Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Canada to Raise Tariffs on Recordable Media

Posted by michael on from the we'll-be-having-nunavut dept.

Joel Ironstone writes: "A new Canadian levy will be introduced in 2003 on all recordable media (pdf). The magnitude of these tariffs is staggering: $1.23 for all CD-RW's, $2.27 on all DVD-R's, and get this: $21 for each gigabyte of storage on portable MP3 players. That's an extra 160 dollars for a Nomad." Like in the U.S., this tax is collected and given directly to the record industry, a governmental subsidy for no apparent societal benefit.

6 of 759 comments (clear)

  1. Does it mean we can pirate legally by anandsr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since the government is going to give money to RIAA
    and MPAA then it should be legal to pirate. They
    will be able to make all their money by subsidy.

    1. Re:Does it mean we can pirate legally by gregfortune · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I've got a great idea.

      1. Start a business model that bases making money around a product that can easily be duplicated and shared.
      2. Cry foul when consumers realize they can share the product easily. (Ignoring the possiblity of a utopian society where everyone is honest)
      3. Earn income from your government because you are being cheated.
      4. Move an arm of your business to Canada.
      5. Repeat Steps 1-3 while expanding to as many countries as necessary.

      Ya know, that's a dang nifty idea Wonder if there's any possibility... nah...

    2. Re:Does it mean we can pirate legally by cgenman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Blank videocasette tapes in the US are sold with a portion of sales going to the MPAA for lost revenue due to piracy. This does not mean that pirating videos is legal. This means that stopping the casual piracy of videos is unenforceable, and as such consumers are free to illegaly copy videos, and the companies involved have been justly compensated.

      The sad thing about all of this is that most of the independent labels with bands worth pirating wouldn't see a dime from this outrageously high tax, and I severely doubt that, say, Qbert, DJ Seishi, or Courtney Love will get their fair share. Do artists ever get a cut from the RIAA?

      All that this means is that audio piracy is now a unstoppable institution, and "creators" are being paid by it. It may not be legal, but now it is moral.

      (IANAL)

      --
      The ______ Agenda
    3. Re:Does it mean we can pirate legally by gilroy · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Blockquoth the poster:

      This means that stopping the casual piracy of videos is unenforceable, and as such consumers are free to illegaly copy videos, and the companies involved have been justly compensated.

      Since everyone has to pay the levy, and not everyone is pirating, the companies might have been compensated but they have not been justly compensated. This whole model is intrinsically unjust.



      Imagine a proposed law that said, since shoplifting is common and unstoppable, all customers at every store will be stopped, background-checked, and strip-searched.

      --
      The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
  2. This is absolutely disgraceful by drsquare · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What right does the government have to steal people's money in order to fund corporations? There is absolutely NO justifiable reason to tax people in order to benefit private corporations. This is an absolute disgrace. Whoever is responsible for this should be deported.

    The only solution to this is to import everything from the US for a much lower price, and to pirate much more music as revenge. Actually, it wouldn't be piracy, as the music has already been paid for through taxes.

  3. One interesting thing about who gets the money.... by phunhippy · · Score: 5, Insightful



    One intersting thing is that it specifically states that only Owners of copyrighted MUSIC can share a portion of the tarrifs... and specifically excludes "Computer Software Programs"....

    Now correct me if I'm wrong.. Doesn't the Software industry claim to lose even more billions of dollars a year in piracy revenue(potential or not) then the music industry does?

    Now why would the software industry not lobby for a levy like this?

    1. Perhaps they know there would be a large backlash against their industry?
    2. They know the whole concept is just free cash for the music producers?(granted its canadian play money but hey ya know...)
    3. OR IS IT THE MUSIC INDUSTRY specifially wanted them excluded from the deal so they don't have to share there free cut of the cash cow.

    things that make ya go hmmmmmmmm..............eh?