Basically, its a levy on mp3 players, blank cds, flash drives, etc. Its proposed in canada, but I have a hunch if it goes through, we will see it here in the states. Nothing like a 49 cent tax per blank cd. woohoo. Not to mention the fact that this will totally screw everyone who makes data backups.
Anyone want to start a betting pool to guess how long it will be before the RIAA and MPAA get wind of this idea, and try to put in their own?
Posted by 30thSSNerd (Member # 2155) on :
Oh yeah! Read down to the bottom.
"The Copyright Board decision comes as the Supreme Court of Canada begins a landmark copyright case that will determine whether Internet service providers must pay a tariff for being a conduit for the rampant downloading of free music.
That case, being followed by music companies and servie providers around the world, is expected to last six months."
If our ISP's get slammed then look out! Say goodbye to the golden age of computing folks. I have even heard of an email tarrif being considered at .05 cents an email to compensate Canada Post for their losses since email has been around. Imagine the braindead person who thought of that! Compensating the post office for a service they do not even provide. I figure in about 10 years nothing will be free anymore. You will even get charged for posting a message cuz somehow it will infringe on someones rights. Posted by DanPazich (Member # 1352) on :
There's ALWAYS away around things, especially in the Computer World.Look at all the new technologies with copy protection, file sharing, etc. They're still ripping movies and CD's, and new ways of file sharing are always being developed. There are some pretty nifty hackers out there...now being caught is a different story Posted by KevinA (Member # 139) on :
quote:Originally posted by 30thSSNerd: I have even heard of an email tarrif being considered at .05 cents an email to compensate Canada Post for their losses since email has been around.
That is completely untrue. It's another urban legend.
Posted by FireChicken (Member # 2067) on :
quote:Originally posted by KevinA:
quote:Originally posted by 30thSSNerd: I have even heard of an email tarrif being considered at .05 cents an email to compensate Canada Post for their losses since email has been around.
That is completely untrue. It's another urban legend.
Maybe so, but congress has considered taxing internet purchases, so its not that much of a stretch..
Posted by HTWLSS (Member # 117) on :
None of this matters anymore! As of 10:00 AM this morning, Canada has a new prime minister! In with the new and out with the old! (although I think there's only a few years age difference between them! ) Hello Paul Martin and goodbye Jean Poutine... er... Chretien Kinda interesting to observe this peculiar method of getting a new P.M. (don't ask... ) Great timing too! It was all over the news here this morning that George Bush actually picked up the phone yesterday to call the outgoing Mr. Chretien to wish him good rid... er... to rub his nose... er... to explain that the U.S. was in no way snubbing Canada by declaring that Canadian (as well as French and German) firms were ineligible to bid on the lucrative contracts which will be awarded to companies looking to benefit financially by helping rebuild the Iraqi infrastructure. British, Australian, Italian and Spanish firms however, are sharpening their pencils! In any event, Mr. Martin has publicly stated that one of his first priorities will be to try and patch up the frosty relationship which has evolved between President Bush and the Canadian Prime Minister's Office. Not one to take a back seat and wait for a presidential invite to the Texas White House, rumors are abound in Ottawa that Prime Minister Martin has taken the initiative to begin a new era in American-Canadian relations by inviting President Bush to his luxury ice fishing hut, secretly located somewhere on Canoe Lake, in the wilds of Algonquin Park, less than an hour's flight from the nation's capital. The P.M.'s exclusive hut is known to be equipped with a wood-burning stove and 2 augers... and Canadian engineers are attempting to determine the most efficient and ecologically-friendly method of installing the very first indoor plumbing arrangement in an ice fishing hut for this very significant international visit!! Supplies of firewood, Canadian beer and douGHnuts (there ya go, Art!)will be flown in daily by the Canadian Air Farc... er... Force's crack team of Bush Pilots, as the Navy's fleet of 4 aging Sea King helicopters that are still airworthy, are currently grounded for scheduled maintenance and repairs. Officials on both sides of the 49th parallel are looking forward to a return of the traditionally open and friendly relationship that has been a characteristic trademark of the two countries' history for generations!
