Slashdot Mirror
Canada to Tax MP3 Players $21/GB of Storage
einer writes : "A brief article on some new legislation scheduled to take effect at the beginning of next year. This tax would raise the price of an archos jukebox from roughly $350.00 to $640.00 (American). "Comments and objections are due by May 8, 2002." Looks like I'm headed to pricegrabber." Update: 03/13 19:36 GMT by M : We did a big story on this a few days ago (although people keep submitting it).
One way you have an MP3 player costing double what it should.
But, on the other hand, you are paying for a right to store whatever you want on there (mainly copyrighted music).
As a matter of fact, if you own one of these devices, the way I see it, they are saying that it is your duty to use it to store copyrighted music on it, because if you used it for something else, then you'ld get no return on your tax dollars.
Then again, just buy a Rio Volt...it only stores ~1/2 GB, but it is on a CD...
As regards piracy, if you do live in Canada, it's quite likely that you haven't actually been pirating music. Canadian copyright law states that copying recorded works for personal use is not an infringement of copyright. It's not even frowned upon. It's totally legal to copy your friend's CDs and make MP3s out of them. It's probably legal to buy a CD, copy it, and return it, as long as the copying is done for personal use.
Living better through chemicals
We need to have this day whether Canada passes its tax or not. We need to have it in Boston, Massachusetts, at the site of the original Boston Tea Party; ideally we need to find a ship with some pallets of shrinkwrapped CDs on board, and dump them over the side. Call it the Boston MP3 Party, and use it to point out that people are paying the RIAA $20 for music that should only cost around $3.
(And don't start bleating to me about how the RIAA needs $20 per CD to "cover its costs." The RIAA is a bloated, inefficient cartel with a business model that has gone the way of the buggy whip. The DMCA is the recording industry's Endangered Species Act -- it's as if a congress of dinosaurs voted to outlaw mammals and asteroids.)
The Boston Tea Party was a heroic act of civil disobedience against a state-sponsored monopoly -- a monopoly that obtained favorable legislation to preserve its own profit, sought to control distribution, and leveraged its power to drive competitors out of business. 229 years later, here we are again; we just need another Sam Adams (the man, not the beer) to get the ball rolling.