iTunes, iWallis, iCan’t make sense of it….
Several days ago I was sent a press release advertising the iTunes festival which started 1st September in London and invited to write a blog post about it – I didn’t, I can’t find the time to write about the things I am interested in, never mind iTunes…there, they got their plug after all. I have dug it out again because with remarkable timing, a news story surfaced last night which had all the hallmarks of well placed spin.
Bruce Willis (House! Keyword Bingo!) “was suing” Apple (House!) in respect of iTunes (House, Full line!) allegedly not allowing him to hand over his iTunes collection to his chidlren (Treble points, disadvantaged children!). This is now firmly planted in the media for the benefit of those who only ever read keyword news on line.
It’s odd, on a number of grounds.
Only a few days ago, a press release arrived from the European Union telling me that near identical activity was firmly against European Law. Oracle had sued a German company for ‘reselling’ computer games, claiming that they only permitted the original user to have use of their goods. They lost. The court ruled that:
“Such a transaction involves a transfer of the right of ownership of the copy.”
So why would a story suddenly appear that was almost guaranteed to get British citizens up in arms at the thought of not having a transferable rights to the music they have bought on-line?
It reminded me of another story that appeared on the news wires a few days ago. The UK Government was ‘concerned’ that terms and conditions on web sites were ‘obscure’ in relation to charges for using credit cards. So ‘concerned’ that they were ‘opening a public consultation’ to see whether anything should be done about it.
Ms Raccoon has the benefit of penetrating foresight. She can discern precisely what the outcome of this ‘consultation’ will be. Something will be done about it. I guarantee you. Not because the UK government cares diddlysquat about the credit card charges you rack up when you book your cheap week-end to Malaga, but because the European Union has ruled that it is so. The UK government has two years to implement the transparency that they are consulting you about to see whether ‘anything should be done’…
I think I shall try a small experiment. Ms Raccoon, a natural red head in her time, (now turned grey with worry) is going to campaign against red hair dye. A specific red hair dye. HC Red 16. Never heard of it? You will, worry not. I shall find celebrities with dyed red hair and report on their anxiety that ‘it might not be safe’. I shall campaign against it. Eventually, if I am lucky, I will discover someone who died merely hours after applying it to their mousey head. I shall report on their heartbroken parents. I will start an e-petition to ask the government to ban it.
I will be hugely successful. The government will listen. Consultations will be undertaken. MPs will demand action. The law permitting HC Red 16 to be applied to precious British heads will be repealed. We shall all be safe in our beds at night.
Ms Raccoon will be famous. I can guarantee you.
The EU have decreed that the UK government have until 1st September 2012 to implement 2012/21/EU. Prepare for a massive publicity campaign against red hair…..
Is Cameron really so frightened of his EU sceptic MPs and UKIP voters that every new EU Directive (which he is forced to implement) is to be turned into a spin story of ‘how the government cares about you’ rather than admitting it is EU law which is coming in?
Any other examples we can point to, of the Government ’suddenly caring’ just as the EU passes another Directive?
September 5, 2012 at 15:44
-
It wasn’t the “WAISCIZM” (lovely idiosyncratic spelling you have there)
that was particularly galling, although, of course, it is there. Tuberculosis
has been controlled for a long time in western countries but that does not
mean immigrants where that has not happened have “riddled filthy bodies”
(again, your colourful phrase). It simply means they have an infection that
their own countries have not controlled to the same degree. The same goes for
HIV/Hep B/C. Of course, the indigenous populations will have those too, to a
certain extent. It was the implied moral judgement in the “riddled filthy
bodies” that riled. People get ill. That does not make them bad people and
neither does it make them filthy. Only in your mind.
- September 5, 2012 at 09:27
-
Off topic, but what a shock to see the BBC News home page today: “‘Alien
Mammal’ invasion of Europe”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/19474287
First Assange and now this! You’ve been sussed!
