Canadian Copyright Group Wants iPod Tax 408
soulxtc writes "Unable to define memory as a 'recording medium,' Canada's Private Copyright Collective goes directly after portable music player devices, memory cards, and anything else that can be used to make private copies. The PCC submitted a proposal to the country's Copyright Board that suggests levies of $5 (Canadian) on devices with up to 1GB of memory, $25 for 1-10 GB, $50 for 10-30 GB, and $75 for over 30 GB. If approved, this propoal would increase the price of a 30-GB iPod by 26%. These collections are intended to compensate artists and labels for the losses they suffer when people 'illegally' copy or transfer music. The PCC is also seeking a new $2 to $10 tax on memory cards. The backbone of digital photography has become tangled up in the fight for making sure music companies get every nickel and dime they feel that they deserve."
The very least they could do (Score:4, Informative)
Re:The very least they could do (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:The very least they could do (Score:5, Insightful)
Anything to get people to reject this so some common sence can be used.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Don't tell let them hear you, or we're all screwed. What happens when they realise we can record music in our memories and play it back at will, will they start taxing our brains. 'Spose I'd best start drinking heavily to reduce my capacity.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
But what are they taxing? (Score:4, Interesting)
And if hard drives get taxed, what will you do when your current HD dies?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:The very least they could do (Score:5, Insightful)
get real, man. portable players were here long before you heard about the iPod, much longer than the 1998 Diamond Rio. At the time there was no market, yet the players did exist.
also, economics 101: if you want to recover your money from a bad investment, you DO NOT raise the price. you lower it. you sell it to the first jerk that show up, then "Take The Money and Run".
Re:The very least they could do (Score:5, Insightful)
That theory applies to most of us, but in advanced Econ 748 - Economics for Cartels - we learn that it the previous economic principles are only valid when you fail to properly legislate yourself a revenue stream and business model.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Wrong, they want you to spend money and pay taxes.
Think of the companies that will lose enormous amounts of money because of that attitude
Maybe the companies would then realize that their stuff is too damned expensive, and become
more competitive.
Think of them recouping their loss in sales by bumping up the prices further
If you don't buy one, they can raise it to a bajillion dollars and it won't matter, you still wouldn't buy one. I fail to see th
Hard disk prices (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I'd have guessed the R-I-Eh-Eh and the M-P-Eh-Eh.
Should I move to Canda? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Should I move to Canda? (Score:5, Insightful)
Wouldn't it be grand if the people who distribute software started pulling this crap too? I'd feel obliged to take them up on their fees and start downloading away.
Re:Should I move to Canda? (Score:5, Funny)
That'd be great since I wouldn't feel bad when I download OpenBSD instead of buying the CDs. The government would obviously give them their fair share of the levy...
What's more... (Score:5, Interesting)
heh (Score:2)
Re:Should I move to Canda? (Score:5, Interesting)
So, this means that I get to download anything I want while in Canada free of guilt and cost... right?
Actually yeah. In Canada we pay a small tax on blank tapes and a special kind of recordable cd that nobody buys. The upside is that it is perfectly legal for Canadians to share their music with each other and to download music off the internet. Making files available on the web is brodcasting and therefore illegal, and charging money for copying is also illegal. However, if you want to set up an mp3 server at work, there is no law preventing that.
What it comes down to is you cannot tax illegal behaviour. Our courts would never accept it. So this isn't that scary, in that there an upside because they also enshrine the right to share music with those players. As for digital photography? That would result in too many pissed off taxpayers. Probably the worst would be some brand of memory card being released with an absurd tax just like for cds. And it will quietly be ignored by consumers, if they ever see it.
Finally, just because they are asking for $25 doesn't mean the politicians won't just give them $2.50 and tell them to keep quiet. We have a minority government right now so the politicians are far too busy kissing voter but.
Re: (Score:2)
> with each other...
So it's just like the US (hint: Audio Home Recording Act).
Re:Should I move to Canda? (Score:5, Interesting)
"So it's just like the US (hint: Audio Home Recording Act)."
Nope. These two statements are true:
However, the following is not true:
Canadians pay a levy on recordable media. Because of this, in some circumstances it's legal for Canadians to share copyrighted music.
To be sure, lots of Canadians use the levy as moral justification to pirate as much music as they can, often citing the fact that artists are compensated by the levy (the reality is that it largely goes to Canadian artists). In other words, Canadians have their choice of 94 moral justifications for piracy, vs. the 93 that we in the United States have.
You're correct that the AHRA defines tariffs on some recordable media (including DAT machines, and those music CD-Rs that nobody buys). I'm sure there are lots of people who use the existence of this tariff as a moral justification for piracy, but the tariff certainly doesn't make it legal.
Crucial difference (Score:3, Interesting)
Americans don't seem to grok that one. "Sharing" to them extends to handing out a copy to every resident of the planet.
Re:Should I move to Canda? (Score:5, Informative)
Count yourself lucky, I guess. In the US, it is, for example, illegal not to declare your income from criminal activity to the IRS for taxation. (Which is why so many mobsters were eventually nailed for "tax evasion" as opposed to racketeering, extortion, theft, or murder.)
Further, I'm willing to bet that paying the tax would not protect you from a civil suit from the RIAA.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Given that being dead doesn't even protect you from a civil suit from the RIAA, I somehow doubt you not breaking any mere mortal laws would slow them down, either.
Hey, after all, it didn't stop them from attacking AllOfMP3, either. Or The Pirate Bay. Or any other site that they just don't like, eh?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
First, Canada never had prohibition. Second, you're thinking Al Capone. That's the US. The GP is saying that Canadian courts don't allow for explicit taxation of illegal behaviour. That has not ever really been a US thing (income is income, whether legal or not). It may be related to the concept that Canadians don't pay taxes on lottery winnings, but Americans do: income tax is targeted at employment income in Canada.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
A couple of years ago in Sweden a prostitute demanded to be able to be able pay tax on her income, she argued that she too had a right to the social benefits this provides (In Sweden, prostituting yourself in not illegal, pimping or buying sex is though).
After a lot of fuss with the tax authorities, she was finally granted to pay tax on her prostitution income. She then immediatley sued our prime minister for selling sex, since he got a share of the money, she argued, he was acting as h
Re:Should I move to Canda? (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, they say its for the artists - but once the PCC's "costs" are taken out - how much will be left.
How will they distribute the money? Proportional to the CD sales? To online sales? Will they just cut a check to every artists in canada? How will recompence non-canadian artists? Or is this just a scam fee going to the RIAA? (Just like the millions that the RIAA is making from their lawsuit business - that sure as hell ain't going to Justin Timberlake or Joni Mitchell)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
As I have sold NONE of my CD's in Canada, clearly I have suffered the largest losses to piracy, and deserve the largest share of the levy.
Re:Should I move to Canda? (Score:5, Informative)
"How will they distribute the money? Proportional to the CD sales? To online sales? Will they just cut a check to every artists in canada? How will recompence non-canadian artists? Or is this just a scam fee going to the RIAA? (Just like the millions that the RIAA is making from their lawsuit business - that sure as hell ain't going to Justin Timberlake or Joni Mitchell)?"
The CPCC has a web site here [cpcc.ca]. Hit the link on the left labelled "Royalty distribution." It's a bit dry, but you should be able to get an answer to all of your questions.
Keep in mind that the CPCC != the CRIA (Canada's equivalent of the RIAA). The CPCC represents primarily artists.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
More than that, you can borrow CDs from public libraries and copy them into your digital collection, then share that digital collection on a peer-to-peer system and, of course, download music, as the supreme court has decreed that this is legal according to the current copyright law.
Better yet, at this moment, there is no bill pending consideration that would change that; bill C-60 died a year ago when
Double dipping bastards (Score:4, Informative)
At the same time, the Canadian Recording Industry Association (think Canadian RIAA) is lobbying [slashdot.org] to eliminate fair use rights [slashdot.org] in order to "harmonize" with the US's draconian copyright system (the same harmonization that fucked over the Australians when they signed their free trade agreement with the US).
