×

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!

Canadian Copyright Group Wants iPod Tax

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the oh-and-5-bucks-for-the-earbuds dept.

Media 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."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

408 comments

The very least they could do (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17977592)

Is have a true sliding scale. Under that pricing scheme, the 1gb ipod has a $5 tax, while the 2gb model has a $25 tax rather than $10. Sheesh.

Re:The very least they could do (3, Insightful)

AlHunt (982887) | more than 7 years ago | (#17978092)

Really? Why would you suggest knuckling under to it at all? Don't BUY an iPod, or anything else the bastards tax. Let your voice (dollars, euros, whatever) be heard. At the end of the day, business buys legislatures and your money effects business. Vote where it matters - forget the ballot box.

Fucking Kikes (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17977596)

Damned greedy Jews in charge of record companies

Should I move to Canda? (5, Insightful)

mstromb (869949) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977598)

So, this means that I get to download anything I want while in Canada free of guilt and cost... right?

Re:Should I move to Canda? (5, Insightful)

Babillon (928171) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977670)

That's the way I go about things. They're pretty much just yelling at us "Hey, go for it. We think you're stealing anyway."

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.

What's more... (4, Interesting)

Kythe (4779) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977706)

...considering that you could fit maybe 250 128 bps mp3's on a 1 GB iPod (that comes to about $.02 per song), I guess we know now how much people should be penalized for illegal music sharing.

Re:Should I move to Canda? (5, Interesting)

acidrain (35064) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977966)

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:Should I move to Canda? (1)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 7 years ago | (#17978008)

> The upside is that it is perfectly legal for Canadians to share their music
> with each other...

So it's just like the US (hint: Audio Home Recording Act).

Crucial difference (2, Interesting)

C10H14N2 (640033) | more than 7 years ago | (#17978084)

"Making files available on the web is brodcasting"

Americans don't seem to grok that one. "Sharing" to them extends to handing out a copy to every resident of the planet.

You've gotta be shitting me (2, Insightful)

DurendalMac (736637) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977606)

It's good to know that the record industry in the US aren't the only thugs in the business. Yeah, let's just assume everyone is a crook and charge them up front! The greed of these fuckers is absolutely endless.

Re:You've gotta be shitting me (5, Interesting)

Derek Loev (1050412) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977668)

According to this article" [com.com] music sharing does not kill CD sales due to the fact that those that download music would not likely buy it in the first place. MP3 Players and P2P software have become the scapegoat of the music industry. They are trying to compensate for something they caused (by releasing music overpriced and more) by taking away from the consumer. It's completely ridiculous.

Re:You've gotta be shitting me (1)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977852)

Shh, you're not supposed to point that out. Someone has to be blamed for "lax CD sales" [though I've been told they're doing better, who to trust, who to trust....] and it can't possibly be the complete and utter lack of talent.

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 cancellations are funny as hell. Now the fucker is on WWE challenging wrestlers? Go white boy go!

Tom

Re:You've gotta be shitting me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17977798)

Furthermore, you'll notice that they put 'illegal' in quotes because actually, it isn't illegal.

Why do I need to pay this? I buy my music @ iTMS (4, Insightful)

aristotle-dude (626586) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977620)

Do they want me to stop buying music? If I am going to be charged for buying a new iPod, I should be able to download at least as much music as it costs for the fee right? If they are going to accuse people of being thieves, then I suppose they have no choice but to stop buying music completely and just pirate it. Way to go CRIAA. Have fun with bankruptcy.

Re:Why do I need to pay this? I buy my music @ iTM (1)

Derek Loev (1050412) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977708)

What will they do when we learn to pirate iPods? HA! What then RIAA??

Re:Why do I need to pay this? I buy my music @ iTM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17977968)

All hail the FLIP FLOP TAX

Re:Why do I need to pay this? I buy my music @ iTM (4, Interesting)

Undefined Parameter (726857) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977892)

I have a better question: If this becomes Canadian law, does that mean that Apple's iTMS and other MP3 stores start providing their content free to Canadian individuals, but start charging the labels/artists per song?

Sweet... (1)

locokamil (850008) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977624)

... state-sanctioned anal penetration!

Friends, we should rejoice, for it is quite clear that we live in exciting and progressive times.

Re:Sweet... (3, Funny)

dmoen (88623) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977802)

state-sanctioned anal penetration!

