Slashdot Mirror
German Court Sets Copyright Tax on New PCs
graemee pastes: "The District Court of Munich has ordered Fujitsu Siemens Computers to pay a copyright levy on new PCs. The landmark decision, announced on Thursday, ends a nearly two-year dispute between the largely Germany-based computer maker and the country's VG Wort rights society, which has sought compensation for digital copying. VG Wort had filed a suit against Germany's largest PC maker, Fujitsu Siemens, seeking 30 euro (US$41) for each new computer sold in the country. The court agreed to a 12 euro copyright levy."
... vomit in absolute disgust.
Unless of course this completely ligitimises copying c.f. Canada. somehow I doubt it though.
They're already paid for.
(Sure the courts wont see it that way)
~cederic
By doing this, they're legitimizing the same activities they claim to be trying to stop. If you are going to pass a levy to compensate for something, you can't expect anyone to listen when you tell them to stop. They will (rightly) say "I paid an extra tax on this equipment to cover the cost of what I'm doing." They'll either have to stop charging a levy or fin that no one will listen.
i am a soviet space shuttle
I could use a pencil to 'copy' a piece of art. And there should also be a copyright levy on the human voice for the ability to sing along with a song.
Don't give Bush any ideas ;)
this assumes that everyone is a thief and makes the people who make the product pay for what people use their products for, even a legitimate use...which then gets passed onto the consumer. Such a stupid legal move IMO
Do independent and alternative labels get any of the copyright taxes in countries like Germany and Canada, or does it all go to the RIAA equivalents?
Slashdot: News for Nerds, Stuff that matters only to them
You pay car tax and you're legally allowed to drive a car.
You pay tobacco tax and you're legally allowed to smoke it.
So if you pay a "digital copying tax" on a computer, you must be allowed to do digital copying on it, surely?
Out of curiosity, if you built a pc from scratch, which component gets this tax, or is it split up between all of them ?
I wonder how this will effect people who build their own PCs. Does the tax only apply to people who buy a pre-fab machine, or will individual components also be taxed, or is it on the honor system where if you build a computer at home you are obligated to send in the ammount required by the tax.
As assinine as this is overall, I would much rather pay a $50 tax on any computer than have the media industries completely destroy or cripple beyond recognition the internet and anything remotely interesting that computers can do.
Famous Last Words: "hmm...wikipedia says it's edible"
VG Wort is not about music. VG Wort is responsible for collecting money on written documents / books and the rights associated with them. And they are right about wanting to get that levy on computers, because people who want to set up Xerox machines and use them commercialy have had to pay that levy since, eh, always (And thereby you have the right to copy material out of books without owning the books).
So yes, you have to pay the levy, but you are also allowed to make non-commercial copies of books / magazines etc because of that. Stop complaining.
If there is an option to get your money back by filling out a form stating that you will not do any copying of copyrighted material and waiting 6-8 weeks for the form to be processed.
This -- or something like it -- is much the best hope for a reasonable copyright regime. Governments are going to have to fix copyright, because no one else will protect the interests of the people who create this stuff. The labels and corporations generally are not on the side of the creators, and most of the consumers of digital property will rip you off blind if they can.
If the problem is left to the untramelled market playing by American rules, you get nothing between free or monopoly, which is what has happened to the consumer software business.
A copyright levy is a political fix that is better than the more obviously technological ones, like DRM, since it will produce more of the music, software, and other digital goods which benefit society than any of the alternatives.
You may say this argument is unproven: how else to find out but encouraging the EU to have one regime, America another, and see which one works better?
OOo word count at http://www.darwinwars.com/lunatic/bugs/oo_macros.
This just means that german PC sales will drop and the countries surrounding it will benefit. How inane. But at least this semi-legitimizes piracy in Germany (pre-paid).
kin242.net
In order to drive a car, you have to pay a tax. It's the law.
However, in order to make a digital copy, or a copy of anything, you don't need to pay anything. Nothing, no tax, zilch. Assuming, of course, that you already own the source material you're copying.
I just don't see how you could justify a tax for copying, because you're either going to be copying illegally obtained material (in which case you can't really tax it, because it would legitimise the crime - you really can't tax something which is illegal to start with), or you're going to be copying something you own already (transferring an LP of yours to CD, recording your own work to a CD), or something that you have permission to copy (GPL files etc.)
It just doesn't work, and doesn't make sense. Perhaps somebody in Germany will follow Canada's example, and scrap it. Soon.
Exactly which of my rights is this ruling violating?
Even if you aren't Eurepean, anyone who reads the article will know that this is an extension of a common European practice to mandate an additional levy on the price of any appliance that can be used to copy copyrighted material.
Seems to me that an attempt to convince the court that this levy shouldn't be applied would have to include an attack on all the other levies. Popular among those who don't believe in copyright, but unlikely to prove successful. (Fervency of belief is know substitute for logic and reality.)
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
First they tax CD-R(W) media by default because they assume you will use them for copyright-protected content and now they're also making you pay an additional tax on computers because they assume you will illegally be using copyright-protected content on your computer. They just assume mens rea without proving it on an individual basis. Guilty until proven otherwise is the premise Germanic law is based on. The German legal system as well as all other modern legal systems are based on Roman law, which is based on the premise that you are innocent until proven guilty. How this decision could have come about is totally beyond me. What's next? An additional tax on eyeglasses because you might use them to view copyright-protected content?!
Just as a reminder, the four levels of mens rea set forth in the MPC (Model Penal Code) are:
I just dont understand why they are charging a computer manufacturer a tax for copyright issues? Copyright from whom? Who has the right to copy what? Integrated circuits? If they want to charge a tax for digital music copying (which I believe is wrong), then they should charge it to the CD writer manufacturer, not the computer retailer. It is equivalent to putting a tax on Toyota Motor Company because their cars come with CD players, and those CD's can have music the user did not paid for. You must charge the stereo maker and the digital meida distributor (if you want someone to pay), not the guys that paid for it because their buyer wanted it. Anyway, I never saw the industries go down with CD burners, cassete recordes, or VCRs. As they were in those times, I think they are being paranoid now.
Ze landmark decision, announced on zursday, ends a nearly two-year dispute between ze largely Germany-based computer maker and ze country's VG Vort rights society, vich has sought compensation for digital copying.
VG Vort had filed a suit against Germany's largest PC maker, Fujitsu Siemens, seeking 30 (US$41) for each new computer sold in ze country. ze court agreed to a 12 copyright levy.
ze rights society plans to apply ze decision to all PC vendors in ze country.
Germany is one of several European countries zat, for decades, has been collecting special copyright levies on ze sale of analog copying devices, such as blank audio and video cassettes. ze levies are intended to compensate rights holders for lost royalties from private copying of music, images and moves.
ze country is now poised to become ze first on ze Continent to impose a copyright levy, similar to a royalty collection, on new PCs. Fujitsu Siemens is considering appealing ze case, ze company said.
ze computer manufacturer, a 50-50 joint-venture between Germany's Siemens AG and Japan's Fujitsu Ltd., has also called on ze German government, vich is currently debating its copyright laws, to review ze role of ze country's rights society in ze digital age.
