Canadians, wake up and start emailing

[Jason Dunn]

<a href="http://www.canadianbusiness.com/xta-asp/storyview.asp?viewtype=browse&tpl=browse_frame&vpath=/2002/04/15/column/45225.html">http://www.canadianbusiness.com/xta-asp/storyview.asp?viewtype=browse&tpl=browse_frame&vpath=/2002/04/15/column/45225.html</a><br /><br />By the prickling of my thumbs, something wicked this way comes! If you're reading this, and you live in Canada, this will put you in a bad mood. In a nutshell, the Canadian Private Copying Collective (CPCC) has decided that Canadians are bad people doing illegal things with their music. Thus, they've taken it upon themselves to "save" the poor music studios whom we're so obviously forcing out of business. Right. They want us to pay 100% tax on CD's - 59 cents per CD! Also on their hit list are DVD-R discs, CompactFlash cards, SD cards, Minidiscs, and even the iPod is getting nailed for $21 in taxes PER GIGABYTE. This is insane! Canadians are already among the most taxed people in the world, and now they want us to pay even more! Here's some text from the article - I'd encourage you to go read it.<br /><br />"CPCC spokesperson David Basskin insists it’s a matter of practicality. “If people would allow our inspectors into their homes to monitor how they use each and every CD-R, I’d be perfectly happy to take nothing on a CD-R not used for music and a full rate on one that is used for music,” he says. “How are we to determine?” Instead, the CPCC makes adjustments based on the medium. MiniDiscs, which have no real use other than copying music, get nailed with a 77¢ markup. The levy is smaller on blank CDs, says Basskin, since “not all CD-Rs are used to copy music.” <br /><br />"Actually, relatively few of them are. When the CPCC last went before the Canadian Copyright Board in 1999, it argued that roughly half of CD-Rs were used for music. The Board estimated that half of those were for private copying. Today, with CD burners standard in virtually every PC sold, consumers have all kinds of uses for their CD-Rs. So with private copying likely counting for less and less of CD-R use, you might assume the CPCC would be seeking lower tariffs, right? “That’s a good one,” says Majeau, with a chuckle. In fact, the CPCC says it now wants even more for CD-Rs: 59¢ per unit, nearly triple the current levy. “That works out to more than 100% tax,” says David Paterson, executive director of the Canadian Advanced Technology Alliance (CATA), whose members include organizations ranging from universities to industrial manufacturers, many of whom buy truckloads of CD-Rs for matters unrelated to copying music. The proposed increase will cost them millions."<br /><br />Those of you who wish to share your thoughts with the CPCC can do so by emailing David Basskin ([email protected]). Perhaps you have a suggestion on what he can with some spare blank media? I'd also encourage you to contact your Member of Parliament, your local MLA, and the media in your area.<br /><br />To all my readers outside Canada, I apologize for the interruption - we now return to our regularly scheduled broadcast...thanks to <a href="http://www.cips.ca/">Karen Lopez from CIPS</a> for bringing this to my attention.<br /><br /><b>UPDATE:</b> I received a response from one of the offices of a member of parliment, and this is what he had to say: "The bureaucrat in charge of this Tax grab is Claude Majeau, of the Canadian Copyright Board. They are taking submissions and you and everyone you know should e-mail Claude Majeau to complain ([email protected]) about this misguided and unwattanted tax."

[stareja]

Jason,

I don't consider your post an inconvenience at all. If you read Jeff Kirvin's articles, you know that the US has had it's leaders come up with some pretty silly things regaarding copyright protection.

I just wish they'd stop the mentality that everyone who has a cd burner or a broadband connection are going to use those mediums for illegal activities. So much for "Innocent until proven guilty", huh?

~Jason Stare

[butch]

Jason, I'm totaly with you, but if I'm correct there is already a 20 or 21 cents tax on every CD we buy.

[Jason Dunn]

Jason, I'm totaly with you, but if I'm correct there is already a 20 or 21 cents tax on every CD we buy.