It's a Canadian tradition. Why else would we legalize gay marriage?

Re:Sweet... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17978104)

> state-sanctioned anal penetration!

Saynkshunned? Looks like you misspelled "mandated" there.

misleading headline and writeup (-1, Flamebait)

macadamia_harold (947445) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977628)

If approved, this propoal would increase the price of a 30-GB iPod by 26% ... 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.

When did ipods become the "backbone of digital photography"?

Re:misleading headline and writeup (3, Insightful)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977680)

memory cards are the backbone of digital photography and they want to add $2-$10 to them.

Re:misleading headline and writeup (4, Interesting)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977768)

They've also been sounding out the idea of a levy on hard drives.

Re:misleading headline and writeup (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17977686)

"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:misleading headline and writeup (3, Informative)

Goaway (82658) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977690)

I know it's too much to expect people to read the articles linked here, but could you at least read the entire summary?

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:misleading headline and writeup (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17977696)

I like skipping parts of articles too, but sheesh:

The PCC is also seeking a new $2 to $10 tax on memory cards.

Re:misleading headline and writeup (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17977698)

When did ipods become the "backbone of digital photography"?

You missed the sentence in between, you idiot:

"...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..."

I know nobody reads the article any more, but you could at least read the summary, especially when you cut & paste it.

Idiot.

Re:misleading headline and writeup (1)

LordKronos (470910) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977936)

Cool, so we can just turn any relevant parts of an article into "..." and then complain about the story, right? OK, let me give it a shot:

"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?

Hey Canadians... (3, Interesting)

tsm_sf (545316) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977632)

Is the fee you currently pay on blank CDs considered a license to burn whatever you want?

Re:Hey Canadians... (2, Informative)

flyingfsck (986395) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977704)

Yes. I copy CDs from the town library guilt free...

Re:Hey Canadians... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17977844)

So can I order CD's or memory cards from canada,
ship them to the US, and then copy all the music I want onto them? :P

I think I could live with 5 to 10 cents a song...

Wait, I forgot to account for the RIAA border crossing tax in there too. oh well...

Re:Hey Canadians... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17977730)

This fee should have been targeted on sales of units in bulk. The duplicators should have been targeted, not those who by spindles of 50 or even 100. Those people are not the ones responsible for the majority of the pirating.

Re:Hey Canadians... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17977908)

what about those who then copy their own stuff legitimately (someone releasing their own EP)? Admittedly they're getting screwed anyway on CDs but the problem remains either way. The scum get the money for somethnig they aren't entitled to.

Re:Hey Canadians... (2, Informative)

KillerBob (217953) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977896)

Basically, yeah. It is. It's the rationale for why the recording industry hasn't ever even tried to sue people for downloading music in Canada: it'd never stand up in court. We're already compensating the artists directly through the tariffs, which are getting distributed to the artists' guilds directly, not to their industrialist herders.

Re:Hey Canadians... (2, Informative)

Henry V .009 (518000) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977978)

The recording industry has never tried to sue anyone in the U.S. for downloading -- only uploading.

Huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17977638)

Would they do the same for all HDDs? I mean... thats all an iPod is. Does this mean they could also tax SD, CF, or anything else? This is absurd.

Canadians just like their taxes I suppose.

How much of this would get to the artist in question anyways?

Re:Huh? (1)

rustalot42684 (1055008) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977748)

Actually, I, as a Canadian, [and I do not claim to represent views of people other than myself] favour legitimate taxes (i.e. income, sales, property, etc., as long as the money is used wproperly, whilst acknowledging that there will always be some waste. However, ridiculous and ineffective taxes, such as this one, which does not differentiate between media used for music & media used for other things (which would, by the way, be very hard to enforce), are not acceptable.

Re:Huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17977958)

It is not a tax. Be definition, taxes are money collected for the government. Money collected for a 3rd party is called a levy.

Thought this was old news as there had been refund when this levy was abolished. Did they bring it back again?

Consumers (2, Insightful)

CriminalNerd (882826) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977640)

Eventually, if this tax is approved, the entire weight of the tax is going to shifted onto the consumers. Why must the consumers be punished by the same people they're purchasing music from? And people wonder why I never listen to/buy new music these days.

