Slashdot Mirror
Canada to Raise Tariffs on Recordable Media
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.
You realize there will be a real market in smuggling MP3 players. And will Canada apply this tax to hard disks which could be added later to an MP3 player?
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.
If you read the .pdf, you will notice that it is a PROPOSED leavy -- it hasn't been implemented yet.
That doesn't mean that it won't be, though. Canadians: contact your provincial premiere and let them know that the idea of a tarrif on media may be legit, but the prices proposed are simply unacceptable.
Hell, you elected them -- that's why they're there.
... is that this will make all the other recording companies that much bolder. Considering how close Canada and the US are physically, socially, and economically, it's not a huge leap to have the companies push for it to extend here for "consistency." This is a damn steep slope.
Nicotine free Amish .sig.
Making it much cheaper to just buy Office for OS X instead of trying to put it on an ipod....
Ergh. =] At least I didn't meantion that goat site.
-Sara
Its insane. Worst part is that a tax on cigarrettes would be fought vigorously and there would be national debate. But when it comes to this, the general public is ignorant of the issues.
.. unless a major lobbying force and an education campaign happens.
Government is elected by the people, when laws like this pass and the people dont hold the government accountable, more laws like this will pass. Unfortunately only tech types understand the issues here, so basically everyone's screwed
If Canada wants to compete technologically this is a extremely bad move and it will screw over the economy.
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.
News like this always make me wonder when there's finally going to be a new revolution in "the land of the free" which would make it that once again.
But I'm afraid that after 9/11 it'd be very hard to do something seemingly against your own country... Pity.
I actually do hope the craziness ends someday.
Yesterday was the time to do it right. Are we having a REVOLUTION yet?
http://www.stallman.org/
I heard him do one of his talks about copyright in London a few weeks ago. I was a sceptic on some of this views, but the extremity of some of them now seems to be matched by the extremity of the legislation we are now seeing around the world (DMCA, the EC thing, and now the Canadians).
I would recommend we all take his advice and boycott action that infringes the right to share information.
G
"And the meaning of words; when they cease to function; when will it start worrying you?"
The obvious solution is to set up your own record company. Then just sit back and wait for your handouts.
-- And when Justice is gone, there is always... Force. --Laurie Anderson, "Oh Superman"
how about handhelds (mini handheld HP/compaq computers or whatever you call them) that has mp3 playback functionality? are they going to add tarifs to that too? :(
or cell phones... but i guess that would be going too far...
my blog
Simply sell them without drives or flash memory, then have the user buy them on their own.
Problem solved, for now...
As it stands though, looks like Canada has just made buying an mp3 player a reason for a trip over the border.
What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey
Right now, the tariffs for recordable media are as follows (from http://www.pch.gc.ca/culture/cult_ind/cpb-pdd/arc
Audio Cassette Tape > 40 minutes = $0.29
CD-R and CD-RW = $0.21
CD-R Audio, CD-RW Audio, and Minidiscs = $0.77
In 2003, this will nearly double, but the most significant impact is the $/GB:
CD-R and CD-RW = $1.23
DVD-R = $2.27
$/GB storage on MP3 player = $21
This is completely unfair for independant artists who release their tracks exclusively in MP3- their fans are effectively paying the recording industry to buy independant music.
This is rediculous. The only reason that these companies get away with this is that there's some kickback somewhere. I gaurentee that if someone were to dig deep enough, they'd find a lot of this "tax" in the pockets of some officials.
In 'free' countries, taxes are supposed to be levied for the benefit of the people. The money collected should be put back into a social program of some kind. Canada is supposed to be a socialist government, but it seems that they're trying to more and more make the same mistakes as the US without taking any of the virtues. I don't know about the rest of the country, but BC is becoming about as democratic as the old USSR. If the Campbell administration doesn't like the way a arbitration turned out (doctors) or that a labor union is striking (the teachers) they just legislate the problem away. The doctors aren't even allowed to sue the government over the issue under the bill that was passed.
The recordable media issue is just more of the same. We're losing our freedoms, not to the big scary governments, but to the corperations; to people we can't vote out of office and can't effect in any way. They obviously have 'representatives' at their beck and call (DMCA) to make whatever laws that they feel benefit their profit margins (SSSCA). Government is supposed to be representing the best interests of the people of the country, but it seems here to be representing the best interests of the corperations.
The Canadian government, like it's Big Brother to the south, has traded consumer piracy for corporate larceny.
--
Mike Nugent
-- Mike wildcard@illuminatus.org
Tell them there is a diffrence between a music CDR and a data CDR. See if you can keep the RIAA out of your computer backup media. Music CDR's are already covered for music use.
The truth shall set you free!
I think Apple can sell their iPod as a firewire hard-disk, if they change the software.
So the question is: will all devices that CAN be used as a MP3-player be taxed (Pocket-PC devices etc.)?
How about a MP3-player that comes with no memory of it's own.
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?
Be sure to point out the fact it only is for blank audio media when buying blank DATA CDR's. The tarrif is only for the blank MUSIC media. (read the PDF.) Print out the PDF and take it to your local retailer who doesn't know the diffrence between a data and audio blank CDR.
The truth shall set you free!
The ammount of possible brain-capacity I have to store MP3s will have me taxed to death!
eek!
Better get that lobotomy now!
Although don't call it pirating (which is a dumb term anyway), since it's not illegal. In Canada, we're allowed to borrow CDs and make copies of them for personal use. That's what the tax^H^H^Hlevy is supposed to offset; unfortunately, if you buy CD-Rs to burn the latest FreeBSD, you're still supporting Celine Dion's retirement fund.
"If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
Until then, I'm going to consider any claim any of these idiots make with respect to "piracy" as complete and utter bullshit.
Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
And I thought I was predicting usury when I wrote this little ditty a while back.
$21/Gig? I would never have believed anyone could seriously propose such a figure. Even if it is Canadian Dollars, it's still outrageous.
Schwab
Editor, A1-AAA AmeriCaptions
In other news, goverments world wide have added a tax for pen and paper and any copying techniques which will effectively raise prices by 800%. Mr. John Doeyes from GreedyBastardsPublishing was quoted saying: "This is very important for the entire books industry, after years of studying we found that people were actually copying selected sections of books! Furthermore we found that students and proffesionals were taking a lot of notes based on our material, this illegal activity must seize for the good of the nation and democracy. Copying books or exerpts is aiding communism and terrorism by blocking the freedom of fair trade.
Another proposed bill states that any books bought for multiuse purposes (meaning to be read to others) will see a price increase of 250%. Mr Doeyes again explains: We found that a large amount of parents actually read books out loud for their children, thus violating the single use license of the book. When someone reads the book out loud, 3 things happen, 1 person is reading it which is ok, then they relay the contents by voice, and another person listens, this is unacceptable because the industry loses the income it could've gotten from selling audio versions of the books. Not to mention infringing on the voice artists work by making a very poor copy of their effort, this is sheer terrorism at work! But after careful consideration we decided to only raise prices by 250% instead of 300%, this means that parents instead of buying a book license for themself, one audio license and one listeners license, they can get all 3 bundled at a lower cost, thus benefitting all.
When asked if this isn't just excuses and heavy lobbying from the book industry to increase their revenues at consumers expense Mr. Doeyes giggled like a schoolgirl and laughed all the way to the bank.
Or not, strange how different media have different rules ain't it?
Wax-Museum Fire Results In Hundreds Of New Danny DeVito Statues
(a) 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, including
All one needs to do is to sell re-writables with pre-recorded free music from struggling artists?
I'll gladly pay a levy on that if the money actually goes to the struggling artists...
Hmmm...
First, this is a levy, not a tariff. This new charge will be applied to all recordable media sold in Canada, not those imported into the country.
Second, the government has been trying to get this off the ground since 1999. (Many of you will remember the first time this story came around). However, I can still buy a 50-pack of 80-min CD-Rs for $35 CAD in Toronto. Public and political opposition to this move prevented it from being enacted back then; it can again this time. The story got a lot of press in Canada at the time and the Globe and Mail ran several high-profile editorials attacking the proposed levies. Remember: this levy is only a proposal, and the Copyright Board of Canada will be holding public hearings into the matter. It's a simple matter to type up a letter to your MP, and as many of them have so little to do that they are bored silly, they are likely to give your letter some attention, especially if it is halfway-intelligent.
This proposal is so basically flawed that it really stands little chance of ever being enacted and will likely fall to the wayside as it did in 1999. It is unlikely that this idea could withstand a court challenge. Moreover, were this levy actually imposed, there would be a big boom in business for American online computer shops. I'm pretty sure that Canada Customs has better things to do than to levy a $5 charge on your $30 CD-R purchase.
You can see the Copyright Board's original proposal from Dec. 2000 here.
...so that's about $0.06US
Name a Canadian-made CD-R. Just one. No? How 'bout a Canadian-made mp3-player? Hmm, didn't think so.
"If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
Not only that, but it's just the Canadian music industry that gets the profits. Nothing against Bryan Adams, but who do you think sells more albums, him or N'Sync? Who do you think gets copied more, him or Britney Spears? So not only does he get a cut if I copy Slackware, he gets some cash every time I copy American/English/Swedish/Zimbabwean/Japanese music. Laughing all the way to the bank.
"If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
So...
I can't find the answer. I hope Canadian government does. BTW, notebooks are also quite good mp3 players, and they've got HUGE hard drives. As well I can mention mp3 workstations or... mp3 servers with terabyte raid arrays.
I have a pencil and a bit of paper, and I was thinking about writing some music down.
Do I owe someone money ???
Hmmmmmm
>you're still supporting Celine Dion's retirement fund.
yeah but at least it means she might retire sooner which would be a good thing.
The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction, but they eat more steak.
Only by your standards, because you artificially make others' statements into a boolean of 'government interference' OR '! government interference' which would also make the following (hypothetical) person appear to be a hypocrite:
"I am against the government passing a law forcing me to vote Democrat" ('government interference' = FALSE)
"I am a proponent of the government locking away rapists" ('government interference' = TRUE)
Hypocrite!!
I know these examples are extreme; the point is, yes people are selective because they aren't using the same (Libertarian) ruler as you are. The fact is, most people you label as being 'selective' are measuring one view on 'government intervention' when a crime has been commited vs. 'government interference' in anticipation of a hypothetical/potential crime. Try to at least see what kind of ruler others are using.
-chris
San Francisco values: compassion, tolerance, respect, intelligence
On the bottom of Page 6 of the PDF lists a lower levy on regular CDR's of 59 cents each! Ouch! Audio CDR's have a higher levy of $1.23. This definetly crosses the line from sanity to insanity.. It reaches too far and taxes all your office backups, e-mail archives, digital camera photos, removable microdrives for your PDA, etc. This needs to be fought tooth and nail. Defend your backup media. The RIAA is not entitled to a tax on my photo backups.
The truth shall set you free!
Wow.. I cant actually believe they are going to start taxing customers for recording media.. how long before other countries follow suit? I know that, living in the UK, they tax EVERYTHING you do - I dont see why recordable media will be any different.
:)
I can't believe that they are gonna tax you per GB on portable MP3 players though.. I am genuinely stunned. Though seeing as some of the coolest ones use laptop harddrives, why not sell the MP3 players as 'bare bones' and then make you go buy the laptop drive seperately
What a stupid stupid tax..
"Hey! Unless this is a nude love-in, get the hell off my property!!"
Observe: an 40GB 2.5" HDD costs about $215 CDN
Ratio: approx. $5/GB (3.5" HDDs are approaching $1/GB, but let's assume they don't use these in MP3 players)
They are levying a $21/GB charge on MP3 players with HDDs - so for a 40GB this is $840
So the tax is about 400% of the cost of the HDD! Even if you assume the base player w/o HDD costs $200, you would still be paying 200% tax on the entire device, making it triple what it would cost without the tax.
"Like in the U.S., this tax is collected and given directly to the record industry, a governmental subsidy for no apparent societal benefit."
How is this different from say, they way the US is taxing steel imports and farm product imports or the way Japan taxes automotive and electronic imports? Often, these taxes are used to subsidize the aforementioned industries too (especially, the farm industry).
I think this particular (potential) tax/subsidy strikes a nerve merely because it is something that falls within the collective radars of people who post here, NOT because it's something drastically different from things government has done in the past. The "societal benefit" is that it's protecting jobs of the people who work in that industry in that country.
Okay, someone tell me again what the **** was the point of NAFTA?
"Free" as in beer.
"Free" as in speech.
"Free" as in anal rape?
Any sufficiently advanced civilization is indistinguishable from Gods.
Perhaps every canadian should start his or her own music label and thereby lay a claim to the tax..!! it could be a new kind of social welfare.. nifty thought at least..
I hear they make good weed up there. It'll be dandy when I can get my barter goods at Best Buy.
What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey
Somehow I doubt that Bryan Adams, or for that matter any artist, will ever see a single red cent of the money collected from these taxes. Its the record labels that get the money, and its the record labels that will keep the money.