Chief Executive Officer Bernd Bischoff called ze copyright levy "a de facto tax on PCs," which has a negative impact on sales to consumers.
I'll gladly pay a $10 tax on the computers I buy, I'll make sure I get my moneys worth in music and movies though (although with todays music, I might have a hard time getting my full $10 worth..)
Full cavity search authorised for agents of
the MPAA and RIAA and IDSA !!!
Bend over everyone and don't forget to pretend you enjoy !
I thought you would reply to my insult, as someone as stupid as you just can't keep away from a fight.
Anyway, i think it should be pointed out that Slashdot has already covered this story back when they originally started considering it about two years ago. The analysis linked to might still be relevant.
Man is a slave because freedom is difficult, whereas slavery is easy.
Sticking these into Google:
Und was haben deine Grosseltern im Krieg gemacht?
Isn't it good that our countries are now friends?
And which your grandparents in the war have made?
Hor auf, so laut in dieser nervigen Sprache zu reden.
I'm sorry, could you repeat that in English.
Hor up to talk so loud in this nervigen language.
Willst du Arger, Grossmaul?
Can you give me directions?
Do you want bad one, large muzzle?
Dein Schwanz ist so klein, dass es 'ne Maus nicht merkt, wenn du sie fickst
Pleased to meet you
Your tail is so small that it does not notice 'ne mouse, if you it fickst
I'm going to ask my penfriend Hans to make me a copy of his multimedia CD titled 'learning German for English speakers' now he can do it legitimately since he's going to pay the tax!
AT&ROFLMAO
So... Will this replace my SCO Linux license, or do I need both? I'd really like to get my $699 back...
Pacifist paratroopers yell, "Ghandi!" when they jump.
I hate bureaucracy.
Tax this, tax that, distort the market.
VG Wort have increased the price of PCs to *everyone*. Over the whole of the economy, anyone who uses a PC to create a product or offer a service will now have to charge that much more - which means the entire economy is that much less productive, because there is a fixed amount of money available for investment, and the price of buying a PC based service is now higher.
What's more, the knock on effect is huge, because PCs are vital to so many industries. It will now be that much more expensive to buy *food*, because all the PCs bought by food retailers and wholesalers are that much more expensive; and we ALL buy food!
This sort of ruling, the very fact is can occur, is a hallmark of the danger of concentrating economic power in the hands of political power.
This court has both political power - the right to make decisions - and economic power - the right to make decisions which influence, in this case, a form of taxation.
When political decisions are badly made in the political sphere, the consequences are things like national ID cards, or foreign countries becoming upset with us.
When political decisions are badly made in the economic sphere, there is less choice of goods to buy, they cost more, and everyone, to a greater or lesser extent, becomes poorer.
--
Toby
Get together and have these same kinds of taxes imposed in the US with the same rational written into law. Get a few court decisions legitimizing the downloading of basically everything. Then let the anti-tax crusaders kill the taxes, for the children, or the manufactures, or people who incorporate in tax free Nevada, and giggle like school girls as the xxAA suck on sweaty hairy precedent as they're forced by the market to produce a superior product at reasonable prices. Muwahahaha. Hic. HAhahaha.
In America we'd just whine quietly and fork over the extra bucks, like the weak little pussies we are.
I dunno what the gp was trying to do, but his translations were all wrong. Google was closer, although incomprehencable.
Those computers installed at supermarkets will no longer be computers. They will be elements of a Point of Sale System. Now a mom and pop "shoppe" they might well be buying a computer. But rest assured Der Wal*Mart will not. This will only impact small businesses, or the children. Now be a good consumer and buy your new laptop in France. Or hell, buy it on a trip to the US. With the way the dollar is crashing, the tax savings may pay for your airfare and hotel.
With the EUCD (EU's DMCA) and DRM in place laws of this type don't make any sense.
Yeah--exactly like we did when gas prices went up. Oh wait--I guess Europe is where they pay outrageous prices for fuel.
So what happens when a record company release a cd that is "copy proof" in a country that has a media levy? Can the consumers then sue that record company as now they now took your money but are trying to stop you from using your right under law to make copies.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Well, Germany forgot to tax Microsoft Window OS, Linux, whatever OS and CD/DVD copy software. Without the OS utilities, software and application program, end user can't actually make a perfect digital duplication.
Now for an actual translation:
Und was haben deine Grosseltern im Krieg gemacht?
Say, what did your grandparents do in the war?
Hör auf, so laut in dieser nervigen Sprache zu reden. (note the Umlaut!)
Stop talking in that annyoing language!
Willst du Ärger, Grossmaul? (Umlaut again ..)
You looking for trouble, Loudmouth?
Dein Schwanz ist so klein, dass es 'ne Maus nicht merkt, wenn du sie fickst
Your d*ck is so small that a mouse wouldn't notice you f*cking her.
All in all: not really useful advice.
By the way, if I remember correctly, Canada for one applies the levy also to hard disks (I'm not sure Germany does this). So Canadians already pay the IP tax on their computers.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
... good thing I do all my work on a Mac.
Now all I need is that stupid CD-R tax to go away...
I don't know German either. But based on your Google translations, they probably mean:
.. the rest is pretty obvious.
Sticking these into Google:
Und was haben deine Grosseltern im Krieg gemacht?
Isn't it good that our countries are now friends?
And which your grandparents in the war have made?
And what did your Grandparents do in the War?
Hor auf, so laut in dieser nervigen Sprache zu reden.
I'm sorry, could you repeat that in English.
Hor up to talk so loud in this nervigen language.
Hor auf must be an idiomatic expression. As for nervigen, it seems to eitehr mean "stupid" or be a mild curse. Searching for it shows usage to describe spammers, popups, and Windows XP, so it can't be a good thing. Clearly it means something like "you have to speak so loud in this crazy language!" (referring to German).
Willst du Arger, Grossmaul?
Can you give me directions?
Do you want bad one, large muzzle?
large muzzle should be "Big mouth"
Dein Schwanz ist so klein, dass es 'ne Maus nicht merkt, wenn du sie fickst
Pleased to meet you
Your tail is so small that it does not notice 'ne mouse, if you it fickst
"Your dick is so small the mouse doesn't notice when you fuck it." pretty obvious really.
I'm going to ask my penfriend Hans to make me a copy of his multimedia CD titled 'learning German for English speakers' now he can do it legitimately since he's going to pay the tax!
Maybe you should ask Hans to look at this. He might be amused. I am going to go out on a limb here and guess that our troll was an english speaker who knows some German and wanted to make a joke. That makes it funny, though, not a troll. If you really said these things to a German it would probably result in a good pranging. If you were lucky you'd get a lesson in language.
Any Deutchlanders want to correct our ignorance on these fine phrases?
In Germany you need to pay copyright levies on virtually everything that would be suitable for creating copies, be it on CD/DVD writers, CD-R(W)/DVD-R(W) media, printers, etc. You would think that this copyright levy would entitle you to some fair use, such as private copies of, say, the latest audio cd you bought. And sure enough, even though the very people who get the money would like to abolish any notion of fair use and legal copies for private purposes, you may find that even now you are not allowed to make copies of things you paid for. Way too many audio CDs sold in Germany today have copy protections (I'd rather refer to them as play protections), and by law you may not attempt to overcome these protections, rendering any copy you make an illegal one.
I think this is really a fine display of greed. Make everyone pay but give nothing in return.
He was allowed to make that copy even before this tax was even considered.
And since your translation there is pretty much gibberish:
1) And what did your grandparents do during the war?
2) Stop talking that annoying language this loudly.
3) Want trouble, loudmouth?
4) Your dick is so small, not even a mouse would notice being fucked by you.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
I'd gladly pay a small tax (1 or 2%) on PCs and CD-Rs if that ment I now had a free pass to copy/download whatever I wanted without fear of being sued. Whats that? they want all our money still?
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
It seems many of you say that if the govt. taxes something the legitimize it. That is not the case, govts often tax illegal things. For example, in around four states in the U.S. you can buy Cocaine or Pot "stamps" to pay the taxes on your illegal sales. And the IRS also goes after ANY income NO MATTER how you earn it.
If a coal company dumps coal slurry on your property, your problem. The fact that it just kills everything and is a significant health risk isn't really something that worries the EPA now that they got rid of their ombudsman. Interestingly, if that coal slurry then destroys your neighbors property, or federal land from your property, you have to pay for the clean up. The Germans, are just nickle and dime'ing people. Our administration actually champions the destruction of people's homes, way of life, communities, and health. It's been a little while since Germany has been on that particular bandwagon as near as I can tell.
you have to pay tax on coke in North Carolina
Marijuana stems & stalks that have
been separated from the plant.
$.40 for each gram
or fraction thereof
More than 42.5 grams
Marijuana other than
separated stems and stalks
$3.50 for each gram
or fraction thereof
More than 42.5 grams
Cocaine
$50.00 for each gram
or fraction thereof
7 or more grams
Any other controlled substance
that is sold by weight
$200.00 for each gram
or fraction thereof
7 or more grams
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
Levying a tax on blank media is not the fairest way to collect such a fee (if such a fee has to exist at all). I have never used a blank DVD or CD for storage of copyrighted material - I use such media for backups or for the transfer of my work between machines.
I suggest you get out into the real world, and not just teenagers' bedrooms, before you make pronouncements about what content is stored on recordable media. No doubt many people use recordable media for storing copyrighted material but this is by no means their only use.
In Canada, there has been a copyright tax on blank CDs and on MP3 players. Well the supreme court of Canada just ruled these to be unconstitutional in Canada. Though the court has yet to rule on remidies, it is widely expected that refunds of the levy should be forthcoming. Hence statements in the press of late, that if you should decide to buy a media player in Canada, keep your receipt.
You'd do what you already do now too: assemble your PC from spare parts.
Visit http://ringbreak.dnd.utwente.nl/~mrjb/growingbettersoftware to download your free copy of the book
As an aspiring soccer hooligan I need a phonetic presentation of the phrases.
....know what is good for you, but take the advice of an older person (who was once just as young and stupid as you), and think about what you are saying. Maybe someday you will need some help from your government, and they will be able to help you because of the money they received from the Dog Tax (or some other tax).
Think about it!
eat shiat and bark at the moon
Same reason I love the hacked version of kazaa!
eat shiat and bark at the moon
You can't offer the stuff, that's the quirky point about copying. Just like up here in Canada I can't lend you a CD to copy, but if I accidentally leave it at your place and you make a replica for personal use there's aboslutely nothing wrong with it.
...now if that money could be sent straight to artists... yadda-yadda... you get it.
Funny, while it's a sad precedent saying that by buying a computer I intend to infringe on the copyright of others it really just makes me feel less bad for recording industries and their fight for protection.
-Matt
--- Need web hosting?
I realize that Germany isn't America, and doesn't have their government setup the same way, but I thought most modern forms of government had the concept of seperation of powers, that some sort of legislative body makes the laws and the judicial system rules on disputes over those laws.
I'm surprised that people aren't more upset by the fact that you had here a court creating law. While on the face of it I think the ruling is bogus, I'd be a little bit more upset that judiciary just created a new tax, something that is clearly the job of a legislative body. They've basically usurped the process by which a law is passed, and all the checks and balances built into the system.
Since they can't seem to capture Whitey Bulger, the FBI has decideed to throw all US citizens in jail for three days instead.
"Can't you see that everyone is buying station wagons?"
a 100$ tax is imposed on every vehicle to gather the uncatched speed limit violations.
-- "If A equals success, then the formula is A=X+Y+Z. X is work. Y is play. Z is keep your mouth shut." - Einstein
That's why I, occupant of the Netherlands, still order DVD's/CD's by the hundreds from Germany for half the price (12 euro for 50 cd's instead of 25 euro....)!
I (as someone who holds the copyright to a bunch of things) can get my share of the money to compensate me for any illegal copies of MY copyrighted material out there.
yeah, you're right.. nothing new to see here, just the same old imaginary statistics....
"55% of blank CD's sold in Germany are for piracy" And just how the hell did someone arrive at these figures? I'll tell you how - they made them up out of thin air because they wanted to have a sob story for the court..
Any organisation that tries to use statistics that could never be collected, let alone verified, should never be trusted again.
Oh wait, Record compaines, like we trusted them so well anyway..
So yes, you have to pay the levy, but you are also allowed to make non-commercial copies of books / magazines etc because of that. Stop complaining.
The problem of taxing a general purpose computer is that you must tax every possible use. One tax for books/magazines, another for music, a third for photographs, a fourth for movies, a fifth for applications, a sixth for games, a seventh for pr0n and so on and so on. Wasn't there supposed to be a TV tax on LCDs now too (even those without tuner?)
If you have to pay a tax for everything the computer could do, the price would be nothing like what it is today. On this machine I *could* store 2-3% of the library of congress. Does this give me permission to do that? Is that fair? Someone else might not give a f*ck and never have a single book, and yet pay the same. Is that fair? I don't think it is fair to tax a computer based on the capabilities it has. Do you?
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Hor auf, so laut in dieser nervigen Sprache zu reden.
;) - though I think that term denotes the "Germany-born" children of Turkish immigrants.
Stop talking so loudly in this annoying language.
("nervig" as in "getting on your nerves")
Willst du Arger, Grossmaul?
Looking for ("do you want") trouble, big mouth?
It's actually "Hör" and "Ärger" ("Arger" would be "worse", comparative form of "arg". "Hor" isn't a word in German; at least none that I'm aware of it.)
Any Deutchlanders want to correct our ignorance on these fine phrases?
Deutschländers
I guess the "VG Wort" is raising their funds in order to catch up with the legal action already going on with music and movies. Pay the tax so we can sue you for what you have already paid the tax for.
And who the hell makes copies of whole books, anyway.
Also, if I'm a German, and I use my PC to copy some of my daughter's piano playing, does she get a share of the levy ? Does it depend on whether she is a famous pianist ?
Here in france we have the right of "Private copy" but since 1-2 years we have a tax on every kind of media allowing storage of music (CD/DVD, HardDisk, FloppyDisk, Memory Cards, ...) The reason is a compensation of the loose of profit generated by the "private copy" right allowed by law.
Actually European Laws permit us to buy these taxed stuff elsewhere in Europe without paying the french tax if and only if the equivalent tax is paid by the provider in his country. The point is that German people can buy their computer in another country to bypass the tax as french people can buy their blank media in Germany or England where there's less or no tax on blank media
Regis C
...whereas the blank media are used almost exclusively to store copyrighted content.
You confuse two kinds of copyrighted "content", one is available for copying (like GNU stuff) and other isn't (the new Hollywood movies)
Not a small part. It's about 40% of the retail price.
Teosto also collects over 1 euro for every DVD-+R(W) disc. As a result a pack of 50 no-brand discs costs 129 euros here versus 25 euros when ordered from Estonia INCLUDING shipping. However, importing CDs and DVDs without paying the levies is illegal and carries insane penalties (fines over 20 euros for a single disc and even jail time).
And no, you can't legally download or copy CDs nor DVDs even though you have to pay the levies - there's absolutely NO way for a non-corporation to avoid paying the levy other than ordering from abroad, but like I said before that's illegal.
The reason for this insanity is partly the fact that the majority of Finns continue to vote for the same celebrities year after year, even after they raised their own already mind-boggling salaries by 60% and lowered their retirement age to 45 years while the country was suffering from record-high unemployment and new lay-offs were announced every week.
As my personal opinion I think only those with higher education should be allowed to vote and all goverment officials should not be paid more than the average salary.
Capitalization is the difference between "Helping your uncle jack off a horse" and "Helping your uncle Jack off a horse"
I can add some perspective as someone who has received funds from VG Wort, because after all, this is all about people like me, right? The whole point is to protect the rights of copyright holders and ensure that they are adequately compensated for their work. So is it really worth it?
I co-authored some long-since-forgotten academic articles and a book back in my days as a graduate student. The articles appeared in some conference proceedings, and the book, as well as a couple of the articels, were published in the Lecture Notes series of the Springer Verlag. So my name got put on a list somewhere, and every year for about three or four years, a check from VG Wort came in the mail.
To put it briefly, I could have just as well done without it. I don't know how they determined how much money was dispersed to each individual, it was based on some formula that I never bothered to try to understand. At any rate, it was nothing to get rich on, maybe about a hundred marks or so if I remember correctly (this was back before the Euro). About enough to take a girl out on a nice dinner date, once a year. Which of course is nothing to sneeze at, especially if you're a student hustling to make ends meet and struggling for ways to impress a girl. But I could have just as well managed without it. (If she's worth it, you always find a way, you know; and one nice dinner in a year won't get you very far.)
More prolific authors get more money from VG Wort, since the money is based on how much you've published. But I doubt that the cash from VG Wort makes a whole lot of difference to people who make their living as authors; they have to get the vast part of their income by other means.
So if this is the benefit to society that is to be gained by making everyone pay an extra 12 Euros for each PC, I think it's obvious that we can just as well pass it up. Aside from all the philosophical debates about copyright law and whether it's fair and just to pay creators of content this way, the practical effects of the scheme are just not very significant. Why put this added burden on the buyers of PCs just so some student can take someone out once a year? It's better for everyone, economically and socially, to keep the prices of computer hardware down than to extend this meager benefit to copyright holders.
Always keep a sapphire in your mind
I make music, how do I get my share of the cash? Oh, let me guess, just like Canada, the money won't actually go to copyright holders at all, especially ones not living in Gemany
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
The VG Wort is also the reason why scanners, printers and copy machines often are slower in Germany than in the rest of the world.
The VG Wort gets a fee based on the throughput of these machines. To lower this fee, many devices sold in Germany are (or were?) sold with reduced speed.
Sometimes you could speed up peripherals by installing english drivers.
Cheap at the price. Book me my ticket to Germany now !
Deutschländers ;) - though I think that term denotes the "Germany-born" children of Turkish immigrants. ... nach bester deutscher Art ..." - you get the picture.
http://www.songtexte24.de/songtext-Meica---Deutsch laender-179068.html m
No. Deutschländer are a brand of sausage with a very cheesy commercial with WASPs singing patriotically "Deutschlander Würstchen
Also producer Meica claimed in the commercial that the sausage has "the best of all kind of german sausage: blurb like Wieners, blurb like Bockwürste and blurb like Frankfurters". If you take a look at the map you will see that Wien is not part of germany. And the only time it was, was in the late 1930s till the early 1940s. Not a good time to make commercials with.
http://www.fragenohneantwort.de/fragen/frage77.ht
So they're called "Wiener" in Germany and "Frankfurter" in Austria? Heh. Anyway, I seem to have been kinda right as well: "Deutschländer" is the term for Turks who return to their native country after spending decades living in Germany, according to this page.
...since the copyright fee is deducted with price of the computers, this should make copying copyrighted data from P2P legal? After all I paid 12EUR for it. One-time fee for clearance to download any amount of copyrighted data, sounds fine to me.
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
http://www.songtexte24.de/songtext-Meica---Deutsch laender-179068.html
LOL!
Knackig, würzig, zart, nach bester deutscher Art.
Snappy, Sausagelike, Delicious to german standards
Ja, das sind Deutschländer Würstchen, Deutschländer Würstchen.
Yes, those are germany's sausages, german sausages
Das Würstchen mit dem Knack, es lebe der Geschmack.
The sausages with the snap, the life of taste
Ja, das sind Deutschländer Würstchen, Deutschländer Würstchen.
Yes, those are germany's sausages, german sausages
Knackig, würzig, zart, von Meica.
Snappy, sausagelike, delicious, from meica
-Meica macht das Würstchen!-
Well, if i have paid my 'copyright tax', then I'm free to copy what ever the hell i want ( for non-profit of course.. ). I've paid for that right.
F-em.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
The law does not submit to rational analysis.
Remember this is being driven by media corporations.. the fact they have that much power should really scare the hell out of everyone.
The fact that a government taxes anything that moves, well thats typical.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
In Omaha Nebraska, the city council adopted an emergency, one-time, one-year only $1 "road" tax. Thirty years later, it is now $28 (last time I checked) and is supposed to be paid by anyone who lives in Omaha, as well as anyone who works or goes to school in Omaha.
When challenged about the continuation of the tax, councilmen have rationalized it with explanations that include comments like "if you people didn't need so many programs, we could get rid of it."
In other news, new pens will include a 2% copyright tax. Pads of paper will include a further 2% tax, while packets of A4/8.5x11", used in photocopiers and laser printers, will include a 5% tax.
