| Sunday, January 14, 2007 |
17:20 - Here we go again, again
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/14/business/yourmoney/14digi.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1&r
|
(top) |
Not only does the iPhone have to contend with the "You can't put third-party apps on it" argument, it's also got the ever-popular "Waaahhh! DRM is teh suck!" thing to listen to, now from millions more people who never bought iPods but did have cellphones. So now it's the New York Times' turn to whine like a hippie with a tomato plant in his foil-lined kitchen window box:
Apple pretends that the decision to use copy protection is out of its hands. In defending itself against Ms. Tucker’s lawsuit, Apple’s lawyers noted in passing that digital-rights-management software is required by the major record companies as a condition of permitting their music to be sold online: “Without D.R.M., legal online music stores would not exist.”
In other words, however irksome customers may find the limitations imposed by copy protection, the fault is the music companies’, not Apple’s.
This claim requires willful blindness to the presence of online music stores that eschew copy protection. For example, one online store, eMusic, offers two million tracks from independent labels that represent about 30 percent of worldwide music sales.
And approximately zero percent of any music anybody's ever heard of.
I'm not going through this again, except to say that we can probably look forward to plenty more of this bullcrap, until such time as one of these lawsuits meets with a judge that uses an Ogg-Vorbis-playing music device made of hemp and kelp and decides that Apple's brought happiness and joy to too many people to be allowed to live.
Via JMH.
|
|
Brian Tiemann
