Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Canada Quashes Copyright Tax on MP3 Players

Posted by michael on from the rated-q-for-quash dept.

Rippy the Gator writes "The Globe and Mail says that consumers may soon be paying less for MP3 players because the Federal Court of Appeal ruled that special copyright levies applied to digital music players are not legal. You might want to keep those receipts if you're giving them as a Christmas Gift."

20 of 437 comments (clear)

  1. Hooray! by mistersooreams · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Isn't it strange how Canada seems to have such a different attitude to copyright enforcement to America, when Europe seems to want to follow in the footsteps of American law? Canada is culturally more similar to America than Europe is, besides the obvious geographical proximity. Is this the Canadian government deliberately being contrary? I'd be interested to hear from some Canadians on the matter.

    --
    apterous.org
    1. Re:Hooray! by jest3r · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I get the same impression ... by dropping the media levy on devices that support MP3's the Canadian RIAA can start going after Canadian MP3 file traders. On the otherhand the levy on my iPod was $25 ... which irks me enough that I make a point to copy / pirate / trade everything just to get my moneys worth.

      I did buy 10 hard to find tracks from the Canadian iTunes music store when it opened last week - good experience.

      Ramble on ...

    2. Re:Hooray! by Fr05t · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "So, basically because you want to steal music I should pay the Recording Industry extra? This is moronic, selfish and childish."

      Nope, I buy all of the music I like and can find in the stores here. I may have a few tracks which are unlicensed but not many. I do however have a problem with big companies being able to demand client lists from ISPs,etc. Canada isn't a litigation state and I would like it to stay that way.

      "No, they just die waiting for treatment. Been to a hospital lately?"

      Yes I have been to a hospital lately - My Uncle was there not too long ago getting cancer treatment, which he would have never been able to afford if he was in the US. I think you would feel diferently about this if you actually knew what you were talking about.

    3. Re:Hooray! by tdhillman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why is it that the quietest voices in all of this are always they artists themselves? The RIAC and RIAA don't speak for me, and despite having had my copyrights infringed many a time, I've never seen dime one in retribution. The RIAA for example doesn't give the fine money to those harmed (the artists) but rather to the organisation.

      --
      befuddled (noun) 1. Unable to create a pithy sig
    4. Re:Hooray! by Nijika · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Is this the Canadian government deliberately being contrary?

      For later referece, Canada is a sovereign country seperate from the U.S., so what we do up here isn't always a reaction to what is happening down south. As a liberal[1] country, we often make decisions based on general fairness to all of our citizens.

      [1] - And no I don't mean Liberal, as in the U.S. swear word. I mean it in the classic sense.

      --
      Luck favors the prepared, darling.
    5. Re:Hooray! by goates · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Typical Eastern responses. Attack anything different without actually trying to propose realistic alternatives.

      Alberta paid more per person for health care than any other province except Manitoba. And unless something changes, that still won't be enough. At least Alberta is looking at new ideas to fix the problem.

      Do I want a two tiered system? Hell no, and I won't support anyone who does. And the Americans can keep their system. Ours can't last without changes though, and something needs to be done.

      My problem is that I don't trust the Liberals, and I don't like the influence the far right conservatives have. I like ideas from both sides, but apparently you can only be on one side or the other. Alberta's flat tax for income is great, and so is free health care. Why can't this work across the country?

    6. Re:Hooray! by shark72 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "I know this has been said before, but I find it hard to understand how the record companies claim millions or billions lost due to piracy. There's no real way to even come close to an actual dollar amount. I'm sure there's some effect, but I have a hard time believing it's as great as the record companies claim."

      You're correct. The record companies hire their own analysts and accountants, then there's third party independent research firms who conduct their own analysis, and then there's consumers who have their own gut instincts. If I can make some broad generalizations and summarize:

      Record companies: "we're losing billions! It's going to put us out of business! Won't somebody think of the artists! Oh, and the children."

      Independent analysts: "there are indeed significant lost sales due to piracy, but not as large as the record companies state."

      Slashdot users: "Piracy actually helps the record industry, because I'm providing free advertising. Yeah, I might even go out and buy two copies of a CD after I've warezed it. Oh, and I might go to the concert, too."

      The correct answer is, as the math texts state, left to the reader.

      "Let's not forget the huge percentage of each CD sale that the record companies take."

      Hmm... I've lost you there. Do you have a cite for that? The best data I can find is that the Canadian music industry, as a whole, operates on net margins of about 12%. That's about as well as Logitech and Creative Labs do. Then again, the Vivendi Universal group (a major record label) only managed negative three percent net margin last year, and Time Waner (which includes Warner Music) cleared an 8% net margin.

      I often do see people who point out that since a CD costs two bucks to produce and they sell it to the stores for eight bucks, they must be making money hand over fist, but those people are largely idiots who don't have a grasp of the concept of gross margin vs. net margin. So, if you have any data to support the idea of huge profit margins in the recording industry, please post it. The market shows otherwise.

