×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Canadians May Face 25% Download Tariff

timothy posted more than 8 years ago | from the show-me-the-clause-in-the-social-contract dept.

Music 615

C-Yo writes "While Canadians have battled against an iPod tariff for more than a year, now comes news that Canada's copyright collectives are seeking a tariff on iTunes as well. Professor Michael Geist (who last week dismantled music industry claims about peer-to-peer) reports that one collective is demanding an incredible 25% of the gross revenue of music download services as well as 15% of webcasters' gross revenue and 10% of gamers gross revenue (free version of report or Toronto Star reg. version). When combined with other tariff proposals, it would appear that Canada's collectives want to the kill the download industry, demanding at least 40% of everything iTunes, Napster, and other new services earn."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

615 comments

FP (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276533)

"This is Lars Ulrich of the rock band Metallica. Do you know why he's crying? He was planning on getting a solid gold shark tank bar for his pool. But now, since people have been downloading his music from the internet, he has to save up for a couple of months first. Is it still no big deal?" -- Cartman from Southpark

Re:FP (1)

weenis (656512) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276617)

WTF?? that wasn't cartman.
that was the cop that broke in on them dling music . . . .

Re:FP (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276668)

It was cartman. I stand by what I said.

It isn't just downloads.... (5, Informative)

Greg Wright (104533) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276534)

I am not so sure that Canada's collectives want to "kill the download
industry" as much as they are still upset about the United States
failure to comply with the WTO ruling on the Byrd Amendment. In fact,
on March 31st of this year Canada put this out:

"The Government of Canada announced today that it will retaliate
against the United States in light of its failure to comply with the
World Trade Organization (WTO) ruling on the Byrd Amendment. Following
extensive consultations with domestic stakeholders, Canada will impose
a 15 percent surtax on U.S. live swine, cigarettes, oysters and
certain specialty fish, starting May 1, 2005"

Seems to me this download tariff is just another retaliation like the
above. It isn't just Canada either, several countries are upset that
the US has not complied.

For those that don't know, The Byrd amendment, passed by Congress four
years ago, provides that when foreign manufacturers are found to be
dumping goods in the U.S. market -- that is, selling at unfairly low
prices -- any anti-dumping duties that are imposed can be handed over
to the U.S. companies that brought the dumping case, rather than to
the Treasury. It has benefited U.S. firms in industries including
steel and pasta, with one of the largest beneficiaries being Timken
Co., an Ohio maker of bearings, which collected about $40 million last
year.

Re:It isn't just downloads.... (5, Funny)

eviloverlordx (99809) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276591)

Canada will impose a 15 percent surtax on U.S. live swine...starting May 1, 2005

I knew it was pretty easy and cheap to buy politicians, but now Canada is taxing them? How do I get into this racket?

Re:It isn't just downloads.... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276602)

Wow. So just as farmers get paid for not growing crops, manufacturers can get paid for not selling products?

I am in the wrong line of work.

Re:It isn't just downloads.... (1, Insightful)

Geoffreyerffoeg (729040) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276669)

So just as farmers get paid for not growing crops

Oh my gosh. There are still people who believe this is wrong?

Sure, let's go and give incentives for farmers to farm the heck out of their land. Then what do you do when the land is useless for a couple of decades? Appropriately rotating crops and leaving the land to rest at times will give more production than killing the land in a few short years. So no, it isn't "not growing crops."

And price fixing in small amounts is also justified, if the natural market price would force many farmers out of business. Sure, once the food supply runs low the demand will increase, but for something like the food of a nation, letting the free market play out isn't quite the best strategy. If you let the farmers grow all they can, the danger is that supply will outrun immediate demand, prices will fall, suppliers will fail, and demand will far outrun the long-term supply.

Re:It isn't just downloads.... (1, Flamebait)

ThreeE (786934) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276782)

Just finished macroeconomics 101 at your local junior college eh?

Trust me, keep your day job...

