Canada contemplates iPod tax

[Jules]

Canada contemplates iPod tax

Legislators in Canada are said to be contemplating the introduction of a levy on devices such as iPods and mobile phones that can play audio files, as part of the nation’s private copying laws...

[PhiloBeddoe]

And I'm sure this revenue gets distributed back to its rightful owner, the recording artist, right?

[SeanBlack]

Not going to happen...


The Canadian Supreme Court won't hear a case involving extra fees for iPods and other MP3 players in that country, ending a dispute over a so-called iPod tax, but rekindling debate over the legality of file swapping.
At issue was a long-standing law that allows a regulatory agency to collect a small extra fee on blank media such as CDs and tapes, with the revenues going to artists and record labels to recompense them for the private copies being made of their work.


That agency, the Copyright Board of Canada, said in late 2003 that iPods and other hard-drive players were being used to copy music as well, and imposed a fee of up to $25 on the devices. An Appeals Court set aside that decision last year, and Thursday's Supreme Court action will leave iPods untaxed.


The decision may have broader implications for Canadian computer users, however.


The country's trade association for record labels quickly welcomed the Supreme Court's action as a sign that unauthorized file swapping was once again viewed as unambiguously illegal.
That connection stems from another court ruling, in which a judge said that trading files though a file swapping network appeared to be legal, citing the Copyright Board's fee regime.


But if copying files to hard drives--whether on an iPod or a computer--is not included in the private copying fees, then file swapping is no longer protected, executives at the Canadian Recording Industry Association said.
<!-- STORY TEASE --> <newselement> </newselement> Now on News.com


<!-- END STORY TEASE --> "For years, those supporting unauthorized file sharing have misleadingly used the existence of the Private Copying Levy to justify illegitimate file sharing," CRIA President Graham Henderson said in a statement. "Today, the Supreme Court says 'no such luck.'"


Copyright regulators said the Supreme Court's action was regrettable, and might even make most common uses of the iPod illegal.


"The clear result of this decision is that copying recorded music onto an iPod is illegal, unless the copying has been authorized by rights holders," said David Basskin, a director of the Canadian Private Copying Collective, which collects and distributes the fees on blank media, in a statement.
The CPPC would return the fees that had been collected from iPod and other digital audio device sales between December 2003 and December 2004, the group said.


The ambiguity in Canadian law may be resolved before the courts have much time to address file-swapping issues again, however. The Canadian government has introduced a wide-ranging new copyright law that is expected to definitively make trading copyright files online without permission illegal.

[Inner Light]

Originally Posted by PhiloBeddoe

And I'm sure this revenue gets distributed back to its rightful owner, the recording artist, right?

it usually does, i mean I've received private copying royalties on my statements, due to things like cdr's, cassettes (ugh) etc. it's not an exact science but it's cool

[kats]

As far as governments are concerned, Canada is pretty good at supporting the arts. I know in my neck of the woods half the studios would be out of business if not for artist development grants.

Just a FYI, the Canadian government charges a levy on businesses that play music in their establishment as part of their business. For example, a restaurant will pay about $500 annually (depending on seat capacity) for playing music (that they bought and own) for the benefit of their customers.

I'm sure administration eats up alot of the money, and some of the grants are quite questionable - but then I don't believe the efficiency & judgement of large corporations are much better these days

But I believe it IS the job of government to protect the industry and help support/foster it's growth. I dont think the industry in this enviroment can do it alone.

[Windtaken]

I'm thinking about the psychology behind the idea that's been shown in many experiments. If you're being taxed for file sharing, then it's legitimizing it.

Where are you from Kats?

[lpkyer]

Canada...taxes...corruption... MAKES TOTAL SENSE TO ME

[cornutt]

Originally Posted by kats

Just a FYI, the Canadian government charges a levy on businesses that play music in their establishment as part of their business. For example, a restaurant will pay about $500 annually (depending on seat capacity) for playing music (that they bought and own) for the benefit of their customers.

ASCAP/BMI/SESAC collect those fees in the U.S. A friend of mine owns a ballroom dance studio, and he pays about about that amount each year in performance rights license fees. He has them all posted in the office.

[joeq]

Originally Posted by cornutt

ASCAP/BMI/SESAC collect those fees in the U.S. A friend of mine owns a ballroom dance studio, and he pays about about that amount each year in performance rights license fees. He has them all posted in the office.

I think the point PhiloBeddoe was making was that the PROs usually distribute the money on some sort of statistical basis- linked to the charts for example. Is someone logging the actual plays in every club and dance studio?

If a song by the "Relatively Unknowns" are played in your friend's ballroom every night of the week, they probably won't see their dime, unless their record has charted- in which case they would get some money even if he never played them.

[T_R_S]

All that levy would have done was to help give Bryan Adams, Celine Dion an Shania Twain more money. I really don't think they really need it.

[kats]

TRS, while some big names DO benefit from these grants (although Adams refuses them) they still make sense. They give them the grant then the video production(for example) stays in Canada and creates quite a trickle down effect.

In Manitoba, the Province is really aggressive in this regard and Winnipeg has become quite popular for movie making - a non existant industry here 20 years ago. Quite a few big Hollywood production pass through as well each year, a more famous one being "Capote" which one the Oscar.

In the recording side, there's money to bring in international acts to record in Canada which is very beneficial as it brings outside money into the economy (as opposed to spinning your wheels), while at the same time creating work in the industry. The list goes on. Anyhow, if you know how to play the game you can get your slice.

Just want to say that ther is some good going on here with the money being collected by the government.

[cornutt]

Originally Posted by joeq

I think the point PhiloBeddoe was making was that the PROs usually distribute the money on some sort of statistical basis- linked to the charts for example. Is someone logging the actual plays in every club and dance studio?

Not in our studio. It would be a rather difficult thing to allocate anyways: is the song being played during a social dance, a showcase exhibit, a group class or a private lesson? Was the whole song played or just a fraction of it? Was it altered, modified, or mashed-up in some fashion? (We do a lot of editing and processing for instructional purposes.)

Once in a blue moon the owner gets a visit from a PRO rep. But all they ever do is check that the license paperwork is in order. They never ask for a playlist or any such.

[Jim Williams]

As long as the money is used to pay out the disability checks for all these future deaf kids, it seems like a plan.

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades