Slashdot Mirror
Apple to Refund iPod Levy for Canadian Customers
The Hobo writes "According to this CBC report, Apple Computer will be starting a refund program for those who purchased their iPod product during the year that a levy of $25 per iPod over 10 GB was collected. The levy was in effect from December 2003 until a year later, when a Federal Court overturned it. Previous CBC coverage here."
Will this have liability ramifications for music copying using the iPod? I don't know very much about the law behind the levy here in Canada, but I do know that it is meant to compensate the middlemen^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H artists for fair-use copying that does not provide revenue. So if the iPod is in some way not covered by this levy, does that somehow expose iPod users?
Helping with organizational effectiveness is our job.
Especially if the refund can be redeemed for a higher amount at iTunes. Than they actually refund nothing at all. Slick. But still quite nifty.
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
That way, since I've already paid for crimes I might commit, I can freely go ahead and commit them to my heart's content. Sort of like buying an indulgence.
Hardly, the only time you'll think a corporation as large as Apple is cool is when you succumbed to their marketing spin. It seems that if they hadn't started this, things would have gotten worse for them in the future, especially as the amount collected grows.
"Hardly one to comment on the "deficiencies" of the product, especially if you don't even own one."
Can I comment? My iBook is on its 5th logic board...
I rarely criticize things I don't care about.
(You are) Hardly one to comment on the "deficiencies" of the product, especially if you don't even own one.
I am not a soldier, I guess I'm hardly one to comment on the war.
I do not own an American car, I guess I'm hardly one to comment on their quality.
I am not an African American, I guess I'm hardly one to comment on racism.
I don't use Windows, I guess I'm hardly one to comment on its features.
I have never been in a terrorist attack, I guess I'm hardly one to comment on terrorism.
I have never eaten rat poison, I guess I'm hardly one to comment on its dangers.
I have seen this type of argument a lot lately, especially on this site where we would expect the level of argument to be a little higher than somewhere like FreeRepublic or Indymedia. It's a bad argument. Stop it.
Actually, the consumers were the ones screwed the first time, since Apple passed the levy along to them. So Apple is only getting screwed once (unless you count the lost sales resulting from the levy).
Also since it was the Canadian Private Copying Coalition (CPCC) who received the money from the levy, it would make sense that they should be the ones to refund the money instead of the Canadian government. But good luck getting it out of them.
This isn't really a PR stunt, or great customer relations - although it is *good* customer relations. Apple are just fulfilling their customer obligations under the Canadian legal system. The only reason they're doing this, and not the Canadian Private Copying Collective (who held the funds) is that Apple know who their customers are!
But then to link this to batteries..? Where does the logic come from? It's a bit like saying "I like Halo, it's a fun game, but that registry in WinXP just plain sucks."
Different issues.
Hmm, that's a good question. Why isn't it OK?
Because Christians don't think logically like that when it comes to their faith. Let's disregard the other reply to this post, because as I understand it, most Protestant forms of Christianity allow you to be saved by faith alone, irrespective of your good works. And even Catholics, who believe in faith and good works allow you options like repenting when you're near death, I think.
The paradox is similar to that of the old puritan belief of the elect and predestination. They believed that, from birth, everyone was either going to heaven or going to hell, and nothing you did could change that. From a logical perspective (assuming your actions are ultimately dictated by how your afterlife will turn out, as is the case from the Christian perspective), then, you might as well do whatever the fuck you want, because it's not going to change anything that really matters.
Of course, this didn't happen, because the puritans spent their lives trying to prove to each other that they were part of the elect, even though it doesn't really make any sense to do so, from their perspective. Of course, that was a reasonable thing to do, because people want to go through life with a certain amount of comfort, and being part of the elect got you power in Puritan society.
So, if you believe that Jesus dying for your sins is all that it takes to get into heaven, then, yes, you might as well go sin as much as you want; you're covered. However, that won't get you very good standing in the Christian community, and may get you out-and-out killed, depending on what you do. It seems that most people understand, unconsciously at least, that having a good time in 'this life' is important (no matter how much they profess otherwise), so they block out such a paradox, or try to rationalize around it, or do whatever so that they don't feel silly doing the opposite of what is the logical conclusion of what they believe.
Of course, if you're inclined to think about things in this way, odds are you aren't Christian, so you're screwed from the get-go. Then again, your morality would also probably be based around something other than fear of hell, or bribery of heaven, so none of this would really apply to you anyway.