-
September 5, 2012 at 07:45
-
Would someone please explain to me what the late Duchess of Winsdor has to
do with this story .
- September 5, 2012 at
07:58
-
Spotted – Dog!
Over 3000 viewings of that page, plus proof reading by me (!!!) and you
are the first person to see that. Congratulations.
- September 5, 2012 at 10:52
-
It was kind of you not to notice ” Winsdor ” ; or did you have someone
else in mind ?
- September 5, 2012 at
11:15
- September 4,
2012 at 17:01
-
Won’t software companies and iTunes simply get round this ruling by
stopping downloads and keeping their software in the cloud?
The problem with the MSM and the EU is that the MSM has over-invested in
slebnews and footer to fill their papers and programmes and there are very few
knowledgeable EU experts. Thus the MSM writes its stories using the default
setting of EU bad which is accurate for 95% of the time but obviously misses
the 5% when one lot of corporate lobbyists happen to share the same interests
as consumers.
I suppose if we allowed all markets to be completely deregulated (for
buseeeness growwwwth – as annoying as charidee for the children) most
multinationals would own our internal organs (take it or leave it, it’s our
contract terms) to transplant when they see fit.
- September 4, 2012 at 16:33
-
So the Government is mealy mouthed – no surprise there then.
-
September 4, 2012 at 15:12
-
XX So ‘concerned’ that they were ‘opening a public consultation’ to see
whether anything should be done about it.XX
Just who ARE these “public” that keep getting “consulted? Does nay one here
know ANY one that has EVER being “consulted by Government”? I certainly bloody
do not.
- September 4, 2012 at 16:31
-
If you trawl the government’s website pages you sometimes find that a
consultation process is under way and that you are free to contribute. If
you rely on the MSM to inform you then you will find that the process is
often on the verge of being closed.
Even if you are alert to these calls for input you will find that the
question isn’t the one that you would like to answer. As an example the
consultation regarding the re-definition of marriage asked how the proposed
law should be implemented, not whether it should be done. Always a case of
“when did you stop beating your wife?”, the virtue of the government’s
proposal is always a given!
- September 4, 2012 at 14:08
-
Anna: from the Oracle case, it would seem as if the EU directive is good
for the consumer. Once we have paid for something, we can re-sell it if we
want to. Surely that should be an easy case for ever Cameron to make. Why
can’t our government just say: “This is a good idea” when it patently is,
instead of opposing everything that is “from Europe” (which obviously means
it’s EEEEVIL)?
- September 4, 2012 at
14:10
-
Precisely the point I was trying to make! Why can’t they? Scared of the
backbenchers?
-
September 4, 2012 at 14:28
-
Probably more scared of the Daily Mail. I’m glad I understood you
correctly!
- September 4, 2012 at 16:22
-
I thought this was being introduced as ‘a good idea’ so it isn’t true
that everything from the EU is painted as ‘evil’. As a general rule it isn’t
the government of the day that is standing up to the EU, regardless of
political colour they are in there at the top pushing for these new
rules.
It is a wonderful system as once an idea has been fed to the commission
and becomes a directive there is pretty well nothing anyone can do about it.
It only takes a few activists to start the process yet needs a united Europe
to reverse a ruling, virtually impossible and they know it.
On the subject of charges for card payments, I thought that when cards
were introduced it was against the card provider’s rules to make such
charges. The retailer paid a small charge knowing that a) they had got
business they might not have done without the credit loan facility and b)
payment was assured by the card provider so no bad debts. There was also the
consideration that cash handling isn’t free to large businesses as it has to
be handled, stored, protected and managed within the business as well as
possibly being subject to a charge if it handed over to the bank. Virtually
all of these costs disappear with card transactions.
- September 4, 2012 at 12:30
-
Shame, Anna, you just missed the best opportunity to launch your campaign
–
\\An annual festival of redheads has been taking place in Breda,
Holland.
