Palm may only use the single Vendor ID issued to Palm for Palm’s usage….Usage of another company’s Vendor ID is specifically precluded.
Basically, what Palm is doing is against the rules of USB, and Palm should stop doing it. What is more, the USB-IF says that Apple has all the right to do what they are doing, since it’s not against the rules:
Palm’s allegation (if true) does not establish that Apple is using its Vendor ID contrary to USB-IF’s policies.
Palm told Business Week that they are going to reply to the USB Implementers Forum because they believe the users have the right to use whatever device they want to use their non-rights managed media. They are right, especially when Apple has an almost-monopolistic position on the software music player market, and they are trying to get a hold of it by limiting access to their own devices. However, maybe they should take the matter to the FTC instead of going against the rules. [Business Week]
Shane Lord
Thursday, September 24, 2009 at 7:40 AM“they believe the users have the right to use whatever device they want to use their non-rights managed media”
Umm, people CAN use any device they want with their DRM-free media. iTunes is a media manager owned by Apple. It doesn’t stop you from accessing your music files directly – in fact one could argue Apple have made it easier to access it in iTunes 9 by seperating the files into distint folders on your hard drive.
There is a big difference between having a right to access your media (which you can do directly) vsdoing so by a companies software package which has been written specifically to support their own media players.
Palm is in the wrong and should just spend some cash and develop their own music syncing software that can see the music folder on your hard drive.
Shane.
matt
Thursday, September 24, 2009 at 9:20 AMWhy doesn’t apple just license out to 3rd party manufactures to be compatible with itunes? I can’t for the life of me think why they would want to associate their devices with that p.o.s software but clearly they do.
Its just proof that apple is the most anti competition company out there at the moment.
Tell me, how is this any different than if MS decided not to let any other browser besides IE work on windows?
ObviousT
Friday, September 25, 2009 at 1:55 PMDon’t you mean how is this different from MS deciding not to support any MP3 player other that the Zune with the Zune sync software? Canon printer drivers only working with Canon printers? Sony remote controls only working with Sony TV’s / etc?
Personally I think it’s pretty stupid as you’d want to get as many people as possible using your store now that noone’s tied* to it.
*See: DRM.