In a radical attack on the roots of copyright theft, literacy education will now charge a 5% tax, on estimated future earnings, scaled to performance on standardized tests. An experimental tax per alphabet letter is being studied.
"People who steal copyrighted work have to pay their way, whether they steal it or not. Statistics don't lie, and we've got our duty to protect the public. Disney movies don't come from thin air, and we've got to protect this essential economic resource", said the unnamed spokesperson for the Global Recording Industry Network.
--
make install -not war
In Sweden, you can actually copy entire books for personal use. Copy shops here in Gothenburg advertise to students about making full copies of, for example, library books. My friend does it all the time.
The restricted fair use applies to how much you can copy and distribute to others, such as in a classroom.
The important legal difference is that private copies are legal in Germany. Again: In Germany, I can take a DVD, CD, video, whatever, and rip a copy for my own private use. Of course, if I start distributing that copy or screen it in a public place etc. they get to throw the book at me, and will do so very, very hard.
This Recht auf eine Privatkopie is something German consumer groups have been fighting tooth and nail to keep in he face of massive industry pressure to adopt an American-style "sorry sucker, you can't do jack" system. On the long run, this new ruling will actually work for the consumer, because it weaves the right to a private copy tighter into the greater legal fabric. Now, when I buy a computer, I have paid for that private copy, so industry can just go shove a bratwurst up their Po, with mustard. Or they can try to get the VG Wort system changed -- and good luck with that, because it touches just about every scrap of printed matter in Germany, from newspapers to pornographic novels.
All the talk here about "guilty until proven innocent" is pure crap by people who haven't taken the time to read the background kindly provided by the Germans on the list and should be modded down as ranting, if not German-bashing.
As somebody who has lived in Germany for a while let me say that German law for the most part is a very sane, logical, and balanced system that almost across the board is superior to the 18th Century money-comes-first atavism that the U.S. is forced to suffer through. The SCO case proved this quite well: German courts took about a week to bitch-slap Darl's minions back into the real world, while, what is it now, years? later IBM and RedHat are still forced to pour millions into legal fees.
Might try to charge you for used PC's too.. would totally destroy the used market here in the US..
Especially for Retro PC's...
( no i didnt read the law.. just guessing here )
And dont expect the 50 bucks to stop the *AA's practices of making p2p illegal, and going after everyone they can find that *might* be copying something.. They are much too greedy for that. the 50 bucks was just for extra guaranteed revenue, until they wreck the PC industry totally.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
You are actually free to lend me all the CDs you want, they are yours.
I am also free to make copies of them.
My understanding of our law is that I can make a copy for myself, you cannot make a copy and give it to me (because you would then be copying & distributing copyrighted works without permission.) If I make the copy myself, no distribution of unauthorized copies is taking place.
Of course with the internet, things like who is doing the copying and where it's being done get debatable.. but the intent is fairly clear.
The VG Wort publishes very detailed information on what they do, why they do it, and who gets the money here. You might want to take a look.
I am almost sure that there will be an appeal to Bundesgerichtshof, Germany's highest court.
And people will ask questions about it. Then you explain it (in the FAQ or a brochure) and point people toward the government.
How am I supposed to fit a pithy, relevant quote into 120 characters?
that people will stop buying corporate proprietary crap and perhaps try to build their own, then we are better off anyways, no?
that since it's already paid for, that using such a PC to copy would then be legal
rich peeps really sux
yup, it sure does
Your reference to Nazi Germany re. 'Wiener Würstchen 'is just plain stupid. Read the link you supplied and dont be silly.
For the, ehm, German challenged crowd, the name derives from a German producer having set up shop in Vienna and using a recipe (beef and pork) which just didnt allow him to use the 'Frankfurter' name.
ROTFL! This is signature matter! ;-)
Prepaid piracy? So I'm now legally allowed to download the stuff I like?
Nice move. These stories about RIAA ripping off students were getting boring anyways.
Ok, I know it's not really meant that way but how the heck are they justifying
this "flat" 12 EUR tax then?
What's next, will they add an adobe-tax (roughly 80% of all photoshop installations are "borrowed")? Another 15 EUR to aid the holy war on ter^H^H^Hpiracy?
what about child porn? We all know computers are used to hurt little children. Another 30 EUR tax just because it's such a serious matter?
Will I pay a $50 tax on the next crowbar I buy because these are used to break into houses?
On a more serious note, I think all they will achieve if this becomes real is to hurt the german computer industry. It will drive the ppl that actually buy whiteboxes to Dell and other international distributors who will certainly find a way around this tax ("manufactured in...").
They are effectively taxing on the basis of potential, rather than executing their obvious duties as lawmakers in overhauling the copyright laws made obsolete by ubiquitous technology. Not only is this entirely against the public interest -- the very foundation of the copyright institution -- but, it is, also, taxation which neither funds public infrastructure nor implements a public service. This is entirely unethical, morally bankrupt, and represents an astounding and inexcusable level of incompetence after ignorance. What manner of deliberation would not lead to the conclusion that this half-headed logic opens up a Pandora's Box, short of none?
Using potential infraction of the law, or even the past infractions of a vast multitude, as a compelling basis upon which to preemptively adjudicate for any crime, which may occur in the future, is maddeningly ludicrous.
Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden...
Stories about the exact same levy: Germany Mulls A Copyright Levy + VAT For PCs, Have You Paid Your Bertelsmann Tax Today?
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck
I'm a copyright holder. When should I expect my check (oops, I'm hypothetically in europe, so it's cheque)? Or do I have to be a part of the record industry crime syndicate?
_______
2B1ASK1
Read the link you supplied and dont be silly. [...] The name derives from a German producer having set up shop in Vienna and using a recipe (beef and pork) which just didnt allow him to use the 'Frankfurter' name.E 4nder.html
Thats right. But the link show the company trying to make damage control. Still the company cleary intended to make that connection (esp. if you hear the song in addition to the text itbis obvious). In a commercial it is much more important what you suggest - the facts are almost irrelevant.
Just take a look at the associations germans get from the word "Deutschländer":
" [...] Heim ins Reich? Noch immer - oder schon wieder?"
"That are the Nazi-Würstchen from the TV-commercial. [...]"
"[...] For a germany in the borders of 1483. Neapel stays ours!"
source: http://www.assoziations-blaster.de/info/Deutschl%
You already need to pay a levy to sing a song under copyright in public. Famously, ASCAP threatened to sue the Girl Scouts of America over singing songs like "God Bless America" or even "Happy Birthday".
Another reference on this.
Short answer: No.
Long answer: Not unless you are Big Corp or otherwise part of some sort of union of artists, which leads other problems.
The most stupid part of this whole dumb-ass affair is that the Powers That Be want people addicted to the media. Keeps them from thinking too much. This whole legality distraction is just that. Distraction. (People crave what they can't have. Seems to work like a charm.)
