Slashdot Mirror

See the FAQ.

According to that, $21, of those $30 went to the Levy. (seems extremely high)

S

You can find more information here It seems that it hasnt been updated in a bit, but some good information.

Lucky I am Canadian...and pay that fee with my blank cds thats lets me more legally do that.

WRONG. The CD levy in Canada does not make it legal for you to download and burn music. It only makes it legal for you to borrow a CD from a friend and copy it. It does not extend do copies (meaning you cannot copy a copy - you have to borrow the original and copy it). And you have to do the copying yourself - your friend is not allowed to copy one of his CDs for you and give you the copy.

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

Vip

Perhaps this will result in a router tax, similar to the CD-R tax... because, everyone knows, CD-Rs are only used to burn illegally copied music.

Well, Canadians have the right to copy. Unfortunately, this comes with heavy levies that double the price of CD-Rs. "Audio" CD-Rs are even more..

Actually, grand parent post is true. In Canada, you are legally allowed to copy your friend's CD for your own use - notice, though, that you cannot copy CDs for others. Here's a FAQ about CD Levys where it talks about legality of copying, and here's a Article in College Newspaper (pdf, first page, bottom right) in which Canadian Heritage Minister Sheila Copps says that in her opinion, the levy meant that record companies and music labels are being compensated for music piracy, nullifying the negative aspect of copying music for free.

True enough. You also remind me of this lovely levy on blank audio recording media we have in Canada.

Not so in Canada, unfortunately. SOCAN (basically Canada's RIAA) has managed to get a 21 cent levy on ANY and ALL blank CD-Rs and a slightly smaller levy on all CD-RWs. They want to make it even higher, too. 59 cents per CD-R is what the bastards want.
CD-Rs are ALREADY too expensive in Canada.. a 10 pack of CD-Rs will set you back ~CDN$10, 25 pack of CD-Rs will set you back ~CDN$20, a 50 pack ~CDN$35-40.
http://neil.eton.ca/copylevy.shtml
Canadian retailers aren't happy either, and big names like Wal-mart Canada and Radio Shack Canada are apart of the Canadian Coalition for Fair Digital Access.

you know things are going to hell when they start charging for illegal downloads

Why not? They already charge a levy on CD-Rs for illegal copying of copyrighted music.

In Canada you can copy a CD legally for "personal use"

Correct. The Copyright Act 1985 states flatly that you can make a copy (on any medium) of any musical recording for personal use. You do not even need to own the recording. In fact, it specifically legalizes personal recordings of someone else's copy of a musical work (according to the Copyright Board).

Here's the legal reference. Check out this interpretation of the current law.

For example, it is illegal to grab a song from a P2P network and save it to my harddrive or a CD, as you cannot make a copy for yourself and a "friend".

However, simply ripping or making a verbatim copy of a CD for your own personal use is a right for all Canadian citizens.

WRONG WRONG WRONG!

When you pay the Levy, you are LEGALLY given the right to make a copy of any audiocd you like.

Ottawa has just, on your behalf, effectively REDUCED the price of AudioCDs (all of them) to Less than $2 making Legal-CD-Audio the cheaper than ANYWHERE else on the planet.

For instance - your buddy buys a copy of the New %Your-Desired-Audio-CD-from-local-retailer% you can take that CD home and MAKE A CD COPY FOR YOURSELF LEGALLY , return the CD to your friend, and Voila(!) you just got a legal copy for less than $2.

For everyone who is decrying the levy, they are missing the point -- Ottawa has just dealt a death-blow to the CD-has-value paradigm that we hate (levereging CDR-drives to remove the 'value-add' from producers) and people whine about the levy?!?

Really, tell your friends and have a "bring your discs and go copy-crazy party" at the local library!

From this page:
To emphasize this point, endnote 4 of an early Copyright Board ruling says:

Section 80 does not legalize (a) copies made for the use of someone other than the person making the copy; and (b) copies of anything else than sound recordings of musical works.It does legalize making a personal copy of a recording owned by someone else.

start here

Uhhh, which tax has been struck down? The German or Canadian one? The German one seems pretty new to me, the Canadian one would be about 4 years old, so I'll have to assume the Canadian tax.

The current tax (it's called a levy for whatever reason), which is implemented in Canada, as of a couple of years ago, is $0.21 per CD, whether you think it exists or not.

However, we do get a benefit for the tax: Citizens are now allowed to create a CD library, where CDs can be lent to people, and the people borrowing these CDs may make copies of them for themselves (legally) before returning them. I really hope this happens sometime soon -- it seems like an easy way to make some profit, if done properly! Think VHS Village and BETA Barn, but filled with CDs instead. Yes, most CDs say you can't rent them, but it's a job for a lawyer to see if that holds water now this law has been passed. It seems to be relatively legal considering the amount of stores selling used CDs.

We are also now allowed to create CD copying chains, whereby a disc is passed from user to user and copied each time.

[ Seems like a worthy moneymaker for myself! :-) Maybe I should keep my mouth shut on this idea... ]

Before you do this, you might want to read the law for yourself and possibly consult a lawyer. ;-)

Uhhh, which tax has been struck down? The German or Canadian one? The German one seems pretty new to me, the Canadian one would be about 4 years old, so I'll have to assume the Canadian tax.

The current tax (it's called a levy for whatever reason), which is implemented in Canada, as of a couple of years ago, is $0.21 per CD, whether you think it exists or not.

However, we do get a benefit for the tax: Citizens are now allowed to create a CD library, where CDs can be lent to people, and the people borrowing these CDs may make copies of them for themselves (legally) before returning them. I really hope this happens sometime soon -- it seems like an easy way to make some profit, if done properly! Think VHS Village and BETA Barn, but filled with CDs instead. Yes, most CDs say you can't rent them, but it's a job for a lawyer to see if that holds water now this law has been passed. It seems to be relatively legal considering the amount of stores selling used CDs.

We are also now allowed to create CD copying chains, whereby a disc is passed from user to user and copied each time.

[ Seems like a worthy moneymaker for myself! :-) Maybe I should keep my mouth shut on this idea... ]

Before you do this, you might want to read the law for yourself and possibly consult a lawyer. ;-)

Here in Canada we can now make copies of CDs legally. I borrow my friends CD, copy it, and give it back to him. My copy is perfectly legal thanks to the blank media levy that was introduced. I'm not sure it's worth it, though.

The current legislation defines "blank audio recording medium" as "a recording medium, regardless of its material form, onto which a sound recording may be reproduced, that is of a kind ordinarily used by individual consumers for that purpose and on which no sounds have ever been fixed". Details here

So if manufacturers cared to record some sound onto a CD-RW (heck, make it an advertisement, for all I care) then perhaps it would not be subject to the levy.

The levy is applied at the wholesale level, not retail. Sounds like they're engaging in misleading advertising.

On March 19, 1998, new federal copyright legislation came into force. Among other things, the legislation provides for a levy to be collected on blank audio recording media. It is called a levy (and not a tax) because it is not collected by any level of government, it is collected by a group representing the recording industry.

If you buy any blank recording media outside Canada and use it yourself they will not be subject to the levy. Why? Because YOU are the importer and you are not selling blank media. It is the sale of blank media by the importer or manufacturer that triggers the levy.

Some retailers mistakenly believe that they need to raise their prices to collect the levy. However, the levy is not applied at the retail level, it is applied to importers and manufacturers.

Technically, you're not allowed to make a copy of music for your friend. Your friend is allowed to borrow your CD and copy it, but you are not allowed to copy the CD and give the copy to your friend. It's a subtle difference, but it is a difference -- the basic premise is that the person copying a copyrighted CD must intend to use the copy for his personal use.

See here for more info.

Recording artists and performers are compensated for this by massive levies collected on all blank recording media sold in Canada.

This would be a handy device to take advantage of this law. It might take a few years to borrow and copy 1000 CDs from your friends, though.

Recording artists and performers are compensated for this by massive levies collected on all blank recording media sold in Canada.

This would be a handy device to take advantage of this law. It might take a few years to borrow and copy 1000 CDs from your friends, though.

Okay, that was easier than I thought. I wouldn't even have posted my previous comment if I'd realized I could find it that quickly. The relevant link is here. In a nutshell you were right - you cannot legally make copies for your friends, but you can legally make copies for your own private use.

If we are already paying for it, why more anti-piracy legislation?

Get the people who are SELLING copies!

I think the RIAA owes ME money for the CD-Rs that turned into coasters, backups, and frisbees.

Ironically, the RIAA assumes they have the copyright on everything. So if I buy CD-Rs to burn my own music on, I'm still paying them for the *privilege*.

Well... not exactly, but if your friend makes a copy of a cd for you ( even with your own computer ) then it is legal. I.E. Person A owns commercial CD. He copies it, then gives the copy to person B OR gives the original to person B and keeps the copy. Thats all legal. And if you want to know more of that, then check out this site

Yes, and computers as well... for us here in Canada, it is still legal to copy a CD, even if it is a friend's, as long as you only use it for private use... still legal are they planning to create computers that are only anti-copying enabled in the US ( and possibly the EU... now that they are getting a variant of the DMCA ) and have that anti-copying feature disabled everywhere else?

Yes, and computers as well... for us here in Canada, it is still legal to copy a CD, even if it is a friend's, as long as you only use it for private use... still legal are they planning to create computers that are only anti-copying enabled in the US ( and possibly the EU... now that they are getting a variant of the DMCA ) and have that anti-copying feature disabled everywhere else?

Wrong. This tariff only applies to importers that import AND resell the media. Since I would not resell it, I would be well within the law to buy my media from other countries and import it to avoid the tariff.

Go ahead try it.

S

This may be a great idea, but there are definite consequences.

The proposal is similar to what's being done with the blank audio cassette levy in the US (see Title 17, section 1004) and the Canadian CD-R Levy (see this random link I found on Google).

But the question is: how does the collected money get back to the artists? There are two ways:

1. Use the BMI or ASCAP system that already exists to pay artists for music rebroadcast.
Of course, this has problems of its own (see ASCAP & BMI -- Protectors of Artists or Shadowy Thieves?). This is unlikely, because the sampling method used to dole out royalties is even less valid for the Internet than it is for rebroadcast and live performances. Additionally, it's unnecessary because they could just...

2. Track actual downloads from the Internet.
Think about it -- to accurately divide a >$2B pie will take a very thorough analysis to get all parties comfortable. It's easy to legislate: either all download sites or sharing systems aggregate their download data in a central database or they will be considered illegally supporting piracy. IMHO this will very shortly be a part of the proposal.

Note that this could use unique IDs, assuring that your actual music listening habits won't be tracked, etc. But do you really believe this will happen, when there's yet another advertising vector to exploit? Think about the metadata that could be gained from this data...the licensing opportunities...the marketing...the potential for privacy intrusion....

Who would control this big usage database in the sky? Who would you trust?

In Canada it is also (...for now... but stay tuned to properly oppose any pending legislation(!)) perfectly legal for a person to make copies of their own media. It is also absolutely LEGAL to copy ANOTHER PERSONS AUDIO CD.

What does this mean? (first see this faq) You can take your friend's CD and burn yourself a copy - and its legal. This is because Canadians pay a levy on CDRs which 'compensate' producers (et al). I dont agree that this is the best tactic, but it is a powerful one. If people were informed of this fact, and groups actively promoted this, you could eliminate the present distribution scheme in Canada (retailers/distributors/labels). The Library would be all that Canadians needed to have copies of all the music they wanted.

Now, why is this going OT? I would like to know, does anyone have links or Info to make a Linux based, CDR 'copy machine'? I would like to organize a 'Copy Your Friends CDs Party" at a library or some such (near the Uni in town would be good), but would like to be able to copy many-many volumes of CDs.

I also have thought about make such a device available on loan to local Libraries in order to 'promote' and 'encourage' the practice.

Can anyone provide a info to do such a thing? What would be really nice is if the device could be operated without a monitor - just insert discs and close the trays...

Crispin
----
Crispin Cowan, Ph.D.
Chief Scientist, WireX Communications, Inc.
Immunix: Security Hardened Linux Distribution
Available for purchase

Is Canada alone?
At least 25 countries, including most G-7 and European Union members, have introduced comparable regimes with respect to the private copying of sound recordings. Canada is one of the last to do so.
The USA is often held out as an example of a place where "this could never happen", but as far as I can tell, it has been law there since December 8, 1994. It is part of Title 17, section 1004, and if you go to:
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/1004.html you will find this paragraph:
(b) Digital Audio Recording Media. - The royalty payment due under section1003 for each digital audio recording medium imported into and distributed in the United States, or manufactured and distributed in the United States, shall be 3 percent of the transfer price. Only the first person to manufacture and distribute or import and distribute such medium shall be required to pay the royalty with respect to such medium.
Note, however, that in the US there is NO levy collected on "ordinary" CD-Rs When the legislation was last changed (in 1994/1995) CD-Rs were not seen as a media intended for copying music. There IS a levy applied to other digital media, such as DAT and CD-R Audio

Whoa, am I reading this right? Most 1st world countries have a levy, and in the US the recording industry *can* legally charge a 3% levy BUT instead they think SSSCA with DRM CPUs, DRM chipsets and all of that is the best idea. WTF?

- If you buy any blank recording media outside Canada and use it yourself they will not be subject to the levy.

- If you are a manufacturer or importer, you can avoid the levy entirely on your products as long as you record some sound on the media before you sell it. The sound recorded on the media can even be erased. Clearly this is not an option for CD-Rs, but for devices that include a hard drive, simply recording a sound on the drive and then erasing it exempts the drive from the levy. This is because (as the legislation states) "blank audio recording medium means a recording medium, regardless of its material form, onto which a sound recording may be reproduced, that is of a kind ordinarily used by individual consumers for that purpose and on which no sounds have ever been fixed..."

Also, if you're Canadian you should check out this link and tell them that iPods and such are not recording devices. Alternatively, tell Apple and friends to record a lame greeting message to avoid the stupid levy.

The last cool thing is this: "It does not matter whether you own the original sound recording (on any medium), you can legally make a copy for your own private use."

Rock on, Canadians.

a governmental subsidy for no apparent societal benefit.

This is UNTRUE . The copy-right people decided that they would collect the levy and extend citizens rights. You are now LEGALLY ENTITLED to copy other people's audio CDs.

See here for details

What does that mean? Tell your friends to come over with their blank media and COPY ANY DISC of yours they like, set up CD-copy pools at LAN parties, call your Local University radio station and ask them to sponsor a "Copy any CD in our Library" radio-show (invite people to come down and burn away), arrange a CD-burn session at the local library.

Whats my point? Well, all CDs in Canada (at least your own burned copies) now cost a total of $2.00 - TELL PEOPLE TO STOP BUYING MUSIC IN STORES.

Actually, I know a few people that "Burn 'n Return". People who work in office supply stores often have access to shrinkwrapping machines, so they can make it look like a package was never opened.

Also, the first two methods may not be illegal. At least in Canada, paying the CD levy means you can borrow and copy music legally (for your personal use only).

what you're saying is that once something has been created once, that because we are capable of copying it, that the creator can not reasonably expect to be rewarded for his work.

Yes, that is what i am saying. If I write a song. only the activity of writing it should be compensated - not the use of it after it has been performed/written. The * act * of creation should be compensated. Simple. If i was a carpenter, would I collect a fee for every comfy-night you spend in bed??? NO!

It is exactly the same, patents and copy-written material are not magic. If they exist then the work required to create them has ceased. It is in the past -- what makes these things so special that their control, and the 'right' of the builder causes such a pile of ill-logic and nonsense as copyright and patent law?

You sir are a LEECH.

And you excrete dogma without a mite of critical thought. You are a PUPPET.

It's precisely this sort of attitude that Copyright is designed to thwart.

