Battleangel

Hopefully this will be a serious attempt at curbing Apple’s proprietary designs, other shoddy business practises and the beginning of the end for such systems. If Apple can be forced to retreat from any one of its markets, it will compel the company and its competitors to reconsider their position. And it could encourage other nations to realize the problem and speak up.

Apple will meet with representatives of consumer rights groups from Sweden, Norway and Denmark to discuss concerns over the closed nature of iTunes, an executive with Sweden’s consumer rights agency told Reuters on Wednesday. The meeting is expected to take place sometime in September, although no solid date has been set.

The Cupertino, Calif. company has responded to concerns voiced by the groups, but has also requested that the sides meet in person. Apple reportedly wants to explain its position, and likely why it intends to keep the iTunes Music Store an iPod-only service.

In Norway, two aspects of Apple’s position are technically illegal in the country: its unwillingness for interoperability, as well as a refusal to be liable if iTunes damages a computer when the user does not own an iPod. However, Norway’s chief concern was the lack of freedom with purchased tracks.

This is basically where Apple flaunts Swedish law as well. Hence it is much more than just the proprietary design. Of course, knowing Apple and its American guardians, the personal meeting will most likely feature embassy representatives or similar extensions of the U.S. government, business complex making it very clear that Apple’s position is one backed up with near limitless economic and military might. And that the consequences of questioning the global hegemony could be dire. I fully expect there is no one with a backbone that will stand up to the intimidation.

It should be noted that part of my fascination / disgust with Apple stems from the fact that they are the perfect analogy for American “benevolence”. That is to say, deception. The thin veneer and shiny surface, yet rotten to the core. The concept that people laud, virtually worship despite the mere skin-deep beauty and seedy contract rules, history and dismal business practises. Practises that are there for all to see with a minimum of effort. But they keep seeing the veneer. As with the U.S. itself, Apple sets a dismal example for others to follow and thus it is of the utmost importance to go after the greatest rule breaker, the hegemon. Plus, I do recall Microsoft being slapped for business practises that are not so different after all. But then again, they’re the “evil empire”. Apple is a “benevolent empire” or so they’d like us to believe.