Courtney Love, being nothing but an opportunistic sellout, would certainly see her fair share of the proceeds if anyone would.
Read the original essay by Steve Albini that that gold-digging no talent hussy plagarized during the napster fallout.
She's nothing but a corporate stooge pretending to be a revolutionary.
It just doesn't say how they decide who gets the money. Is it based on how much money you are getting from other sources? If so, if a band only releases its music for free on the Internet, do they get no money at all even if they are more widely played? The end users need to be given control over who gets their money (see www.namesys.com/open_products.html)
Hans Reiser
Since when? History has shown that the RIAA and MPAA are given protection after protection after protection, many of them layering on top of each other. In the US, for instance, there is a tax on these objects, but copying anything copyrighted to them is still illegal, bootlegs are still stopped at customs, and they are still allowed to sue people for using this media to copy anything of theirs, regardless of whether or not the person bought it and should have a fair use right to copy it. They've also gotten multiple copyright extensions which protects the whole damn thing.
The SSSCA and these taxes can be layered on top of one another easily, and that's what US legislators are trying to do.
Somehow I doubt that Bryan Adams, or for that matter any artist, will ever see a single red cent of the money collected from these taxes. Its the record labels that get the money, and its the record labels that will keep the money.
;)
Hehehe... you mean you don't trust the record labels to distribute this new source of income derived from the work of artists back to the actual artists!!! shame on you!
No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a digital audio recording device, a digital audio recording medium, an analog recording device, or an analog recording medium, or based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings. 17 USC 1008.
I don't know if you're aware of this, but you quoted
the license terms for Adobe ebooks quite precisely:
No printing is permitted on this book.
This book cannot be given to someone else.
This book cannot be read aloud.
These are actual terms in the license for the ebook version
of 'Alice in Wonderland'. This is even more strange because
the original text is by now in the public domain.
You can get a free, legal copy at Project Gutenberg.
It has even been suggested that the text of the ebook version was
actually taken from the Gutenberg archives.
Here's an article that a quick search retrieved.
After all, people put Debian on CDs and DVDs
The Canadian government should remember that most of the country lives within a shopping day-trip of the U.S. Not only will Canadian businesses lose money to those making casual purchases over the line, the Candian government will lose tax revenue via lost VAT (or whatever you call it). People will buy their mp3 players in the U.S., take it out of the box, chuck the box, strap it to them, drive back across the border. Maybe Canadians should discuss this concern with their elected officials.
It kind of makes you wonder about Canadian sanity. To the south we have Bush passing an import tax on foreign steel to protect a dying U.S. industry. To the north, we have Canadians passing a tax that will only affect Candians and will benefit an industry making loads of money already.
If you're a Canadian, you have the right to submit your objection to these proposals, and there's a hearing to be held May 23.
Download the document, print it out, and submit your comments if you so care.
tarrif on media may be legit
Oh no it 'aint!
I use CD's solely to make HD backups and blank casstte tapes solely to record myself playing the gutair!
Or are we now suddenly all guilty of piracy and have to prove our inocence?
Anyone quoted by a reporter knows how little they understand
Don't believe what you read is the truth.
Border Guard: Welcome to Canada, do you have anything to declare?
Me: No sir.
Border Guard: Are you sure?
Me: Um no.
Border Guard: Time for a cavity search.
Me: An Ipod, 160 gig hard drive, 20 128 meg smartmedia cards, and a sleeve of minidiscs in my shorts. Now who do I make the check out to again?
Don't laugh, it could happen to you!
SD
âoeWho knew something as harmless as willful ignorance could end up having real consequences?â
1. I live in a flood-prone area. Since I know it'll it'll flood and the house will sustain some damage, should I just go and get money from the Insurance company (even if there is no flooding)?
2. Someone lives in a high-crime area. Should the government pay for him to live there, since the government knows that it can't enforce the laws 100% of the time and keep the area crime-free ?
I think its pretty common for retailers in the US to ship to Canada, so won't a tariff like this simply hurt the Canadian retailers that will need to mark-up their prices compared to American retailers? I can't imagine that Apple will change the price on the iPod simply because its being shipped to Canada - usually only the taxes of the country your business is in are applied, or am I totally off base?
If this does in fact only hurt Canada's retailers, I imagine there will be significant commercial opposition to this new tax.
Only by your standards, because you artificially make others' statements into a boolean of 'government interference' OR '! government interference' which would also make the following (hypothetical) person appear to be a hypocrite
Personally, I'm a Centrist. Both the Left and the Right are crazy. Left --> central planning --> government runs everything --> socialism. Right --> corporate power --> mega-mergers --> central planning --> one corporation runs everything --> fascism. Selective government intervention is the only sensible choice.
"Any extreme point of view is naive."
yeah, you know what's coming...
Imagine (the tax on) a beowulf cluster of iPods!
do not read this line twice.
That if you've paid a tax on your storage media, that the industry has already been paid for anything you might want to store on that media? $21 per gigabyte works out to a little less than a dollar for a CD worth of music. I could see someone floating the legal argument and winning, insuring that a dollar is all the industry ever sees out of Canada for any given user of any given CD.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Instead of giving these taxes to the content pimps, the Canadian government should directly support Canadian artists, who do not get a fair shake in the current pimp regime. With the money distributed to all three Canadian recording artists - Joni Mitchell, Neal Young and Leonard Cohen - the quality of world-wide artistic output will be raised a notch (by the first two) and become less depressive (on the part of the last). As a bonus, Mitchell and Young will spend their bonus largely in their state of residence - California - lessening the US demand for trade retaliation.
___
"with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
Sorry to piss on the parade, but this has nothing to do with remitting money to the RIAA or MPAA. You might first remember what the last A in both those acronyms stands for. It ain't Canada.
Second, these are proposed levies. If I recall correctly, the proposed levy on tapes was going to be $1.50 on each tape. It was implemented at $0.29. All these figures are $C, not $US. The first proposed levy on Audio CD-Rs was going to be per megabyte and add up to $2.50 per disk or something similar.
Third, this initiative is from Heritage Canada, the ministry charged with promoting and protecting Canadian culture. The levies are supposed to compensate CANADIAN artists for "lost sales" due to copying. I do not know if the situation has changed, but at the time the first stage of the levy came into effect, no US artists or companies would be paid a dime from the fund. However, other artists from Europe and elsewhere would share in the fund. This was because the US had failed to sign a trade treaty that allowed for international copyright compensation, among other things.
