ITMS Faces Complaint From Norwegian Ombudsman 270
Whiney Mac Fanboy writes "Following the French Bill that threatened Apple's iTunes service in France, the iTunes music store is facing more uncertainty in Scandinavia. According to a report in Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten, Norway's Consumer Ombudsman has filed a complaint with Apple's music download sales service iTunes, arguing that the transaction terms violate Norwegian law. The Register is also reporting this story:, saying a contract cannot be regulated by English law, rather than Norwegian law, so iTunes must accept responsibility for damage its software may do, and said it is unreasonable to alter terms and conditions after a song has been sold. Consumer Council told the Reg: 'The Consumer Council has asked Apple to respond as to whether iTunes should work on other platforms - they have until 21 June to respond. After that the Ombudsman is likely to set another deadline and then start fining the company.' The BPI (Britain's RIAA equivalent) has also called upon Apple to license Fairplay."
Re:Foriegn Laws For US Companies? (Score:5, Informative)
They don't. They say that when a business which has a norwegia branch operates a norwegian-language e-shop explicitly directed at the norwegian market, distributed through a
Supported by others in Scandinavia (Score:3, Informative)
So I think this is a problem with laws common to a number of Scandinavian countries, and in short they dislike that Apple is writing themselves free of so many things upon signing up; e.g freedom of changing the license agreement without warning and with immediate effect.
Re:Don't like Norways laws? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Foriegn Laws For US Companies? (Score:4, Informative)
If the customers were dealing directly with Apple in the US, things would of course be different.
Re:Don't like Norways laws? (Score:5, Informative)
Incorrect. Apple divides the market up. Try buing from the US itunes with a British Credit Card.
Re:Apple + Interoperability = Ha ha ha ha ha (Score:3, Informative)
I'm a little curious where you're getting these sales figures?
From this TIME article [time.com]:
and this NARIP document [mit.edu]. (Sorry, direct link to a PDF.)
If you insist on making spurious claims about Apple, or any other company for that matter, don't try to disguise them as facts please, that's all we ask. They're certainly not the kings of interoperability, but I can't think of any OS/company that is. no, not even *nix.
Re:Foriegn Laws For US Companies? (Score:5, Informative)
In the U.S., if a company has a significant business presence* in a State, then they are subject to the laws of that jurisdiction.
If some cookie cutter EULA says "State of New York"... well, that doesn't mean shit, unless that company has no significant business presence in your state.
The second Apple opened a branch in Norway, their product became subject to the laws of that country.
Apple can either comply, change the laws of Norway, or take their shiny white iBall and go home.
*A significant business presence doesn't actually require significant business, it just requires a significant presence. Like a company store or corporate offices etc.
Re:Symptom of a wider problem. (Score:3, Informative)
EU consumer protection to the rescue (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Don't like Apples DRM (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Symptom of a wider problem. (Score:3, Informative)
>U.S. States) will explicitly state which laws govern disputes under the contract.
Yes, but if someone in, say, Norway buys from a shop in Norway, norwegian laws applies, period. In this case, it is about Apple's Norwegian store, not if someone from Norway goes to some site in another country and buys from there. Still, at most you will end up with the possibility of the country you buy from having its law apply.
Do note that we talk about consumer sales here, which in most cases are conducted in the country you also live in (or is visiting). For such cases, there is no room or need for specifying laws to govren the purchase. The fact that companies themselves buy and sell between them across boarders is a different bussiness and such sales are typically governed by far less laws and there is much more roof for contractual agreeements on most things, while for consumer sales, the laws are usually not possible to override by contracts, including spcifying another law.
>If you're rolling out a service to customers in many different countries, you don't want to
>have to retain lawyers in each, and customize your product.
On the countrary, at least for consumer sales, if you want to be present in different countries, you MUST know the laws and adjust to them. With your proposal, each consumer would instead have to emply a laywer for each country when he goes shopping instead, obviously a horribly bad situation. It would basically be chaos, imagine going to your grocery and having 10 different laws apply to your purchase!
Re:English Law = England, not US (Score:3, Informative)
>they would be able to choose any particular EU member states laws (in this case England) to
>apply
Not completely true, you can't chose law at will inside EU, especially if both the seller and buyer is in the same country. Even if you are buying from another country than your own inside EU, the seller can't chose arbitrary laws of a country of choise, at most you can end up with the laws of the country in which the seller is doing his bussiness, however, there are still restrictions in the unfair terms used so that they can't be worse than in the buyers country. Here is a good link to an EU directive on the issue:
http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/cons_int/safe_shop/
Click on link in second paragraph, or chose another language if you like.