Re:It isn't just downloads.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276948)

Mass starvation from transport delays, inevitable with large scale transport, is not beneficial for any nation. Agriculture prices could be lowered by greater international trade but national requirement to have capacity for independent sufficiency in event of war and to stabilise food prices to placate lower classes prevents them from becoming desperate and revolting at every opportunity. Also, with the elimination of local productive capacities the buyer becomes the subject of the seller as they would then at best only face transitory costs, in this case measured in malnutrition and starvation deaths, during restoration of local capacities for agricultural production.

Re:It isn't just downloads.... (1, Insightful)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276658)

Yup. Its the US who has the restrictive trade. That is why we have a $61 billion dollar trade surplus with our trading partners (more info: http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000006& sid=a3EW2L1Gdkow&refer=home) [bloomberg.com]

If we continue to run up $700 billion dollar annual surpluses, our trading partners are pretty soon going to pack up shop and refuse to trade with us. Can you imagine the barriers we must have set up to make this happen? Evil. Pure evil.

I don't blame Canada for this trade war at all. Obviously, the US needs to revamp its trading policies.

Will Canadian musicians be affected.? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276679)

[Greg Wright wrote :]
I am not so sure that Canada's collectives want to "kill the download
industry" as much as they are still upset about the United States
failure to comply with the WTO ruling on the Byrd Amendment. In fact,
on March 31st of this year Canada put this out:


Will this produce a negative impact on any Canadian artists such as k.d. lang, barenaked ladies, Celine Dion, Avril Lavigne, etc., etc.?

Re:Will Canadian musicians be affected.? (5, Funny)

Clay Pigeon -TPF-VS- (624050) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276742)

Will this produce a negative impact on any Canadian artists such as k.d. lang, barenaked ladies, Celine Dion, Avril Lavigne, etc., etc.? We can only hope...

Re:It isn't just downloads.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276703)

USA only plays fair when its to their advantage. The so card Byrd amendment is just another example of USA not playing fair in the international market.

WTO stated what USA is doing is illegal, yet they continue to do so. Why? because it suits their needs, who cares about other countries, right?

Who cares about the WTO? (0)

Travoltus (110240) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276854)

I'm not meaning to insult fans of the world trade organization here. I'm just saying that the it's scary to see the United States even being ASKED to bow down to the WTO. Of course, the US probably created the WTO, and if so this is exactly why I oppose the US trying to make rules for the world. Those rules eventually get rammed back up our own butts.

I say respect the sovereignty of America and of the rest of the world and only violate someone's sovereignty when our country is CLEARLY threatened.

That being said, Canada is free to retaliate as they please... it is, after all, their country.

(note, I'm not intending to be a troll or post flamebait here... I'm trying to make a genuine point.)

Re:Who cares about the WTO? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276923)

(note, I'm not intending to be a troll or post flamebait here... I'm trying to make a genuine point.)

Note: You have failed.

Re:Who cares about the WTO? (1)

Chmarr (18662) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276936)

The WTO was the successor to the GATT, both were created by the UN, not the USA.

Re:It isn't just downloads.... (1)

nametaken (610866) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276922)

I am not so sure that Canada's collectives want to "kill the download
industry"


I think Canada's collectives want to assimilate us and fit us with various technological improvements, like unhinged heads. Resistance is futile.

My apologies to the Canadians, I couldn't help it. Much love!

Re:It isn't just downloads.... (1)

Bullfish (858648) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276937)

There is going to be an increase in the heat applied to the US to bargain fairly by a number of countries. The tariffs put in already are just starting point. How about a 25 per cent tax on energy exports to the US (Canada supplies 40 per cent of US energy imports)? They are already talking in BC about refusing to alow the propsed pipeline from Alaska through the province if they don't start abiding by the softwood lumber rulings. How does $3.00 at the pump sound?

As for this tariff, as others have pointed out, this is just a proposal by music industry lawyers. I mean really. What is a crying shame? A bus full of lawyers going over a cliff with one empty seat.

Really, downloads stink most times. Usually my friends and I just buy one CD each and then copy the one we like.

What the hell is wrong with Canada? (0, Flamebait)

andy_shepard (315539) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276538)

And I thought it sucked here...

Re:What the hell is wrong with Canada? (4, Funny)

zoeith (785087) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276635)

Are they gonna start driving across the border for cds then? Maybe we can get an exchange going!

Re:What the hell is wrong with Canada? (1)

promethean_spark (696560) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276711)

Border Guard: "Howdy sir, welcome to canada, you wouldn't happen to have any fruits, vegetables or blank media in your car, eh?"

Canada (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276556)

I think this will get rid of all the bums in Toronto

And your little dog too! (5, Funny)

FunWithHeadlines (644929) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276561)

"one collective is demanding an incredible 25% of the gross revenue of music download services as well as 15% of webcasters' gross revenue and 10% of gamers gross revenue"

And 7% of gross revenue from hamburger sales since it's been shown that copyright violaters eat them, and 11% of posters of 70s rockers in cheesy poses since their images retain valuable copyrightable money-making potential, and 3% of the sale of every wheelbarrel since they can be used to haul off copyrighted material, and 1% of every breath you take since that's part of a copyrighted song lyric...

25% of what? (0)

Tackhead (54550) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276577)

> one collective is demanding an incredible 25% of the gross revenue of music download services as well as 15% of webcasters' gross revenue and 10% of gamers gross revenue

"Copyright infringement results in no revenue, so enjoy your 25% of nothing, you insensitive clods!"

Re:Did you even read the synopsis!? (1)

Bastian (66383) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276644)

It says clearly in the synopsis on the main page that this tariff is on music downloaded from vendors like the iTunes music store.

That doesn't make any sense... (4, Insightful)

the_skywise (189793) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276578)

The whole point of the tariffs were to collect funding based upon implied piracy. (IE tariff's on blank video tapes because blank tapes were used to "illegally" copy movies and broadcast NFL games and such)

But, at least in the case of iTunes, you're already PAYING for the product. So there's no need to tariff it because the product is being legitimately purchased.

(Of course, that won't stop your friendly government from figuring out how to tax you...)

Re:That doesn't make any sense... (5, Informative)

iamnotanumber6 (755703) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276762)

actually it's not a government tax, the government doesn't get any of the money. it's a copyright collective representing the copyright owners that gets the money, which is called a "levy" rather than a "tax". the money goes to the musicians. and their lawyers. well mostly to their lawyers i'd guess :-)

Re:That doesn't make any sense... (1, Informative)

the_skywise (189793) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276872)

It's a "tariff", which means the government gets ahold of the money first and eventually gets around to doleing it out for its proper use.

The government is getting its cream out from this, at the very least charging the collectives for doing the work for them.

Re:That doesn't make any sense... (2, Insightful)

jdunlevy (187745) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276851)

It makes sense if the interests behind the "copyright collectives" are losing significant revenue to competition from sales on iTunes, e.g. of tracks by more independent artists not represented by the "copyright collectives." Sometimes shutting down the competition is easier than actually competing.

As a Canadian (5, Interesting)

mark*workfire (220796) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276579)

I don't really like our new music & movie association overlords. Thank goodness for sites such as www.allofmp3.com. Since I already pay a tax on my blank media, I feel no shame in downloading from KaZaA or Usenet or Morpheus or IRC. And the music & movie industries blatant cash grabs such as this are simply going to make it harder for legitimate business to prosper, since users won't be as eager to move to them. Quite frankly, since I pay the copyright tax, I really haven't bought that many CD's. However, the movie industry still makes a killing off my kids

Re:As a Canadian (2, Insightful)

drg55 (409730) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276804)

Well, kill the golden goose, the return that a record comapny makes from a retail cd is at least a fifth of what they charge on line.

You idiots, set a reasonable fee, like 5 cents, and watch 200 million people download your song. Charge $1 and get nothing.

I use Allofmp3 because they do pay royalties, I do not condone illegal copyright violations.

Dave from Downunder

As if. (5, Insightful)

Staplerh (806722) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276586)

It doesn't stop with the cited sources either, this proposal has an extremely wide scope. From TFA:

SOCAN's proposal does not stop with music download services. The new Tariff 22 also calls for a tariff of 15 percent of gross revenues from both audio webcast sites that feature content similar to conventional radio stations as well as from established radio stations that webcast their signal. Moreover, gaming sites that communicate musical works as part of their games face a potential tariff of ten percent of gross revenues. In fact, to ensure that no one escapes Tariff 22, SOCAN envisions a tariff of ten percent of gross revenues for all other sites that communicate music.

Ultimately, this is all a bunch of legal poppycock. It's a proposal, and I'd argue that it's a damn stupid, untenable proposal. We need to let the Canadian government know that its a stupid proposal, but I have a feeling that they'll see it for what it is. After all, they've ruled positively in downloading cases before - what with our tariff on blank media.

Kill it in Canada, maybe (5, Insightful)

winkydink (650484) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276589)

When combined with other tariff proposals, it would appear that Canada's collectives want to the kill the download industry, demanding at least 40% of everything iTunes, Napster, and other new services earn."

I can't see it killing these globally, just in Canada.

As a B.C. Canuck (-1, Troll)

JohnnyGTO (102952) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276590)

born and bread all I can say is AAAAHHHHahhahhhaaahha Socialism you gotta love it. Thank good I live in Arizona.

Re:As a B.C. Canuck (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276671)

Well, thank Good Arizona's public school system is so good... or is it?

Re:As a B.C. Canuck (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276722)

This doesn't look like socialism, more like the work of corporate lobbyism.

Re:As a B.C. Canuck (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276809)

First, the fees are not a tax, they are a levy, which means the funds are given to the private sector. That hardly seems socialist to me. Second, this seems far better than to play the lawsuit lottery.

Note that I am not condoning the collection of such a high levy, because it will kill any chance for music downloads to succeed. On the other hand, it will be another reason to delay the time where canadians will be sued.

Easy solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276592)


Easy solution: pirate everything!

Tell me again how great Canada is. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276601)

I need to hear it.

I really want to think it's true, but doggone, things like this and the way news that paints a government in power is stifled, and I gotta wonder.

Anonymous Coward (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276605)

But thats 25% Canadian so its less than 25% American.

Eh? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276607)

as long as they can still upload for free, I'm not worried.

Potential problem for all access monopolies (5, Interesting)

wheelbarrow (811145) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276610)

This is a manifestation of one fear I have about publicly owned internet access monopolies (municipal WiFi). Some activist city council somewhere could decide that these sorts of taxes are just the thing needs to fund libraries, kiddie daycare, free everything, etc. Or, perhaps, activist city councils could decide to ban access to politically incorrect activities on the internet (e.g. cigarette purchasing).

There are dangers to collectivist centralization. Give me the hell of high stakes competition and unclear standards.

Oh Canada! (1, Troll)

AstroDrabb (534369) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276613)

Wow! What is wrong with these Socialists? How in the world can they say to themselves, "OK, our citizens are LEGALLY paying for music, however, they are all theives, so we might as well tack on another 25%!".

Re:Oh Canada! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276739)

You're a moron if you think this has anything to do with socialism.

You're also a moron if you think Canada has a socialist government.

Re:Oh Canada! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276940)

You're a moron if you think this has anything to do with socialism.You're also a moron if you think Canada has a socialist government.

Right, it would only be socialism if all this money went to providing universal, free access to all music downloads. It would be Canadian socialism if it took weeks for your free music to arrive.

Re:Oh Canada! (1)

gobbo (567674) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276779)

Wow! What is wrong with these Socialists?

Woah, doofus, CRIA is a bunch of capitalist overlords, eh, they're about as pinko commie as the RIAA.

Re:Oh Canada! (2, Informative)

Soko (17987) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276790)

We pay a reasonable tariff on blank media that has the ability to play back content protected by copyright. This is to compensate the artists for any violations of copyright due to selling blank media. It works out pretty well. Its Socialist in that we're trying to be fair to everyone.