The attempt at double-dipping is truly mind boggling; it's depressing that no one in power cares.
At $75 extra a player... (Score:3, Funny)
You've gotta be shitting me (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:You've gotta be shitting me (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I think if any artists wants to test their bones they should set up an escrow. Give the world an ultimatum, "put $X dollars in an escrow or I won't release my next album." Once they decrease $X a few times they might stop thinking they walk on water. Though K-Fed's recent tour ca
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Maybe a better analogy would be going into an "all-u-can-eat" special and pocketing some extra dumplings for the dog.
It's still be a broken analogy though. Downloading is more taking pictures of the food than stuffing it in your pockets and taking it home with you.
I have an idea (Score:3, Funny)
How about (Score:2)
Re:I have an idea (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Why do I need to pay this? I buy my music @ iTMS (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why do I need to pay this? I buy my music @ iTM (Score:5, Interesting)
Sweet... (Score:2)
Friends, we should rejoice, for it is quite clear that we live in exciting and progressive times.
Re:Sweet... (Score:4, Funny)
It's a Canadian tradition. Why else would we legalize gay marriage?
Hey Canadians... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Hey Canadians... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Consumers (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Consumers (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Translation, please... (Score:5, Insightful)
No, they're not. They're intended to set up yet another cash cow for large recording companies, irrespective of whether individuals put legal or illegal copies of music on their recording devices.
And no, they're not intended to supplement the compensation of artists, regardless.
Geez, that was easy to translate. The recording companies don't even try to hide their intentions behind competent PR any more.
Re:Translation, please... (Score:5, Insightful)
What's that? The artists don't get paid directly, only the big companies do? Indie musicians aren't appreciated or compensated? Doesn't seem right, does it?
What about the other memory? (Score:3, Interesting)
Someone call someone before the fabric of society is torn!
Re:What about the other memory? (Score:4, Funny)
As it is, you'd probably have to have DRM in your brain "add-on", and possibly pay a fee just to remember stuff, and be prohibited from communicating with your friends about certain things.
A penny for your thoughts? That's probably too cheap for the RIAA, MPAA etc.
One of two things (Score:2)
Or they pass this and add to the madness that is corporate greed. Cuz you know not one dime will go to indy arties.
Tom
It'll get worse (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
To me this is the patent and DRM situations. It has to become completely ridiculous before the average layperson [re: 99% of the population] will start to give a damn. In the meantime, every hack in a suit will try to slice a bit of the illegitimate pie for th
Paper tape player (Score:2)
Write your MP. (Score:2)
Where's my brother's money, dammit? (Score:5, Interesting)
He's now been an artist on about six albums over the years, one of which was nominated for a Juno. Why, pray tell, has he not gotten a single bloody cent from this tariff?
If I didn't know better, I'd almost believe that the point of it isn't actually to reward the musicians! But of course, that's just crazy talk.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Where's my brother's money, dammit? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Where's my brother's money, dammit? (Score:4, Informative)
From the seller's point of view, it's not so much that they have to charge the levy to customers, but that they themselves have to pay the levy to the CPCC for any CDs they sell (the exception being sales to customers that have a levy exemption such as my workplace). Of course, that expense is passed on to the customers in the form of higher prices. In the interest of full disclosure, I've seen some places with signs out by the CDs/DVDs outlining how much of the price goes to the levy.
In this case with the seller you point out, there are a couple possibilities. The first is that they are indeed paying the levy to the CPCC, but are not raising their prices because they subsidize their CD sales from their other sales. The second is that they are not playing by the rules. If they're not paying the levy, they're engaging in illegal activity, to the best of my knowledge.
One other thing to point out here is that since it's technically that the Canadian sellers pay the levy on CDs they sell as opposed to Canadian customers paying it on stuff they buy, it's perfectly legal for Canadians to purchase their CDs from the US and avoid the extra costs associated with the levy.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Then consider that while my brother is recording gigs, practices, jam sessions, etc., any copies of original music that they'
Revolution! (Score:5, Funny)
Ah, fuck it. Why wait for a revolution? Everybody get your guns and we'll meet down at the bar to plan our attack on these useless leeches.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Private Copying Levy (Score:5, Informative)
I don't know who the 'Private Copyright Collective' is, but this position is at odds with what we've been hearing about the Canadian Recording Industry Association's position - last heard as wanting to do away with the levy:
http://michaelgeist.ca/component/option,com_conte
I think this is an interesting tactic: collect levy at the front end, squeeze the availability of material via p2p networks through increased DRM on released materials.
