Slashdot Mirror

1. Selling illegal drugs is (by definition) illegal. Selling cd-r disks is legal.
   
2. As you point out, the government never receives revenue from sales of illegal drugs, it is just a prosecutorial tool (cf. Al Capone's conviction on tax evasion charges). By contrast, substantial revenues would be raised from a cd-r tax.
   
3. The various cd-r "taxes" are actually levies/royalties that go to the music industry not to the government.
   

Information about that can be found here.

In short: yes, they redistribute the money.

Canadians pay a tax on all materials used to store digital data, which licenses them to reproduce copyrighted works.

http://neil.eton.ca/copylevy.shtml

None of that CD-R levy money makes it through the bureaucracy to the artists/label.

Wrong.

It's nothing but a tax grab

Except that it's a levy, not a tax, (which doesn't go to the government.)

While the levy paid on music players may or may not make downloading legal, that does not change the fact that downloading music from P2P is 100% legal in Canada. If you are confused about your rights, please see the CBC's music download FAQ.

An even better FAQ is this one

Yours currently applies to DAT and CD-R Audio (it was last revised in 1995), and is 3% of the price.

Ours does not go straight to CRIA's pockets. The fee is collected by the CPCC and is distributed as follows:

To Eligible Authors 66.0%
To Eligible Performers 18.9%
To Eligible Makers 15.1%

Nice try.

Meanwhile, we can point and laugh as Americans get sued by the hundreds for sharing music, while our Canadian courts say that CRIA has no right to subscriber contact info.

Oh no it's not....

Try going to buy CDRs at a place that does charge the levy. At London Drugs, for example (who by the way is is actively campaigning to have said levy repealed). You'll see them ring up the CDs, then ring up the levy as a separate item, just like when you buy a bottle of pop and they throw the deposit on after.

Besides, do the math: The current CD levy is 21 cents per disk, or $21 per hundred. There's one place in town I buy 100 CD-Rs for $19.99. You're telling me this place is losing $1.01 in levy cost, plus the cost of the stack of blanks for the sheer joy of supplying me with my blank CDs? No....

they're fucking with you.

Yes -- in your own country, assuming you are American.

They are not asking for money on every hard drive bought -- they are asking money for non-removable storage build into MP3 players -- currently, $5 for 10GB.

Here is the complete list of levies.

They are not asking for money on every hard drive bought -- they are asking money for non-removable storage build into MP3 players -- currently, $5 for 10GB.

Here is the complete list of levies.

CDR/CDRW discs: they facilitate recording pirated music;

They already have a chunk of that.

Other countries like Canada?

What right do you have to make a copy for your friend?

This one?

Be interesting to see how well this initiative flies in a global marketplace.

I've heard that rumor floating around but I'd like to see the proof that you can infact copy the CD legally. I know they charge a blanket tax but I'd be very suprised if infact the CRIA has given away the right to prosecut you.

Do you have any links to prove this (and no slashdot opinions don't count)?

How about Part 8 of the Canadian Copyright Act? Plenty of legal speak in it, but the part that matters here is this section:

80. (1) Subject to subsection (2), the act of reproducing all or any substantial part of

(a) a musical work embodied in a sound recording,

(b) a performer's performance of a musical work embodied in a sound recording, or

(c) a sound recording in which a musical work, or a performer's performance of a musical work, is embodied

onto an audio recording medium for the private use of the person who makes the copy does not constitute an infringement of the copyright in the musical work, the performer's performance or the sound recording. (emphasis mine)

The section after that sets up the levy on CDRs, tapes, etc. If you want it explained in something other than lawyer-speak, try this FAQ.

Exactly who is the thief? There is certainly stealing being done on both sides of this argument. What really frustrates me is that when I by blank CDs I'm aready considered a thief by having pay a levy. I haven't bought music CDs in years. I don't download music. Yet, I'm still considered a thief.

Don't get too freaked out - a lot of retailers have managed to elude the levy via an apparent "data centre" designation. So far it's just the music industry collecting, and places like Office Depot and Compusmart don't pay the levy (so neither do you). Stores like London Drugs (and maybe Future Shop) do, presumably because they also sell music CDs. I think this is the real reason for London Drugs's cost-upfront campaign against the levy.

I buy lots of CD-Rs, and never burn music to them (why? I only listen to it from my computer, or occasionally a friend's iPod). I think the levy stinks, but it turns out I haven't actually paid it yet - which was news to me because I assumed the cost was being embedded. Not so, and most places that pay it will loudly inform you of the additional charge. I do expect this discrepancy to be "corrected", though (and it's admittedly unfair to retailers like London Drugs).

It's not actually the government, btw, it's the CPCC.

Are CD-Rs really a cost-effective means for backups? I like DLT, myself. Are you able to recycle the old CDs, or do you just retain them indefinitely?

Part VIII of the Copyright Act would appear to disagree:

Copying for Private Use

80. (1) Subject to subsection (2), the act of reproducing all or any substantial part of

(a) a musical work embodied in a sound recording,

(b) a performer's performance of a musical work embodied in a sound recording, or

(c) a sound recording in which a musical work, or a performer's performance of a musical work, is embodied

onto an audio recording medium for the private use of the person who makes the copy does not constitute an infringement of the copyright in the musical work, the performer's performance or the sound recording.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply if the act described in that subsection is done for the purpose of doing any of the following in relation to any of the things referred to in paragraphs (1)(a) to (c):

(a) selling or renting out, or by way of trade exposing or offering for sale or rental;

(b) distributing, whether or not for the purpose of trade;

(c) communicating to the public by telecommunication; or

(d) performing, or causing to be performed, in public.

I think, however, that uploading would count as distribution.
More information here, for example.

On March 19, 1998, Part VIII of the Copyright Act came into force. Until then, copying any sound recording for almost any purpose infringed copyright. Part VIII legalizes one such activity: copying of sound recordings of musical works onto recording media for the private use of the person who makes the copy.
-neil.eton.ca
[emphasis mine]

but in canada it is not piracy, it is legal to download songs.

the judge's main beef was the copyright law didn't have anything in there to prosecute users who had files in their shared folder,

Not exactly. From my understanding, US Law allows for a 3% royalty payment on digital audio medium, which are such things as DATs and CD-R-Audio... not the regular CD-Rs that can be used for data or audio.

In Canada, we pay a much higher fee, $0.21 on each CD-R and $0.77 on each CD-R-Audio. So, on a 10-pack of CDs for $10, we pay an additional 21% for the levy.

Dave

$2.50 ?

Its 77 cents (canadian) for a normal cd-r.

Its also not a tax, its a levy (there is a difference).

Also, the levy is NOT to compensate for pirates, it is to compensate for the legal copying of music in canada. As I and many others have mentioned many times, copying your friends cd's and downloading music from P2P services is 100% legal in canada.

A nice FAQ on the levy and and legalities of copies and stuff is available here.

Here are some of the numbers in regards to how much money the Canadian Private Copying Collective has collected in recent years. Over 26 million dollars was collected in 2002.

Hmmm, i thought it was quite normal to have the right to make a copy for personal use.

CD-Rs were not seen as a media intended for copying music.

Hmmm, i thought it was quite normal to have the right to make a copy for personal use. Oh well, maybe it's just that i'm not a US citizen..
look here and mind this quote: (...) CD-Rs were not seen as a media intended for copying music.

Some info on the Canadian laws:
http://neil.eton.ca/copylevy.shtml

By law, no levy is payable on sales to a society, association or corporation that represents persons with a perceptual disability. There are no other exceptions. Note that a blind or deaf person purchasing CD-Rs in a retail store would be paying the levy because it is embedded in the price of the product.

However, unless the legislation is changed or the courts interpret matters differently, it appears that making a private copy for your own use of a musical work downloaded in any manner from the internet is not an infringement of copyright. In their decision, the Copyright Board states:

The regime does not address the source of the material copied. There is no requirement in Part VIII that the source copy be a non-infringing copy. Hence, it is not relevant whether the source of the track is a pre-owned recording, a borrowed CD, or a track downloaded from the Internet.

The more complex answer to the question posed above is you cannot post a song on the internet in any manner, but you can make a private copy of any songs you find on the net.

I checked, and here are the details for Canada. It appears that you are partially correct - the authors should get most of the money, with a bit going to the performer and the record company.

It still doesn't change the fact that because it is based on sales and airplay that the money is going to be given to a few people and some record companies. It is worth noting that even non-Canadian authors are getting paid by this system - at least what small amount of the money is actually being paid out.

Now excuse my while I pay $0.21 to Celine for backing up my home directory to CD-R :-|

This does not bode well for Apple. As a Canadian I know we have the "Blank CD-R Tax", which is comparable to the French tax. There are at least 25 other countries that have similar taxes.

If this French musicians rights group wins their case, this could set a precedent for other countries with comparable laws to sue as well.

As a musician, i feel embarrassed about this lawsuit.

On another note, cue the anti-french sentiment from a post-terror american centric peanut gallery... But at least this gives hope that the USA isn't the most litigious country in the world. Maybe you aren't #1 in everything after all. ;)

Here's a link to the The "Blank CD-R Tax" FAQ, which is a pretty complete FAQ on copyright with regards to CDs in Canada. The short answer is, there's a levy on all media (like CD-Rs, mp3 players, etc), but a provision the law that enacts the levy allows you to make a copy from the original for personal use.

