Federal lawsuit over iTunes/iPod monopoly

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: L00ker
<snip>

IANAL But this lawsuit seems rather frivolous to me....

yeah, i think it's stupid too, i'm just explaining what the law is and what i see the issues to be.

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: Quasmo
Actually this a pretty clear antitrust case. As a company you are not allowed to operate more than one aspect of a product, ie. production, distribution, and exihibition. Apple clearly is keeping others out of both distribution (iTunes), and exhibition (iPod).

uh???

so should GM parts fit on my Toyota?

i dont get your arguement, how is Apple keeping others out of distrubition and exhibition?????

 

[L00ker]

Originally posted by: smack Down
Wow your an idiot.
Great you got a copy of itunes I can install on my zune? Oh you don't point stands.

As for a law requiring them to license their propiertary technology you are right there isn't one that specifically does that but that doesn't have anything to do with an anti-trust case.

I'm the idiot?

Problems:
#1 iTunes does not install on ANY equipment other than the computer connected to the media player, try installing Windows Media player on your Zune, maybe you will have better luck nice try dumbass...
#2 Assuming you were referring to installing iTunes media (not "a copy of iTunes") on to your zune you can't and it's clearly illustrated in your terms of service that media downloaded from iTunes may not be installed on any devices that Apple does not specify as "compatible devices" so this being said, show me where on the HCL (Hardware Compatibility List) the Zune is listed? You can't because it's not, and even if you were able to through some form of hackery able to load iTunes music on your Zune, you would be violating your ToS and therefore not entitled to hold a copy of said iTunes media.
#3 The lawsuit (in short) as it applies to anti-trust violations is "over Apple's use of a copy-protection system that generally prevents iTunes music and video from playing on rival players" If your wondering where that came from check the first page of the thread. This is the basis for the lawsuit, and based on your previous statement that there is no law requiring Apple to license their software or proprietary technology there is no case. The "copy-protection" system Apple uses is proprietary (as you stated you concurred) and therefore Apple is under NO obligation to license it to anyone. Furthermore they clearly state that "4. System Requirements. Use of the Service requires a compatible device" Zune is not one of those, see #2... Thanks come again...

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: Quasmo
Actually this a pretty clear antitrust case. As a company you are not allowed to operate more than one aspect of a product, ie. production, distribution, and exihibition. Apple clearly is keeping others out of both distribution (iTunes), and exhibition (iPod).

uh???

so should GM parts fit on my Toyota?

i dont get your arguement, how is Apple keeping others out of distrubition and exhibition?????

Other then apple where can one buy music to play on an ipod? no where.
Other then apple where can one buy a portable music player to play itunes music? no where

Other then Toyota where can one buy toyota parts? Basicly everywhere.

See the difference. Now can we please leave the bad analogies at the door?

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: L00ker

Originally posted by: smack Down
Wow your an idiot.
Great you got a copy of itunes I can install on my zune? Oh you don't point stands.

As for a law requiring them to license their propiertary technology you are right there isn't one that specifically does that but that doesn't have anything to do with an anti-trust case.

I'm the idiot?

Problems:
#1 iTunes does not install on ANY equipment other than the computer connected to the media player, try installing Windows Media player on your Zune, maybe you will have better luck nice try dumbass...
#2 Assuming you were referring to installing iTunes media (not "a copy of iTunes") on to your zune you can't and it's clearly illustrated in your terms of service that media downloaded from iTunes may not be installed on any devices that Apple does not specify as "compatible devices" so this being said, show me where on the HCL (Hardware Compatibility List) the Zune is listed? You can't because it's not, and even if you were able to through some form of hackery able to load iTunes music on your Zune, you would be violating your ToS and therefore not entitled to hold a copy of said iTunes media.
#3 The lawsuit (in short) as it applies to anti-trust violations is "over Apple's use of a copy-protection system that generally prevents iTunes music and video from playing on rival players" If your wondering where that came from check the first page of the thread. This is the basis for the lawsuit, and based on your previous statement that there is no law requireing Apple to license their software or proprietary technology there is no case. The "copy-protection" system Apple uses is proprietary (as you stated you concurred) and therefore Apple is under NO obligation to license it to anyone. Thanks come again...

