Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Music Media

Canada to Raise Tariffs on Recordable Media 849

Joel Ironstone writes: "A new Canadian levy will be introduced in 2003 on all recordable media (pdf). The magnitude of these tariffs is staggering: $1.23 for all CD-RW's, $2.27 on all DVD-R's, and get this: $21 for each gigabyte of storage on portable MP3 players. That's an extra 160 dollars for a Nomad." Like in the U.S., this tax is collected and given directly to the record industry, a governmental subsidy for no apparent societal benefit.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Canada to Raise Tariffs on Recordable Media

Comments Filter:
  • by w3woody ( 44457 ) on Tuesday March 12, 2002 @04:43AM (#3147609) Homepage
    You realize there will be a real market in smuggling MP3 players. And will Canada apply this tax to hard disks which could be added later to an MP3 player?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 12, 2002 @04:53AM (#3147644)
    Well it probably doesn't mean that you can board their vessels, hold them at swordpoint, and forcibly take away their wares and wenches, making them to walk the gangplank in the process. Piracy is such a poor analogy for what is being talked about that we really shouldn't even use that word in this context.

    But this sort of substantial tax could be the beginning of a positive development by making it clear that consumers have the *right* to make copies, share with their friends, and use digital copies of the works of others as they see fit in their own creative endevours. After all, the consumer will already have paid a substantial amount of money earmarked to reward the professional content creators in the first place.

    The real question is whether the citizen will have any direct say in deciding how the pool of media tax revenue will be distributed among various professional content creators. If there is no system of direct voting or the like put into place, it means that they will have to rely on their indirect representation through parliament --- or more likely, their doubly indirect representation through government appointees on the appropriate content councils.
  • by midom ( 535130 ) on Tuesday March 12, 2002 @05:19AM (#3147746) Homepage
    I have hundreds of CD's stuffed with various software (I'm developer of it as well), ISP accounting data (just in order to have whole history). CD-R's and CD-RW's is really affordable media for data you don't use often, but you have to keep.

    So...

    • How will recording industry pay to free software developers?
    • How will recording industry pay to those, who keep their backups, accounting data, and similiar stuff, which has no relations to music?
    • How will recording industry pay to independant artists?
    • Why not charging floppy disks, mini discs, zip's etc? They're recordable as well, and can hold files, documents and of course mp3's :)

    I can't find the answer. I hope Canadian government does. BTW, notebooks are also quite good mp3 players, and they've got HUGE hard drives. As well I can mention mp3 workstations or... mp3 servers with terabyte raid arrays.

  • Confused (Score:2, Interesting)

    by cannonfodda ( 557893 ) on Tuesday March 12, 2002 @05:22AM (#3147749)
    I have a pencil and a bit of paper, and I was thinking about writing some music down.

    Do I owe someone money ???
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 12, 2002 @05:46AM (#3147821)
    >> If you read the .pdf, you will notice...

    If you read the PDF, you will see that it has been decided that a tax/levy WILL be applied. The only question at issue now is how much the tax will be.

    I did find the last item in the document interesting:
    "(5) The Copyright Act exempts from the levy recording media that are sold to a society, association or corporation that represents persons with perceptual disabilities."

    "Perceptual disabilities" has a nice, broad ring to it. If you wear glasses, you have a perceptual disability. Or if you're colour blind. Or wear a hearing aid. If you just have bad taste. Hell, if you secretly believe you're Superman you obviously have a disability in perceiving reality. There's some potential there to exploit if enough of us jump on it.

  • by kiwipeso ( 467618 ) <andrew.mc@paradise.net.nz> on Tuesday March 12, 2002 @06:07AM (#3147862) Homepage Journal
    Actually it is piracy, the companies are forcing the artists of the gangplanks to make room for more profits in the distribution of the artist's works.
    Courtney Love had a great article on record companies being the pirates [salon.com]
    Consumers already have the right to make copies for backups, show to friends and reference from

    The real question is why should people be taxed to backup their computer on CD or DVD if they already have that right and have paid for the products?
    I want to know why I should have to pay a tax to make a digital copy of my content, why should I pay to record music I bought or video I produced?

  • by hansreiser ( 6963 ) on Tuesday March 12, 2002 @06:28AM (#3147904) Homepage
    It just doesn't say how they decide who gets the money. Is it based on how much money you are getting from other sources? If so, if a band only releases its music for free on the Internet, do they get no money at all even if they are more widely played? The end users need to be given control over who gets their money (see www.namesys.com/open_products.html)

    Hans Reiser
  • by phunhippy ( 86447 ) <zavoid&gmail,com> on Tuesday March 12, 2002 @07:00AM (#3147961) Journal
    Somehow I doubt that Bryan Adams, or for that matter any artist, will ever see a single red cent of the money collected from these taxes. Its the record labels that get the money, and its the record labels that will keep the money.

