In Defense of Apple

I really want to be able to use other music players with iTunes. Don't get me wrong. I like the iPod just fine--and I'll like it even more once the wireless version comes out--but more than that, I like having options. The iPod may very well be the best music device available, but I want the freedom to use another device with my favorite music download service, even if doing so winds up being a bad decision.

Companies, like people, have a vested interest in making good decisions. If they fail to deliver what the audience wants, the market punishes them.

Government agencies and elected officials have a vested interest in self-preservation, so the immediate temptation for politicians whenever the market demands something companies aren't delivering is to intervene on behalf of both the market and, in many cases, the competitors who contribute to their political campaigns.

That all brings us back to Apple, who was recently ordered by the French government to make iTunes compatible with other MP3 playing devices and to make the iPod compatible with other music download software.

Even though the result is what I want out of iTunes and the iPod, I must object to this unnecessary and dangerous intervention. I'm not an expert on the French constitution, and I like French dressing and french fries as much as the next person, but I can see quite plainly the injustice of the French government telling Apple how to make a competitive product that increases its chances for success. It's hard enough to compete with Microsoft in the overall technology marketplace without having the weight of an entire continent on one's back.

Even as I write this, new media devices are being introduced that might force Apple to revisit the wisdom of its compatibility decisions. It seems everyone wants a piece of this pie, and no one needed the government to tell them to do this, because there is a profit motive to giving people what they want. No one is forcing anyone else to buy iPods or use iTunes. People have done so because it is one of the best, if not the best, way to download music and make it portable.

What's worse, as consumers, we are nearly powerless to influence the results of this dispute. For its part, Apple's website makes it no easier for users to find out what they can do about this travesty. I think they understand that the best thing people can do is to buy more Apple products, which they continue to promote.

I would hate for Apple to become one of those companies that takes out ubiquitous advertising in order to compel the government to do something (such as was the case with the recent Wright Amendment fiasco in the Dallas/Fort Worth area), but its news pages would be the perfect place to direct interested people to write, blog, and otherwise be an influence where they can to make sure our government responds appropriately to this restriction on the market that surely at least violates the spirit of the World Trade Organization's charter, that was supposed to protect the freedom of companies to fairly compete in the global marketplace. - Cam Beck