I've come for the woman, and your head.
"Many Apple loyalists are happy to overlook some deficiencies in Apple products"
"I personally see the battery as a natural product limiter. When the battery dies in mine, I'll buy a new one."
That's the problem with Apple worshipers. They overlook Apple's problems to the point that they think Apple is perfect and Apple has no incentive to perfect their products. I'm not saying that Apple doesn't fix their problems (in time!), and I'm not saying that Apple isn't a great company, but why do people irrationally ignore the problems and attack anyone who is critical of an apple product?
The iPod had terible battery life in its first few generations. My iPod mini initially got about 6 hours of normal use (I skipped through songs sometimes). Now after a year of infrequent use, I get about 2-4 hours. This doesn't last me even half my day. I would NOT have bought the ipod mini if I knew this - competing similar products advertised battery lives of close to 20 hours. Sure, I could go out and get a new battery (for 67 dollars, plus they will replace my ipod, not battery!) but that won't really fix my problem.
Anyway, enough complaining. My point is that apple makes products that could be a lot better. Live with it.
CPCC should be returning the money and passing the buck onto Apple is their second screw. They punished Apple by extorting the money in the first place. Returning the money will cost Apple another pretty penny that the CPCC should pay. Apple will have to pay the administrative costs of the refund and bear ill will generated by CPCC record keeping mistakes.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Now... let's place some bets.
How many iPod owners will...
a) be aware that this refund exists; and
b) be motivated to fill out a form and address an envelope.
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
authorized this levy (not tax)
This is splitting hairs. A levy is a tax by any other name. Calling it something different doesn't actually make it a different thing. In the end a government body is demanding money from you under penalty of law if certain specific conditions are met - and that's a tax, no matter what they decide to call it. In fact, it appears to be a kind of property tax, in that if you choose to purchase the property you have to pay the tax (although not annually, for obvious reasons).
Max
My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
That's the problem with Apple worshipers. They overlook Apple's problems to the point that they think Apple is perfect and Apple has no incentive to perfect their product.
I think this is a rather broad brush. And contradictory. In one sentence, Apple fans overlook problems in search for approval that Apple has the best "all around" product. In the next sentence, they're perfectionists.
why do people irrationally ignore the problems and attack anyone who is critical of an apple product?
If you were to look at fan-boys vs. detractors in terms of anxiety assumptions, Apple fans tend to have a big need for constant approval. My take: smaller market share, especially in the early to mid 1990's, led to a trend of knee-jerk attacks against anything "Apple" as bad / weird. This was prevalent in IT departments, and still is to some degree. People had their preferred platform, and felt sneered at.
I've seen this trend with OS/2 fans, I've seen it with Linux fans -- anyone who attaches emotional worth to their technology purchases tends to get anxious about the market share.
Now, this probably wasn't actually happening on a grand scale, there are a few vocal detractors in any community, and that probably just stoked a shared anxiety.
Now, Apple detractors (often alpha geeks, free software worshippers, or marketshare-obsessed capitalists) are that they exhibit perfectionist tendencies: they find one or two faults in the product or in the company that somehow makes the whole thing useless.
Now after a year of infrequent use, I get about 2-4 hours. This doesn't last me even half my day. I would NOT have bought the ipod mini if I knew this - competing similar products advertised battery lives of close to 20 hours.
Of course, these other products have no better battery life expectancy, they'll degrade all the same. Perhaps it will be more useful because they started at a higher level. But there is often a trade-off: the Dell DJ for example has much higher battery life but is VERY heavy. And then there the other features / bugs. For example, I have a friend that is pissed he didn't buy an iPod because his DJ locks up on him all the time, he has to carry a paper clip to reset it.
Anyhow, back to the battery issue. All batteries degrade: watches, cordless phones, mobile phones, laptops, PDAs, etc. There is a market for replacements. Some require professional service (watches?!). First gen iPods had worse batteries, but I wonder how many other hard drive MP3 players from 2001 are doing , battery-wise.
FWIW, my 1st-gen iPod from Autumn 2001 is still in use , with the original battery, and has just under 2 hours of battery life, and is used daily (I gave it to a friend, it fits within his commute). I use my 1st-gen iPod mini fairly regularly since Spring 2004, and its original battery life (8 hours?) is down to about 6 hours.
-Stu