Melanie Tucker must die!

alra111 · #1 January 6th, 2007, 12:44 PM

The following is an excerpt from this article.

Quote:

Apple faces a lawsuit in the U.S., following similar charges in Europe, over tying its iTunes music store to the iPod digital music player.

Apple revealed the suit, submitted in July to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, in a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on Friday.

The suit was filed by a user, Melanie Tucker, and seeks class-action status. It alleges that Apple violates antitrust laws by refusing to allow music bought in its iTunes store to be played on any digital music player besides the iPod. It also charges Apple with not making it clear to customers that music from the iTunes store and the iPod are incompatible with music and devices offered by other companies.

Does anyone know this her? If so, can you please tell her to leave Apple alone and go work for her money?

Alra111

**fryke** · #2 January 6th, 2007, 01:15 PM

It's a bit much to call for her death, really. :/ ... And let's be honest: Apple behaving like a Microsoft isn't exactly why we've chosen Apple in the first place. At least I think so.

Lt Major Burns · #3 January 6th, 2007, 01:22 PM

i agree with her. i mean, i've not been a fan of legal music downloads at all. if i want music, i'll buy it on cd. if i want single tracks, i'll get them off limewire. if an artist wants my money, they'd better work for it, by making a good album. getting single tracks off limewire or similar is just a slightly easier alternative to recording from the radio. which we've all done for 20 years, and the industry survives.

i am in absolute opposition to DRM. it's ironic that it removes my right to listen to music i've paid for. or suspects me of stealing. my ipod is 90% full of music that i paid for. i must have spent thousands of pounds on music, and yet none of it has any DRM on it. i have about 5 tracks i've bought from iTMS and i don't listen to them because i've rebuilt my computer so many times without 'deauthorizing' beforehand that it won't let me play them.

bobw · #4 January 6th, 2007, 01:24 PM

Hope she has a lot of money if she's suing Apple.

Viro · #5 January 6th, 2007, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobw

Hope she has a lot of money if she's suing Apple.

Most law firms who do class action lawsuits do not charge a fee, preferring instead to go for a percentage of the winnings. This is especially profitable, as class action lawsuits try to seek millions and billions of dollars in compensation. That's why there are so many frivolous class actions going on.

**fryke** · #6 January 6th, 2007, 01:57 PM

While I agree that DRM is not especially helpful and I certainly think Apple could actually do better - I also have to say that I *really* don't see grounds for a lawsuit. She's got all the freedom in the world. She could buy an iPod - nobody hindering her - or buy her music elsewhere. It's not as if Apple were the _sole_ supplier for that thing called "music". They merely primarily cater for the users of their successful music player, the iPod.

The real question, I think, is if Apple is _so_ confident that the iPod's the best music player in the world and that iTunes Store is the best place to buy music and videos online, why do they still have to make each product protect the other this way. They could easily let other digital music players have access to iTunes (and make money off of more people buying tracks) and let the iPod have access to other online music stores, since if they're right, one would buy on iTunes, anyway.

That said: Me too, I'm not buying songs on iTunes, because I still like to have a "real" album, i.e. a CD. Then _I_ can choose what quality my digital files on the iPod should have and I automatically have a backup as well. On CD.

bunga · #7 January 6th, 2007, 08:55 PM

It's an on going issue and the saga continues over at digg over the iPod DRM

Apple doesn't force pople to buy iPods, it's just if you do decide to buy an iPod, you have to use iTunes. Apple doesn't force people to buy from their ITMS, that's an option too. You can freely add any CD, downloaded track etc and put into iTunes etc

As for Melanie wingeing she can't put her bought songs onto a ugly looking MP3 player, it's just Apple protecting their sales so the Music Artist can get some commision. I think a lawsuit is ridiculous and waste of time.

For those interested, here's the Discovery channel Documentry of iTunes and iPod history

Direct link to Movie sorry, 166mb and worth the look for the enthusiast and others

http://web.mac.com/hackersmovie/iWeb...0Channel-1.mov

Mikuro · #8 January 7th, 2007, 12:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fryke

The real question, I think, is if Apple is _so_ confident that the iPod's the best music player in the world and that iTunes Store is the best place to buy music and videos online, why do they still have to make each product protect the other this way. They could easily let other digital music players have access to iTunes (and make money off of more people buying tracks) and let the iPod have access to other online music stores, since if they're right, one would buy on iTunes, anyway.

Well, Apple can't make songs from other stores work unless they license that store's DRM (really Microsoft's DRM, in most cases). And they certainly can't license their DRM to others if they don't buy licenses for all other DRM schemes as well — otherwise you'd have iPods only supporting iTunes and other players supporting iTunes AND other services.

I hope she wins this case, not because I hate Apple, but because it would set a good precedent for the industry. If Apple is deemed guilty here, what does that say about the iron-fisted DRM built into Blu-ray and HD-DVD? It would open the door to seriously challenge the DMCA, and the DMCA really needs to be challenged, IMO.

Personally, the only way I'll buy DRM'd media is if I know of a way to bypass that DRM (which would be illegal, thanks to the DMCA, but that doesn't stop anyone from ripping DVDs).