Yes, and that's bad enough - but they're talking about nearly TRIPLING that to 59 cents! And then there's the memory cards, the iPOD, etc. They're going too far - we're not criminals!

[butch]

We're not criminal, but I think it give us the right to use those medias for anything we want, we paid for it.

[macpel]

No wonder I moved out of there 8O, it's a nice country but I work too hard to give all my money to the goverment. Aren't you guys still paying for the olympic stadium :wink:.

[DaleReeck]

Good to hear this about Canada. I was afraid that only the US has moronic, hypocritical, self righteous, business first-screw the little people leadership. But apparently, idiot leaders are an international problem :)

[Aceze]

Good to hear this about Canada. I was afraid that only the US has moronic, hypocritical, self righteous, business first-screw the little people leadership. But apparently, idiot leaders are an international problem :)


While that may be true (ghod knows, there's enough stupidity to go around!), in this particular case, it's the Recording industry (the Canadian version of the RIAA) that's pushing this particular tax through on the grounds that 50% of recordable media usage is illegal.

Since the bill also includes portable harddrives (like ones in the IPod and Archaeos type jukebox mp3 players), I think it's a small stretch for them to start coming after laptop hardrives in the near future.

In fact, any media is at risk in this "war". Once this bill passes, it's just a matter of time until ALL media is levied (it's happening already, due to the original bill being passed).

Aceze

[Will T Smith]

They foolishly assume that the only use for recording material is to copy THEIR interests.

Little do they know that every insult visited upon their customers will ad impetus to the liberation of artists from their monopoly on music distribution.

The only true way to defeat piracy is to make legitamite commerce easy and more affordable. The recording industry is doing the OPPOSITE. They are throwing water on a grease fire.

I have personally avowed to stop buying music from studios altogether. $15 for that silly little disc is WAAAAYYY too much to ask. I suggest everyone else do the same as well. When artists offer their material direct to consumers over the web, thats when I'll buy music again.

I believe in art, not the exploitation of art.

[Will T Smith]

I don't think that these taxes can stand under the weight of a real legal challenge. The recordable media had no real interest in fighting a tax as it doesn't cut into their revenue's.

However, I see merits in a massive class action lawsuit against these taxes. The primary plantiffs are folks who use CD-Rs and MiniDiscs to perform personal backups AND record their OWN personal works of music and art.

This taxation is a presumtion of theft. I personally resent that. Especially considering fair use and archival data statutes that are well established in law. If I bought it, I have a right to back it up ... OR to convert it into a portable format for personal use.

[Hugh Nano]

Here's what I had to say to those responsible...

"As a law-abiding citizen of Canada studying abroad, I am ashamed to find my country raising and expanding a levy that was based on what was a deplorable presupposition to begin with. How can you possibly justify penalizing law-abiding citizens for the law-breakers' crimes? I always thought the basic assumptions in Canadian law were that one is "innocent until proven guilty" and that it is the guilty and not the innocent who should pay pentalties for crimes committed. For shame!

"And, should any elected officials actually care about what I have to say, please note that this immoral and unjustified tax-grab simply reinforces my perception that the current government cares very little for the rights and interests of its private citizens."

[Aceze]

Anyone want to guess whether or not the recording industry will stop the levy on using recordable media if their efforts at copywrighting CDs (making them unreadable on PCs, etc) succeed?

Fat chance.

Aceze

ps. I've stopped buying CDs for a few years now. I find it amazing that while manufacturing and technology costs keep going down, the prices of CDs continue to rise. It's not exactly like music is getting any better either (but that's a different discussion...! :) )

[johnm]

Hmm, glad I don't live there.

I didn't realize it was the governments job to collect revenue for the music industry. You your tax payer dollars are being used to pay for people to collect more taxes from you and then give them to the music industry. Hmmm.

So if I'm an independant musican and I burn my own demo CD to give out the music industry collects a royalty. Nice.

