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."
But shouldn't the Canadian Government be doing the refunding? They mandated it, they probably took the money from Apple as it was collected, seems like Apple gets screwed twice, along with Canadian citizens.
"Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
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.
Apple is a master of customer relations. I don't think you can find any other computer company (maybe the now-defunct Amiga) that engenders the kind of appreciative customers that Apple does. Especially under Steve Jobs, they pull little stunts like this here and there that really bring in the herd.
But why, then, do they not focus more on also getting the technology right? Many Apple loyalists are happy to overlook some deficiencies in Apple products, but some things like the iPod battery issue are hardly ever resolved to satisfaction.
I really like Apple, and though I don't own any Apple products, I see them as a very significant counterweight to Microsoft hegemony. They keep Microsoft on its toes, which can only lead to improved products for everyone down the road.
Jesus saved me from my past. He can save you as well.
Shouldn't Apple instead be giving them 25 iTMS downloads? After all, court decisions always result in vouchers -- not cash!
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
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.
Levy = Fee administered by a private organization
Tax = Fee administered by a government
There is another kind of evil which we must fear most, and that is the indifference of good men. -- Boondock Saints
(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.
A court didn't impose the tax. The Copyright Board, a non-judicial tribunal, imposed a levy (not a tax), with the authority granted to them to do so via Order-in-Council.
www.kitchengeek.com -- Nosh for
Mind, the interest might barely cover the costs of processing the tax both coming in and, now, going back out.
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
I hadn't thought of this, but you're right. We should sin as much as we goddamned please. Hey, maybe my neighbor's wife would be up for a few lines of stolen blow and a dick in the ass after i kill her husband.
The Canadian Government, specifically the Copyright Board, authorized this levy (not tax) through ammendments to the Canadian Copyright Act.
The Canadian Private Copying Collective, a non-profit organization representing the music industry, collects the the levy from manufacturers (moderately important to note here is that it's not the government collecting it, nor is it actually being imposed on consumers; the recording industry collects it from manufacturers of recordable media).
Apple, not wanting to let the levy cut into their profits, pads the price of iPods in Canada to offset the levy paid to the CPCC.
The CPCC has been holding the money pending the final ruling from the courts on whether this levy should stand. Now that the court has ruled that it should not stand, they will be paying the money back to Apple.
Apple, in turn, refunds consumers as well (at least those who apply for the refund, which will likely not be everyone, so ultimately Apple can expect to make a small profit off of this, as will the recording industry, which collected interest off the money while holding it).
By the way, you have a similar levy in the United States as well, although it isn't quite as pervasive (ie. it doesn't apply to quite as many types of recordable media as it does in Canada). Many other countries have this levy, too.
"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein
It seems the iPod was mis-classified by its ability to be used as an external hdd. The iPod isn't sold as blank media. It's marketed as a portable media player. It has an OS w/ the ability to dual boot to linux(ipodlinux.org) software, RAM, hdd, audio support, display and input device. It's closer to being a PDA, configured to be very good at playing audio files, than just a blank hdd/cd/dvd and anything else covered by that canadian tax that I know nothing about.
"The tariff was...for non-removable memory"
Depends on how non-removable you consider the ipod memory? There was a post many months ago about removing the microdrive from another audio player and could be used with cameras and PDAs that use microdrive, I think the price of the player was less than that of the flash memory.
"The CPCC got the levy instituted in the first place because it successfully argued that iPod users were making illegal copies of songs, so money should be collected on behalf of the copyright holders."
So one could make that claim, but what about the people with well paying jobs who can afford to and do purchase all the music they own. I have no idea where recording off the radio fits in. Good idea Kanuck RIAA, treat all those high paying customers like criminals. iPods cost a lot more before Dec2003 when the taxation was in effect.
If it were up to me, fortunately for them it's not, I'd make them match the tax refund with an itunes gift card. Their member corporations get more than their share of songs sold on itunes that it wouldn't be a total loss.
F7 doesn't work, ignore spelling and grammar
Will Creative be sending refunds to those that bought their players?
Will both people that bought Dell DJs be getting refunds?
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.
Here is something that really annoys me. These levies go to the Canadian Recording Industry Association (CRIA) because they lobbied the government -- and are still actively influencing the Heritage Minister -- to try and convince them that implied theft of Canadian content should go back to the association that represents them.
This is an abomination of facts on multiple levels. First, the CRIA does NOT represent the majority of Canadian artists. They might represent the largest percent of mass music sales, because they have the largest commercial artists but the CRIA does not represent the majority of Canadian musicians. Many artists are independent of course.
Second, the CRIA is basically a Canadian flagged arm of the RIAA. If you use the wayback machine's history to look at www.cria.ca before they removed the logos, you'll see that the majority of the artists are under large American labels - Sony, BMG, Warner etc.
So here is basically what has happened. The American recording industry has opened a wing in Canada, slapped on a Canadian flag, claimed to represent Canadian musicians, pressured government into forcing levvies for implied theft and then stolen that money.
Dear Sir or Madam,
You are not a customer. You are a criminal sir (or madam)! I'll take your money AND I'll call you a criminal. Who are you to disagree? We have a United Nations backed copyright treaty behind us, support of world governments, and millions of dollars to lobby your government (our government) and pay for lawyers.
There is no way to argue, we wrote copyright law and we shall amend it as required. Copyright allows us to strictly protect intellectual property for many years after an artist's death, even though even patents for the greatest inventions in the world can only last a couple decades. Copyright is King!
If you don't like it then I suppose your only recourse would be to refrain from purchasing anything supported by our industry such as audio CDs, but please don't do that because our profit margins are already very weak and we can not survive. Plus we will just claim that you have been stealing the CD content and collect even more cash from you to compensate us for your evil theft!
We're real assholes that way. What can you do? Pay up, bee-atches. Just remember to keep buying our stuff. Do not ever buy or sell used CDs, the secondary market is theft too!
Sincerely eh,
CPCC
CRIA
RIAA
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!"
I live in B.C. and got a 40GB iPod from Future Shop in December 2004. When I read about the levy being repealed (I think it was here on /.) I headed over to Future Shop with my reciept and got $25 charged back to my card with no hassle at all. I figured that the retailer would handle something like this (as they did in my case).
Well, in that case I don't want my $25 back.
I want my $25 + a year of interest back.
It cost me a year's worth of interest to have that money out of my bank account. And the CPwhatevers have been collecting a year's worth of interest on it.
UTF-8: There and Back Again
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?
You should check out PresentMovie. It's a shareware application that lets you play Quicktime and mpeg files full screen. If you're using windows you can use Qucktime Alternative which also supports full screen playback. Wow, I didn't know slashdot put the URL in brackets for you after links, I always thought people were just being considerate. Sorry for being a n00b, this is my first post.
If people continue to abuse this feature, I will have to remove it. - Slashdot Comment Box, 1998
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