SOCAN doesn't think anything is fair unless they say it is.

SOCAN - these people would have the government tax air if they could, since it is capable of carrying copyrighted material - is proposing a totally unreasonable tariff in order to ensure that they still control the channels of distribution. Make no mistake, this is not about getting money - it's about making sure some garage band in Sarnia doesn't produce a CD quality track, release it via p2p and suddenly everyone realises they don't need the big content companies anymore.

That's what al the bluster is about.

Soko

Drinkin' the koolaid (0, Troll)

Mr. Underbridge (666784) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276865)

We pay a reasonable tariff on blank media that has the ability to play back content protected by copyright. This is to compensate the artists for any violations of copyright due to selling blank media. It works out pretty well. Its Socialist in that we're trying to be fair to everyone.

A reasonable tariff is zero. By your logic, they should go ahead and put me in prison for owning a gun "capable" of killing someone. Why does your country accept this idea of punishing everyone evenly for possible illegal use of something that is generally used for legal things? How come copiers aren't taxed? And who gets that tariff money?

Re:Drinkin' the koolaid (1)

Soko (17987) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276924)

A reasonable tariff is zero. By your logic, they should go ahead and put me in prison for owning a gun "capable" of killing someone.

I said 'reasonable" meaning "not onerous" - it adds pennies to the price of a blank CD. Your example is way over the top.

Why does your country accept this idea of punishing everyone evenly for possible illegal use of something that is generally used for legal things?

It's not punishment. Its trying to be fair to everyone.

How come copiers aren't taxed? And who gets that tariff money?

Copiers aren't taxed since they don't affect the business models of book publishers to any great degree. The tariff money is supposed to be evenly divided amongst copyright holders.

Soko

Re:Oh Canada! (1)

iamnotanumber6 (755703) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276797)

it's not a government tax, it's a "proposal" by the copyright collectives that represent private copyright holders, asking the government to pass a law that lets them collect money for nothing.

Re:Oh Canada! (1)

nightfire-unique (253895) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276807)

Wow! What is wrong with these Socialists?

As a Canadian, let me just say: this isn't socialism; this is corruption. It's not limited to the US.

Re:Oh Canada! (1)

quakeroatz (242632) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276927)

Socialist?
Maybe a few isolated Premiers, Boob Rae in Ontario, and Vander Zam(sp) in BC.

Aside from those brief red blinks we're pretty much 100% capitalist pig dogs. We just don't let people suffer because they can't afford healthcare, that line is purely American.

Strange tax rates, choose the cheapest! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276618)

music download: 25%
radio-station-style audio webcast: 15%
video game music: 10%
recorded sex moans: 0%

Dammit, they're taxing the wrong ones... (4, Funny)

nxtr (813179) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276622)

They should tax the illegal downloaders. Then again 25% of 0 is... um... uh... get back to me.

Copyright cases: the next Tobacco cases? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276632)

Anyone know how the U.S. trial lawyers can use these proposed laws to "benefit" the average consumers? The trial lawyers used the legal environment in the USA to almost bankrupt the tobacco companies. RIAA/MPAA and the recording/movie studios look like a juicy target for the trial lawyers.

Hypothetical scenario:

Trial lawyer sues Columbia Pictures $1 billion for excessive harassment of innocent movie customers?

France has something similar... (5, Informative)

Sprotch (832431) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276636)

In France all blank writable media is subject to a special tax. The proceeds of this tax are distributed to the various copyright agencies. The idea is that since they are going to be used to rip music or videos anyway, the copyright holders should get some compensation. Uterly silly, but it has been effective since the first blank audio cassettes arrived on the market....

Re:France has something similar... (1)

NetNifty (796376) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276690)

Well that makes sense (I mean yeah a lot of blank media is going to be used for that), but this is just plain stupid - they're taxing people who download and pay for the product, which in turn makes the product more expensive, making people more likely to download the product illegally instead.

Re:France has something similar... (1)

NetNifty (796376) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276709)

s/illegally/through less legitimate channels . Forgot it isn't illegal (at the moment anyway) to download copyrighted music in Canada without permission.

Re:France has something similar... (2, Interesting)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276701)

Yep, same in Sweden too... And in place since the cassettes here too.

It's a compensation for our fair use laws, it's said. Because you can copy music to your close friends and not violate any laws, they're said to need this compensation.

Re:France has something similar... (1, Troll)

Vaevictis666 (680137) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276743)

Yes, Canada has this blank media surcharge as well. As well as applying to media such as CDs and DVDs, it also applies to some appliances, like standalone MP3 players (and it's a huge amount for iPods)

It's not that similar when you think about it (1)

Khashishi (775369) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276769)

How does relate to a tax on online music stores and others? Maybe a tax on hard drives or the internet would be more analogous.

Re:France has something similar... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276895)

When they start taxing reams of paper accordingly (for their copyright-violation potential [side-note: let's tax bullets for their mis-use potential and give the moneys collected to families of individuals' lives cut short by them]), then France and Canada will be on the right track.

For everyone who thinks France/Canada are wacky with this: the idea started in the United States when early CD-R discs earmarked for sole CD-AUDIO use (special bit set to allow them only to work in over-priced consumer 4x and slower burning devices no longer available on the market for obvious reasons) were taxed in this way. The U.S.'s RIAA invented this media tax.

I can't recall off-hand right now, but I seem to remember an unintended consequence of this bizarre tax scheme in Canada being that consumers' fair-use rights weren't squeezed as much as they are in the U.S. in some important court case. Of course, the price of this is a tax collected by the government, given to private individuals, and people who wish to use media to make their own original material being penalized for no reason.

Yeah.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276639)

fine.. but then this money should be set aside to provide medical coverage to MP3 players.

Let's see... (1)

Headcase88 (828620) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276686)

Take the place where downloading illegally is probably more safe than most other places, and then charge extra to download legally.

riiiight....

I'd bet not (0, Troll)

Malicious (567158) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276691)

For those who don't keep track, Canada is currently (however not necessarily for much longer) ruled by a Minority government. Chances of any bill that smells even vaguely of Controversy is slim to nil. Now if the Conservative party should take control, it's time to move to a country where freedom is free. Like Quebec.

SOCAN The Saviors of Canadian Music? (1)

rinkjustice (24156) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276692)

I can see SOCAN [socan.ca] handing Bryan Adams a big fat check; monies accrued from the greedy hordes of music downloaders at iTunes. Yeah right.

Question is, if they were able to levy these tariffs, where would this money really go? Back to the artists? Into a legal fund? I doubt the artist would benefit one ioda from these taxes (much like Employment Insurance in Canada which is a huge ripoff taxgrab from the middle class worker).

Re:SOCAN The Saviors of Canadian Music? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276883)

argh!

learn to pronounce your Ts and your spelling will improve!

iota

But then I guess, what can you expect on the innernet?

So does this make downloading files legal? (3, Insightful)

pagefaultca (859270) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276729)

So if I am paying for them with a tarriff does that mean I can download anything I want now and not pay a cent. Since technically I just already paid for it?

Re:So does this make downloading files legal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276914)


So far as I understand that's actually been the theory up until now. You're not actually allowed to share files on the net, but you can leech to your heart's content.

My opinion...... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276730)

I HATE microsoft! Pee in my anus! I'd suck CowBoyNeals dick any day of the week! ....You know the rest.

Whoopidy do (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276731)

There isn't a single tax that Canadians don't like. Nothing new under the sun.

Holy.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276732)

Holy Socialism Batman..

I don't think this applies to me. (4, Informative)

Grey Ninja (739021) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276750)

I mean, honestly. I don't know a single person who's ever BOUGHT a song online. Absolutely everyone I know has a ridiculously huge music collection that's come from napster, bittorrent, kazaa, morpheus, winmx, you name it. Anything but an officially sanctioned music site.

There's no incentive for us. We already pay a tax on our blank media, and downloading and uploading music are perfectly legal in Canada. Somehow I don't think that the online music companies are going to be shaking in their boots at all.

That's great news (1)

Anita Coney (648748) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276751)

I was worried that successful legitimate services like iTunes would hinder the flow of free P2P music. Let's praise the Canadian government for helping to stamp out legitimate online music!

bout time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276770)

finally the canadians get screwed...
us Americans have had to put up with this for years...
*all of the USA collectively sticks out their tounges at Canada - "na na"!*

The only time a Tarrif should be collected (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276792)

Is when you are on a dock and there's a man that goes "Yeharr, that be five shillings to be where you be"

*ahem* Or possibly when an official purchase is made.

Maybe NOT a 40% price increase? (2, Interesting)

mh101 (620659) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276798)

My first reaction from reading the blurb, was "Oh crap, a 40% price increase on iTMS?"

After reading the article and re-reading the summary, the key point here is that these groups want up to 40% of the gross revenue. Unfortunately I'm not 100% certain as to the definition of "gross revenue," but if as I suspect, that means "whatever is left in the bank after paying the related expenses" then this would be 40% of Apple's cut. If they (or the runners of other music download services, for that matter) only get to see 5% of my $0.99, and assuming they raise their price to cover this tarriff, then that would only be a 2% increase.

Of course, I may be wrong in my understanding. IANALOA (lawyer or accountant).

Woah, exactly when (2, Insightful)

hypergreatthing (254983) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276818)

did non-gov't organizations get the ability to tax people or even suggest a tax? Hell, I'd love to start a company and propose they tax the hell out of everyone and collect it. Considering that those "collectives" do not represent everyone, it seems quite unfair. I'd say boot them out just for thinking about it.

A rule of thumb (:-)) (1)

davecb (6526) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276819)

Don't bothe reading any newspaper article with "may" in the title, or whose title is a question.... which also seems appropriate here (:-))

Rogue nation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276824)

Red Canada must be stopped. We've seen their kind before. God willing, our nation's forces will be victorious over this rogue regime and restore freedom to their oppressed people and secure them from tyranny, injustice, and excessive music fees. Thank you and may God bless America.

absurd (2, Insightful)

YayaY (837729) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276831)

I don't see why anyone would think this tax would be a good idea. After all, if a compagny thinks that music downloaded from online store are going to get rip, why don't they just raise the price? Plus, how do you distribute fairly the amount of money raised by the tax? IMHO, the song that get downloaded the most get the largest piece of the pie. From my point of view, it seems the same as raising the price tag for a song.

oh ha ha ha (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276841)

I don't know how many times I've read that Canada is closer to a divine perfection than the US, well at least I can say something for sure, my state representative to the congress listens to its people instead of paying favors to the music industry, when canadians stopped having their voices heard?, oh I forgot, the so called canadian socialism is a dictatorship in disguise, prove me wrong with all the violations to human rights in canada and the goverment spending on so unimportant issues like music downloading.

Contex, PLEASE. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276842)

Another cryptic Slashdot summary. Geez, we don't ALL know what to make of this mysterious "Canada" of which you speak. Whowherehuh?

Anyway, from a helpful primer I found:

"In fact, Canadians enjoy advancements such as refrigerated food, zippers and printing," notes Dorman, an "accountant" who goes to work wearing the comfortable trousers, dress shirt and necktie that form a traditional Canadian costume. "Our industries are large and varied, ranging from logging to automobile manufacturing."

Not too shabby for a nation that just 240 years ago had no electricity.

More info here [att.net]. Good to know.

download services should publish their own music (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276846)

... just don't offer stuff where the old industry owns copyright.

the old music industry is doomed. why subsidize it any onger?

As a canadian... (4, Interesting)

meanfriend (704312) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276856)

There might be a scenario that would be acceptable to me. The blank cd levy may not be perfect, but as we saw in a previous slashdot story, it more than compensates the industry for *ahem* lost revenues due to illegal copying.

From the article:

"...The SODRAC/CMRRA proposals demand the greater of either 15 percent of gross revenues or ten cents per permanent download..." Emphasis mine.

If by "permanent download", they mean non-DRM encumbered file that I may have unlimited personal use in perpetuity, then to me, that is a fair tradeoff for a small tarriff. The 25% figure quoted on the front page would be way too high, but if I can legally download an mp3/flac/ogg/whatever and burn it as many times, put it on as many portable players, and stream it from as many computers as I want for my own personal use, without some retarded DRM app phoning home to ask for permission, then that might be worth a small surcharge.

If they insist or crippling it with DRM or if (download price + tarrif) > (price I'm willing to pay), then guess what? They've just outsmarted themselves out of potential revenue (though we know who they'll want to blame for that...)

True, legimate buyers end up covering the costs of the thieves, but the same goes for any other industry (retail, insurance, etc). I think it's more important for both sides to compromise a bit to keep the system usable for the vast majority of legitimate users, then to screw everyone in sight.

Canadian Gov. (2, Insightful)

Deliveranc3 (629997) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276860)

Canadians wouldn't retaliate in this way against U.S. companies, the Byrd proposal is in direct violation of Nafta which was a pretty damn big deal and Canadians were largely against.

That out of the way I have faith in Canadian regulators to find public methods of stimulating Canadians arts into which to dump the money so it won't benefit corperations (like it would in the states)...

The main reason, well if the RIC (or whatever is pushing it) then it's simply because they don't want to negotiate with apple which is silly because we have the same large music corperations (Sony etc.) but who knows maybe they're bitter.

The main thing that Canadians have and many other countries also have is regulations requiring media distributers to distribute a certain level of Canadian content (it's not bad maybe 15% or 25% but it's well regulated and has to be in prime time etc.) This leads to strange effects where artists become huge in Canada without any international acclaim.

Anyway this tarriff could be used to replace this clause, since we're getting RIC lawsuits anyway (Despite the fact that our laws will rule against them) it seems the only possible reason.

It's nice to be able to trust our government to have the interest of the citizens and artists at heart rather than industry, they do get a trifle misguided sometimes though I'll admit.

They don't want to KILL pay-for-play, (2, Interesting)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276879)

they simply want to be the only ones that can do it. The simplest way to do that is to have the government tax any competition out of existence, and then make any such competition illegal. iTunes is certainly competition (even though it has to pay royalties for every song it sells). And, sure as Hell's a mantrap, you can bet that there will "exceptions" to any such tax regulations that exempt the big boys from forking over a penny. It stinks, any way you look at it.

Where it got written (in either Canadian or U.S. law) that monopolies are entitled to maintenance and protection by either of our respective governments is beyond me. It's ridiculous. I'm sorry, I like music as much as the next man, but I don't consider the studios to be such an important national treasure that they can't be allowed to stand a little competition. And, if that competition proves to be a little too stiff and the music cartels just happen to go under ... well, I certainly won't shed many tears for them.

I believe they are the "evil entities" that both Captain Kirk and Captain Picard referred to in a number of episodes.

Not so bad (2, Funny)

cmcguffin (156798) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276902)

You have to put it in its proper perspective.

25% Canadian is only 20% American, after all.

And that's before converting from metric to Imperial.

Is it me or.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12276930)

Is it me or are these people sounding too much the same:

Michael Wiess
and
Michael Geist

Can you say conspiracy?

Fat Chance (4, Interesting)

IamLarryboy (176442) | more than 8 years ago | (#12276938)

"Canadians May Face 25% Download Tariff"

Canadians are not facing ANYTHING. The governing party is in the midst of the biggest political scandal in 50 years. In addition, they are a minority government. They were only able to pass the budget because the conservatives were not ready for an election and allowed it to pass. By all the indication of the polls the next government will be a Conservative minority. That government won't be able to pass a bill against murder let alone something as complex as copyright. Canadians, for the forseeble future, have a government that is for all intent and purposes, nuttered; Just as it should be :-)

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...