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."
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"
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.
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.
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.
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
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?
As a state gets corrupt, its laws multiply; the most corrupt states have the most numerous laws. (Tacitus, Annales 3:27)
Strict liability - Did everything possible to prevent the result that happened, but will be held liable anyway
And this "strict liability" is what has scared some people away from writing songs at all. Learn why
As fine as all that may be, why should you have to *pay* for the right to make a backup copy of something you have *already* paid for? It sounds like the pretense is 'we know you are going to give a copy to someone else, depriving us of our deserved right to make each and every 'consumer' with a breath to pay us for a copy of our work, so we think you should pay us ahead of time for doing so, and without us even having to take the effort to suggest that you have or might do so'..
A charge such as this *assumes* that every person that owns a PC is going to use it to make copies (legal, private, or not) of media to which they do not own the copyright, *and* that their is some obligation on their part to pre-compensate those who would claim damages as a result. Neither of those is true in any sane society.
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...
[...] Recht auf eine Privatkopie [...]
[...]
[...] As somebody who has lived in Germany [...]
How long ago did you left? In the meantime, things got worse regarding copyrights... you know, corruption by lobbies, masked as 'international pressure', 'germany has to stay competitive' (wtf!) etc...
The right to a 'Privatkopie' only exists on paper now. The new copyright law implemented a few years ago specifically forbids cracking copy ''protections''. What if you want to make an allowed copy of such media?
Germany's attorney general Brigitte Zypries said that there is no right to personal copies in copyright law ("Das Urheberrecht kennt kein Recht auf Privatkopie", see e.g. this German c't computer magazine article).
IMHO, such laws show how corrupt our goverment became.
Interesting opininions on slashdot (comparing copyright violation to drugs and to rape) let me strongly suspect, as another poster in a previous thread said very well: 'meme injection by *AA astroturfing agents'.
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
It's like saying that the city _lowering_ the speed limit in certain areas is only encouraging people to break the law in those areas more frequently by speeding.
Get a grip.... the levies are insignificant compared to the impact that other everyday things like inflation would have on the prices anyways.
Although I live in a socialist country, so perhaps I have a higher tolerance for this sort of thing.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
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.