Slashdot Mirror
Canadian Music Group Proposes 'Copyright Tax' On Internet Use (torrentfreak.com)
After ongoing discussions and proposals about new taxes and fees to compensate creators for "missed revenue," the Screen Composers Guild of Canada is calling for a copyright tax on all broadband data use above 15 gigabytes per month. TorrentFreak reports: A proposal from the Screen Composers Guild of Canada (SCGC), put forward during last week's Government hearings, suggests to simply add a levy on Internet use above 15 gigabytes per month. The music composers argue that this is warranted because composers miss out on public performance royalties. One of the reasons for this is that online streaming services are not paying as much as terrestrial broadcasters. The composers SCGC represents are not the big music stars. They are the people who write music for TV-shows and other broadcasts. Increasingly these are also shown on streaming services where the compensation is, apparently, much lower.
SCGC's solution to this problem is to make every Canadian pay an extra fee when they use over 15 gigabytes of data per month. This money would then be used to compensate composers and fix the so-called "value gap." As a result, all Internet users who go over the cap will have to pay more. Even those who don't watch any of the programs where the music is used. However, SCGC doesn't see the problem and believes that 15 gigabytes are enough. People who want to avoid paying can still use email and share photos, they argue. Those who go over the cap are likely streaming not properly compensated videos. SCGC writes: "[W]hen you're downloading and consuming over 15 gigabytes of data a month, you're likely streaming Spotify. You're likely streaming YouTube. You're likely streaming Netflix. So we think because the FANG companies will not give us access to the numbers that they have, we have to apply a broad-based levy. They're forcing us to."
SCGC's solution to this problem is to make every Canadian pay an extra fee when they use over 15 gigabytes of data per month. This money would then be used to compensate composers and fix the so-called "value gap." As a result, all Internet users who go over the cap will have to pay more. Even those who don't watch any of the programs where the music is used. However, SCGC doesn't see the problem and believes that 15 gigabytes are enough. People who want to avoid paying can still use email and share photos, they argue. Those who go over the cap are likely streaming not properly compensated videos. SCGC writes: "[W]hen you're downloading and consuming over 15 gigabytes of data a month, you're likely streaming Spotify. You're likely streaming YouTube. You're likely streaming Netflix. So we think because the FANG companies will not give us access to the numbers that they have, we have to apply a broad-based levy. They're forcing us to."
Came here to say the exact same thing. GG Canada. Nobody is buying CD-Rs anymore, so these asshats are trying to find other ways to force money out of people that have nothing to do with the work they're producing.
One of the reasons for this is that online streaming services are not paying as much as terrestrial broadcasters.
Then get streaming services to pay you more, not Internet users in general.
As for me, I don't think I've ever used more than 15GB in a month, but if I did, it wouldn't be because I downloaded (or streamed) music or video.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
The movie industry noticed this decision and did not want the same thing to happen to them.
Much of the current copyright fee structure had been created by a few very large corporations guarding their profits on a relatively sma number of works, and they don't care about any other concerns, people or artists. It really doesn't surprise me that this proposal is coming from a group of smaller artists. The current system is completely broken for smaller works, orphan works, and near orphan works.
How do they divide up the procedes? Per copyright? Per sale in normal media?
How does a band with 20 songs and 1 hit fare againse music copyright trolls who write "1000 songs", none of which are hits, and they aren't really a recording musician, but are happy to sue a hit song that happens to vaguely sound like one of their planted scatershot?
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
But it's open season on raping Conservative women until then, Kavanaugh proves it's legal now.
Except not surprisingly all the women who accused Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct were all far left liberals.
In Canada, we just switched to DVD-R's, plus the courts ruled that due to the levy, we were free to copy music for personal use.
Perhaps if this idea goes through, it'll mean being free to download movies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Actions speak louder then words. Has the Republican Congress tried to fix the civil forfeiture thing? How about the President through executive power?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism