eScholarship Repository eScholarship Repository California Digital Library
eScholarship > BCLT > LTS > Paper 5

BCLT Papers

BCLT Website

Policies

Search BCLT

Submit a Paper

Notify me of new papers

institute_logo

Berkeley Center for Law and Technology
University of California, Berkeley

BCLT Papers  •  BCLT Website  •  Policies  •  Search BCLT  •  Submit a Paper

Did Apple’s refusal to license proprietary information enabling interoperability with its iPod music player constitute an abuse under Article 82 of the EC Treaty?
Giuseppe Mazziotti, European University Institute

Download the Paper (322 K, PDF file) - March 8, 2005 Tell a colleague about it.
Printing Tips: Select 'print as image' in the Acrobat print dialog if you have trouble printing.

ABSTRACT:

This article concerns the decision taken in November 2004 by the French Competition Authority on Apple’s refusal to license its digital rights management (DRM) technology to a competitor in the downstream market for music downloads. The analysis herein finds that neither the indispensability test spelled out in the Magill/IMS doctrine nor the new, controversial test advocated by the EU Commission for compulsory licensing of interoperability information in the 2004 Microsoft decision was applicable to the leveraging by Apple of its proprietary DRM technology into the music downloads market. The article draws on this analysis of the case to show that property rights and trade secrets in respect of DRM technologies have the potential to establish a “bottleneck” between content providers and media player manufacturers in the near future. To avoid such a bottleneck, the conclusions of the article suggest that interoperability and competition may be structurally supported and pursued either by more permissive “reverse-engineering” exceptions in the field of DRM software protection or, more effectively, by the collective establishment of an open DRM standard. In the absence of these structural remedies, compulsory licensing of proprietary DRM technology should remain subject to the “exceptional circumstances” doctrine made famous in the Magill judgment.

Forthcoming in: World Competition, Kluwer Law International, June 2005.

SUGGESTED CITATION:
Giuseppe Mazziotti, "Did Apple’s refusal to license proprietary information enabling interoperability with its iPod music player constitute an abuse under Article 82 of the EC Treaty?" (March 8, 2005). Berkeley Center for Law and Technology. Law and Technology Scholarship (Selected by the Berkeley Center for Law & Technology). Paper 5.
http://repositories.cdlib.org/bclt/lts/5

 
bar
Open Archives Initiative eScholarship is a service of the California Digital Library bepress