Quite honestly, I don't really notice the levy at my pocketbook, and it does make for an entirely different legal landscape for p2p downloading. Michael Geist is the Guy in the Know about this landscape in Canada - check out his blog at the address above, there's reams of material there.
Why not make it an option? (Score:3, Insightful)
For people who want to go the iTunes route, they could simply turn down the contract.
Sigh. Something tells me the fact that they're trying to legislate this means they wouldn't go for my idea. Not enough free money in it for them, I'm guessing.
How do I send them my comments? (Score:4, Insightful)
1) Make unauthorized copying illegal.
2) Charge me for it.
Do they want a compulsory licensing scheme, as has been proposed by The Register, or do they want people to pay for each copy of music they purchase.
They should make up their damn minds, because they can't have their cake and eat it too.
It's a global thing I guess. :) (Score:2, Interesting)
There have been a game going on for years here in Europe, fx in Denmark the price of a blank CD or DVD were at one point 5-10 times higher than the same product in Germany. So of course people would just buy a spindle when on vacation og ordering it on the internet and save
It only makes sense (Score:2)
And yes, then you can continue to download guilt free.
I'm fine with that as long as...... (Score:2)
Oh, as to assuming that we're all stealing, I would now presume that we have a reason for a class action libel lawsuit due to the fact that they are essentially calling everyone on the North American continent thieves. I assume that not all of us are, and should stand up to thes
why is it (Score:5, Funny)
Why don't they try something novel like oh.... selling a product to us?
I say we pass a law that everyone that buys a crowbar has to pay me a nickel, to make up for the losses I incur every time someone breaks into my house. ya.
Idiots. No, I take that back. By saying that I'm just insulting the idots and that's not fair for even them.
Brilliant (Score:2, Insightful)
$40 for a 30 gig ipod? (Score:5, Insightful)
A 30gb ipod has 30000mb-
30000mb/700mb = 42.9 cdrs
42.9 cdrs x 30 cents = 1286 cents = 12.86 dollars
The association better have a very good reason why they want to charge for than 3x for the ipod compared to cd-rws.
Also, why stop with ipod? I can record information on harddrives too! Let's see, a typically hard drive in a computer has 250 gb. Obviously, if a 30gb ipod costs $40, a 250gb computer should cost (250/40) x $40 = $240! We all know computers are the main source of illegally downloaded mp3!
Re:$40 for a 30 gig ipod? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
...It says devices such as the iPod can be classified as a "recording medium" and should be subject to taxation.
Noticed that the collective is arguing that the device is a "recording medium" used to "store music", not "you can listen to it".
In other words, they are putting the tax not because you can l
Lesser of two evils (Score:2, Insightful)
Maybe the tax should be HIGHER because... (Score:2)
New Canadian iPod version (Score:2)
You then go buy your flash / hard drive and install yourself - or better yet - the Apple store sells the drive / flash separately, and installs it for you.
They did it in Europe (Score:5, Informative)
The content providers contribute very little (Score:5, Informative)
I think the suppliers of blank media make a greater contribution to the economy and the tax base - and really shouldn't be victimised because some loud tax dodgers with good lobbyists want a special tax to feed themselves and drain from another portion of the economy.
Goverments are not supposed to be fee collectors for private companies - they are supposed to work in the interest of their nations.
It doesn't make sense (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, is the levy applied to the price before or after sales tax/VAT?
If before, then there's your answer.
Distribution of Tarriffs (Score:5, Funny)
So say if I download a few songs from groups such as Blood-Axe, mix it up with a bit of psy-trance from Finland, and then round it out with some Pendulum
What, they dont ?