So if the people are basically assumed to be criminals and the government's job is to protect copyright holders at all costs.. then all items that 'could' be used to violate a copyright need to be hit with a tax and the profits given to all potential holders. So if this includes CDs, flash, harddrives etc, it should also include, photocopiers, audio tapes, VHS tapes, scanners, printers etc. Well why stop there, pens and pencils, chalk and paper could be used to illegally copy books. Film could be used to take photos of copyrighted works so throw that in too. Even silly putty could be a violator. What about items used to transport or store illegal copies? Cars, shelves, homes, coat pockets?

Wow, I think it would be cheaper for the government to just require each citizen to install cameras in every room of their house so they could keep an eye on you, and just throw you in jail if you did something wrong.

[Take1]

We've got this Senator called 'Hollings' that would fit right in up where you guys are. We'll send him pronto once you give the word -- we'll pay the airfaire.

[Rob Alexander]

Wow, I think it would be cheaper for the government to just require each citizen to install cameras in every room of their house so they could keep an eye on you, and just throw you in jail if you did something wrong.


No need to go to that extreme! The obvious thing to do, following the precident set here, is to require each Canadian citizen to spend one week in jail every year. Naturally, some innocent people will contribute their time to this great cause, but we'll also get those who committed crimes but didn't get caught. Under this system, the total "debt-to-society" paid collectively by all Canadians will correspond much more closely to the penalties due for actual crimes committed. :wink:

[Daniel]

So, pretty soon, all the CDs you buy are going to be copy protected but not only that, when you buy CD-Rs you'll be paying a tax put in place to fight piracy that you probably never commited. This prevents you from doing what is (was?) a legal right, ie. making a copy of the music for your personal use.
I am quite concerned about the direction we're going with copy protection and now taxes. I rip all my music CDs to my HDD so that I can listen to them. What right does anyone have to stop me doing that? I will return any CD that I cannot RIP and I will get a refund.

It's disgusting. But then again, try locking anyone that comes to your country as a refugee in a prison in a desert and claim that everything's ok. "Welcome to Australia" land of the paranoid bigot, home of the luddite rednecks. Allegedly the "White Australia" policy was ditched in the 50s...

Daniel

[Jason Dunn]

I rip all my music CDs to my HDD so that I can listen to them. What right does anyone have to stop me doing that? I will return any CD that I cannot RIP and I will get a refund.


I'm with you! I do the same thing - I very rarely listen to the physical disc. The first time I buy a CD that I can't rip, things are going to get very interesting...I'll likely buy 30 of them, open them all, then return them just to prove a point. :twisted:

[Daniel]

Hey, that sounds like a great idea. Just keep going into the music store saying "I couldn't use that disc" return it and then buy the same one. :twisted: That would be hilarious.
I have to say the RIAA (and obviously the Canadian equivalent) are up there with M$ in the evil stakes these days. They don't seem to be caring about people anymore. Damn, do I ever sound like some old guy!
I don't really use my CDs either, they're stored away so that they don't get all scratched up. Stops me having to buy another one. Hey come to think of it, maybe thats why record companies don't want us to back them up/rip them, loss of revenue stream!

Daniel

[iPAUL]

Once again we bend over and take one for our country. :roll:

Whatever.

It really is a great country to live in (if you can afford it)

[Jason Dunn]

You can read the official proposal here:
http://www.cb-cda.gc.ca/tariffs/proposed/c09032002-b.pdf

If you want to make your voice matter, here's what you need to do:

Send an email and/or write a letter to:

CLAUDE MAJEAU
Secretary General
56 Sparks Street, Suite 800
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0C9
(613) 952-8621 (Telephone)
(613) 952-8630 (Facsimile)
[email protected] (Electronic mail)

"Objections must briefly state the reasons therefor, and must in-
dicate the name, address, telephone number, facsimile number
and electronic mail address of the objector. The objection must
also contain the following declarations:

I intend to participate actively to the process leading to the cer-
tification of the private copying tariff. Consequently, this con-
stitutes my formal objection to the proposed statement filed by
CPCC.

I have read the information set out in the Board™s notice pub-
lished in the Canada Gazette on March 9, 2002 with CPCC™s
proposed statement. I understand the duties that I undertake as
an objector and intend to abide by them."