Again your an idiot and again it has nothing to do with apple's terms of serives. Or if they want to or have to license to anyone. Those simple are not an issue.

 

[L00ker]

Originally posted by: smack Down
Other then apple where can one buy music to play on an ipod? no where.
Other then apple where can one buy a portable music player to play itunes music? no where

Other then Toyota where can one buy toyota parts? Basicly everywhere.

See the difference. Now can we please leave the bad analogies at the door?

You obviously don't know what your talking about Non-iTunes places to purchase music (in DRM free MP3 format) that are free to use on an ipod: emusic, Audio Lunchbox, Bleep, Live Downloads, Magnatune, Garageband, Archive.org/Audio, Calabash Music, MP3Tunes, Allofmp3.org, gomusic.ru

iTunes music is only licensed for use on Apple qualified hardware and for portable media there is only one qualified player, an iPod other than that any platform that is capable of having quicktime installed is also a qualified deivce, therefore you do not have rights to use iTunes on non-iPod hardware (as far as portable media players are concerned) and you agree to this when you agree to their terms of service, if you don't like it don't agree and don't use iTunes.

Parts for New and late model Toyota parts are not ALL available at third party retailers, many are dealer only parts. This is for a limited time and the same for most auto manufacturers, however depending on the part is what determines whether it is available at a retailer other than the dealer.

 

[L00ker]

Originally posted by: smack Down
Again your an idiot and again it has nothing to do with apple's terms of serives. Or if they want to or have to license to anyone. Those simple are not an issue.

Then please clarify, as according to the article I read the lawsuit is as stated:

"The case, filed July 21, is over Apple's use of a copy-protection system that generally prevents iTunes music and video from playing on rival players. Likewise, songs purchased elsewhere aren't easily playable on iPods."


Which as I read it (in english) states that the lawsuit is alleging that Apple's use of copy protection prevents iTunes music from being used on rival players. This is the basis for the Antitrust (Anti-competitive as it applies here) lawsuit.

However when you sign up for iTunes, you AGREE (of your own free will) to the terms of service which state that you can not use iTunes media on portable media players OTHER than the iPod, you can however use the media on any computer that has quicktime (and therefore the iTunes/AAC codec) installed. Secondly you do not HAVE to use iTunes media to populate an iPod, you may use MP3's which are very available, (which this article seems to think they are not easily playable on an ipod?)not to mention there are other utilities other then iTunes to manage music on the iPod.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: L00ker

Originally posted by: smack Down
Again your an idiot and again it has nothing to do with apple's terms of serives. Or if they want to or have to license to anyone. Those simple are not an issue.

Then please clarify, as according to the article I read the lawsuit is as stated:

"The case, filed July 21, is over Apple's use of a copy-protection system that generally prevents iTunes music and video from playing on rival players. Likewise, songs purchased elsewhere aren't easily playable on iPods."


Which as I read it (in english) states that the lawsuit is alleging that Apple's use of copy protection prevents iTunes music from being used on rival players. This is the basis for the Antitrust (Anti-competitive as it applies here) lawsuit.

You doing good up till now

However when you sign up for iTunes, you AGREE (of your own free will) to the terms of service which state that you can not use iTunes media on portable media players OTHER than the iPod, you can however use the media on any computer that has quicktime (and therefore the iTunes/AAC codec) installed.

Here is where you get lost. Apple saying they are going to be a monoploy and the costumer agreeing to it are not defesnces. Free will has nothing to do with it also.

Secondly you do not HAVE to use iTunes media to populate an iPod, you may use MP3's which are very available, (which this article seems to think they are not easily playable on an ipod?)not to mention there are other utilities other then iTunes to manage music on the iPod.

Now you are just totally lost. This has nothing to do with having to use itunes software or not.

 

[mrSHEiK124]

Originally posted by: JackBurton

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: JackBurton
The iTunes/iPod suit is complete billsh!t. That should be thrown out of court and the plaintiff punched in the face for being a moron.

