doing something unusual in the slightest when compared to their competitors.
User avatar
The Kernel
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7438
Joined: 2003-09-17 02:31am
Location: Kweh?!

Post by The Kernel »

Praxis wrote: My entire point is that when every single player in the market does the exact same thing, why does Apple deserve any special criticism?

Did you read your own post? You proclaim that the entire tech industry gives Apple a pass on it because "they're Apple". No. The entire tech industry lets Apple pass on it because that's how *everyone* operates and Apple is not doing something unusual in the slightest when compared to their competitors.
It doesn't matter if you engage in anti-competitive behaviors unless you own the market. It's SUCCESS from these behaviors which causes trouble, and Apple owns the fucking digital music market.
User avatar
Zac Naloen
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5488
Joined: 2003-07-24 04:32pm
Location: United Kingdom

Post by Zac Naloen »

General Zod wrote:
Zac Naloen wrote:
Because people wouldn't know how to do this, which is why I raised the point.

I don't use Itunes, I don't have an iPod so I have no reason to and I actually prefer media player 11 as a piece of software.
I don't see how the fact that some people are too stupid to use a common feature is a good argument against iTunes when iTunes is designed to be incredibly user-friendly. (Compared to WMP's hideous interface).

It's completely relevant for the simple reason that if most users don't know how to do it it's not particularly user friendly feature is it?

If you say to the average person "oh just take it out of your boot sequence" you get a blank stare and they say "can you do it?"

The feature is only common among people who know how to use it.

I'm not even arguing against Itunes, I don't like it and I don't need it so I don't use it. It's a personal preference.
Image
Member of the Unremarkables
Just because you're god, it doesn't mean you can treat people that way : - My girlfriend
Evil Brit Conspiracy - Insignificant guy
User avatar
Admiral Valdemar
Outside Context Problem
Posts: 31572
Joined: 2002-07-04 07:17pm
Location: UK

Post by Admiral Valdemar »

iTunes being a piece of rotten shit is one thing. Microsoft winning a lawsuit to reverse the one thing Apple is doing right here would be quite another. DRM needs to die a death. Now.
User avatar
General Zod
Never Shuts Up
Posts: 29205
Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
Location: The Clearance Rack
Contact:

Post by General Zod »

Zac Naloen wrote:
The feature is only common among people who know how to use it.
By your logic tabs aren't a common feature in a browser if a person is too stupid to figure them out because they've used IE all their life.
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
User avatar
Zablorg
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1864
Joined: 2007-09-27 05:16am

Post by Zablorg »

Regardless of iTunes quality, I still think it is silly for them to sue over what is essentially Apple making certain things exclusive.
Jupiter Oak Evolution!
User avatar
Praxis
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6012
Joined: 2002-12-22 04:02pm
Contact:

Post by Praxis »

The Kernel wrote:
Praxis wrote: My entire point is that when every single player in the market does the exact same thing, why does Apple deserve any special criticism?

Did you read your own post? You proclaim that the entire tech industry gives Apple a pass on it because "they're Apple". No. The entire tech industry lets Apple pass on it because that's how *everyone* operates and Apple is not doing something unusual in the slightest when compared to their competitors.
It doesn't matter if you engage in anti-competitive behaviors unless you own the market. It's SUCCESS from these behaviors which causes trouble, and Apple owns the fucking digital music market.
The problem is this. Your stance is essentially that Apple is being anticompetitive because, despite the fact that they support their own DRM and format standards and industry standards (formats like MP3), the fact that they don't support a competitor's proprietary format is anticompetitive.

I think you are viewing this completely the wrong way. The criticism should be on music stores for not selling music in MP3.


My view is this. If Microsoft sells music on the Zune store wrapped in their own proprietary format with their own proprietary DRM, and it doesn't play on an iPod, then it is Microsoft's fault. If Napster sells music on the Zune store wrapped in a Microsoft proprietary DRM, and it doesn't play on an iPod, then it's Napster's fault; they crippled their own music by putting the DRM on there.