I'm currently staying away from home at a place with a satellite dish. So I've been watching regular TV for the first time in a few years. Man, it sucks.
I sat through two episodes of Star Trek DS9 which SUCKED ASS, an episode of Star Trek Voyager which SUCKED ASS, an episode of Enterprise which SUCKED ASS, and an episode of Stargate which, you guessed it, SUCKED ASS.
So much for Starfleet. I remember liking that stuff.
So then I watched two back to back episodes of something called, "Lost". -A popular show which sucked in a totally different way. Man, that show had me squirming in my chair. It's like all the writers out there think that the bullshit facades which they call their lives are accurate measurements of what it means to be human, and so map that onto the characters they try to "Bring to Life", and end up with a bunch of shallow and utterly false mannequins parading around on screen. Ugh!!!! It's maddening.
Yes, I've seen some fairly good episodes of some of these shows, but three days of trying and getting nothing but shit? I think I'll take that as a hint to stay on the wagon and be damned happy about it.
Or maybe it's an abstinence thing; I hear people who have quit cigarettes often feel sick at the smell of tobacco smoke afterwards. .
-FL
Fujitsu Siemens is considering appealing the case, the company said.
So wait a minute. It was the the District Court of Munich which is entry level.
CC.
TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
rxmd, I wish I had some points to mod you up. You summed up the whole argument with one paragraph. Not tax, but levy. Not for illegal copying, but compensation for fair use.
Nazism is back in vogue in Germany.
I kid, I kid.
EvilCON - Made Famous by
..in Spain. :)) are very upset about this. Most people don't know/care. Sad but true.
Part of the cost of cd/dvd/-r goes to the SGAE (the Spanish RIAA) and most newly released CD have copy protection.
Some people (that we could call the slashdot spaniards
Judges can levy taxes? seems a little tyrannical to me.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
They could tax cd/dvd readers/burners, or high speed internet connections. But instead they tax computers?
I build most of my boxes from old systems my parents retired. So, if I combine a new box from two of their old ones, the fee has been payed twice on one box. Should I get a refund? Or pay the fee a third time, since its a new box now, made of the best (or at least working parts) of the two parent systems.
-- Put crudely, the world is an extremely large problem instance. (Russel/Norvig Artificial Intelligence)
"Innocent until proven guilty" has no meaning outside of a criminal charge. Mens rea as defined in a penal code has no meaning beyond the penal code.
Taxing a computer because of it's potential for abuse or to provide compensation for copyright abuse is a policy decision, not a determination of guilt or innocence.
I have a copier and I have never copied any work other than one I created or which is a public domain court document... nor do I want to.
It is nothing but perversly warped socialism to make an individual pay for a right to do something which that individual does not want to do.
Maybe you're right, maybe the tax should be on prerecorded media instead?
I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
Tax every beer and give the money to insurance companies to pay for drunk driver damages.
Tax every car to pay for the ones that get stolen from dealerships.
I mean they can't demand people pay for it and call it illegal at the same time, right?
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Der Spiegel recently reported that computer users with internet connections would have to pay the yearly TV license, too, since the German state owned TV companies stream their shit onto the net and thus every computer is a potential television programming receiver.
Entrapment. Of course, since you have already paid for it when you bought your computer and your media, you now have a license to pirate, right?
By the way, if I remember correctly, Canada for one applies the levy also to hard disks (I'm not sure Germany does this). So Canadians already pay the IP tax on their computers.
No we do not.
The Cdn levy originally covered only recordable media - tapes & CDs. DVDs weren't even on the shelves - it was the days of the Laser Disc...
There was a increase about a year ago which added an additional 1% IIRC to CDs/tapes & included DVDs, but primarily targetted MP3 players. It was this addition that was recently struck down as the body implementing it was not found to have the power to do so (still no word on refunding what was collected or any change in street pricing).
So the levy continues to exist but to date does not cover hard drives. That is, currently does not. IMO, that's why the addition was repealled and it's likely we'll see the levy increase to include hard drives in the near future.
You have noticed the oil cartels just raped us for hundreds of billions of extra bucks in the U.S.? And it had nothing to do with the government? At least the Europeans get less pollution, get smaller cars with better mileage, and use the taxes on gas for the public good? We in the U.S. gave trillions over to the oil industry -- which will then buy up more of our private sector, bribe the public sector, and make sure we never see a non-oil-based economy established. SUCH A DEAL.
How do *I* get in line for a handout? That tax is for 'infringed works' - did ya pay me 100,000 Euro for reading this? No? I want my 100,000. Give it to me Germany.
*shakes head and clicks tounge*
It is the Government using its powers to take money from its citzenry and redistribute it as it sees fit.
I don't care how you package it, it is a TAX.
Why in the hell do the creators of written content need a levy? If their stuff isn't good enough they should damn well not get paid.
The government has been the strong arm of the artistically weak for too long. Its how many no-talent artist survive. Government grants and such because the "little people" are too "ignorant" to understand good art when they see it. It shows in that some of the worst examples of art are in government buildings or funded exhibitions.
I am all for the arts, but I am also all for them supporting themselves. If the public ain't buying its isn't the public's fault. It also isn't right to tax the public to support it just because they wouldn't buy it in the first place.
Quit being so damn lazy about protecting your money and your rights.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
More likely perspective: Maybe someday you manage to get rich and buy a senator and become rich on some pork project you "win" the realization of. *Then* you really appreciate the benefits of the Dog Tax.
Don't give Bush any ideas ;)
GODWIN'S LAW!!!
oh, wait...
I retain my right to foam at the mouth.
First of all, this system charges the levy on those who do not use their computers to copy copyrighted content. And even among those who do, the charge is not in proportion to how much content you have or how much copying you do. If I buy 5 CD's all year and occaisionally just play them on my computer, I'm being force to pay the same price as someone else who buys 500 CD's a year and rips every one of them into his computer, and makes extra copies for car, bike, etc.
And, of course, there's that ambiguity of how to apply the levy to computer components people often build their own customized systems from. Should it be charged by the CPU? The disk drive? Did the courts actually say?
And does they levy come with a law that prohibits any attempt by the copyright owners to use any DRM that blocks any form of legal copying?
Charging a levy on blank media gets a bit closer to being fair. But this media can still be heavily used by people backing up, or even distributing, their own data and content. So it's still nowhere near the ideal solution.
Adding the levy to the actual sales of the original material is what is actually most fair. The person who buys 500 CD's pays 100 times as much as the person who buys only 5 CD's. It won't exactly compensate for the number of copies made, but that's not nearly as likely to vary in scale as much. Some people may make no copies, many will make one copy, and very few will make more than three copies ... when considering only legal copies this law is intended to compensate for (e.g. we're not talking about all those pirated copies made to give or sell to friends, and internet uploads/shares).
And of course, this most fair way of charging is exactly what the industry is fully capable of doing since it is they who are selling that product in the first place. They just don't want to do it that way because then people will see the added price.