Agreed. However I believe making the plaintiffs pay all of Apple's legal fees would be a better punishment.

I'll go with that... AND a punch in the face.

QFT!

Bad analogy, but do you ever see diesel truck manufactures suing the ****** out of gasoline only service stations? NO!

Second of all, it shouldn't be Apple's fault that all of the other DAPs and online music stores on the market suck ass now, should it? Not saying that the iPod or iTunes are perfect, because they sure as hell aren't, but you can't blame them for being able to capture and keep the majority market share in that segment for 5+ years.

 

[L00ker]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: L00ker
Then please clarify, as according to the article I read the lawsuit is as stated:

"The case, filed July 21, is over Apple's use of a copy-protection system that generally prevents iTunes music and video from playing on rival players. Likewise, songs purchased elsewhere aren't easily playable on iPods."


Which as I read it (in english) states that the lawsuit is alleging that Apple's use of copy protection prevents iTunes music from being used on rival players. This is the basis for the Antitrust (Anti-competitive as it applies here) lawsuit.

You doing good up till now

However when you sign up for iTunes, you AGREE (of your own free will) to the terms of service which state that you can not use iTunes media on portable media players OTHER than the iPod, you can however use the media on any computer that has quicktime (and therefore the iTunes/AAC codec) installed.

Here is where you get lost. Apple saying they are going to be a monoploy and the costumer agreeing to it are not defesnces. Free will has nothing to do with it also.

Your sentence makes no sense, maybe engrish classes be good for you? I will attempt to guess what your saying...

Apple does not CLAIM to be a "monoploy", however you need to be licensed to use their codec, so far Apple has licensed it's use on their iPod as well as the Motorola RAZR V3i and more recently the Nintendo Wii. I am not aware of any other devices that take advantages of the iTunes codec however the fact that it is used on the RAZR V3i and the Wii indicates that they will license it to third parties provided they meet Apples standards. This being the case this demonstrates that they are not being monopolistic in their endeavor, selective yes monopolistic no. I fear that arguing this further with you would be a futile effort as your understanding and use of the english language is less than "robust" therefore I don't trust your understanding of the issues at hand is much different.

Originally posted by: L00ker
Secondly you do not HAVE to use iTunes media to populate an iPod, you may use MP3's which are very available, (which this article seems to think they are not easily playable on an ipod?)not to mention there are other utilities other then iTunes to manage music on the iPod.

Now you are just totally lost. This has nothing to do with having to use itunes software or not.

Are you even serious? The second part of the complaint CLEARLY states that using media other than what is provided by iTunes is difficult "songs purchased elsewhere aren't easily playable on iPods." Which is a complete fallacy.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: L00ker

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: L00ker
Then please clarify, as according to the article I read the lawsuit is as stated:

"The case, filed July 21, is over Apple's use of a copy-protection system that generally prevents iTunes music and video from playing on rival players. Likewise, songs purchased elsewhere aren't easily playable on iPods."


Which as I read it (in english) states that the lawsuit is alleging that Apple's use of copy protection prevents iTunes music from being used on rival players. This is the basis for the Antitrust (Anti-competitive as it applies here) lawsuit.

You doing good up till now

However when you sign up for iTunes, you AGREE (of your own free will) to the terms of service which state that you can not use iTunes media on portable media players OTHER than the iPod, you can however use the media on any computer that has quicktime (and therefore the iTunes/AAC codec) installed.

Here is where you get lost. Apple saying they are going to be a monoploy and the costumer agreeing to it are not defesnces. Free will has nothing to do with it also.

Your sentence makes no sense, maybe engrish classes be good for you? I will attempt to guess what your saying...