      --
      Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.
  2. Re:The end of the canadian musid industry by Yaa+101 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You are wrong, it means that Canadians cannot anymore hide behind a levies law.
    It means that soon the floodstreams of lawsuits against illegal users will flow...

  3. Won't change anything for me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting
    With such advantegeous currency exchange rates, a lot less taxes, and the extra fee, I've bought my IPod on a trip to New York and ended up paying 100$ less than if I would of bought it in Canada.


    Or there's always Ebay...if the US shipper agrees to indicate "Gift" on the box, you won't pay any taxes whatsoever.

  4. Double-edged sword by Mwongozi · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Digital sharing of copyrighted music in countries which put a tax on CD-Rs, MP3 players, etc. is effectively legal, since you're paying for the priviledge of doing so whether you actually are or not.

  5. Re:Heh by Egonis · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Agreed!

    I remember when CD-R's were quite suddenly affected by the recording taxes -- did you know that the CRTC (Canadian Radio and Television Commission) imposed a tax on Audio Tapes and VHS Cassettes back in the early 80's?

    So many people here just don't know that these fees have been implemented into the sales structure already, and assume that things are just strange in the US.

    I do think, though that these taxes are not a terrible idea, as it keeps the recording industry off of our backs for the most part.

  6. just a moment here by compro01 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    this only removes the tax on MP3 players. the tax on blank cds and tapes remains. but hey, it's only $0.25. i can deal with that.

    and the canadian court system already informed the CRIA (canadian RIAA) that they can take their ideas to sue and stick them where the sun don't shine, so this isn't gonna change that in a hurry.

    --
    upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
  7. Re:Interesting by Egonis · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Hmm, so if we Americans started charging, say, a burglary tax to everyone we could not ever have to worry about going to jail for burglary. That sounds great, plea bargains before the act is even committed!

    Nice comparison.... seriously! You do have a great point here....

    On one hand, yes.. copying music is breaking the law, but on the other hand... the levy tax pays the record industry as a whole for their "losses" -- so there is a half-right and half-wrong to the concept of levies.

    Ah, I love this Canadian mentally that has them believing that everyone here dies on the street because they are uninsured. Sorry, but it's a huge myth. Moreover, Canada caps its doctor's salaries so most of the really good doctors who specialize in the rare and complicated diseases that save people's lives come to the US because our schools are better and you actually get paid properly for your skills. I'm not going to open the socialism debate, but it certainly has its own set of flaws.

    The Canadian Mentality is a feeling that everyone 'deserves' to be given health care... no matter what their circumstance. I agree with this concept, obviously...

    What you see from Canadians regarding the thoughts of people dying in the streets in the US, is because of fear -- I admit that the thought of a capitalist approach to health care is frightening to me, and it paints a confusing picture to many of us, as we could not imagine getting a second mortgage for a heart bypass (provided that said person doesn't have coverage, etc, etc)

    Doctors in Canada do get severely capped, and mistreated, but that's not speaking for all of them. There are many fantastic surgeons, specialists, etc here who enjoy their work, get compensated well for it.. etc.

    You must consider the opposite though, the family of a friend of mine moved up here from Ohio over 30 years ago because the parents wanted to work within our health system, because they felt that American Medicare was too oppressive.

    So their are many opinions from different sides, I am not knocking the american system, but I personally do feel more comfortable and loyal to the ways of my own country.

  8. Re:Interesting by Fr05t · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Hmm, so if we Americans started charging, say, a burglary tax to everyone we could not ever have to worry about going to jail for burglary. That sounds great, plea bargains before the act is even committed!"

    Oh thanks for a great laugh! :P That's a rediculous comparison especially since music trading here isn't even illegal.

    "Ah, I love this Canadian mentally that has them believing that everyone here dies on the street because they are uninsured."

    I didn't say anything about dying in the street. I'm talking about going broke because you got sick.

    "so most of the really good doctors who specialize in the rare and complicated diseases that save people's lives come to the US because our schools are better and you actually get paid properly for your skills."

    What I read was - "All of the doctors that do it for the money and not because they care go to the states" damn that's a real shame. Either way Doctors do make decent money here compared to other professions.

  9. Canada will eventually have Levies and Lawsuits. by guidryp · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Originally this scheme was started with the rationale to capture revenue lost when you copied an album from a friend. Knowing there was no way to stop this or prosecute this, the entertainment lobby came up with a way to get paid for this "violation". At the same time the law was amended to allow private copying. A coup really. The industry allows a concession that was unstoppable and in return taxes all media.

    Cue the internet music boom. Buisness as usual, time to go to war and kick in the doors of some file sharers, sue some grannies and single moms when there kids download music. But wait, that dang private copying amendment makes it a grey area.

