[Mb-civic] Apple not happy, but French may be on the right track

[Harold Sifton]

Article by David Lazarus
SF Gate.com

Sunday, March 26, 2006 


The French have a point. 

Lawmakers in Paris last week approved a bill that would require Apple Computer to make songs sold on its hugely successful iTunes Web site playable on all music devices, not just Apple's hugely successful iPods. 

The draft law, which still must be approved by France's Senate, doesn't specifically target Apple. But as the overwhelming market leader for music downloads, Apple is clearly the company that would be hit hardest by a one-song-fits-all requirement. 

Apple calls this a recipe for "state-sponsored piracy." 

Consumer advocates say otherwise. 

"It's not a recipe for piracy," said Gigi Sohn, president of Public Knowledge, a Washington digital-rights group. "It's a recipe for competition, which is what Apple really doesn't like." 

She called the French bill "a big step in the right direction." 

France's draft law essentially says that anyone who legally purchases a song (or, by extension, a video, TV show or movie) via the Net has a right to be able to enjoy that material on the gadget of his or her choice and not to be beholden to a single maker's product. 

It's tempting to say that the draft law places art before commerce, but that's not quite right. The French aren't opposed to profiting from digital downloads. They're just reprioritizing things more in favor of the consumer. 

What the law would do is require Apple and other companies to share details of copyright-protection software with one another so the same content could run on all players. 

In tech terms, it would create open standards for so-called digital-rights management. It wouldn't be an invitation for people to make as many copies of a song or video as they please and distribute them free online. 

"Without guaranteed interoperability, we run a major risk of captive client bases and an anti-competitive situation," French lawmakers explained in a note that accompanied the legislation. 

Their goal, they said, is to prevent consumers from being "held hostage" by any one company's media player. 

Apple issued a brief statement last week that offers an oddly contradictory response to the French vote. 

On the one hand, the company is attacking the move with its sound-bite-ready warning of "state-sponsored piracy." 

"If this happens, legal music sales will plummet just when legitimate alternatives to piracy are winning over customers," Apple says. 

On the other hand, it's saying that the French law would be a boon primarily for Apple, which would benefit as additional, non-iTunes content becomes available for the company's popular iPod players. 

Apple predicts "iPod sales will likely increase as users freely load their iPods with 'interoperable' music which cannot be adequately protected." 

A company spokesman in Cupertino declined to elaborate on whether Apple ultimately views the French bill as a plus or minus. 

U.S. Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez told an interviewer last week that the federal government supports Apple's efforts to keep details of its proprietary software to itself. 

He said he needs to study the French bill more closely, "but anytime something like this happens, anytime that we believe that intellectual property rights are being violated, we need to speak up. And in this case, the company is taking the initiative." 

Jeff Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy in Washington, said European lawmakers tend to take a more egalitarian approach to consumer technology. 

"If you buy the content, you should be able to play it on any device," he said. "There shouldn't be toll booths and gatekeepers when it comes to distribution of digital content." 

Chester said Apple, in opposing the French bill, is acting exclusively out of self-interest. He chided Steve Jobs, the company's chief exec, for trying to depict this as a piracy matter. 

"They're just trying to squeeze out as much excess revenue as possible," he said. "Jobs knows perfectly well that, over the long run, digital content will be available on all platforms." 

Jason Schultz, staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation in San Francisco, said the French bill is ultimately about providing consumers with choices and boosting competition, which can only have a positive effect on the marketplace. 

"The more people can move their content around from one device to another, the more they'll buy things to play it on," he said. "You might have one device at home and one in your car, and they wouldn't have to be the same." 

Joe Kraus, co-founder of Palo Alto's DigitalConsumer.org, an advocacy group, said he understands why Apple would be against open standards for copy-protection software. 

"The incumbent with the largest market share will always try to hold on for as long as it can," he observed. "It has the most to lose. But the best thing for consumers is to create a fair and open marketplace." 

Assuming the French bill is enacted, the question now is whether Apple will play ball or whether it will close down iTunes in France and stalk off to sulk. 

Then comes the question: Could it happen here? 

Every advocate I spoke with said no -- not without an overhaul of the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which forbids tampering with anti-piracy measures in commercial software. This would take a whole lot of political muscle, they said. 

You know, like they have in France. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20060326/179f38e4/attachment.htm