I want to see this bill turned to dust - start emailing!

[lord_darkside]

We're not criminal, but I think it give us the right to use those medias for anything we want, we paid for it.


That's totally true, if the recording industry gets their way and they get this tarriff, does that mean that they'll lay off of all of the "anti peer-to-peer" nonsense that they're engaging in?

I recently bought 50 CD's, I used 10 of them to save all of the digital photos that I've taken over the last year and a half. 5 more were for web sites that I've been creating. I used 2 as a test to burn a VCD of a Buffy episode. 4 discs became useless coasters when my computer kacked. I used one to burn a backup of all of the drivers for my PC, and made two mixed CD's (mostly of music that I ripped from CD's I've bought, although a couple of songs were b-sides stuff that I could only find on the web).


By my estimation, if the Record industry is already getting $.21 per CD I'm burning, then that means that they recieved $2.52 for each of the music CD's I burned. That's a pretty sweet deal!

[Hugh Nano]

Here's the CPCC's response to the e-mail I sent them (given in my previous post):

"Mr. Hewlett,

"Thank you for your email.

"Please understand that private copying has been made legal – there is no infringement. To achieve this, the Copyright Act was revised in 1997. Individuals were given the right to make copies of recorded music for their own personal use. But in exchange, copyright holders in recorded music were given a right to be compensated by way of a levy to be charged on media used for private copying. Copyright holders in more than 25 countries around the globe enjoy similar protections.

"Sincerely,

"Alison Thompson
Collection and Enforcement Associate"

What do you think?

[Gerard]

I sent in my initial stream of vitriol, as I rarely even use the 'privilege' of personal copying of music CDs. I got a virtually identical reply from Alison Thompson mailto:[email protected]
(except the bit about 25+ countries was missing). Thanks for the new address. I'll be sending more. I replied to Alison, at length, detailing my exact thoughts on the matter. It feels difficult to keep a civil tongue in this matter, but really, why am I being taxed for a service or product I do not use? I use CD-RW and CF memory for backups and data filestore. I use them also for copying home-recorded sessions of my partner's and other friend's music, played live to minidisc and transferred. I even convert some of this to MP3. But none of it infringes anyone's copyright. This is just insane.

[rlitchfield]

The following was the response and my original letter sent to my representatives. I obviously made a mistake thinking it was $21 per meg rather than per gig.....anyways...here is the thread.


Dear Mr. Litchfield,

Thank you for your email.

To be subject to a levy, media must be capable of being used for private
copying and proven to be ordinarily used for this purpose. Currently,
levies are applied to audiocassettes, MiniDiscs, CD-R/RW and CD-R/RW
Audio (a specialized form of recordable CD intended for use only with
audio recording equipment). CPCC has now asked that the Copyright Board
also permit it to begin collecting a levy on recordable DVD, MP3
players, removable flash memory and removable micro hard drives.

It seems clear that MP3 players are devices used primarily, even
exclusively, to copy recorded music. Some MP3 players use removable
memory. It is for these reasons that CPCC is requesting a levy on
removable memory used in MP3 players (electronic memory cards, flash
memory and removable micro hard drives).

I hope you find this information helpful.

Sincerely,
Alison Thompson
Collection and Enforcement Associate

----Original Message-----
From: David Basskin [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 9:17 PM
To: Robert Litchfield
Subject: Re: Tax on CompactFlash cards, SD cards


Dear Mr. Litchfield:

I have forwarded your correspondence to the Canadian Private Copying
Collective for a direct response, but I just thought I should correct a
point right away: we're seeking a levy on hard drives used in
music-specific devices on the basis of $21 per GIGAbyte, not per
megabyte.
That's a thousandfold difference. Might I refer you to the actual filed
Tariffs? You can read them in Adobe Acrobat (pdf) format on the
Copyright
Board's web site at
http://www.cb-cda.gc.ca/tariffs/proposed/c09032002-b.pdf or CPCC would
be
happy to send you a copy.

