Softened French DRM Law Passes Senate

They should just close the French iTMS. :rolleyes:

This is, in the end, better off for French consumers. Apple would otherwise have simply backed off from France.

But I wonder... aren't all forms of DRM approved by copyright holders? Isn't that the point of DRM, to protect the author's content?

Who would this law apply to, then?



irmongoose

Damn it, just liscense fairplay already..sheesh.

i think that this is all a bunch of crap. how do we find ourselves (u.s. co's) under foreign jurisdiction? maybe im not getting this, but it appears that the damn french are always perverting good ideas and plans. on top of that, the windows users complaining about how they want unlimited access to "their music", wake up get an iPod a Mac and realize that you never "own" music.

i think that this is all a bunch of crap. how do we find ourselves (u.s. co's) under foreign jurisdiction? maybe im not getting this, but it appears that the damn french are always perverting good ideas and plans. on top of that, the windows users complaining about how they want unlimited access to "their music", wake up get an iPod a Mac and realize that you never "own" music.

To paraphrase "When in Rome, do as the Romans"

When you are trading in another country you respect their laws.

If you don't want to respect other countries, don't trade with them. People need to get away from the idea that the world is made for the utility of the US.



I don't agree with what the law was trying to do, but you have to admit that there is a danger that a "foreign" company (to the French at least) will wind up in a momopoly situation. that's not a desirable outcome. The proposed law was an attempt to redress the balance, but was seriously flawed imo, as it pushed the balance too far, and misses a crucial point - iPod and iTunes are really one integrated product.

Typically French.

A complete waste of time and taxpayers money.

Piss off Chirac :p

If this continues like this, and the loophole is fixed, it wouldnt surprise me at all to see apple drop the french iTMS.

One of apples biggest points about the iTMS is that you can only play that music on an iPod, or your computer, and that you cant use your iPod with other programs.... so I dont think apple would be to happy to just let the french government tell them how to run their business.

Goodbye French iTMS

i think that this is all a bunch of crap. how do we find ourselves (u.s. co's) under foreign jurisdiction? maybe im not getting this, but it appears that the damn french are always perverting good ideas and plans. on top of that, the windows users complaining about how they want unlimited access to "their music", wake up get an iPod a Mac and realize that you never "own" music.

Typically French.

A complete waste of time and taxpayers money.

Piss off Chirac :p

I'm not going to drag this thread into the Political forums, but:

If you do not live in France and/or pay tax there, you can't insult the French way of doing things because:
[LIST]
[*]You don't live or pay tax there;
[*]It's none of your goddamn business what they do in their own country;
[*]They don't give a f*** about what you think.
[/LIST]

And before you say something, point 2 applies even if you're a non-French company. If you want to do business in France, abide by their laws. If not, piss off.

Don't get me wrong, you're more than free to express your opinion on the matter (e.g. "I disagree because..."). Just don't bloody tell the French (or any other country) that they're stupid/dicks/etc. because of the way they do stuff. :rolleyes:

I personnaly view it as a good thing that Apple licenses its DRM system.

I kinda like what this law was remade into. Everyone is protected this way, if the consumers complain they have a legal forum to take their complaints to, the company is protected because they are not forced to open up anything unless the consumer and the owner of the copyright agrees that it isnt a fair limit on the usage. Artists are protected because they wont have their music pirated and have a bit of say on how their work can be used.

I dont see a reason why if a group of consumers and artists disagree with Apples DRM that apple cant simply cut out the artist from the store, the artist will loose income because they dont accept a mechanism set out to protect them?!? Fairplay is a decent DRM system, we all agree, the amount of music and sales on and by the iTMS prove that, why are people worried?

I kinda like what this law was remade into. Everyone is protected this way, ...

Well not really. This just made Apple's life much harder when it comes to negotiating distribution rights with record labels and/or individual artists and fulfilling those contracts.

It also could make the end users life difficult / confusing since some songs they purchase may support being switched among DRM systems while others aren't, etc.

Really this isn't a very good situation for customers or distributors...

IMHO this law should not have done anything in regards to DRM at all but if they feel they must it IMHO should have ONLY stated that a service to convert between DRM schemes (with matching end user rights) should be made available to customers (with no requirement for it to be free).

Again no one is forcing anyone to buy an iPod and/or songs from iTMS, folks have a right and the ability to not buy into a product/service if they feel it doesn't serve their needs.