Lastly, the minister in charge here is Sheila Copps. Her ambitions to take over the leadership of the party (and thus become Prime Minister) are well known. She hinted last week that she would be running when the time came. As the present PM is almost clinically dead, the contest to replace him is already starting. The one thing that no Canadian politician can never be accused of is being to vigilant in protecting and promoting our culture. This is a no-brainer for Ms. Copps. Even if some of the money were going to US artists, it would make no difference politically. The only way she can lose on this is to let the opportunity to vigorously defend Canadian culture slip by.
So the levy will come to pass, it will be a fraction of the proposition stated here, and no US artist or cartel (how does the RIAA get away with it?) will see any money from it. Oh, and the good part is that Ms. Copps hasn't got a chance of succeeding the Rt. Hon. Mr. Cretin no matter what she does or doesn't do. Thank God.
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.
$1.23 per CD? That $15 100 CD pack from CompUSA looks like a winner. Someone could drive ten of them home, sell each CD for a buck and pay for their trip. If this goes over, CDs will become another part of the Canadian cash economy. Retail outlets will have them for people who screwed up and need some RIGHT NOW. Because they never sell legitimatly, they will cost $3.00 and be individually wrapped. Kinda like floppies used to be at University book stores.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Does the legislation mention the recording industries by name, or does it just say generally what kind of groups the money should go to? I might be time for me to incorperate myself and become a recording industry fatcat.
"Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons!"
what kind of education does this guy (and his finance minister) have?
One that his parents paid for and that he wants to ensure that his kids are able to get (why? Because he _can_ pay for it...)
I'm fortunate considering I'm in University at the moment courtesy my parents' generous checkbook. But the thing is that if it weren't for that, i'd be forced to pay up the yin-yang, especially now that Campbell's lifted the tuition freeze, and that banks are starting to lobby to get rid of Student Loans.
Some other upper/middle class students are complaining that the freeze was hurting their education and making it more difficult for them to get into their departments. My reaction: GOOD ON THEM. If lower tuition fees means that you need a 3.6GPA to get into your faculty, GOOD. Maybe finally we'll be issuing degrees based on actual academic capability rather than who can afford to get one. But again, that would make too much sense given the money-driven people who seem to think that the government is a corporation who are running our country/province.
Come the next federal, I'm voting for Svend again. Come the next provincial, I'm voting for the Rhinos again. Seems like I don't have much other options.
Karma: Non-Heinous
For those that haven't read through it, there's information included on how to file an objection in page 2 of the document. I wish to stress that the deadline for this is May 8th, 2002.
/.'s do this, as after reading through the proposition, I noticed that this will not only effect writable discs and MP3 players, but also all flash cards and portable memory media. This means you'll be paying levies on flashcards for your digicam, videogame console memory cards, and PDA's, all of which contribute in no way to piracy.
I highly suggest that all Canadian
From the document:
Objections must briefly state the reasons therefor, and must in-dicate the name, address, telephone number, facsimile number and electronic mail address of the objector. The objection must also contain the following declarations:
I intend to participate actively to the process leading to the certification of the private copying tariff. Consequently, this constitutes my formal objection to the proposed statement filed by CPCC.
I have read the information set out in the Board's notice published in the Canada Gazette on March 9, 2002 with CPCC's proposed statement. I understand the duties that I undertake as an objector and intend to abide by them.
Objections must also state if the objector intends to participate in the pre-hearing conference to be held on Thursday, May 23, 2002 at 10:00 a.m., the object of which is set out below.
Where possible, the Board asks that all comments and objections be sent by electronic mail.
CLAUDE MAJEAU
Secretary General
56 Sparks Street, Suite 800
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0C9
(613) 952-8621 (Telephone)
(613) 952-8630 (Facsimile)
majeau.claude@cb-cda.gc.ca (Electronic mail)
This is just another reminder that politicians can be bought.
Canadians on average are taxed about 10-12% more than their US counterparts. (This was in 1993, may be more now). I hope the Canadians raise a huge stink about this. Especially since we all know that the money will go straight to the suits, and the artists get screwed......again.
"Science is about ego as much as it is about discovery and truth " - I said it, so sue me.
Could it be because Canada does not own a CD maker or an MP3 maker? More power to them if they want to grow their own, but I'm affraid this is more a move to fund music publishers, hopefully Canadian.
They do have a music industry and it is worth protecting. Much Music / Musiq Plus acutally play music and it's sooo much better than MTV. This is more likely to hurt than to help, just like killing Napster shot down music sales.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
I trimmed the opening and closing. Here's the meat. Not that good, but you asked for it.
0 02 -b.pdf
I have been reading today about the increase in tariffs for recordable media
(tapes, CDs, DVDs, Hard Drives, RAM, etc.). I have read through the
document outlining this plan here:
http://www.cb-cda.gc.ca/tariffs/proposed/c09032
and have some feedback. Hopefully you will share my concerns and will
accept the task of expressing these and other objections more formally to
the Board.
Shortly but sweetly, here is my list of objections thus far:
1: The tariff will now apply to devices used to transport and
non-permanently store music. RAM and hard drives are not a permanent,
single use storage medium, as are cassettes (short usable life) and CDs.
This is an extension beyond what I believe is the logical scope of the
original tariff, and the potential to future extension to similar devices is
frightening (cables, computers, internet access). This is the second
increase/extension since Bill C-32 in 1997. I wish I had been paying
attention then.
2: My money is going to support record companies lost profit even if I am
using the technology fairly, and even if I am using the media to record
something but music. Why BMG should get $.03 every time I make a computer
backup or create a disc of pictures is beyond me. The Government is taxing
the people in an effort to offset the people stealing from the companies.
There's no mystery here, which gives us 3.
3: Now that the Government has clarified their role as the tax collectors
on piracy by fortifying the tariff of 2000, I can feel justified that the
mechanism for control is in place, and feel right to take advantage of it.
After all, I'm paying the companies for the (implied) right to pirate music.
Let the good times roll.
4: This is a horrible situation for independent artists. Now the recording
industry is receiving more money, while they themselves are giving it to
them by buying the blank media to promote their work.
5: I don't own a car. Some day I will have to pay $21 per spoke on my bike
so that the oil and car companies will be fairly compensated. With logic
like that used in Bill C-32 ('97) and the extensions, it's bound to happen
some day.
I really should be working now. Thanks for your time.
DataSquid.net, a little about me.
I think if you look at some of the past battles regarding content, etc. you'll find that the RIAA and the MPAA are *very* involved in Canadian lobbying. They do participate, sometimes as member companies.
Just as the tax on gasoline is directed to road maintenance, the tax on recordable media will flow to Canadian artists. Don't believe a word of what the Heritage ministry says: whatever the size of the levys are, the money will be dropped into general revenue and handed out to fountain builders, and golf course owners.