Whoops. They backed off the MP3 levy down to $25/40GB, but I didn't see that in the main chart. I'm not Canadian, so I haven't followed this too closely.

This is the country that already has some pretty high media levies based on the assumption that illegal copies are being made. It's currently $0.21 (data CD) and $0.77 (audio CD), but there are proposed increases, including an $840 levy on each 40GB iPod! ($0.021/MB)

This is the country that already has some pretty high media levies based on the assumption that illegal copies are being made. It's currently $0.21 (data CD) and $0.77 (audio CD), but there are proposed increases, including an $840 levy on each 40GB iPod! ($0.021/MB)

From The "Blank CD-R Tax" FAQ

The regime does not address the source of the material copied. There is no requirement in Part VIII that the source copy be a non-infringing copy. Hence, it is not relevant whether the source of the track is a pre-owned recording, a borrowed CD, or a track downloaded from the Internet.

I looked for a bit to find that directly from the copyright board's site, but it's a government site. It's probably on there somewhere, buried deep.

So it doesn't matter where you got the music, you can make a copy of it for personal use. Canada has odd (compared to the US) copyright laws. We don't really have a concept of fair use. We follow the British "fair dealing" model. Until Part 8 of the copyright act came in to effect, we weren't allowed to make backup copies of music without the copyright holder's permission.

This page addresses most of your questions and misunderstandings.

So far in Canada, artists have not been paid a cent from the CD-R royalties we all pay.

Not true.

Most of the money ($28M) collected for 2000 and 2001 has been distributed, with 66% of it going to songwriters, and ~19% going to musicians/singers. (The remaining ~15% went to record labels.) They say they should have a good start on distributing the money collected for 2002 ($26M).

You can see how the levies are calculated here and read the actual Certified Tariff documents here

You can see how the levies are calculated here and read the actual Certified Tariff documents here

Almost entirly correct.
Music is subject to those provisions and thus the levy only goes to support music.
You are not entitled to make copies of other copywrited works (movies, software, etc) in the same way. See here for info:

You're right about that, but in this particular case it's worth mentioning that in Canada we're actually *allowed* to copy CDs (and other media) for personal use. I can borrow a CD from wherever and make a perfect copy of it for my own use, then give the original back. AFAIK, the same holds when you rent a movie, but don't hold me to it :-) This page explains what is allowed / disallowed with regards to copying music.

You make a good point, but I still think that the spirit and interpretation of the Act relate specifically to copying original, physical media. Here's an excellent explanation of the changes to the Copyright Act. In virtually every related material I've read, it states that you can only copy the original recording (i.e., the legally purchased CD), not a copy.

This is not a Good Idea. Why in the fuck do I have to pay the following taxes when I'm not copying music illegally? We go through assloads of CD-Rs to archive projcet photos and now we have to pay more "Because I said so." That's pure thuggery.

We're already getting jacked for $.21 for each CD-R we buy and they want that bumped to $.59, double that if it's a "CD-R Audio" disc. You want an MP3 player? Pony up $21 per GB of storage. Memory sticks/cards for your digital camera? Sure! Just hand over .8 cents per megabyte. How about a fancy new 256MB USB dongle for your keychain? Same rate for that, too.

Unfortunately they seem to think I have a lot of money left over so now they're petitioning for an Internet levy on ISPs. Again they take my money and I get ...nothing?

Face it. If I really wanted to live in a police state and be subjected to financial shakedowns on the whim of the local merchants I'm quite sure I could find a much warmer place to live than Canada

Indeed. That's the idea. When the copyright levy was introduced for blank CDs, we got the right to legally make copies of a friend's CD for our private use in exchange. I suspect that is an attempt to pull something similar for music downloads off the internet.

The levies are NOT PER MB

Not yet. But that's what they are proposing. Although, it does say that it's only for hard drives that are a part of MP3 devices. So try to act surprised when they start selling hard drive based MP3 players without the hard drive...

Granted, this currently only applies to sneakernet and the application of this argument to peer-to-peer networks has yet to be tested in court. This is IMHO a very important point that needs to be clarified in Canadian law for the good of the public. Otherwise, everyone there runs the risk of having to double-pay for every song they get online -- once to download the song, and once again to burn it onto CD.

See for more info.

Does this guy know how many megabytes are on a typical CD-R? or on a new hard drive? Let's see, the tax on a new 120Gig drive would be, what, $1200?

If the music is put onto a blank CD, then it is not infringement. If the music is left on a computer hard-disk, it is currently considered infringement.

Please check out this link for a detailed analysis of the CD Levy law.

There are many reasons opposition is strong against the levy: it presumes you'll use a blank CD to copy music, it's expensive, none of the money has actually been distributed, and now that anti-copy CD are here it's pointless.