Re:Consumers (5, Insightful)

ChoralScholar (1062892) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977720)

First of all, this is more "you have an iPod, you must be a criminal" nonsense. Well, here's what I have to say about RIAA and it's Canadian counterpart: If you treat everyone like they're a thief, it's probably because you're a thief too. (Credit to my father who said this referring to Wal-Mart) Furthermore, from their standpoint, why give people MORE ammo with which to justify pirating music and video. This will have the OPPOSITE effect than they want. (i.e. I paid $75 extra for this 30Gig iPod, and I'm gonna get my money's worth.. etc...)

Re:Consumers (1)

flyingfsck (986395) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977738)

Think of the poor artists! Since they cannot make money from bad quality new music, they are forced to charge consumers multiple times for the same old music. Sniff...

Re:Consumers (1)

edschurr (999028) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977980)

I don't think it is actually a tax, despite what the article paraphrases. It's a "levy" because the government doesn't get a dime; it goes to the collective or whomever.

Translation, please... (4, Insightful)

Kythe (4779) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977644)

These collections are intended to compensate artists and labels for the losses they suffer when people 'illegally' copy or transfer music

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... (1)

Sneakernets (1026296) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977678)

I'm so tired of hearing that bullshit phrase, "Compensation for the artists". We are not fucking stupid, MAFIAA!

Idiocy (1)

rustalot42684 (1055008) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977650)

Yeah! Let's add even more cost to music! I'm sure our totally loyal customers won't care! I mean, our sales haven't been decreasing at all lately, so this couldn't add to any problems we might have!!

Re:Idiocy (1)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977818)

I have very little sympathy for thieves (bring out the "it's not theft, it is copyright infringement" whiners). However, if I were subject to this "tax", I'd damn well steal enough to compensate me for this tax. After all, if I've already paid for it, then I am going to get my money's worth.

Re:Idiocy (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17977976)

Wow. People really don't know how to troll anymore.

What about the other memory? (2, Interesting)

ezratrumpet (937206) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977656)

I know musicians who can reproduce a musical score after only one hearing. Are we going to find a way to control them? What's more - they have virtually limitless memory.

Someone call someone before the fabric of society is torn!

Re:What about the other memory? (1)

AppleButter (1061188) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977754)

Doorman: "May I check your coat, sir?" Savant: "Yes, who do I leave my brain with this evening?" Doorman: "The recording industry will collect that inside. Be careful, please, we've had reports of brains with unauthorized memories of music being confiscated." Savant: "Best I should just leave, then. I heard a cover band playing a Beatles tune last night."

Re:What about the other memory? (3, Funny)

TheLink (130905) | more than 7 years ago | (#17978036)

The problem with current copyright laws is that in the future everyone might be able to have that sort of memory for hearing, sight etc. You can also have virtual telepathy. Most of the tech is already available, it's just a matter of cost and making the implants safer and better.

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 (1)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977660)

Levies get shot down entirely, music industry goes and sits on their thumbs. Why should I pay SOCCAN [or whatever] money for DVD-Rs that I use to backup my HD with?

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

Re:One of two things (1)

edschurr (999028) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977944)

Actually, I don't think any DVD mediums have levies. The levy is meant to be for music recordings, after all.

It'll get worse (1)

Khyber (864651) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977952)

soon enough we'll be paying a tax on hard drives because of this nonsense. I say fuck this noise. No agency has a right to charge me a tax on something I may not use for music, or if it does get used for music, it's MY music. Charging me for using my own property in my own way is just fucked up.

Re:It'll get worse (1)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977994)

Yeah, but you have to realize this is driven by greed, not necessity. Logic flies out the window. What I love is the double standard. They claim the levy is to offset piracy, then claim that piracy should be illegal. Well can't have it both ways.

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 themselves.

Tom

I'll be the first to say it: (1)

cuantar (897695) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977666)

this is BULLSHIT.

To the Canadians: please, PLEASE help out your neighbors down south and oppose this proposal before our infernal RIAA decides it would be a good idea to pay off some Congress-critter to tack it onto another "defence-related" bill.

Re:I'll be the first to say it: (1)

KillerBob (217953) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977718)

yeah, no. It'd be a good thing, really... because it would be grounds to prove in court that I've already paid for any music downloading I ever do.

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:I'll be the first to say it: (1)

anagama (611277) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977846)

And while they're at it, Jim Flaherty could go too. I have a grudge against the MOF for other reasons, but still ...

Response? (1)

FrozenFOXX (1048276) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977716)

Could this be a response to last week's news regarding the amount of movie bootlegs coming out of Canada or should this be considered totally unrelated?