Apple does not CLAIM to be a "monoploy", however you need to be licensed to use their codec, so far Apple has licensed it's use on their iPod as well as the Motorola RAZR V3i and more recently the Nintendo Wii. I am not aware of any other devices that take advantages of the iTunes codec however the fact that it is used on the RAZR V3i and the Wii indicates that they will license it to third parties provided they meet Apples standards. This being the case this demonstrates that they are not being monopolistic in their endeavor, selective yes monopolistic no. I fear that arguing this further with you would be a futile effort as your understanding and use of the english language is less than "robust" therefore I don't trust your understanding of the issues at hand is much different.

Originally posted by: L00ker
Secondly you do not HAVE to use iTunes media to populate an iPod, you may use MP3's which are very available, (which this article seems to think they are not easily playable on an ipod?)not to mention there are other utilities other then iTunes to manage music on the iPod.

Now you are just totally lost. This has nothing to do with having to use itunes software or not.

Are you even serious? The second part of the complaint CLEARLY states that using media other than what is provided by iTunes is difficult "songs purchased elsewhere aren't easily playable on iPods." Which is a complete fallacy.

If apple isn't a monoploy they are free to license fairplay to how ever they want. But if apple is a monoploy then tying of fairplay music with ipods is illegal.
So it is easy to play a song purchased from music downloads on an ipod?

 

[L00ker]

Originally posted by: smack Down
If apple isn't a monoploy they are free to license fairplay to how ever they want. But if apple is a monoploy then tying of fairplay music with ipods is illegal.
So it is easy to play a song purchased from music downloads on an ipod?

Merriam Webster says:
Main Entry: mo·nop·o·ly
Pronunciation: m&-'nä-p(&-)lE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -lies
Etymology: Latin monopolium, from Greek monopOlion, from mon- + pOlein to sell
1 : exclusive ownership through legal privilege, command of supply, or concerted action
2 : exclusive possession or control
3 : a commodity controlled by one party
4 : one that has a monopoly

Explain to me how Apple has a monopoly on either of the following:
1. Online music sales
2. Music sales for the iPod
3. Cite where it says ANYWHERE that tying of fairplay music format (Apples Proprietary PROTECTED format i.e. intellectual property) to a device (comprised of standard components) also proprietary and protected by the same is illegal.

This can be narrowed further to stating that Apple does have a monopoly on their technology however this is covered as a legally protected trade secret see:
http://www.chillingeffects.org/tradesecret/faq.cgi

Here is a parallelism from my work environment. I work for an enterprise storage company (we develop SAN's) and have our "array" of disks, all are standard SATA disks, (Hitachi's and Seagates mainly) connected to standard Marvel SATA controllers in a proprietary fashion in a chassis, our firmware is authorized for use on ONLY our array. We license it (the proprietary PROTECTED firmware i.e. intellectual property) to our array which as a package (comprised of standard components) is proprietary and protected by the same. Because of it's proprietary nature we are not obligated (in ANY way) to provide copies of it to use on anything but our hardware on OUR Terms of Service.

1. In the form of online sales as far as monopolies go they don't have one, see my list of "alternative" onine music sales services provided previously
2. ANY MP3 Can be loaded onto an iPod without much technical ability or any kind of difficulty, therefore ANY of the aforementioned services can be used to populate the iPod with music, You etiher have no comprehension of what a Monopoly is (as it is applied here) or are just plain ignorant, I would prefer to believe the former however I am more inclined to believe tha latter based on your previous posts...

Yes it is EASY to load songs onto an ipod in MP3 format. This being said IF the music purchased is not available in MP3 format then you can not use it (without some form of conversion) on an ipod, however with some form of conversion utlity (to make it an MP3) it is easily loaded on an iPod with the iTunes software (and other 3rd party products) You obviously have demonstrated a lack of understanding of the product in question certainly preclude's you from meaningfully debating wether or not the product in question has a monopoly on it's market.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: smack Down
The problem is if I own some iTunes music then the only player it will work with is an ipod.

Then don't buy music from iTunes...? I'm no fan of Mac and I'll probably never own an iPod because I don't like the iTunes software. However, you aren't *forced* to buy an iPod or even buy music from iTunes if you do.

 

[NFS4]

For all the talk of iPod/iTunes, what about eBay/PayPal? They're locking Google out from providing Google Checkout