Petition against Canadian CD-R Tax 57
Darren Morofke wrote to ask the Canadians in our audience to head over and sign a petition against the proposed CD-R tax. We had covered this tax when it was first coming around-let's see if we can help put a stop to this.
Canadian Music (Score:1)
But just remember: Would you rather hear Third Eye Blind on the radio or The Tragically Hip?
(Hum. I'm sure many fellow Americans are going 'tragically what?' Well, here's a link [thehip.com]for you.
GST and the Senate (Score:1)
Doesn't make it legit (was: This tax is good!) (Score:1)
I don't think this is the best way of doing things either, but until people stop making illegal recordings of copyrighted music, the artists should be compensated somehow.
BTW, does anybody know if the US musicians/record companies get any of the money raised from the tax?
<tim><
I hope they don't figure out... (Score:1)
What the tax is really for (Score:1)
Do taxes in canada go to executives? I just assumed it would go to the government...
International law (Score:1)
This is to get Canada in line with international copyright law. This has something to do with a ruling made in the 1950's in Rome. The U.S. already pays this levy, and it is nowhere near the levy proposed in Canada. As I understand, this bill must exist in some form or another. Hopefully Canada will impose a levy similar or lesser to that of the US.
In the meantime, let us just hope that the CDR companies don't take advantage of this situation and try to mark up their products to match the maximum levy. It is true, the levy has not been set, and the levy will be retroactive to the 1st of January 1999.
I wrote a letter to the MPs who are supporting this bill, and asked them if sheet music would qualify as a digital recording media, and if so, what will be the value of the levy imposed upon it?
If there is to be no levy on paper, what is the difference between the rights of musician's sheet music, and live recordings? Is one protected by the law more than another? If not, why? They still have not given me a reply.
I forgot the precise wording, but the bill is explicit in the fact that it must be a media which is commonly used for the purposes of musical recordings. I'm pretty sure sheet music could technically qualify, at least enough to make a point. Scribing musical notes on your chair however, would not.
The levy applies on all imported media, whether you are given it as a gift or not. If you choose not to declare that you have recieved the gift and subsequently not pay the levy, then you are breaking the law.
The one way around it is to have a group of sensory-impaired people purchase and burn CDs for you. They are the only excemption to the levy, and when they sell the burned CDs they will not be selling blank recording media.
I don't think VHS tapes or DVDs fall under this bill. People don't carry portable DVD audio players, or install them in their cars. But the Bill's definitions are a bit fuzzy on definitions... Where CDs, sheet music and audio cassettes are commonly used to store and share music, DVDs are not. There is even some question as to whether the bill will apply to normal-bias (voice grade) audio cassettes.
What the tax is really for (Score:1)
Once again our elected officials are voting themseleves bread & circuses.
F 'em!
What a coincidence: us Dutchies too! (Score:1)
(Perhaps the Wassenaar guys had an exchange of ideas beyond the ordinary stupid crypto export laws...?)
Fortunately, the net is there to voice your protest [www.guts.nl]...
What the tax is really for (Score:1)
Don't blow this out of proportion... (Score:1)
Income generation. (Score:1)
Any thoughts? Perhaps individual artists should ban together and hire an attorney to protect their rights in this matter.
Lando
French or Socialist? Which one is wrong to you? (Score:1)
Marc
Expat Canuk hangs his head in shame (Score:1)
Doesn't make it legit (was: This tax is good!) (Score:1)
Now if we had to pay rich people 5% of our salaries (because they are robbed more), that would be the same thing. It would then be ethical to steal from them (at least for 5% of our salaries), because we already paid for that right. (Please note I said ethical, not legal. Thank you.)
Also...just because a product you make is easily copied, doesn't give you the right to, in essense, steal money from another industry (the media manufactors...taxes on your productsalways lower revenue).
The whole concept is based on a fallacy...if someone drives up to my house in a pickup truck and steals my TV, can I levy a tax on pickup trucks until I can afford a new TV? The idea is crazy...but this is what the recording industry has managed to trick people into paying.
No Subject Given (Score:1)
: be played on radios from 30% to 35%. That means more than 1/3 of the songs played HAVE
: to be Canadian.
Well, why don't you move down south and become an American? Then, you'll be able to listen to all the yankee music you want.
It's a free country, here, nobody's holding you in.
-- ----------------------------------------------
Vive le logiciel... Libre!!!
This policy shouldn't suprise anyone. (Score:1)
: the union mentality) move the fuck out of Canada.
: Undemocratic, too much govt, stupid laws, excessive taxes, french socialism in Quebec etc..
Just move out, it's a free country. We democratically voted socialism in, so why are you complaining?
-- ----------------------------------------------
Vive le logiciel... Libre!!!
One Word (Score:1)
Or did you mean that the Canadians should invade the states and pillage their supply of non-ludicrously-taxed CDR blanks and video tapes?
Video Tapes (Score:1)
I've also heard from a Chrysler employee that about 5 skids of video tapes (ie: 4-5 foot cubes) were seen being loaded into a storage room and locked up, so it seems that they had the same unpleasant feeling about it.
Taxation Without Represention. (Score:1)
Apparently, only music is pirated. There is no contingency for Canadian software companies, who are no doubt robbed of millions though piracy as well. This shows the government has 100% capitulated to the recording industry lobbyists. The government isn't genuinely interested in fostering talent (regardless of discipline), just greasing palms.
Where will the money go? Considering that a $17.00 album yields $1-2.00 for the artist, I would guess a $2.50 tax would equate to about $0.22. Sadly, this is logical. It would only show how shameful the recording industry is, if they started rewarding an artist more for the pirated copy then the original.
The major radio stations don't give new artists much of a chance, so all we get is more Rush, Tragically Hip and BNL. In my area the radio plays new artists in a spot called "Red, White and New", it's runs weekly and 22:00 at night. This is pretty sad. Before running to taxation as a solution, maybe the industry show look at it's self first.
This tax is going to be with us now in one form or another (taxes NEVER get revoked). I would like to ask other posters, how one may go about registering as a recording artist to start collecting a portion of the booty. Hey if we all scratched something together in Cakewalk/Cubase we get back what we put in (minus the $2.28 administration overhead.)
What the tax is really for (Score:1)
of SOCAN, the Canadian musician's union -- many
members of which hate the levy.
International Ordering? (Score:1)
International Ordering? (Score:1)
our blank media elsewhere.
Perhaps the companies that sell media will make
lobby to drop this nonsense when their revenues
dry up!
-- Idan
Us Aussies know it too well (Score:1)
Can-Con (Score:1)
The new tax is a joke but this is Canada. It's what we do best. (except Hockey!)