Uh huh (1)

romland (192158) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977736)

Times have changed
Our kids are getting worse
They won't obey their parents
They just want to fart and curse!
Should we blame the government?
Or blame society?
Or should we blame the loss on pirac(eeee)?

No...

DUDE!! Go for it!!!! (1)

Mabonus (185893) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977742)

No, really. Pay the $5, $25, $50 whatever on your ipod. Then, DOWNLOAD EVERYTHING and put it all on there. If anyone tries to sue you, tell them to STFU because you've paid for it.

Re:DUDE!! Go for it!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17977790)

Actually, that's basically what it is. It's the same thing for blank CD's over here too. We pay a tax on them and in return they agree not to sue us.

Write your MP. (1)

arthurpaliden (939626) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977764)

Write your Mp about this and explain to him that he/she was not elected so that they could enact a 'tax' that by definition makes both Them and you a criminal.

Where's my brother's money, dammit? (5, Interesting)

swordgeek (112599) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977772)

My brother is a full-time professional musician in Alberta, and has been now for about 20 years. It's not an easy job, but it's his love and his passion.

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:Where's my brother's money, dammit? (1)

flyingfsck (986395) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977806)

Because these CD tarriffs and whatnot are not actually collected. There is no mechanism in place to collect and distribute the tax, consequently the existing CD levee is ignored by blank CD importers. My guess is that the same fate will befall the latest money grab attempt.

Re:Where's my brother's money, dammit? (3, Informative)

wes33 (698200) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977938)

It's a levy not a tax. You don't see it at the cash register. According to the Canadian Private Copying Collective they collected $35M in 2005 (http://cpcc.ca/english/finHighlights.htm). Up to 2005 they have distributed almost $93M. Why the OP's brother hasn't seen any of it, I can't say.

Re:Where's my brother's money, dammit? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17977874)

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?

And how many copies of his albums were sold? Critical acclaim is not the same thing as high sales volume. The money is distributed based on album sales.

Is he the copyright holder? Songwriter? Or a performer doing a work-for-hire?

Now I am pissed.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17977786)

First off they tax me every time I burn a Linux ISO to a cd....not they have the balls to suggest that when I record something of my own to a media player or whatever then I should pay the "already subsidized" so called Canadian artists for the ability to record anything! As Bugs says "you realize this means war?" If they get away with this nonsense I am going to pirate copies of Terry Jacks and Edward Bear and Celine and give them away for free...just for vengeance. I have never pirated anything and yet wind up being assumed guilty. If the recording industry does not smarten up there are many who will just stop buying content period. I have a large collection of legally purchased cd's but will completely stop supporting the industry if this idiotic tax becomes law!

Revolution! (4, Funny)

rossz (67331) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977816)

The members of the RIAA and the Canadian equivalent will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes.

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.

Private Copying Levy (5, Informative)

vic-traill (1038742) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977824)

The Private Copying Levy is what lets me download with impunity in Canada. The dollars may or may not actually get to the artists (google away on this one), but it certainly does facilitate my p2p activities.

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_conten t/task,view/id,1200/Itemid,85/nsub,/ [michaelgeist.ca]

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.

Is it just me, or... (1)

Arceliar (895609) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977830)

If you're going to tax anything with the potential to store music, why not start an electricity tax while you're at it? Pirates need electricity to run their computers and download, why not charge every person in Canada who uses electricity an extra 30 or 40 a month and give it to the recording industry? I mean...seriously...

Thank goodness things are still semi-sane here in the US.

Why not make it an option? (2, Insightful)

Kythe (4779) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977836)

If they think this is a good deal, then why not make it part of a package when one buys an iPod? Spend an additional $5 for your 1GB iPod, and you get a contract that says you can download as much cartel music as you want, from any source, to that device.

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.

Have any artists actually seen any money from this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17977838)

There's currently something like this on blank CD's, right? How much money has it raised and where exactly has that money been distributed? How do you even work out fairly who it would go to? Does any artist actually see a single cent from this scheme?

How do I send them my comments? (4, Insightful)

javacowboy (222023) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977842)

How do I contact the organizations making these proposals? I want to give them a piece of my mind, namely to tell them they can't have it both ways:

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. :) (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17977940)

Seems like local versions of these interest groups in other countries, are lobbying for similar taxes. sometimes they get away with it, sometimes they don't. The all have the same thing in common that they lack any form of PR skills. :)

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 a lot of money. I believe that the price today still is like 3 times higher in DK. about 1$ for 1 DVD.
Example in Danish and Kr. http://www.edbpriser.dk/Products/Listprices.asp?ID =175201 [edbpriser.dk]
(se) eq. online shop in Sweden. (de) eq. shop in Germany. fragt=delivery, pris=price, total=price incl. delivery.
The shop in the bottom are a local/national shop, hence the 3x price.

So all they gained from the tax was that everyone who aren't stupid, are buying their media in bulk from abroad. and then they get 0%. Even when I bought a DVD burner in a store they advised me not to buy the DVDs in their shop(they also only had small selection even tough it was a huge store), but order them online from Germany instead.

Piracy now legal in Canada? (1)

MBrichacek (1063004) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977942)

In that case I'll just buy my memory in the United States, but continue to download in Canada ;) But on a more serious note, wouldn't this suggest to the public that downloading is actually acceptable since they are truly paying for it when they pay for such a device?

It only makes sense (1)

Bullfish (858648) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977948)

Actually, it only makes sense. DRM etc won't stop downloading so the companies may as well get something. This is all cool provided two things: the first is that the artists actually get the cash, and the second is that this set of numbers is only a start position for negotiations. Properly done, this can be quite a decent solution for all involved.

And yes, then you can continue to download guilt free.

I'm fine with that as long as...... (1)

GuyverDH (232921) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977956)

We (the people who have to pay this tax) get paid back .50 for each song that we buy (be it digital download or off of a CD) due to the fact that RIAA and Canadian equivelent are stealing from us due to overpriced crappy products.

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 these people who think they can get away with spreading lies.

why is it (4, Funny)

v1 (525388) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977960)

that the recording industries believe that all they have to to do make money is to make more laws?

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 (2, Insightful)

augnober (836111) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977964)

I always did find "innocent before proven guilty" to be rather ineffective. Why not just calculate the average of criminal activity among the whole population, and incarcerate each person for the amount of time found in the result? Think of the money that could be saved when the courts are closed down.

Wonder how this letter would be received... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17977988)

Dear RIAA,

My buisness "********" is suffering from lack of profits due to your tax.
I believe my sales would be higher if my prices were lower without your taxation.
Therefore, I demand that you pay me $225,000.00 for the loss of 3,000 iPod sales that I would made otherwise.

Thank you.

Dear Canada (1)

Butterwaffle Biff (32117) | more than 7 years ago | (#17977992)

I feel I will be horribly wronged by your citizens. Please have each of them pay me $5. Or $10 if their name contains the letter J.

This is their wish list, it'll never fly (1)

kawabago (551139) | more than 7 years ago | (#17978004)

They asked for this last time too and it was denied with good reasons.

mod me redundant, but... (1)

ummit (248909) | more than 7 years ago | (#17978014)

Every song on my iPod is paid for. Why should I be additionally taxed?

A slice of canadian life. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17978042)

Not that anyone cares, but here's the poll [cpcc.ca] in question.

Here's the one for the canadian court decision [cpcc.ca].

And here's the iPod [cb-cda.gc.ca] tax.

$40 for a 30 gig ipod? (4, Insightful)

guardiangod (880192) | more than 7 years ago | (#17978052)

For each 700mb cd-rw, the levy is 30 cents.

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!

Lesser of two evils (2, Insightful)

wicka (985217) | more than 7 years ago | (#17978056)

I agree that these taxes are ridiculous - $75 being quite a hefty price increase - however, if this is a replacement for record companies suing random 12 year olds for $5000, I can't say it's totally bad.

Maybe the tax should be HIGHER because... (1)

FauxReal (653820) | more than 7 years ago | (#17978076)

Shouldn't every content provider / IP holder who's content could potentially be recorded onto these types of media get a cut of the money? It would be a great crutch for talentless hacks to still make money without worry. In fact, I think manufacturers of bags/backpacks/luggage etc. should be taxed because their products could possibly be used in robberies.

Tax xerox paper (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17978078)

Paper could be used to reproduce copyrighted works. A 7x11 sheet can surely be taxed as capable of holding up to 1GB of data.

New Canadian iPod version (1)

GuyverDH (232921) | more than 7 years ago | (#17978120)

Comes WITHOUT storage.

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.
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...