
In a Bay Area Courtroom, Lawyers Hit Replay on Apple’s History - dnetesn
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/12/02/in-a-bay-area-courtroom-lawyers-hit-replay-on-apples-history/?ref=technology
======
jeffbush
Wait, what? The iPod didn't block songs that weren't sold through iTunes.

~~~
georgemcbay
The way this article words it is completely confusing, the actual argument (as
I've read it from other sources) is that Apple's DRM prevented iPod users from
using their iTunes-bought songs on other devices thereby locking them into
Apple's ecosystem (because they couldn't buy a cheap MP3 player and export all
the songs they already bought), thus having to pay high prices for replacement
iPods to continue to enjoy all their iTunes song purchases.

... which is entirely true (pre-Apple's decision a few years back to switch to
DRM-free MP3s), though it is debatable whether consumers should have had any
other expectation as that's how essentially everyone's DRM works.

~~~
mitchty
Not only that, but didn't the music labels mandate Apple use DRM and keep it
up to date? They always threw out updates after the DRM got cracked within a
few days. Which struck me as likely indicating they had a legal obligation to
keep it that way.

Besides even with the DRM it was easy enough to remove. Easier than the Real
DRM in use at the time.

------
iaw
Even if found at fault it just amounts to the cost of doing business for
Apple.