It is apparent that there is no longer any federal elected government in Canada. Just a bunch of petty arguing tribes until they hold the leadership race.
It is so shameful.
We can rub ourselves with ochre and put feathers in our caps.
Then we'll find the port shipping the newly tariffed goods and gaily dump said goods into the harbor -- cackling freely as the native savages are assigned the blame.
Dirt doesn't need luck.
A 40 gig neo MP3 player goes for $479 US. According to an online currency converter, that's $759 Cdn. The tax would be $40 * 21 = 840.
Of course you could also buy the player with no hard drive at all and then buy a 40 gig hard drive separately. Presumably then, the tax would be nothing. Odd law.
The involvement which enforces copyrights and patents?
Infuriate left and right
This tarrif is only proposed on media that has never had sound affixed to. For the re-recordable media (such as CD-RW, flash memory, etc.) the solution would be simple: affix sound. Any sound. A simple "beep" will do.
If the thing already has sound on it when it crosses the border into Canada, no tarrif can be levied. The user may then choose to keep or erase the "beep" that came with it.
(Standard IANAL disclaimer applies)
-Eldurbarn
There's always a way around the draconian measures these idiots come up with. I'm already a criminal, (speeding, jaywalking, ripping tags off mattresses, driving after having a beer with dinner, taping NFL broadcasts without express written permission, etc.) what's one more illegal act?
Even after giving them a subsidy, the recording industry continues to whine about piracy and harrasses those who actually tries to use the recordable media for which they already paid a subsidy!!! Whatever amount of money the recording industry gets, it will never be enough because they will continuously evalute the cost/benefit ratio of more whining, more lobbying, in pursuit of more subsidies.
Of all the things the government could subsidize, I would rank the recording/entertainment industry as dead last in terms of social or economic benefits. I'd rather not subsidize these people, but if we must subsidize something, then I would rather spend it on military hardware. At least it creates high-paying jobs, which is more than I can say for the recording/entertainment industry. "Who do you want to bomb today?"
The sure-fire way to end the whining, lying, congressional lobbying, media spin, and court action is to bag the subsidies altogether and let the recording industry face the wrath of unhappy customers. If ever there was an industry that needed to learn the hard way about the consequences of failing to satisfy its customers, this is the one.
This is essentially a wishlist from the organization that represents the copyright owners. Think of it as an initial bargaining position. They will back off if there is massive pushback from consumers and manufacturers. The manufacturers should be particularly upset. Think of how pissed off you would be if you made an MP3 player that was taxed but a similar product was not taxed because it advertised itself as a "personal organizer WITH MP3 CAPABILITY." Think about if you are a microdrive manufacturer and your product has to compete with slightly bigger drives that are not considered "microdrives." I don't see how this thing could go through without major changes. Surely the manufacturers will scream bloody murder.
The crux of it is things like the fact that they TRIED to have a monopoly by telling PC makers that they either had to sign a deal with Microsoft that they would never use any other OS in ANYTHING THEY MADE or not use any Microsoft products at all.
Wrong. It's not illegal to have a monopoly. It's illegal to abuse your monopoly power in order to retain your monopoly. That is their crime.
Unfortunately, most people think that the case is simply about Microsoft being too big because the media, even the technologically inclined side of the media, is grossly irrepresenting this story.
1. Irrepresenting is not a word. Try misrepresenting.
2. Most of the media I've seen on the case has been pretty fair about why they are on trial. I think most of the PEOPLE in this country don't bother paying attention, and probably think it's just because Microsoft is 'too big.'
"And like that
The tax is intended to apply only to blank recording media, and not to eg pre-recorded CDs. So on page 6 the proposal indicates that this applies to media on which 'no sound has ever been fixed'. So for eraseable media, if the manufacturer records eg a 1 second "test-tone" on it then it will not be liable to the tax. Obviously this isn't a solution for CD-R or DVD-R, but it does seem like a pretty big hole. Might even make CD-RWs cheaper than CD-Rs in Canada!
Objections to the levy have been invited, as long as they follow a specific format:
You can send these objections via email to majeau.claude@cb-cda.gc.ca
If you're not the letter-writing type, you can take the time to appear at one of the Consultation Meetings on Digital Copyright that are being scheduled by Industry Canada. Meetings are still scheduled for Vancouver, Montreal, Toronto and Ottawa, and one was held in Halifax on March 8th. Although this proposed levy isn't on the agenda, other items such as the DCMA and the internet based retransmission are, and there's also a spot on the agenda for "Other Items."
Better yet, keep your eyes and ears open for the results of the pre-hearing meeting on May 23rd, at which point a timetable and agenda for a formal hearing will be scheduled.
I'm attending the Toronto Consultation Meeting, and I urge others in the scheduled areas to visit the website and sign up to attend as well.
cheers,
mike
(I would appreciate it, not for the karma but for the passing of information, if this were modded up)
SSCA or tax on blank media? I know what I'd choose if I had to. Don't get me wrong neither sit well with me but given the choice.....
When someone yells "Stop" or goes limp, or taps out, the fight is over.
Based on that what is to stop Creative from shipping a diskless model that requires the end user to install their own hard disk thus placing the burden of paying the tax on the consumer. For those of us south of the border it would be analogous to purchasing from a vendor outside your own state and having it shipped in to avoid sales tax. Just like a state government with regards to the sales tax I am sure the Canadian government would require its citizens to report the tax and pay it, but come on, who really does?
(Yes, I understand that most consumers would be incapable of doing it themselves, but most people know a geek and how many of us would help out to keep the RIAA and friends from collecting on this tax?) The side benefit is that the consumer can use any size laptop drive they desire.
So nice of you to say what Clinton wanted to say for eight years but never could because he KNEW it'd get his ass voted out off office.
Knee-jerk Left-wing commie bastards. :)
I use ... blank casstte tapes solely to record myself playing the guitar
If you publish those recordings, you become an independent label, and you may be able to collect some of those royalties back.
Will I retire or break 10K?
So is it also wholly unjust to check *every* passenger who gets on an airplane?
(my answer would be yes)
- Sig
For land's sake, please respond to the request for comments! Doesn't matter if you're a Canuck or not: while they won't actually use a foreign comment, it will surely make an impression on them.
Comments should be emailed to majeau.claude@cb-cda.gc.ca
Please be polite but strong. Make it clear to them that this levy harms you, and is going to harm artists.
The most important bit of the proposal follows. Note that it doesn't matter that most of these media are used for data archival: everyone still gets punished because someone might copy a Canadian artist.