Around 1,400 redheads from 52 countries took part in the
festivities which included activities such as fashion shows and art
exhibitions devoted to the colour red.\\
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-19461177
- September 4, 2012 at 11:49
-
Women should just stick to i Rons. They can be handed down no problem.
- September 4, 2012 at 13:41
-
Ah – but under these new rules, can anything secondhand be transferred?
Cars? Houses? Antiques? Family Bibles? What will happen to all those
collecting discarded clothes and bric-a-brac for charities? What about
butchers, selling secondhand bits of animal?
-
September 5, 2012 at 12:34
-
iCreased up at that one.
- September 4, 2012 at 11:47
-
Seems this is a non-story Anna.
Bruce Willis’ wife has refuted reports of Bruce’s planned legal action on
Twitter:-
https://twitter.com/EmmaHeming/status/242631258310594562
Whatever happens, Bruce could simply leave his passwords in his will, so
his daughters can then listen to his music when he’s dead and buried.
- September 4, 2012 at 11:06
-
Use of ‘decreed’ and ‘forced’ suggests you don’t understand how the EU
works. When we joined we agreed to implement directives. So did every other
country. Thus we are doing it willingly.
Incidentally my reading of the directive is that it must be implemented by
01/09/2013 (see Article 2), which rather undercuts your point.
- September 4, 2012 at
11:26
-
I think you may have missed MY point – which is that I shall campaign
vigorously – but it will be coming in anyway, since it is a directive, I
just wish to be seen to be claiming the credit, ala Cameron……
-
September 4, 2012 at 12:59
-
Anna,
It appears that you have gathered for yourself a Stalkertroll:- either
a denizen of Whitehall or Bruxelles would be my inference…
- September 4, 2012 at 13:08
-
I didn’t vote to join. I wasn’t alive at the time.
So actually someone else decided they would force me to abide by all the
rules that the EU can come up with.
And in fact the whole “primacy of EU law” was a bit of European judicial
activism in the first place.
- September 4, 2012 at 13:35
-
I didn’t vote to join, either – I wasn’t old enough to vote. I’m now on
the wrong side of 50. It’s also worth remembering that those who did vote
were asked whether they wished to join a free trade area – the Common
Market. Nobody has ever been asked whether they wish to part of a political
or even economic union.
-
September 4, 2012 at 15:43
-
As one regrettably old enough to have voted in the ’75 referendum and
before, a slight correction.
No-one was ever asked to vote whether we should join the EEC (as it was
then) in the first place – Edward Heath simply signed us up without
bothering to check if we wanted to go in. A few years later, Harold Wilson
at least had the decency (or political cunning) to float a referendum, in
which we were asked whether we wanted to Stay In something which we had so
recently joined. Setting aside the covert involvement of the CIA in that
referendum and the cunningly stacked decks, the electorate voted 2:1 for
‘No change’, i.e. to stay in. No surprise with the result. The EEC was, at
the time, simply described as a trading zone – no inference of future
political union direction
For the record, I voted to leave the EEC in ’75 and, in every election
since, have always supported the candidate whom I consider most aggressive
towards the EU – we can’t get out soon enough from something which, in my
consistent view, we should never have got into.
- September 4, 2012 at 22:59
-
Although I see logical reasons why we would want to ‘leave a
eurozone’, I also see that prior to the eurozone there was 50 years of
bickering, war and fighting through stunning hardship. If a united
Europe is less likely to involve inter-European wars (and arguably,
mutual union more likely to stand up to a Chinese or American threat)
and less likely to involve me dying in a field in Germany, then to be
honest I’ll put up with a few well-meaning irritating laws every now and
then.
I really can’t remember the last time the EU really upset my life
balance. Plus if it means more beautiful Eastern European women who
adore English guys then why not.
- September 5, 2012 at
04:37
-
XX Plus if it means more beautiful Eastern European women who adore
English guys then why not.XX
Complete with their AIDS/TB/Hep.B and fuck knows what ELSE riddled
filthy bodies?