Now I'm not going to defend the legal system in the USA over the German. It's crap here, too, and probably even more so. I'm just saying that what is being done in Germany is wrong; but it would be just as wrong if done anywhere else, including the USA.
As for your reference to your 18th century reference ... it's actually more 19th century here. US industrialism, and the creation of the "corporate person" concept, came about in the late 1800's, which was the 19th century. It's then been going downhill ever since.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
Huh? You do know that the word "rich" by definition, by DEFINTION applies only to a small percentage of the population. If that percentage were not small, then they cannot be "rich".
But your attitude is common among most Americans, and maybe even most humans. We seem to throw logic out the window when it comes to our personal chances. But it is also rather peculiar that most of us Americans do not have a firm grasp of the basic definition of "rich". It is strictly a relative thing....
eat shiat and bark at the moon
If I live in Germany, and pay the E12 fee, do I get to copy as much music as I want?
Media companies are putting ever increasing amounts of pressure on their customer base, both those who have never illegally downloaded a copyrighted file and those that have. Yes, evil as all those peer-to-peer downloading pirates may be, as a class they are also still customers. In fact, some studies seem to indicate that downloaders may even be better customers. In any event, the MPAA is posting record profits in the face of "rampant" BitTorrent use, and the RIAA has never proven that their drop in growth rate has anything to do with downloading of music (they are still obscenely profitable compared to most other industries ... consider that you can buy a Compact Disc drive for less than the price of Britney Spears' latest.) Ultimately, this isn't about money, per se, but about control. Absolute, unquestioned, iron-fisted control of content distribution, and to hell with any collateral damage. Control which, in the collective hind-brain of the media outfits, equates to maintenance of their profit stream. This is an example of risk-averse behavior carried to a truly paranoid extreme.
... but then the playlists started to shrink, and the variety and quality of music that we enjoyed in the seventies began to disappear (can you say, ClearChannel?)
Put it this way: if absolute profit were the only motivation for their behavior they could make more money by simply adapting to changing technological landscape, as they were forced to do decades ago with the Sony vs. Universal decision. An initially bitter accommodation on their part which, I might add, netted them billions they would otherwise have never seen. The DMCA, in my mind, is nothing less than payback for that original Supreme Court decision: if the old Klingon proverb about revenge being a dish best served cold is true, this one is covered in dry ice.
The question in my mind is this: at what point will the ongoing loss of value in our personal media purchases make them simply not worth it? I must say that the music and film industries seem to have an inflated idea of their own worth. I like music. I like it a lot. But I haven't bought a CD in twenty years, because after the first hundred-odd discs that I bought, I realized that it just wasn't a good deal. Too much money for too little good music. For a while I just taped what music I liked from various FM stations
Millions of others were hoodwinked into continuing to buy sub-standard product simply because of the millions spent on promotion and because there was simply nowhere else to go.
This is really an artifact of the early eighties, when DJ's lost control of playlists and the media companies decided that they were better able to decide what we like than we are. Then along comes the Internet and Napster, and then suddenly, without warning, the shoe was on the other foot. The buying public was suddenly in control of content distribution, they had freedom to choose individual songs from a vast library of virtually every song ever recorded. And they liked it!. How could they not? The music companies had a once-in-a-lifetime chance to capitalize on yet another phase change in technology, and as usual they failed to see it. Those old enough will remember the content companies' reaction when the audio cassette became popular ("it will destroy the industry!"), videocassette ("it will destroy the industry!"), DAT ("it will destroy the industry!"), the CD-Recordable ("it will destroy the industry!"), and the DVD-Recordable ("it will destroy the industry!".) And yet, in every case except DAT (which was successfully killed off by the forced addition of Serial Copy Management) not only was "the industry" not destroyed but in fact became even more profitable. Some would call their continuing to rail against that which has made them so damn much money as, well, ungrateful. Others might call it just "stupid".
The RIAA likes to go on a
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Briefly, what happened was this: SCO started running around in Germany claiming that these IBM guys have ripped off their code and they would be suing everybody and their dog three ways to Saturday any day now. This is obviously bad for Linux, RedHat, IBM, and of course SuSE, and so somebody filed what would be an injunction in the U.S. (Einstweilige Verfügung). This said something to the effect that if SCO wanted to go around dissing IBM, they'd better have some proof.
Ah, SCO said. Proof. No, we'd rather not show proof. Can't we just run around for a few months making these claims, telling everybody what evil people IBM, RedHad, and SuSE are without any proof like those nice American judges are letting us do? When we get around to sueing them here, too, we'll show you plenty of proof. We do have it, honestly. We just don't want to show it right now.
To which the German court responded: No, we are not going to let you run around destroying the reputations of these companies without proof because there is this thing called slander and we think you are displaying malice here. If you don't want to show us some evidence, shut up, or you will be financing the next Autobahn.
End of story for SCO in Germany.
Now, this has absolutely nothing to do with free speech in any country. If you read up on the First Amendment (here would be a good start), you will see that you are not allowed to shoot off your mouth if you are displaying malice in the States, either. The difference is that German law recognizes that you can destroy a business merely with FUD and aims to protect that business from such attacks until you have shown that they are justified. The U.S. system will get you in the end, too -- but by then of course the damage is done. This wasn't a problem in the 18th Century, but in the age of mass media, it is serious.
Where people can display proof or make a good case, they can go around saying all kinds of things in Germany. A large corporation, Müller, just lost a court case against Greenpeace who had been running around calling their milk "gene milk" (as in genetically engineered, which is the kiss of death in marketing terms in Germany) -- you can read the details here, albeit in German. The point is, Greenpeace could provide a rational argument for this attack on the company, which the court recognized.
Germany's laws about Freedom of Speech are in fact far less powerful than those in America -- this is one area where nobody on the planet comes close to the freedoms enjoyed in the States. But this has no relevance in the SCO case.
But I think we're getting pretty off topic here.
By the same logic we should all do some pre-time in jail, because we *may* commit a crime in the future.
Or we could pre-pay some traffic fines, because we *may* speed in the future.
If I'd buy a computer in Germany, and I could honestly say that I will not copy anything illegal, I would refuse to pay this fee.
Has anyone tried defending an infringement suit on the theory that they paid a copyright levy on the media and thus paid for making the copy?
It sounds like the legal theory already has that blocked. But still the argument ought to be tried - especially in front of a jury.
If nothing else, getting the meme out there might make imposing such levies couner-productive. People who had been gouged for the fee might be more likely to make fair-use copies rather than buying additional originals and to ignore claims that it was somehow illegal.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
In the US, 22 states now have laws on the books that say drug dealers must pay tax on the illegal drugs they sell. Of course these states aren't actually going to collect anything, but it gives them something else to charge drug dealers with when they're arrested.
It also gives them another excuse to sieze the drug dealers' assets.
Sounds like they're expecting RICO to be struck down or limited, and want to put another tether on the cash cow.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Don't worry. It just means that non-oil economy won't start in the US. US will be forced to follow, though. The oil megacorps will kick and scream while being dragged off the scene, maybe buy few more years of life, but that's about all they will be able to do.