"3. (1) Subject to subsection (2), the levy shall be
(a) 60 for each audio cassette of 40 minutes or more in length;
(b) 59 for each CD-R, CD-RW or each unit of any other type of recordable or rewritable compact disc of 100 megabytes or more of storage capacity;
(c) $1.23 for each CD-R Audio, CD-RW Audio or MiniDisc;
(d) 0.8 for each megabyte of memory in each removable electronic memory card, each removable flash memory storage medium of any type, or each removable micro-hard drive;
(e) $2.27 for each DVD-R, DVD-RW, DVD+RW, DVD-RAM or each unit of any other type of recordable or rewritable DVD;
(f) 2.1 for each megabyte of memory in each non-removable electronic memory card or each non-removable flash memory storage medium of any type incorporated into each MP3 player or into each similar device with internal electronic or flash memory that is intended for use primarily to record and play music;
(g) $21 for each gigabyte of memory in each non-removable hard drive incorporated into each MP3 player or into each similar device with an internal hard drive that is intended for use primarily to record and play music. "
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
Sigh, here we sit six months after the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Osama, how much money will it take to put Parliment Hill in Ottawa on the next priority target list? I have a blank cheque in hand, and I'll fill in as many zeros as you need. I'll even guide the planes in.
.mp3s or software here. Just business records and other content that we are the legitimate owners of.
/.'ers do the same. This nonsense has gotten out of hand, and will only get worse unless we speak out.
In all seriousness, this kind of insane behavior only happens when scum-sucking, bottom-feeding lawyers [aka: elected politicians] have one too many power lunches with "industry" (and certainly not my industry, that is for certain) representatives.
I go through a freaking spindle a week for data archiving purposes alone. Why? It's cheap and machine readable on pretty much any machine with a CD-ROM. It's strictly for business use. No pirated
Why in all that's unholy should a damned dime go to the RIAA/MPAA/LMNOP? In this kind of business scenario:
Levy == subsidy.
That's right. As a business, this levy amounts to our subsidizing another industry at our own expense. Now, why should we do that? I don't have the various recording industries subsidizing our business in any fashion.
I'll be contacted my Minister of Parliment immediately. I suggest any Canadian
Fuming....
I'm not Canadian, so I can't do it, but if you are, read the PDF file carefully, and put together a formal objection. Every Canadian citizen is entitled to object. It looks like it's pretty expensive for them if you produce a proper formal objection, so go for it! If enough Canadian citizens object, you really could make a difference here.
''' ... corrupt government formed by polititians who are being paid by the record industry. ..."
The "record industry" doesn't get a dime. These levies are paid, in whole, to musicians and songwriters directly through the same mechanism the get money for airplay, publishing, etc. It's a performer-controlled organisation that collects and distributes the cash. The "corrupt Government" collects and then pays each penny to an organisation controlled by creative artists, directly.
In fact, the "record industry" are actually cutting checks to this same performer's association; (for example:) if you write a song; somebody records it; and it appears on a CD, the record company pays a royalty for each sale to you via this association.
The musicians themselves get checks in the mail (collected and distributed based on the above examples, from radio stations based on airplay, etc) and the songwriters get checks in the mail; if you were Michael Jackson, you would be getting money based on owning the words & lyrics to Beatles songs, and sales/airplay/etc of these songs in Canada; but you would also be getting some money based on how popular Bealtes songs are (sales, performance, broadcasting) relative to all music, from the pool of money already collected on blank cassette tapes and CD-Rs (two forms of media that have been covered since the last revision).
It's proposed that these same creative artists get to share in the levy for newer forms of blank media that can and is used to record music.
That's why it is perfectly legal in Canada to make a copy of any CD (or any musical performance of any kind) and there is no requirement to show "fair use" (which exists only in US law); you can borrow them from the library if you want. You are correct about the Industry's position, however. They constantly provide erronious information to naive reporters, consumers, and the public citing US "Fair Use" as somehow applying in Canada; I have never seen a Canadian Record Company link to relevant Canadian Statutes; they send you to a US-based site in an attempt to convice the curious of what they want you to believe.
Finally, this is a proposed levy, not final. The amounts mentioned are amounts musicians and songwriters have lobbied for; and is subject to change based on public input. This is the first time the proposed amounts have been made public; basically it reflects what the musician's organisation wants and has lobbied for.
The recording industry would much rather outlaw copying altogether and control artist incomes directly; a lot of the noise in the media is from the record industry itself. If this story hasn't been posted to SlashDot by an outraged consumer feeling "ripped off" because a mechanism exists for actually compensating musicians, I humbly suggest that the next most likely candidate would be a Record Company Executive.
Lastly, these levies have existed for eons in Canada; this latest outbreak is based on a proposal to increase the levies themselves and to introduce new media not previously covered. It's not written in stone (as far as the amount itself); the actual amounts levied and exactly what new media is appropriate is open to comment, discussion, and change.
For example, the last time it was revised, cassettes of under 40 minutes were exempted (because they are predominantly used for dictation). The do have good stats on what percentage is used for data and what for copying music; that's almost certainly why the drive-in-a-mp3-player levy is so high while the same drive in a laptop is unaffected.
So this is *not final*! You *can* do something about it. All you independent musicians and CD-R-backup-ing computer scientists: file written comments objecting!
(If only I were Canadian.)
[
From the PDF:
Limitations on the Powers of the Board
Anyone contemplating objecting to CPCC's proposed statement must realize that the Copyright Act sets out a number of limits on what the Board may or may not do. No purpose is served by objecting to the proposed statement based on grounds about which the Board can do nothing. In the following paragraphs, we summarize some of the limits imposed on the Board's
powers in this matter:
(1) The Board must certify a tariff and set a levy. Those who own the rights to sound recordings of musical works (composers, authors, performers and producers) are entitled to be remunerated for private copies. No purpose is served by asking the Board to reject the tariff as a whole.
(2) Only persons who own rights in sound recordings of musical works are entitled to share in the remuneration; owners of rights in other works (computer programs, movies, literary works) are not.
(3) The remuneration must be paid by manufacturers and importers of blank audio recording media, in the form of a levy to be imposed on those media. The obligation to pay arises when the media are sold or otherwise disposed of in Canada by the manufacturer or importer. The Board cannot set the levy at the retail level.
(4) The levy is payable on all media that qualify, without regard to end use. No purpose is served by asking that the tariff include a mechanism that would allow those who can prove that they use qualifying media for purposes other than reproducing musical works to be exempted from payment or to receive a refund.
(5) The Copyright Act exempts from the levy recording media that are sold to a society, association or corporation that represents persons with perceptual disabilities. The Copyright Board cannot grant any other exemption.