No, copyrights were granted to people to protect them from printing press owners. Copyright was granted to a person so he could sell his works. Capitalists have, by making themselves legal-persons (amongst other plutocratic-borne legislation in the USA), granted themselves copyrights... the concept was built to protect a person from publishers. Not publishers from people. Dont try and pretend this is not the case, it is indisputable and intellectually dishonest to suggest otherwise. This discussion is not a debate -- as in public debate as an exercise -- are you honestly presenting this as your opinion?

removing the incentives and rewards of creating will lead to a decline in creation.

Untrue. Intellectual Property was created all through time -- it is society itself... without copyright and patents the mechanisms through which people would have incentive would change. Was Matisse given a copyright? Mozart?

RIAA is trying to protect itself, and it's monopoly on the distribution of music, they're not attempting to foster the creation of music.

Agreed.

but that doesen't justify deliberately flaunting the law, nor taking away from the creators the rightful earnings.

Actually it does. Civil disobedience is an act of a free society. If 50%+1 of the population decides to ignore a law it should be changed - the consequences are ours to reap. If it proved true that creation ceased when copyright ended (it wouldnt) then the people would pay the consequence -- or make a new offer to potential producers. Not being a 'producer' in this dynamic doesnt mean we are with out rights. If the persons (like yourself) willing to accept this construct + the creators ("artists" (or RIAA))
But that is how (im sure you would agree) a democratic and free society should work. Im not suggesting the USA is this place, but that is another issue, and a much bigger problem.

When you say "I copy all my music CDs", you're committing piracy plain and simple.

No, by law, in Canada I am fully entitled to do this. My government has changed the construct of copyright to encourage the act. It is not "piracy".

http://www.cdrfaq.org/faq03.html#S3-33-2
http://neil.eton.ca/copylevy.shtml#copy_for_friend s

If you don't PAY for it, and you don't get it via available LEGAL means, you're still not entitled to STEAL it.

Life is not about money. Watching a movie or listening to music has zero effect on the producer (no incremental cost) - what part of this basic problem with the capitalist-economics of copyright are you not understanding?

The levy applies to all blank CDs. It is 77 cents for the "music" CDs, and 21 cents for the "data" CDs, which are identical except for a single bit in the ATIP. You would probably be buying CDs for 29-56 cents each if there was no levy (unless you've avoided paying it somehow). http://neil.eton.ca/copylevy.shtml

Imagine, you take this thing round to your friends house, and he/she lets you loose on his/her CD collection. In the space of a couple of hours, the damn machine has paid for itself in the savings you could make by ripping CDs instead of buying them.

And if it happened in Canada, would be completely legal

The fair use law (and the common law doctrine it was codified from) never gave you a right to copy

Actually, in Canada, it does

...and another thing brother, go read this: http://neil.eton.ca/copylevy.shtml#copy_for_friend s

the canadian copyright act makes it legal for you to copy your friends CDs... or the CDs you take out at the library etc... more Canadians should know - tell your friends :)

In Canada, we collect a levy on CDR media, this allows us the RIGHT as a citizen to make copies of any music CD for our own personal use.

See more about this here: http://neil.eton.ca/copylevy.shtml#copy_for_friend s

I have been toying with the idea of organizing / promoting a "Come and Copy CDs Day" at University of Windsor or maybe at on of the local Windsor Librarylocations, which does in fact contain a whole PILE of CDs we can now legally copy...

I believe it is important now to 'get the word out' and snuff out their massive revenue stream...

Also I believe we should simply order the CDRs online anf FUCK their 'corporate-whore-tax', it would make this otherwise legal event a little more gray, but hey, fuck them.

This could be seriously fun...

In Canada we have a legal right to make personal copies of *OTHER PEOPLES CDs*.
We pay the tax, we make all the copies we please.
http://neil.eton.ca/copylevy.shtml#copy_for_friend s

So, Canadians, COPY THOSE CDs and TELL YOUR FRIENDS and FAMILY.

In Canada, we collect a levy on CDR media, rigthly or wrongly this allows us the RIGHT as a citizen to make copies of any music CD for our own personal use.

I can take YOUR NSync CD and make a copy for myself (%insert_your_own_joke_here%).

See more about this here: http://neil.eton.ca/copylevy.shtml#copy_for_friend s

So, does this mean that this 'version' of the NSync CD wont be sold here in Canada? Or will I have to start buying and returning CDs and showing them that their product infringes my rights as a Canadian according to the Copyright Act...

This could be seriously fun...

The tax we have here (aside from various compound sales taxes) is only on the CDR media specifically for audio. (read: the kind that works with those near-useless standalone CD copying whizmos).
...

There is no tax on the vanilla CDRs because those have business uses.

Bullshit. The levy (not "tax, but levy", sounds less like ripping you off) is on all kinds of blank media. Even audio tapes and CD-RWs.

if I do pay somone when I buy equipment that enables me to copy copyrighted Items, do I gain rights to do so?

The answer (in Canada, at least) is yes - you do gain the rights.

The catch is that you can make a recording, but someone else can't make it for you.

It's legal to borrow an audio CD (from a friend, for example) and make a copy of it, but it would be illegal for your friend to make a copy and give it to you. (I know, the end result is the same, but that's the way the law is worded, and that's the way the copyright board interpreted it.)

There's lots of people here objecting, but it's quite possible that a 'blank media levy' works a lot better than trying to run the charges on the online end.

There's a great legal summary, which includes this quote from the Copyright Board:

Section 80 does not legalize (a) copies made for the use of someone other than the person making the copy; and (b) copies of anything else than sound recordings of musical works. It does legalize making a personal copy of a recording owned by someone else.

There are exemptions for various institutional users, so musicians don't end up paying other musicians to record their own music.

And - interestingly - the U.S. could simply start charging, because the relevant piece of law simply says 'digital audio recording medium'. That means that hard drives could qualify today. The levy would be extremely low, I expect, because there is a lot of evidence that a small fraction of data on hard drives is music - mostly it's some bloated OS code!

At the current levy of CAD $0.21, I can burn a CD-R with audio tracks at a typical rate of $0.02 per track. There isn't a payment system on the planet that can afford to charge that and not eat it all up in processing!

Finally - it's not a tax. Nobody is taxing free speech. It's a levy. The difference matters. Beyond that, though, new musicians likely have a greater chance of reaching audiences through this mechanism than through lots of the traditional mechanisms - they have greater access to the mechanisms of publishing than if everyone was paying for each individual transfer and copy.

It's times like this that I think people in the U.S. do themselves a disservice. It seems like they only want those mechanisms that provide a benefit to all by providing the benefit to each individual. If the mechanism more directly benefits 'all' and people can't see their individual benefit, they throw out the whole thing as unworkable.

thats really interesting. i never thought of it that way. i still have trouble justifying wrong actions that way. have you ever heard two wrongs dont make a right?

In fact, when the blank media levy went on in Canada, it simultaneously and explicitly became legal to have music that you never paid for. The details are crazy; I think it goes like this: I can lend you a CD, you can copy it, you give back the original, all is kosher; I cannot, however, make a copy of my CD and give it to you. See Canadian copyright levy on blank audio recording media.

-Gareth

Visit me at my site.

Can I now legally copy audio CDs for my friends?

The simple answer is NO, but you can legally copy your friend's audio CD for YOUR OWN use.

To paraphrase the introduction to the Copyright Board's ruling:

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.

It does not matter whether you own the original sound recording (on any medium), you can legally make a copy for your own private use.

To emphasize this point, endnote 4 of the Copyright Board's ruling says:

Section 80 does not legalize (a) copies made for the use of someone other than the person making the copy; and (b) copies of anything else than sound recordings of musical works. It does legalize making a personal copy of a recording owned by someone else.

Please think before you flame

Quote from that page:

To paraphrase the introduction to the Copyright Board's ruling:

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.

To emphasize this point, endnote 4 of the Copyright Board's ruling says:

Section 80 does not legalize (a) copies made for the use of someone other than the person making the copy; and (b) copies of anything else than sound recordings of musical works. It does legalize making a personal copy of a recording owned by someone else.