Canadian MP: Tax media devices to pay for copyright infringement
Summary: New Democrat Party MP Charlie Angus thinks the Copyright Act isn't working and does not want to wait for federal government solutions or international agreements to be signed.
New Democrat Party (NDP) MP Charlie Angus has tabled new legislation adding taxes to any device that can record digital media. On his website Angus states that the Copyright Act isn't working. Angus does not want to wait for federal government solutions or international agreements to be signed. Existing copyright levies are collected by the CPCC - Canadian Private Copying Collective.
It is estimated that between 1997 (the inception of the levy) to 2008, they the CPCC collected $261 million and have distributed $180 million of that to rights holders. The figures have not been confirmed with CPCC.
Updated: The Canadian Private Copying Collective is the non-profit agency charged with collecting and distributing private copying royalties. Established in 1999, CPCC is an umbrella organization that represents songwriters, recording artists, music publishers and record companies. These are the groups on whose behalf the royalties are collected. CPCC is not an arm of government. Enforcement of the private copying tariff and advocacy, including representing copyright holders before the Copyright Board, which decides the tariff, are other important functions of CPCC. This site provides in-depth background on each of CPCC's key functions.
The Copyright Board of Canada manages the tariff schedules and Act copyright registration.
The ACTA talks have been prone to information leaking out despite agreement to maintain secrecy. In 2008 it became known that an important component of ACTA is enabling copyright and intellectual property right holders to disconnect internet users caught illegally downloading without a warrant. This set off a global uproar and demands for transparency. MP Angus ignores the ACTA negotiations and offers his own solution;
"Artists have a right to get paid and consumers have a right to access works. This is what balanced copyright is all about. The government has declared their intention to update the Copyright Act. If they are serious then we need to update key elements of the act like the copying levy and fair dealing."
The Bill extends the Private Copying Levy, established in 1997, to the next generation of devices that consumers are using for copying sound recordings for personal use. The levy provides legal certainty for fans to copy songs onto an iPod or MP3 player.
"Digital locks and suing fans are not going to prevent people from copying music from one format to another," he said. "The levy is a solution that works. By updating it, we will ensure that artists are getting paid for their work, and that consumers aren't criminalized for moving their legally-obtained music from one format to another."
The Canadian government's Intellectual Property Office Industry Canada administers the Copyright Act. CPCC collects existing levies on blank recording media such as cassette tapes and CD/DVD's. Canada is one of the countries participating in the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) negotiations. The next round of treaty talks take place in New Zealand in April. Update: The Ministry of Foreign Affairs & International Trade (DFAIT) is the lead agency at the ACTA negotiation table.
Several countries now have various pieces of legislation surrounding copyright / intellectual property rights including France, the U.K. and now Canada. The European Parliament has also publicly stated that a three strikes your out (cut off from Internet access) will not be acceptable to EU nations. This conflicts with the Digital Economy Bill measures introduced by Lord Peter Mandelson, First Secretary of State, Secretary of State for Business, Innovation & Skills and Lord President of the Council. As resistance to the secret ACTA negotiations continue to rise, government legislators continue offer their own ideas. The ACTA negotiations are sending mixed signals to several nations because they are not occurring within the World Trade Organization framework.
Additional resources:
Internet history - should it be archived?
European Parliament notice to ACTA negotiators: Open up discussion and be transparent to the public
British Telecom chief: File share users should be fined, not disconnected
British wireless internet users - you're guilty
EPIC urges court to block Google Book deal - breaks user privacy laws
French solution to illegal download and copyright infringement - tax Google and Yahoo
Google loses book copyright case in France
Lobbyist: Canada cans copyright deal in exchange for U.S. dropping Buy America
Wireless users may be shut off if sharing copyrighted files
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
Certainly ONE sensible option.
It seems so sensible it will probably fail.
Edit: The content maFIAA will fight it tooth and nail, because their ability to continue to squeeze the consumers will be severely curtailed.
Typical
for itself.
Canadians = Silly subpeoples. Who cares what they do?
Alanis who?
fucharlie
DAT Tax: We did it here
keeping score), a tax was levied on every blank tape. Surely
anyone buying a blank tape would only use it to rip off some
cheesy pop singer.
I and a lot of other people were hired to use DAT machines to
tape concerts of various types. No ripping off--just
professional recording work. Although DAT is long gone, I
always resented paying a tax to the record company lawyers
for completely legal use.
Yes the Canadian proposal is stupid, but we did it first right
here in the USA.
If you have objections...
Another one of those legal tenets
that if we find something simplistic and foolish,
we can call it "stupid". I suppose PC nazis like
yourself would prefer he called Canada's
legislation "developmentally delayed"?
No, stupid is the right term
MP, are reasonably described by the word 'stupid'. Legislation like this
assumes, prima facie, that the user is purchasing a product strictly for
illegal use. If you buy a DAT or an iPod, you are a criminal.
How is that not stupid?
That's what it seems to assume.
And is it any wonder people don't vote Democrat...
Except for one thing @jedikitty
Any political party is capable to doing something dumb.
Now wait a second...
Forget it, how about a War On Copyright Infringement. That will work, like the War On Drugs. Hmm, the War On Poverty. Something must work...
If they're not on iTunes, how do you support the artist?
Piracy is an odd thing. According to existing Canadian copyright law, if I copy an album onto an audio cassette (using 1999 terminology here) in order to listen to it on my walkman, that's allowed. But if I then "loan" or "share" that cassette with my sister, that's legally classified as "distribution" and thus a copyright infrigement. And yet, everyone does exactly that. And in the spirit of copyright, it is an infrigement. Under the rules and spirit of copyright, my sister should go out and buy her own copy, and in doing so, support the artists who created the content. But that isn't the way things work. Not in Canada and not in the USA. And that means that the breaking-through artist gets popular and goes broke at the same time. Everyone is listening to pirated copies of their work because the artist doesn't have the means to create and distribute sufficient quantities of the work for all those who want to buy it.
Spending large amounts of money on police investigations and court costs to chase after teenagers who copy their albums onto a different media and then share with their friends is simply too expensive and it does not help the breaking-through artists who really need the money the most.
Unlike the USA, Canada is a social democracy (which means that the good of the group takes precidence over the good of the individual). [In contrast, the USA is a libertarian democracy which means that the rights and freedoms of the individual take precedence over the good of the group.]
The tariff on blank media was therefore put in as a socialized support mechanism, a subsidy if you will, for established but small-time artists and <b>it should be viewed in that manner only</b>. In addition, the tariff is tiny (about $0.07 per blank CD and about $0.10 per blank audio cassette) and hidden (rolled up in the retail price so the consumer doesn't see it). It means a stack of blank CDs costs about $1 more in Canada than in the USA but the benefit to the content creators is immense. And since it is hidden, NO ONE CARES!
The problem with iPods is that they are legally defined as "devices" and not as "recordable media". Only recordable media is subject to the hidden tariff at this time. But recordable media is on the decline as everything goes digital. This is hurting the cultural industry. Do we tell the artists that, just when they're making it big, they should go broke and/or quit because they're not rich enough? They're not to the point yet where you'll find them in iTunes. But every copy made and distributed without a royalty to them hurts them dearly when they need that money the most.
And that's really what the the bill in the Canadian parliment is all about. How does a country support its artists.
But...
companies. Look, I pay for CDs, then I rip them to iTunes for my own
use. Some people steal and some people don't. But the problem with
legislation like that is the people are assumed to be guilty and they have
no recourse if they're not. With policies like that, further theft is likely to
be encouraged as much as discouraged.
On top of all that, if you're going to tax me, give me some choice. I don't
like a single 'artist' you mentioned. Why should I give them money? Give
the money to the Montreal Symphony and maybe I could get behind it.
Stupid is the right word
If you are going to jump all over something, at least come up with a reasonably well thought out alternative. You have no credibility whatsoever.
@economonkey
post."
Probably had trouble reading coherent ideas because I used polysyllabic
words...
Least of multiple evils
it may be the least of all evils. Some record
label got smacked down in Canada when they tried
to sue someone for downloading music, when the
court told them that they already got their
payment from the tax, and they weren't entitled to
anything else. This essentially legalized
"leeching" in Canada.
Copyright Reform Should Start With A Reduction In The Length Of Copyright
Implement incentives to create not means to stagnation and bondage
If that seems unreasonable then perhaps we can agree that a one time fee is reasonable. After all what incentive is there to create and develop if we can all live off royalties. Thus look at the state of contemporary English music(other language music will follow if similar model is adopted). It is much cheaper to live off the endeavours of past labour then to recreate anew. In the end both the industry suffers due to stagnation and the consumer who only listens to contemporary English pays twice. First a tariff to listen to music he owns and second his marginal utility (ceteris paribus) diminishes every time he listens to the same music over and over again with little else to replenish that satisfaction lost.
RE: Canadian MP: Tax media devices to pay for copyright infringement