I think I'm gonna have to take trips to the States more often to smugle CD-Rs.
GFK's
NAFTA hasn't stopped the US from applying tariffs on goods from Canada or Mexico where there is a political will to do so.
In fact, such trade agreements tend to support limited use of tariffs; the price of renouncing the treaty, for all signatory nations, is much greater than one or two unresolved trade disputes.
Finally, a levy such as this, which applies universally whether the source is foreign or domestic and cannot be shown to be contrived to limit imports and favor domestic production is unlikely to be deemed actionable via trade treaty. Otherwise such things as enviornmental charges (new tires, beverages, batteries, etc) would all be illegal.
Canada had to lobby vigorously to be exempted from the steel tariff; the bill as introduced applied to all nations equally.
Yo folks, haven't you heard of the Boston Tea Party? Colonists protested unjust taxation on Tea imports by breaking into a tea shipment and throwing it into the ocean. Perhaps it's time to repeat this bit of history...
*Condense fact from the vapor of nuance*
"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, including...
So, if I read this right, there's a useful loophole for any of the re-recordable media, like CD-RW, flash, hard drives.
Put some sounds on it before you ship it.
Ta da, it's not a blank audio recording medium, hence not covered.
do we pay tariffs in the us on recordable media?
Can someone provide a link to this?
Douglas Calvert
I wouldn't sweat this too much. This tariff will result in the creation of huge black markets, and in a few short months no one will be paying these fees except the people that have too much money to care. The only people who should really be worried are Canadian vendors, who are about to lose a significant amount of business. You'll be able to easily find some seller on EBay who is selling for the (US) market price. You'll probably be able to find a lot of small vendors who are unscrupulous enough to sell you the goods regardless of the tariff. The only added costs here will be those due to inefficiency, e.g. the extra price you have to pay to get things shipped in from the US. And of course it will make regular citizens criminals. This scenario occurs like virtual clockwork whenever the government tries to excise tax/prohibit a good or service that enjoys widespread social acceptance. Look at our present war on drugs or the prohibition of alcohol in the 1920s. Looks like some stupid Canadian bureaucrat forgot the most important rule of them all: you don't fuck with the law of demand.
I think there is a world market for maybe five personal web logs.
Do it right, apparently they essentially ignore you unless you jump through a lot of hoops:
So if you are Canadian and don't want to be ignored, follow all the steps and become a formal objector, and read the info on what are reasonable grounds for objection. Apparently they won't even consider your objection if you say "people who can prove they aren't pirating music shouldn't be subject to these levies". You might get somewhere, however, if you talk about software backup, digital photography, etc.
I know it was a joke, but I don't think it would work.
AFAIK, the CPCC distributes the money through a SOCAN-like system. SOCAN decides how to distribute tariffs based on media sampling. If your songs don't get heavy play on Canadian radio, you don't get paid.
It is going to the CANADIAN GOVERNMENT for the explicit purpose of doing typically Canadian things with it e.g. paying Tequila Shiela to give everyone who asks a flag, paying Annie Get Your Gun to come up with an invasive, rights-destroying set of laws masquerading as gun control. And I'm sure that a couple of golf courses in Shawinigan will change hands at hundreds of thousands of dollars more than they're worth, with Jean Chretien getting his cut.
Or maybe King Jean has a singing fountain in a river or a portrait gallery or something in mind.
It's a cash grab, pure and simple, for Ottawa bureaucrats to waste on their pet projects.
--- Jump!! Fire!! Bullet time!! - Lego version of the Matrix
This "pesky little law" that you refer to is a provision of NAFTA that (for the first time, anywhere) allows companies to sue governments directly for loss of reputation or market.
h yl .htm
I am very sorry to hear California is the latest victim; the clause was a major sticking point for Canada but was also firmly insisted upon by business interests (on both sides of the border) and was presented by the US side as a non-negotiable condition of adoption of the Canada-US Free Trade Agreement ("FTA", the predecessor of NAFTA, which added Mexico).
CA prohibits both MTBE and MMT; the latter a product of New Jersey-based Ethyl Corporation (the fine folks who brought us leaded gas).
The suit you refer to is almost certainly a direct result of Ethyl sucessfully suing Canada under NAFTA (link below) to compensate for Canada's banning of MMT in retail gasoline (it's not used in US pump gas, for health and envornmental reasons). Canada was forced to pay cash compensation and cannot legally prohibit MMT in Canadian gas; in fact it's the only place where MMT is found in retail gasoline; the enviornmental law was deemed an illegal trade practise under NAFTA.
It seems a Canadian company has wised up to this dangerous provision in order to do the same thing to California; I'm afraid they have a strong case and this clearly reinforces what some grass-roots objectors to FTA in both our countries warned about (naturally, the objections were dismissed as fear-mongering by FTA proponnents).
I think you would find very, very strong support in Canada to amend this provision of NAFTA and if California would object to Congress; there may be some hope for all of us.
http://www.globalpolicy.org/socecon/envronmt/et
The only way to get the government to listen is to get everyone to write in a formal complaint... otherwise we'll all be forced to pay out these rediculous fees (imagine, an EXTRA $840 charged on a portable MP3 player just so they can send the money back to the RIAA!)
[message template]
send to: Claude Majeau majeau.claude@cb-cda.gc.ca
[you need these first paragraphs to have your letter considered as a formal complaint]
I intend to participate actively to the process leading to the certification of the private copying tariff. Consequently, this constitutes my formal objection to the proposed statement filed by CPCC.
I have read the information set out in the Board.s notice published in the Canada Gazette on March 9, 2002 with CPCC ' s proposed statement. I understand the duties that I undertake as an objector and intend to abide by them.
I do not wish to take part in the pre-hearing conference on May 23, however I do wish for my objections to be made part of the official records of these proceedings.
[insert your objections here. Make them clear and consice, state your reasons for objection, etc]
Thank you,
[your name]
[your address]
[your phone and fax #]
[your email address]
A number of points:
1) Don't tell people they have lost all reason. It is unlikely to advance your point.
2) The levies are not arbitrary. See the findings of the last hearing for the mathematical formula used to calculate them.
3) The Copyright Board is not suggesting the new levies. The Canadian Private Copying Colelctive (CPCC) is. They are the group to whom the levies are given, for later distribution to copyright holders.
4) The Copyright Board does not have the power to revoke the levies. They will not rule on the justification for copyright, nor Ms. Dion's need for another million. The Copyright Board does what the legislation behind it tells it to do.
5) I would suggest you make the unreasonable proportion of the cost of media your main thesis: $0.59 will probably represent over half of the cost of a CD-R at retail. $21/GB will add 25% to the cost of an MP3 player.
