Apple’s dominance in the music world has prompted this week’s heated negotiations with a number of European governments and consumer rights organizations.
The negotiations have taken Apple executives to Paris, where government representatives from Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Finland have come to discuss iTunes’ dominance in downloadable music. Representatives argue that Apple’s music sale methods are unethical, citing that the sale of music or video in formats exclusive to the iPod product is a violation of art, and threatens both the sharing and longevity of cultural materials.
The accusations against Apple were led by French legislators who promote “interoperability” in music –- they feel that music should not legally be sold if it is compatible with only one product. Legislators from several European countries are seeking to stop the sale of Apple-exclusive iTunes and promote music and videos that can be enjoyed on any digital device.
Of course, Europeans aren’t the only ones angered by Apple’s monopoly; many in the United States feel strongly about the universal exchange of music, and for the past two years, the European Commission has investigated inflated prices of iTunes in the United Kingdom.
The proponents of music interoperability have a good point -- if digital media is made available in a universal format, artists and consumers alike stand a better chance at getting what they want. The market for artists will be healthier, and the selection for music and video purchasers will be broader.
However, some say this debate could result in government-controlled music standardization, resulting in a technology blockade that could prevent would-be artists from breaking onto the scene.
What do you think? Does Apple have too much of a Monopoly?
Related Stories: | Topics:Work/Life, arts + entertainment, Apple Inc., Apple iTunes, Paris (France), Norway, Sweden |
Email
Digg
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Buzz Up!
LinkedIn
Recent Comments | 7 Total
September 27, 2006 at 9:19pm by Bud Tomafski
Absolutely not!! Apple has waited too long to claim what is rightfully theirs. Ask Bill Gates.
September 27, 2006 at 11:58pm by Scott McAlister
What monopoly? ITMS is not the only source of music available. Go buy the CD. Go to another website that sells mp3's. If I were Jobs, I would shut down the French ITMS and then see what they complain about then. I guess it is okay for the French to have a monopoly on the Mona Lisa.
September 28, 2006 at 1:37am by Richard
No. Apple is not a monopoly and iTunes does not control all of the market. Wonder where Microsoft is in all of this? Apple created this market with a smart, well designed device to play music. And you can import other formats ... such as CDs ... into iTunes. All smoke, no fire here.
September 28, 2006 at 5:21am by Justin Hind
What a load of crap. Apple has developed a fantastic solution and a great technology. Other company's could do the same, create their own device, a music store, a distribution channel and a network of advocates. It is absolute bullshit. If this gets through then all software should be open source, SLR camera's should be able to take any lense, car company's should be forced to give their technology to each other. Get real.
September 28, 2006 at 11:37am by Larsonst
Interesting problem. Open up the format and see rampant piracy (ie public gets to distribute artist's work free) or keep the access orderly and fee-based so artists and labels get paid per distribution.
Free music is great but starving artists suck. So I guess the question is whose rights trump? The property owners or the purchasers?
Apple has done more that any other music vendor to be sure that the artists and distributors get paid. The public has chosen to go along, due to a well thought-out service (iTunes Store) and a generally superior delivery device (iPod). Since there are already many choices from other vendors (including the Russian steal all you want companies) I don't get why there is any interest in f#*king around with a company that, oddly enough in this market, has successfully guaranteed that artists are paid for their work.
BTW, loved the Mona Lisa comment, touche
September 28, 2006 at 12:24pm by john smith
Microsoft and any other corporation is free to do what Apple did. They can can create their own music player, with their own software and shut out itunes if they want. If you think itunes cost too much, don't buy them!
September 28, 2006 at 2:02pm by ben
Music interoperability is a good idea. Not having it means that people are going to be stuck with yet another round of having to re-purchase/re-download their libraries at some point. Of course some of this is going to be inevitable, i.e. no one wants to keep using VHS, but why add to that? And why would anyone be so angry about this? Is what these gov'ts are doing the right course of action, I don't know, maybe -maybe not. What exactly is it that Apple has waited too long to finally claim? And BTW, the Mona Lisa comment doesn't make sense. Not in the context of this, nor on its own.