It's not Apple's fault in that case. Granted, you can blame iTunes for not selling the music in MP3's, but they've actually just started doing this, which makes the whole point moot- and more importantly, they never prevented you from either just buying a normal CD or burning the iTunes music on a CD.


This lawsuit are essentially blaming Apple for not supporting a proprietary DRM scheme. Windows Media Audio is not an industry standard.

Can't you apply this same logic to operating systems? Why can't we sue Microsoft for not supporting Linux executables?
User avatar
Zac Naloen
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5488
Joined: 2003-07-24 04:32pm
Location: United Kingdom

Post by Zac Naloen »

General Zod wrote:
Zac Naloen wrote:
The feature is only common among people who know how to use it.
By your logic tabs aren't a common feature in a browser if a person is too stupid to figure them out because they've used IE all their life.
Erm... no, because tabs are a default feature in the browser. You don't have to go digging through the options to find them.

Stopping iTunes from booting with your pc is completely different from pressing the tabs button on internet explorer or Firefox...
Image
Member of the Unremarkables
Just because you're god, it doesn't mean you can treat people that way : - My girlfriend
Evil Brit Conspiracy - Insignificant guy
User avatar
The Kernel
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7438
Joined: 2003-09-17 02:31am
Location: Kweh?!

Post by The Kernel »

Praxis wrote: The problem is this. Your stance is essentially that Apple is being anticompetitive because, despite the fact that they support their own DRM and format standards and industry standards (formats like MP3), the fact that they don't support a competitor's proprietary format is anticompetitive.

I think you are viewing this completely the wrong way. The criticism should be on music stores for not selling music in MP3.
You still aren't getting this. iPods are the only game in town for playing the vast majority of music available on iTMS, therefore the iPods is given an advantage over other portable MP3 players since Apple won't license their DRM scheme.

In addition, the fact that the iPod will only play iTMS DRM tracks means that iTMS has an advantage over other music stores because it is the only one that will work with the market dominating iPod.

My view is this. If Microsoft sells music on the Zune store wrapped in their own proprietary format with their own proprietary DRM, and it doesn't play on an iPod, then it is Microsoft's fault. If Napster sells music on the Zune store wrapped in a Microsoft proprietary DRM, and it doesn't play on an iPod, then it's Napster's fault; they crippled their own music by putting the DRM on there.
And why do you think they put DRM on there? Because they are fucking forced to! And why do you think they don't put iPod AAC compatible tracks up there? Because Apple won't give them a license.
It's not Apple's fault in that case. Granted, you can blame iTunes for not selling the music in MP3's, but they've actually just started doing this, which makes the whole point moot- and more importantly, they never prevented you from either just buying a normal CD or burning the iTunes music on a CD.
It's not moot when the vast majority of tracks are proprietary, non-licensed DRM tracks that won't play on anything but an iPod thanks to Apple not licensing their DRM.
This lawsuit are essentially blaming Apple for not supporting a proprietary DRM scheme. Windows Media Audio is not an industry standard.

Can't you apply this same logic to operating systems? Why can't we sue Microsoft for not supporting Linux executables?
Actually, Microsoft WAS sued for much less anti-competative practices than these. Remember when they were sued for the mere act of bundling Internet Explorer in Windows and they were forced to offer a separate version of Windows that didn't have IE built in?

You are too used to Apple being the underdog and people not caring what they do. When you are the market dominating force like Apple is in digital music, you are under different obligations not to use this position to put competition out of business. Intent doesn't enter into it, if you are seen as having an unfair advantage, that IS grounds for a lawsuit.
User avatar
The Kernel
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7438
Joined: 2003-09-17 02:31am
Location: Kweh?!

Post by The Kernel »

By the way, everyone here seems to have this backwards. This isn't about pushing DRM, this is about opening up the iPod to other music stores. One way to do that is to support WM DRM (which is the leading non-Apple format) and another is to force Apple to license their FairPlay.

Of course the ideal solution to this is DRM free tracks for everyone which would require none of this bullshit. But that's a different set of lawsuits altogether...
Post Reply