Careers should combine three things: what you can do, what you want to do, and what you can get paid for.
Maybe you should have gone to a better law school. See guide to copyrights. Quoting from page 11: [example of non-infringement use] "borrowing a musical tape from a friend to copy onto a blank tape for private use".
___
If you think big enough, you'll never have to do it.
The tea party in question wouldn't happen today, because corporations hold our nations' economies hostage. They don't serve the public, we serve the corporate agenda. In the 16th century, this wasn't the case, and the main force of the East India company was its monopoly by fiat. Today, corporations have power of their own which is only supplemented by government power (as in this case).
The astute reader will note that this can only get worse as corporate profit becomes more global - able to easily jump from country to country, corporations may play one off against the other in a bidding war for economical benefit. You and I will be the losers in the game, then as now.
What do to about it? I don't know. I suspect it's inevitable, given the headlock corporations have on our governments and, through the mass media, the prejudices of a large slice of our populations (I say "prejudices", because the opinions I am describing are formed based on inadequately balanced information). I know *I* feel disenfranchised.
The Signal/Noise ratio can be improved in two ways. Remaining silent is the OTHER way.
From the PDF (English only):
Also note from the PDF that this is a proposal for 2003/2004 - they'll be talking about raising the prices again in TWO YEARS.The Signal/Noise ratio can be improved in two ways. Remaining silent is the OTHER way.
I spoke to Laura Davison, Manager of Collections and Enforcement at CPCC today. According to her, none of the levies collected to date have actually been distributed to anyone. Also, she wouldn't release any information about levies distributed now or in the future, citing confidentiality reasons. As a non-profit agency, I thought that they had to release this kind of information to the general public? Any fellow Canadians care to comment?
pi=sigma{n:0-infinity}[(1/16)^n][(4/(8n+1))-(2/(8n +4))-(1/ (8n+5))-(1/(8n+6))]
I can't believe the Canadian government holds the view that the only copyright-holders worth compensating are those sponsored by large corporates.
Everybody produces work protected by copyright, whether they know it or not, almost every day.
But obviously some entities produce work that is more equal than others in terms of the protection/compensation imposed by this proposed legislation.
This measure is a ludicrous abuse of power, and will not benefit Canadians in any way whatsoever.
I am not a Canadian, I am from New Zealand, on the other side of the planet, but I fear that my government will foolishly follow the lead set by countries like Canada in introducing these despicable laws.
I would like to see how democracy is served by this proposed legislation - How many canadians consider this legislation beneficial?
I gots ta ding a ding dang my dang a long ling long
http://www.sycorp.com/levy/index.htm
SSL Certificate
it's us Canadians that are paying the tax, so why shouldn't the money go to Canadian artists?
...especially the fact that the vast majority of CD-R use is most likely for data storage...
That's why. Besides, it's distributed according to lifetime album sales, which means Barenaked Ladies get a cut, Bryan Adams gets a cut, Sarah McLaughlin gets a cut. I doubt Nickelback will see too much cash from this.
If the money was used for something like promoting new bands, or giving out record contracts or something, I'd be all for it, but I don't see it helping Canadian music at all
"If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
Hey folks, there's an online petition against it: http://www.sycorp.com/petition.htm Damn, why is Sheila Copps always making things difficult for us Canadian folk. Doesn't she realize that all we want is to listen to our pirated music while playing hockey?
There is something in Canada called the CPCC and it exists to collect this money and disburse it.
Ahem... This organization exists to disperse funds collected due to alleged violations of intellectual property laws? How interesting and ironic, then.
The following e-mail was sent to several standard-ish e-mail addresses within the radioshack.ca domain. You know, legal@, sales@, webmaster@.
Dear Sirs,
It has come to my attention that your trademark, "You've Got Questions, We've Got Answers" is being used, presumably without your authorization, by a Canadian agency which was created to protect the intellectual property rights of others through dispersal of levies on media.
As I've come to associate "You've Got Questions, We've Got Answers" with my friendly and helpful local Radio Shack retailer, as a consumer, I find myself in a most distressing and confusing situation.
Your claim of trademark is available here:
http://www.radioshack.ca/eStore/content/legal.aspx ?language=en-CA
And the confusing use of your trademark is available on the Canadian Private Copying Collective (CPCC)'s website, right here:
http://www.cpcc.ca/English/FAQ/faq.html
I would hope that you will take prompt measures to address this issue.
Thank you,
Lawrence Wade
Toronto, Canada
CPCC: I love you like a cold sore.
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
News flash: A new bill is making its way through the sentate. Proposed by the senator from Disney, the Unlawful Music Memorization Protection Act (UMMPA) would protect the recording industry from violations of copyright by people who know all the words to any given song, or can hum it. Extra penalties are to proposed for people who can sing. The new law would levey a charge of 10$US per word for each word of a song that a person can remeber. Harsher penalties would be incurred for humming the tune. Under the new law people would be required to report to thier local music stores on the first of next year to be examined for song lyrics they can remeber and melodies they know. The bill would also transfer the copyright for any existing or newly created piece music to the MPAA, to be held in trust on behalf of the artists.
Umm... today we call that "terrorism." (We might think it's justified terrorism, but this brings up an uncomfortable question about what else might be.)
(The end user) != (The end user). Because one is the end user of the entertainment industry's products, and another is the end user of blank media. The entertainment industry is accomplishing a cost transfer, forcing producers/consumers in a different industry to pay for their profits.
... every day?
The amount being contemplated to let a bunch of fossil non-producers (Has the RIAA EVER produced an album? Has the MPAA EVER made a movie?) protect their turf is insane.
There must be terabytes if not petabytes backed up everyday. Every fucking day. All to CD-ROMs because that's cheaper and much faster than mag tape. What do you think banks and insurance companies and large (>500 employes,) corporations use?
That's is going to send the xxAA's revenues sky rocketing. They'l get more money in a year that they have earned, EVER.
Then there'll be congressional investigations. And I wouldn't want to be Valenti after his HMO jacks up ALL our rates to pay for the back up mnedia.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
You could read the entire PDF, which indicates the process and the fact that a timetable for hearings has not even been decided yet.
The chance that the levies will pass as proposed are next to zero; the last time this was proposed (1999) musicians asked for $3 per cassette and the final amount was determined to be 23.3 cents. For unrelated reasons, the 1999 proposal lapsed and was never implemented.
Just like last time (and all the other times, this is not the first) there will be a large number of formal objections from importers, retailers, manufacturers, computer industry representatives, etc; even if you don't utter a peep.