So you mean despite the efforts of the original muso's involved, plus my time to mix and burn the CD - they just end up writing out yet another cheque to Celine Dion for all of our collective efforts ?
Fuck No !
Ive never wanted to even to listen to Celine Dion. Not ever !
But when I step into an elevator, or pass through a shoe shop - there she is, singing in the background and generally ruining my day.
I dont want to listen to her, but yet she still gets royalties out of me when I make my own CD, or backup my harddisk ?
That is so totally around the wrong fucking way. Man - I should be PAID by Celine Dion instead as compensation for HAVING to listen to any of her music, which is clearly against my wishes. She infringes upon my personal aural liberty, and yet
That is just WRONG on so many levels.
Seriously - does ANYONE go the effort of actually downloading Celine Dion music and burning it on CD's Why ? So they can hold hands with their so-called 'friends' and dance around and be silly between glasses of cheap wine ?
What they should do is just stick to selling normal CD's and iPods and things without the tarriffs, but give people the right, if they so choose, to pay $100 and get a licence key that will put their CD Burner or iPod into some sort of crappy 'Celine Dion Mode'. In the same way that you can take a perfectly good PC, and pay $400 or whatever it is to stick Vista on there - enabling 'Celine Dion' mode on the iPod will virtually trash the machine, in exchange for getting the 'Wow' of having it play Celine Dion songs
The iPod should just operate normally, unless you 'opt-in', and pay the fee, after which the iPod degrades itself to the point where it will play Celine Dion music. 'Look Herbert, my iPod it now plays Celine Dion !!'. 'Yayy !'. 'Hey Clarence, your iPod - its turning a pale shade of Green !!'. 'Its all about the Yayy !!'.
Its just WRONG
prove to me the artists get the money... (Score:3, Insightful)
Seriously, there is no evidence at all that the labels (almost all American, btw) will actually give a dime to the artists on top of their existing contracts.
The "standard recording contract" pays the artist an upfront advance that is recouped from the royalties (usually a meager 12-14%, some of which may go to the engineer or the producer). IF and ONLY IF that advance is recouped in full (and record labels have tons of accounting tricks to assert that even a million-seller didn't "recoup") will the artist actually start seeing real royalty payments come in. (BTW, through all of this and beyond, the label owns the music, not the artist.)
There is nothing in the artist contract that actually has allowances for when extra "fees" collected on behalf of the artists of the label actually is applied to the payment of the advance. There is nothing in the accounting systems of a record label that will actually distribute such collected fees back to the artists of the label, either as cash or as applied to the advance.
The label keeps the money, most of which is either pure profit (it didn't cost them anything except paying the lobbyist) or at least is applied to the "general fund" which is used to pay the advance for the next standard artist's standard contract, and the legalized slavery continues unabated.
Unless the law goes against the labels as well, requiring that they show proof that they have changed their contracting and accounting systems to actually give an acceptable cut of this income to the artists, then all that has happened is that the legislation has totally bought into the lies and deceits of the music industry, and is sanctioning theft of both the artists AND the consumers.
Just write some data to it, first (Score:4, Informative)
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:misleading headline and writeup (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:misleading headline and writeup (Score:5, Interesting)
They've also been sounding out the idea of a levy on hard drives.
Re:misleading headline and writeup (Score:4, Informative)
The PCC is also seeking a new $2 to $10 tax on memory cards. The backbone of digital photography has become tangled up in the fight for making sure music companies get every nickel and dime they feel that they deserve."
Re: (Score:2)
"The PCC submitted a proposal to the country's Copyright Board that suggests levies of....$75 for...a...music...c...d"
OK, now let me try to work up some outrage to go along with it:
This article is a joke. The $75 levy wasn't for music CD's...it was for >30GB iPods. The story is inaccurate, and the submitter is an idiot.
There, how'd I do?
Re: (Score:2)
You know why there's no RIAA (CRIA is the Canadian equivalent) lawsuits in Canada? Because they wouldn't stand up in court. We already pay for it in the form of a small tariff on every blank CD and tape we buy. This is just more of the same. I'm not gonna fight it at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)