Best regardSS,
Elie (it's been a long day! )
Posted by KevinA (Member # 139) on :
quote:Originally posted by FireChicken:
quote:Originally posted by KevinA:
quote:Originally posted by 30thSSNerd: I have even heard of an email tarrif being considered at .05 cents an email to compensate Canada Post for their losses since email has been around.
That is completely untrue. It's another urban legend.
Maybe so, but congress has considered taxing internet purchases, so its not that much of a stretch..
actually it is far fetched. Go ahead and track every damn email and try to make people pay.
yeah right.
Posted by FireChicken (Member # 2067) on :
quote:Originally posted by KevinA:
quote:Originally posted by FireChicken:
quote:Originally posted by KevinA:
quote:Originally posted by 30thSSNerd: I have even heard of an email tarrif being considered at .05 cents an email to compensate Canada Post for their losses since email has been around.
That is completely untrue. It's another urban legend.
Maybe so, but congress has considered taxing internet purchases, so its not that much of a stretch..
actually it is far fetched. Go ahead and track every damn email and try to make people pay.
yeah right.
Just because something is stupid, bizarre, and nearly impossible doesnt mean congress wont try to do it. I remember when they tried to sponsor a bill to ban internet porn, not having any idea what they were trying to do. I've seen senators and congressmen get on TV and talk about wanting to tax internet purchases to increase revenue.
As far as Im concerned, its all a bunch of hooey, but the idiots on the hill will try anything stupid.
Posted by KevinA (Member # 139) on :
charging for email and taxing internet purchases are 2 different things.
Posted by TimeLord (Member # 1389) on :
I find it great to not pay taxes on internet purchases,but why are brick and mortar stores penalized with collecting taxes because they have a real store?
Kind of seams like an unfair[or unequal] business practice.
I have my shop beside a indian reservation,if an indian walks into the store and buys something I have to charge him tax,if he phones me and I deliver it to him on the reservation it is not taxed,just as nonsensical !!!!!!
[ 14. December 2003, 01:33 PM: Message edited by: TimeLord ]
Posted by FireChicken (Member # 2067) on :
quote:Originally posted by KevinA: charging for email and taxing internet purchases are 2 different things.
Yes. I was actually referring to the taxing of internet purchases as not too much of a stretch, not the charging for email, thats even too bizarre for congress, methinks.
Timelord: If I buy something online, and its shipped from somewhere in the state, I do have to pay taxes on it, according to law. If I buy stuff from another state, its cheaper for me. I agree, some of it is stupid.
[ 15. December 2003, 11:13 PM: Message edited by: FireChicken ]
Posted by KevinA (Member # 139) on :
FC, not all states are alike, however If I buy something online within NY I do have to pay sales tax. The reasoning behind everyone paying tax on internet purchases is becasue some states have lost a lot of tax revenue due to internet sales. While I understand that, it's just another way to reach into our pockets to feed a bloated government.
Bite the hand that feeds you.
Posted by FireChicken (Member # 2067) on :
quote:Originally posted by KevinA: FC, not all states are alike, however If I buy something online within NY I do have to pay sales tax. The reasoning behind everyone paying tax on internet purchases is becasue some states have lost a lot of tax revenue due to internet sales. While I understand that, it's just another way to reach into our pockets to feed a bloated government.
Bite the hand that feeds you.
yep! The interesting thing is that some states dont have sales tax (or sales tax as big as texas does). See, we dont have a state-income tax here, so we have rather high sales taxes compared to a lot of other states (or so Im told). Around 8.25% or so is common in most places, slightly lower or higher depending on the municipality, and while some essential food items are tax exempt, you dont get charged for making a lot of money, but you do get charged if you spend it, so its a tax-incentive to be a conservative consumer.
Posted by Elie Garfinkel (Member # 1635) on :
Glad verizon and other companies are upholding the privacy of their customers. I hot a letter fro Comcast Cable a few months ago stating my IP number, client used, file downloaded, etc. IT just stated to delete the file from the hard drive. Nuttin else. Ah well. Posted by FireChicken (Member # 2067) on :
quote:Originally posted by DanPazich: Glad verizon and other companies are upholding the privacy of their customers.
Yeah, same here. Im glad to see steps against steps against piracy!
Very interesting, though, that the courts sided with verison. I wonder how this will affect the lawsuits filed thus far, as well as the ones that have been settled...