-
September 5, 2012 at 08:58
-
Mr Teutonicus… evidence? Stereotyping? Prejudice? How do you feel
about those indigenous English people dealing with the same
infections? All filthy? Or maybe, unfortunate to have come into
contact with someone else with the same infections? Do all infections
carry a moral judgement with them?
I’m sorry to see that you have so live in such an angry state of
mind – it must be hell.
- September 5, 2012 at
10:57
-
XX gladiolys September 5, 2012 at 08:58
Mr Teutonicus… evidence? XX
“Gesundheitsministerium Bericht”, The prevelance of conminicable
deseases among East European/Russian immigrants. T.B for example,
virtually unknown in Berlin (In recent years, ie since WWII), Now at
an all time high, especially among Russian and other East
European/filthy pikey groups (Roumania/Bulgaria/Ex Jugoslavia.)
And we are talking UNTREATABLE strains of TB here. Not your
common or garden summer snuffles variety.
Sweden and Finland have reported similar, as have Holland France
and Denmark. Although Germany gets by FAR the most immigrants from
these areas. So the numbers are likely to be higher.
- September 5, 2012 at
11:11
-
Figures from the U.S, but note the part on Europe;
XX In the United States, 40% of TB cases occur among persons
born outside the country.4 The percentage of foreign-born persons
among TB cases in other developed countries is even higher: for
example, 80% of TB cases in Australia and > 50% of TB cases in
several countries of Europe occur among the foreign-born
populations.15 Furthermore, a substantial proportion of
drug-resistant TB diagnosed in affluent countries occurs among
foreign-born persons.67
http://journal.publications.chestnet.org/article.aspx?articleid=1078658
XX
Or;
The city of Hamburg (one of the German federal states
and, with 1.7 million residents, the second largest city in
Germany) is particularly affected. There the incidence rate among
Germans has declined to a relatively low level of 8.0 per 100,000
inhabitants (12), while the corresponding level for foreign-born
inhabitants was 59.6 per 100,000, i.e., more than seven times
greater than the level among native Germans.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC446315/
Compulsory screening of immigrants for tuberculosis and
HIV
R Coker – Bmj, 2004 – bmj.com
… countries that have
prevalence rates above a certain threshold then immigrants from
areas … most
rapidly escalating epidemics of HIV in the world,
notably Russia, Belarus, and … The epidemiology
of tuberculosis
among asylum seekers in the Netherlands: implications for
screening …
Zitiert durch: 48 Ähnliche Artikel Alle 8
Versionen
Any FURTHER doubts? Or are you just Automatically set to see
“WAISCIZM!” in EVERY comment about immigrants?
- September 5, 2012 at 15:50
-
I don’t know why my reply to you has appeared before your
comments…. but it has. My reply to you is above.
- September 4, 2012 at 20:09
-
As one that was old enough to vote, and to appreciate the positives of
a ‘Common Market’ and one or two other sensible possibilities, I am
resigned to a total sell out by red, yellow or blue labour.
I remain
convinced that the initial push originated with the post war mutual horror
of what several modern democracies had done to themselves and each other.
We’ve now moved on.
That under the sheltering umbrella of NATO during
the cold war Western Europe prospered. It even accommodated Franco. That
was what kept Europe at peace, not the eec.
Then the USSR collapsed and
the eurocrats got delusions of grandeur and hi-jacked Europe.
Meanwhile
wet Brit politicians have no confidence that the proles can decide for the
themselves or that we can compete in the world.
So no other game in
town, so it has to be europe.
Just a view, but I have been around a
bit.
- September
4, 2012 at 10:43
-
Foe once I’m with Bruce. This non-transferrable stuff is whyI refuse to buy
any online music or film. Being somewhat of a collector I have hundreds of
music Cds and albums going back to the 60s, many of which were bought with
‘family money’ for playing in our house, and if something should happen to me
or my wife I intend that whoever lasts longest should be able to play
them.
{ 33 comments }