In any event, CPCC will be responding to you on a formal basis. Thank
you
for sharing your views with us.

David A. Basskin
Director
CPCC
Toronto, Canada



>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
|
|
|
| Subject: Tax on CompactFlash cards, SD cards
|

>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------|




I have recently read that you are looking at imposing a new tax that
would
be equivalent to $21 per megabyte on compactflash cards and SD cards.
My
understanding is that this is to recoup costs related to illegal copying
of
music onto these medias. I am an owner of a number of devices that use
this medium including digital cameras, none of which is used for music.
I
own approximately 1 gigabytes worth of media and which comes to about
$2,100 worth of extra costs you are trying to get from me. This is
obviously extreme.

Living in Quebec, I already pay extremely high taxes both to the
provincial
and federal governments, adding a tax to my digital camera memory is
obviously a little extreme.

Please consider my situation and many others like mine that would be
seriously damaged by a move like this.

Thank you,
Robert Litchfield

[Jason Dunn]

The following was the response and my original letter sent to my representatives. I obviously made a mistake thinking it was $21 per meg rather than per gig


True, but let's consider that $21 per gig. Once they're able to tax the hard drive on an MP3 player, what's next? Laptops? Desktops? A 100 gig hard drive would have $2100 in taxes added to it. And you can bet your ass they'll try and do it too - these guys live on another planet, because if they used blank CD's to back up data, they'd understand how utterly evil this proposal is. :evil: :evil: :evil:

[Jason Dunn]

My own correspondence with them thus far. I should warn y'all, I was only pulling my punches a little bit. :twisted: First, my initial email to Basskin:

********

Basskin,

After reading this article:

http://www.canadianbusiness.com/xta-asp/storyview.asp?viewtype=browse&tpl=browse_frame&vpath=/2002/04/15/column/45225.html

I'm shocked that your organization would even ATTEMPT to implement such an insulting and costly law. Canadians are taxed enough as it is - we don't need to pay even more for the things we buy. You and your organization are morally bereft, corrupt puppets of the music studios, opting to screw hard working Canadians to put a few more dollars in the pockets of the rich music studios that certainly don't need any more money.

I've personally emailed every Calgary MP, every TV station in Alberta, as well as posting news about this to the 15,000 people who visit my technology web site every day - with any luck, this asinine proposal will be obliterated completely.

How you can possibly justify stealing money from hard working Canadians is beyond me - nor do I know how you go to sleep at night doing this for a living.

Sincerely,
Jason Dunn

********

Then they responded with this:

********

Mr. Dunn,

Thank you for your email.

I would like to clarify that the private copying levy is not a tax. Unlike a tax, which is collected by government, the levy is collected by CPCC and paid to copyright holders.

The purpose of the levies is to compensate authors, performers and makers of prerecorded music for private copying of that music. Under Canada’s Copyright Act, it is legal for individuals to make copies of recorded music for their own personal use. It is legal precisely because there is, by law, a levy on the media typically used for these purposes.

Sincerely,

Alison Thompson
Collection and Enforcement Associate

********

I then responded with this:

********

Thank you for responding Alison. I didn't believe anyone in your organization would have the intestinal fortitude to do so.

I would like to clarify that the private copying levy is not a tax. Unlike a tax, which is collected by government, the levy is collected by CPCC and paid to copyright holders.

I define a tax as something that I, as a consumer, have no choice but to pay. When I buy gas, I have to pay the tax that the government has placed upon that product. That makes a certain amount of sense, because gas can only be used for one purpose. Today, when I buy a blank CD to put a PowerPoint presentation onto (get that? I'm not putting music on it!), I have to pay extra for that blank CD because of what you and your organization has done. If that's not a tax, what is? It doesn't matter that you're not a government agency, or whose pocket it's going into - you're forcing me to pay more for a product on the ASSUMPTION that I'm doing something illegal.

How would you feel if, while pulling out of your driveway in your car, a police officer walked up and gave you a $100 speeding ticket? "But officer," you'd say, "I haven't even started driving yet - how could I be speeding?". The officer would reply "You might speed, and since we might not be there to catch you, we're going to assume you're guilty and give you a ticket." How would you react to that Allison? That's exactly what your organization is doing to everyone in Canada who buys a blank CD.

WHY DO YOU ASSUME WE'RE ALL CRIMINALS?

You're also putting the same tax on blank DVD-Rs - you'll kill the industry before it even starts! Who can afford to put their home movies onto a DVD if they cost $10 each?

As for being "paid to copyright holders", I don't believe that for a second. You're paying the music companies, not the musicians themselves. You're organization is nothing more than a group of puppets for the big music companies to play with.

I'm a musician, and a published author - I make part of my living off of royalties. I have zero respect for what you or your group does. I am not a criminal, and I reset being called one.

- Jason R. Dunn

********

[zylark]

I typically find that 2 out of 10 CD I burn won't be written to correctly. Will this enable me to get a 20% refound on the extra expense due to this piracy-compensation "tax" if I could document this in anyway?

Luckily I don't live in Canada.

Could be worse though, I could live in, say, Palestine where I hear food is a shortage these days. Not to mention the bullets flying around...

And Yes, I know, I need a new CD-R drive :)

[Jason Dunn]

Could be worse though, I could live in, say, Palestine where I hear food is a shortage these days. Not to mention the bullets flying around...


Absolutely. In the grand scheme of things, this is irrelevant. Yet, somehow after paying a large lump of income tax recently, I have no desire to be taxed any further. :-)

[DrtyBlvd]

Jeez Jase.

Pop my buble why don't ya - here I am thinking we have it bad therefore everyone else must have it better, and what do you know?

Guess I better cancel the recent application for an immi permit huh?

:roll:

[jlp]

[...]idiot leaders are an international problem :)


[...]In fact, any media is at risk in this "war". Once this bill passes, it's just a matter of time until ALL media is levied (it's happening already, due to the original bill being passed).

Aceze


The French gorvernment already passed a law to collect these taxes on CDs, etc. Not only removable media, but also the MP3 players as well as they contain memory too. And now they are seriously discussing (not only thinking) about taxing desktop, laptop and you-name-it fixed harddrives too.

This is totally insane.

Now for VCR or audio tapes, why do we have to pay "taxes" in the first place? Have you ever rented a movie and copy it to a blank tape? That would justify collecting a "tax".

But most of us, if not all of us, tape TV shows and movies that the TV stations already paid royalties for. In fact we ultimately pay for every movie aired on TV as consumers who buy goods advertized on TV; and these advertisement dollars are the basis to the TV station budget to pay the movies royalties.

And then we pay it a second time when we tape these movies onto "taxed" blank tapes. Talk about getting double taxed here!!

But wait, if you think you're only taxed twice, think again:

In fact we pay royalties MANY times:
1st) when we go see a movie in the movie theatre
2nd) when we buy t-shirts, pencils, collectable pix, models, binders, breakfast cereals, bags, etc. that bear the movie logo or images of the copyrighted characters
3rd) when we rent the movie
4th) when we buy the movie
5th) when we watch the movie on TV
6th) when we buy the CD from the movie
7th) when we buy a blank tape to tape the movie from TV
8th) when we buy special compilations/bundles that already include one or more of the movies we already own
9th) when we bought the video tape and now the DVD comes out and we get it too
10th) when the tape we bought gets stuck in a defective VCR or the tape wears out or the cassette is broken (pets, kids, drop, etc.) and we get a new one.

So we all pay royalties up to 10 times for EVERY MOVIE that we see!!!

Maybe more if I forgot something!!!

Food for thought:
a) When a car manufacturer (or whatever other goods) wants to sell their new car, they make a videoclip of it. Then they pay the TV stations to air it: it's called advertisement
b) When the audio/movie industry want to sell their CD/DVD they make a videoclip of it; same thing. Then they have the TV stations pay THEM to air it: it's still advertisement, yet they call it royalties!!!