Same like stem cell research. If the clerofascists ban/restrict it in the US, it only means Korea will become the biomed leader.
The world is too big to allow a comparatively small group to stop the progress. Slow down, perhaps - but not stop.
> Thankfully, the federal court ruled that levies were redundant and should be terminated.
What ruling is this? I'd like to read it.
And no one buys them.
Copying was never a major problem of copyright infringers because copyright grants limited unauthorized copying. The problem entertainment cartels have is unauthorized distribution. With these taxing levies, they effectively charge you for making backups of your legit originals. These taxing levies Do Not Include Distribution rights. Distribution and Copying are two completely different things.
They still have the right to sue you and possibly have you put in prison for illegally distributing their materials. Tell me, if you have no source for copying, except your own, then aren't you just making backups of your originals? The people getting sued are Uploaders or Distributors, not Downloaders or Copiers.
These taxing levies are scams.
"Has anyone tried defending an infringement suit on the theory that they paid a copyright levy on the media and thus paid for making the copy?"
- Paid-Them? argument :( Although it makes my skin crawl.
I believe they got the law giving them lovely money to compensate them for the FAIR-USE copies.
A beautiful, nasty, WRONG argument, because a copyright holder is not entitled to compensation for Fair Use copying. That's WHY it's called Fair Use: because it is fair for the user to copy without paying.
But it sidetracks the whole Why-Am-I-Being-Sued-For-Copying-When-I've-Already
That's why word meanings are important! You can't let your foe own the win by redefining the terms used in your arguments so that you can't even make yourself understood in the debate. Orwell made this clear. L. Ron Hubbard used word redefinitions (Win, Enemy, etc) in his writings to redefine how his followers thought when certain key words were used, making argument with his ideas impossible. Redefinitions of the word "pirate" and "thief" to describe copying intangibles was intentional on the **AA's part. Bush's PR people reconstituted the simple idea of the word "torture" into the less objectionable "abuse" in the news media. It's all about the words. If your opponent removes your ability to express yourself in words understandable by a third party, you've lost.
the top tax brackets were as high as 70-90% on all income for much of the mid 20th century. THen the rich started paying off our politicians to cut their top tax rates, and started shifting the burden back onto the bottom of the taxpayers, the working people.
I propose shifting the burden back onto the rich. The working poor should pay tax of no sort. Interest and investment income should be heavily taxed, and the proceeds should be used to pay for healthcare for all. This is more or less what is done in many countries in Europe. Also, all that tax money goes to paying the bills for university and childcare. So we working people can ease our minds. Less stress == higher quality of life.
BTW, just to preempt the rightwingbots, all this has nothing to do with communism. THat is where all property is state owned. There are no taxes in that sort of set up.
eat shiat and bark at the moon
If corporations that distribute copyrighted material are granted a stipend for something that might happen, this is effectively the beginning of a free market that has been dismantled. In other words, it's not a free market any more. What's to stop this from becoming an even greater source of corporate welfare, as the tax is increased to compensate for downward trends in revenue that have nothing to do with the (purported) illegal use of copyrighted material? This almost becomes a form of corporate Marxism...the beginning of what some have termed a "living death".
The EU is a single market which makes these kind of taxes very messy very rapidly. Many people order their blank media from different countries within the EU now in order to avoid levies so no doubt PC mail order will simply migrate over the border too.
That's a problem the EU still hasn't resolved sanely because so many countries have such different views on "fair use" and compensation. At the moment their are plans afoot to unify copyright-collection agency policies and the like across the EU but they are problematic and may get very problematic for things like Creative Commons because they are stuck in the oldthink of "free-cost" v "proprietary" not "non-commercial reuse" v "commercial reuse"
As an overall policy I'm not sure its quite as "assinine" as some posters think. This kind of approach is how radio and copyright was settled originally and people have talked about the same idea for internet and music.
perhaps you would have to qualify the friends part. to be legal you could set up a mud and allow people to swap music in the mud.
People who buy these new PCs will be putting copyrihhted material onto them. (Since all new material is automatically copyrighted, this must be so). Onve common form of copyrighted material is open source software, which is frequently put on PCs. Therefore linux and other open source projects should get a share of this money.
It isn't really FAIR-USE but legal private copying. When the law was made, it was pretty clear that there is no way to stop private copying without a police state and criminalizing a huge part of your citizens. Because of that, the lawmakers allowed private copying but also decided that copyright holders have get a compensation. (like this copyright levy) Imho a very good and fair idea.
Now there are just two basic problems with this system:
Jan
It would really be a bit tough to have a built in levy to be paid for by people who can't listen to music anyway.
On a slightly more serious note, the levy is only on new computers sold, not the components. Sounds as if you can get around the levy by making custom making your own PC. I think it would have been smarter to make the levy payable on new sound cards, whether they are in new computers or not.
If the pattern goes 9am, 10am, 11am, why isn't noon 12am?
Well, actually George H. W. Bush instituted payroll taxes for poor people and capped payroll taxes for those above 65,000 a year. That's what's known as a regressive tax system.
Incidently, when income tax was instituted, a lot of the wealthy paying did so proudly, in support of their country during the Great War.
Now rich people keep their money that they earned through foreign labor in offshore accounts and gladly send the American proletariat off to wars their own children will never fight in so they can get even wealthier.
" it compensates them for the amount of Fair Use copying that is legal"
I want some compenstation for people who walk on the sidewalk in front of my house that is legal.
That doesn't even make sense.
I want some compensation for airplanes which fly over my house which is legal.
Do you see how stupid that is?
I want a levy on people around me to reimburse me for showering, which is legal.
This is one more example that proves: If my anscestors wanted to be European they would have stayed. The Continentials go to extremes, from Nazi's to Communists back and forth and never finding the middle ground. It's no wonder the American Economy always eclipses the European economy. The eurpeans probably won't even notice the extra monies they spend on stuff like computers and being taxed on broadcast TV VHS casset tapes blank CD's DVD's etc... They drink like fish and smoke like chimneys their brains must be completely pickled at the highest levels of European society.
Paul E. Bahre
The more recent word, introduced this century, is "intellectual property" which tries to make a similar implication that copyright violation is theft. This was introduced by WIPO and friends.
Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
[This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
The german law seems to say that authors have a right to be compensated for fair use copies, and to that end, manufacturers of copying equipment (VCRs, and now also computers) are required to put some money into VG Wort.
That's all.
Cheers,
Emile.
All generalizations are false, including this one. (Mark Twain)
"whereas the blank media are used almost eclusively to store copyrighted content"
I really don't know where you get this. Has there ever been any scientific study to determine what percentage of blank media are used to store illegitimate copies versus legitimate copies?
I have two CD burners (one from long ago, and one that came with my laptop). I use them to back up my own files (my own personal work, owned by me), to burn Linux and other free software CDs, and so forth.
It would be rediculous to make me pay a free to the music companies in order to do this. They don't own my work, they don't own my software.