    Hehehe... you mean you don't trust the record labels to distribute this new source of income derived from the work of artists back to the actual artists!!! shame on you! ;)
  • Re:It already is (Score:3, Interesting)

    by thogard ( 43403 ) on Tuesday March 12, 2002 @07:21AM (#3147990) Homepage
    What would happen if a bunch of Linux coders from Canada sued the goverment agency asking for their cut?
  • Don't laugh (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jeti ( 105266 ) on Tuesday March 12, 2002 @07:33AM (#3148013)
    I don't know if you're aware of this, but you quoted
    the license terms for Adobe ebooks quite precisely:

    No printing is permitted on this book.
    This book cannot be given to someone else.
    This book cannot be read aloud.


    These are actual terms in the license for the ebook version
    of 'Alice in Wonderland'. This is even more strange because
    the original text is by now in the public domain.
    You can get a free, legal copy at Project Gutenberg [promo.net].
    It has even been suggested that the text of the ebook version was
    actually taken from the Gutenberg archives.

    Here's an article [thestandard.com] that a quick search retrieved.

  • by SomethingOrOther ( 521702 ) on Tuesday March 12, 2002 @08:34AM (#3148133) Homepage

    tarrif on media may be legit

    Oh no it 'aint!
    I use CD's solely to make HD backups and blank casstte tapes solely to record myself playing the gutair!

    Or are we now suddenly all guilty of piracy and have to prove our inocence?

  • by twitter ( 104583 ) on Tuesday March 12, 2002 @09:44AM (#3148401) Homepage Journal
    $1.23 per CD? That $15 100 CD pack from CompUSA looks like a winner. Someone could drive ten of them home, sell each CD for a buck and pay for their trip. If this goes over, CDs will become another part of the Canadian cash economy. Retail outlets will have them for people who screwed up and need some RIGHT NOW. Because they never sell legitimatly, they will cost $3.00 and be individually wrapped. Kinda like floppies used to be at University book stores.
  • by hacker ( 14635 ) <hacker@gnu-designs.com> on Tuesday March 12, 2002 @09:54AM (#3148438)
    This is completely unfair for independant artists who release their tracks exclusively in MP3- their fans are effectively paying the recording industry to buy independant music.
    You bring up an interesting point. The RIAA only controls 5 recording companies out of literally thousands of other recording companies. Many artists allow ripping and re-distribution of their works, in order to get their name out.

    These artists may be on their own (non-RIAA) label.

    Why am I paying the RIAA for the right to record mp3s of a band that isn't even covered by any RIAA recording company contracts?

    How can I ensure that the RIAA is giving a band that they don't represent, a share of these monies?

    How do they meter this?

    Clearly this is a complete scam, since more than RIAA-controlled music can be legally ripped and re-distributed from bands.

    Something else that I find humourous is that one of the leading bands that originally supported the RIAA, Metallica, used to give away audio tapes of their concerts at shows and told their audiences to record them, give them to their friends, and hand them to everyone. It's amazing how the tables turned when they saw the RIAA siphoning so much of their own income off and blaming it on mp3 trading.

  • by eldurbarn ( 111734 ) on Tuesday March 12, 2002 @10:45AM (#3148782)
    This tarrif is only proposed on media that has never had sound affixed to. For the re-recordable media (such as CD-RW, flash memory, etc.) the solution would be simple: affix sound. Any sound. A simple "beep" will do.

    If the thing already has sound on it when it crosses the border into Canada, no tarrif can be levied. The user may then choose to keep or erase the "beep" that came with it.

    (Standard IANAL disclaimer applies)
  • by alexjohns ( 53323 ) <[moc.liamg] [ta] [cirumla]> on Tuesday March 12, 2002 @10:50AM (#3148819) Journal
    $21 per gigabyte of storage on mp3 players? Well, you can buy a roopaq [genica.com] without a hard disk, then buy the hard disk separately. Hard for Fujitsu or IBM to know you're going to be putting it in an MP3 player. I would imagine if something similar passes in the US, it won't be long before most MP3 players come without built-in storage. You'll just buy flash cards or hard disks separately.

    There's always a way around the draconian measures these idiots come up with. I'm already a criminal, (speeding, jaywalking, ripping tags off mattresses, driving after having a beer with dinner, taping NFL broadcasts without express written permission, etc.) what's one more illegal act?

  • Easy work around (Score:2, Interesting)

    by magiccap22 ( 318891 ) on Tuesday March 12, 2002 @11:12AM (#3148973)
    The tax is intended to apply only to blank recording media, and not to eg pre-recorded CDs. So on page 6 the proposal indicates that this applies to media on which 'no sound has ever been fixed'. So for eraseable media, if the manufacturer records eg a 1 second "test-tone" on it then it will not be liable to the tax. Obviously this isn't a solution for CD-R or DVD-R, but it does seem like a pretty big hole. Might even make CD-RWs cheaper than CD-Rs in Canada!

HELP!!!! I'm being held prisoner in /usr/games/lib!

Working...