Well, France beheaded their king (roy in old French; see what I mean: roy, royalties) because of treachery; I think we should do that again to those who betray us, spoiling us, depriving us of our legal rights!!! (Beheading them morally that is).

Let's fight for our Freedom!!! Freedom, Equality and Brotherhood (Friendship)!!! is the French motto.

Note that the word "royalty" comes from the French "royauté" (kinghood) which pertains to the king's privileges (rights, taxes, etc.)

[karen]

http://www.canadianbusiness.com/xta-asp/storyview.asp?viewtype=browse&tpl=browse_frame&vpath=/2002/04/15/column/45225.html

By the prickling of my thumbs, something wicked this way comes! If you're reading this, and you live in Canada, this will put you in a bad mood.



As the person who brought this to Jason's attention, I'd like to update you on some other major players who will be voicing oppostion to this levy:

- the Canadian Information Processing Society (CIPS -www.cips.ca)
- the Information Technology Association of Canada (ITAC www.itac.ca)
- the Canadian Advanced Technology Alliance (CATA)

Unfortunately, to be an official objector costs around $400,000 CDN, as one must hirer professional help (lawyers) to participate in the process. Neither ITAC nor CIPS have those sorts of resources. That's why it is SO important for individuals to voice their opinions on this unjust levy.

Also, there are some online petitions that every Canadian here should sign. Here's one:

- http://www.sycorp.com/levy/

However, read, dead tree letters will carry the most weight. Please take the time to write as many letters as you can.

[karen]

It's important that any communication that opposes these increased levies focus on the fact that this levy shouldn't be so high for media that has more uses that just music pirating. The copyright board has already approved the levies. What is still to be decided is the amount of levy on each type of media.

Opinions that just oppose any levy will for the most part be ignored. The right to impose the levy is already a done deal. A strong opposition for the amount of the levies is what is needed today.

Even though I believe that this levy unjustly benefits the recording industry, it's important to focus on the type of input the board and the CCPC is wanting right now - how much should be charged for each media type.

[karen]

As a Canadian resident who uses recordable media for backup, storage of intellectual property that I own, transferring files to other devices, storage of data and applications, and other legal, non-music copying, I oppose the proposed increase in levies on media that DOES NOT have a primary purpose of music copying.

This increase in levy should not be thrust upon law-abiding Canadians, nor should the CCPC be allowed to collect this increase instead of moving the cost of legal and illegal copying onto its own product. By implementing this increase on media used primarily for other reasons, the music industry is allowed to artifically support lower prices on their products by moving the burden onto products that aren't primarily used for anything related to their business. This is wrong, very wrong and sets a terrible precendent for other such schemes.

What's next? A levy on my laptop hard drive? A levy on my printer because someone, somewhere uses it to make copies of other's material?

This increased levy, which can inflate the price of some media by 100%, is unjust and assumes a use of this media that I don't use it for. It is unfair and anti-Canadian for the Board to pursue this cash grab by the recording industry.

The recording industry needs to find a solution to their financial problems that doesn't involve 'taxing' legitimate non-music uses.

Karen

[DrtyBlvd]

:?:

Bit of a 'left wing' thought (No pun intended), but will everyone who is able not just shop somewhere that the taxes are not applied? I know Inet transactions across border are supposed to be taxed, if applicable, but even here in the good old tax centre of the world (IMHO of course :evil: ) I can receive tax free very easily?

And, more to the point, with people who do actually use their media for such copyright infringement purposes, is the industry not still going to be losing a shed load? I am a cynic at heart and believe it all to do with the policies of politics ultimately - will taxes raise on the media industry somewhere in the future?

We are in the process of being stung, and I mean BADLY, by the new car tax laws - not something that applies to the US and Canada I believe, or not as much anyway, on account of the majority of individuals here having cars as company benefits - in essence the tax rate is set on the emissions of the cars, based then upon the new list price - don't quote me but I seem to remember seeing somewhere that a £50K (~$75K) car with high emissions meant a tax liability of somewhere around the £18K (~$27K) mark - 8O

Pennies on CDRs put into perpspective? Maybe, maybe.