I also wonder if the woman who was sued by the RIAA for downloading rock and hip hop tunes had something to do with this decision. for those of you who missed it, a retired school teacher who has an apple computer (that cannot run kazaa), and who only listens to classical music was accused of hosting a lot of rap and rock songs for others to download, turns out that the calculations made to determine IP addresses by RIAA, Kazaa, etc, have a gross margin of error, and they didnt get all the digits right with the person they were going after... as a result, they nailed the school teacher! Of course the lawsuit was thrown out, but it really gives their credibility a serious shake.
Posted by DanPazich (Member # 1352) on :
Here's a good article from the NY Times. It explains things more in detail and what's happening:
"The details of my life are quite inconsequential.... very well, where do i begin? My father was a relentlessly self-improving boulangerie owner from Belgium with low grade narcolepsy and a penchant for buggery. My mother was a fifteen year old French prostitute named Chloe with webbed feet. My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. My childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When I was insolent I was placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds- pretty standard really. At the age of twelve I received my first scribe. At the age of fourteen a Zoroastrian named Vilma ritualistically shaved my testicles. There really is nothing like a shorn scrotum... it's breathtaking- I highly suggest you try it."
"Jonathan Zittrain, co-director of the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Law School, said that the problem for the industry was that "the Internet moves at Internet speed," while law moves at a more deliberate pace. "I don't think anybody had peer-to-peer in mind when the statute was written."
Under the decision, notices sent to an Internet service provider that does store its customers' data, as in a Web site, could still be valid.
Advertisement
The decision will probably have little practical effect on the hundreds of people already sued by the industry. But it changes the music battlefield in many ways.
"For people whose names have been requested but not turned over, this is a reprieve," said Stewart Baker, a lawyer who represents Internet service providers. People who have already settled lawsuits by the industry could conceivably argue that their identities were obtained illegally and demand their money back, but the industry could simply sue all over again, he said.
Mr. Sherman, the recording industry executive, argued that the decision would end up hurting consumers because they would no longer be notified before a lawsuit was filed and they had been given a chance to settle cases.
The procedure that the industry now may have to use is a more conventional process for unmasking anonymous people known as a "John Doe" case that involves filing a lawsuit against the unknown person and then asking a judge to compel Internet service providers to reveal the identity. That process will be more cumbersome and expensive for the music industry and, potentially, for consumers as well. But Ms. Deutsch of Verizon said it "will be much more protective of users' rights."
The recording industry, in the meantime, has begun to pursue other tactics in its fight against file traders. On Tuesday the organization began quietly sending out letters to Internet service providers to propose a new "voluntary notice program" asking that file swappers be notified "without providing us with any identifying information."
The industry appears to be moving away from the expensive and image-tarnishing strategy of suing customers, said Gigi B. Sohn, the president of Public Knowledge, a policy group in Washington. While the threat of lawsuits is unlikely to go away, she said, "I can't imagine that this is going to be the core of their strategy" in the long term. "They know they've got to get people buying music online," and the rise of legitimate services like iTunes from Apple and Rhapsody from RealNetworks suggests that the shift is beginning to occur, she said.
Mr. Sherman said, however, that the goal of the new initiative was simply "expanding the reach" of the industry's enforcement and education efforts, and "not to diminish one over the other."
Representatives of several organizations that have taken a stand against the recording industry stressed that the issue in the case was not whether copyright infringement should be legal.
"People who violate copyright can be punished," said Chris Hanson, senior staff counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, which has fought the industry in its attempt to force Internet service providers, including a number of colleges, to give up the names of file traders with a simple subpoena. "The record industry had argued that the courts were required to be a mindless tool of the industry" under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, he said.
The process that the industry had pursued was far too loose, said Peter Swire, a former privacy official in the Clinton administration who served as an expert witness for Verizon in district court.
Like Wednesday's federal court decision in the case of an accused terrorist, Jose Padilla, he said, the music decision asserts the role of the courts in protecting citizens' rights. "Due process," Mr. Swire said, "is alive and well in the American court system." "
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
In with the new and out with the old! (although I think there's only a few years age difference between them! ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
) Hello Paul Martin and goodbye Jean Poutine... er... Chretien ![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