    Unfortunately what will happen next is there will be an attack on the "private copying" portion of the law. It will be changed, eventually we too will have RCMP raiding file downloaders. But of course the levies will stay as well.

    The simple fact is we are in a corpocracy. The law is for the corporations. The certainly won't give up the revenue stream from levies but they will loby until they change the laws so they can sue.

    Eventually we will have the worst of all possible worlds.

  10. Re:The end of the canadian musid industry by dubstar · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sure we can. The levy still exists for blank media such as CD-R.

    I personally don't consider it 'hiding' either. If I'm forced to pay this fee regardless of whether I use the media for music or not, I have zero guilt when it comes to downloading mp3's off of the internet or copying CDs/songs from friends. I still go to shows, and I still buy the CDs of the bands I like as well.

  11. Front page by phorm · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Actually, I was surprised to see this on the front page of the news today (the Province, I think, for British Columbians).

    Most articles of this nature usually end up being buried amongst other "lesser" news as technical mumby-jumbo etc etc.

    It's really quite nice to see that not only has this stupid tax been repealed, but that the media are giving notice to it. I wish they'd do so more often when they try and slip these things in.


    One thing I wonder though, as it mentions "keeping Xmas receipts" - is whether or not consumers can request a rebate on the tax if they've paid it already, as it's been ruled illegitimate.

    But then we get back into the usual stupidity:

    He said the Copyright Act clearly defines media that legally can be used for private duplication of copyrighted material and MP3 players no longer meet that criteria.

    Sorry buddies, while this might mean you can't copy a disc from your friend, it certainly doesn't take away any rights I have to copy my CD to my own iPod. My music, my property, my right to do what I want with it (within my domain).

  12. And now for the REAL confusion... by ratboy666 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    [I live in Canada]

    We are allowed to copy music for personal reasons. In exchange, a levy is placed on blank media.

    All for the good.

    And now, the appeal ruling is that MP3 players are not subject to the levy, because the Act doesn't mention them.

    All for the good -- except that the Act may/will be changed to allow the levy.

    Most MP3 devices do NOT facilitate the copying of music! If you can show me how to plug media into an iPod (for instance) to allow the iPod to function as a duplicator; or you are willing to GIVE your iPod to someone else, then the iPod should have the levy applied. If the iPod is capable of downloading music without another computer with media, it should be levied.

    And here's the problem -- an iPod CAN'T download from the internet, and you WON'T be lending it out, and it CAN'T have media plugged into it.

    About the best you can do is a player with a built-in FM radio, and the ability to record to a removed Flash device.

    And the levy should be placed on the Flash media.

    Not the players.

    So, the ruling is good, but the REASON is wrong, because it opens up the possibility of a lobby to change the Copyright Act.

    I just hope that when that happens, the politicians see their way clear to a correct ammendment (say, a levy on blank VCR tapes and DVD recordable media, and allowing personal copying of video).

    Now, the joker that suggested that is was not OK to use your iPod on Dec 15, is basically full of it. The personal copying provision allows us to copy to ANY media that is commonly used for the storage of music. That would (by design) include your iPod. So suck it up -- that cannot be removed without changing the Copyright Act.

    Ratboy.

    --
    Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
    1. Re:And now for the REAL confusion... by Seska · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You were doing well until you made the point that MP3 devices don't faciliate the copying of music. Regardless of the truth of that statement, it's irrelevant.

      The recordable media levy is placed upon the media, not the recording/copying devices. Hence, tapes and CD-Rs are levied, tape recorders are not. In most flash MP3 players, the flash/hard drive is non-removable. Hence, the levy.

      As someone who participated in the last round of levy setting, I can tell you that the CPCC tried to get DVD+-Rs -RWs, flash memory, and small hard drvies levied. The idea there was the same as for CD-Rs: apply the levy against all media sold, but scale the levy according to what proportion of the media are used for music.

      e.g. 20% (not a real number) of DVD-Rs are used to copy music, so multiply the levy by 0.2, but apply it to all DVD-Rs sold.

      I can also tell you that parliament was being lobbied to change the copyright act anyway, because this provision only provides cash for music copyright holders. Nothing for video games, nothing for the movies, and nothing for photos. All of those stakeholders would love for this to apply to them. Further, the CPCC would like the Act to state the filesharing is not fair use of material (it's a grey area now).

  13. Re:Stop lying by liquidsin · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Actually, asshole, I'm Canadian and a musician, and 99% of the cds I burn are of MY OWN MUSIC (the remaining 1%, give or take a point, is data). So I'm paying the Canadian Music Industry for the right to burn my own music onto cd. And since the monies are distributed based on airplay and charts, I'm essentially paying money to my competitors every single time I make a new recording. Sound fair to you?

    --
    do not read this line twice.