Canadians Overpay Millions on Copyright Tax

An anonymous reader writes "Michael Geist has up a post on his site about the Copyright Board of Canada's decision last week on the controversial private copying levy, which functions like a tax on blank media. The good news? The Board reduced the levy on certain media such as CD-R Audio, CD-RW Audio, and MiniDiscs. The bad news? The millions of dollars in overpayment from these media will go into the pockets of manufacturers, importers, and retailers, not back to the consumers who paid in the first place. 'In addition to the overpayment issue, the decision contains several interesting revelations ... the decision sheds some light on the CPCC's enforcement program. The collective has aggressively targeted those parties that do not pay the levy, with 21 claims over the past three years. In fact, the enforcement program has been so effective that the Board found that concerns about the emergence of a gray or black market for blank CDs has not materialized.'"

Nothing mentioned about DVD-R

[sayfawa (1099071)]

So I wonder if there's no tax on DVD-Rs. And if not, why not?

Last year I got 100 DVD-Rs for $25. At 25 for 4.7GB there's not much incentive to even buy CD-Rs if the tax alone is 21 for 700MB.

Re:

[by Anonymous Coward]

Tax is on ALL blank media. Because if you are using blank media, it's piracy!!

Re:

[faloi (738831)]

The current levy only applies to audio media (from what I'm reading). While you can put a lot of MP3's on a DVD, that's not (in the eyes of the board) what primarily goes on there. Chances are another levy will be put on blank video recording media given the chance.

Re:Nothing mentioned about DVD-R

[CastrTroy (595695)]

First, it's a levy, not a tax, and no, there aren't any levies on DVD-+*/^R's. I think the reasoning behind this is that you can't copy a DVD because of all that CSS stuff (nevermind how easy it is to remove). You can often find a spindle of DVDs for cheaper than a spindle of CDs, because there is no levy.

Copying Has Nothing To do With CSS

[Inhibit (105449)]

CSS doesn't prevent you from copying DVDs.. wherever did you get that funny notion? It simply prevents you from playing them on unauthorized players (one's that haven't paid the play tax) or in unauthorized zones.

People over in the PRC press out massive quantities of DVD copies, CSS included, *all the time*.

Re:

[Teddy Beartuzzi (727169)]

*He* doesn't have the funny notion, our stupid government does. Because yes, he is correct, they don't charge the levy on the larger, more useful dvd blanks, so they obviously think they're "different" some how.

Re:

[crontabminusell (995652)]

All "levy" means as a verb (in this case) is "to collect". "Levy" as a noun is whatever is being collected. As the Canadian government [cb-cda.gc.ca] is issuing the "levy" on behalf of their versions of the **IA, I wouldn't argue with it being called a tax. Also, from my link to the Copyright Board of Canada website:

The Board concluded in the decision issued today that recordable and rewritable DVDs, removable memory cards (such as SmartMedia, CompactFlash and Secure Digital Memory cards) and removable micro hard d

Someone clearly does not understand

[Timesprout (579035)]

the economics of why gray/black markets form, or were they just being deliberately disingenuous?

Back in the hands of the consumers...?

[suv4x4 (956391)]

The millions of dollars in overpayment from these media will go into the pockets of manufacturers, importers, and retailers, not back to the consumers who paid in the first place.

Right, always finding something bad even in a good news, aren't you Mike.

How on Earth would this "return in the hands of the consumers" be organized. How do you imagine the logistics of such an outcome. Maybe you bring your receipts and they give you 1 cents for each disk or something?

What they did is the best they could do. Manifa

Re:Back in the hands of the consumers...?

[SamAdam3d (818241)]

I can imagine it. How about this: since Canada has public health care, why don't they use the money to fund that? Then the people, who paid for the CDs, will get their money back!

Brilliant!

Re:

[yabos (719499)]

In that case, who cares if other people get the benefit from it? I sure don't. The health care system needs more money plain and simple and if they gave it away it's better than remaining in the hands of a few old men.

Re:

[yabos (719499)]

Also, who cares if the RIAA members become sick, we're talking about Canada, duh.

Re:Back in the hands of the consumers...?

[vorpal^ (114901)]

I'm Canadian, and the majority of Canadians I've spoken to don't have the (seemingly) common US mentality about health care being about the individual. (e.g. "Why should I have to pay money to treat someone who overdoses on heroin?") Here, health care is viewed collectively as being about the people, and yes, some people require much more of the health care dollars than others, but in the end, it brings us a better society as a whole, which benefits us all.

Copyright jubilee

[nbauman (624611)]

How on Earth would this "return in the hands of the consumers" be organized. How do you imagine the logistics of such an outcome. Maybe you bring your receipts and they give you 1 cents for each disk or something?

How about a copyright moratorium for a month?

In order to compensate consumers for overpaying, we can download and copy anything we want royalty-free.

If it works out well, we can do it every year.

Re:Copyright jubilee

[suv4x4 (956391)]

How about a copyright moratorium for a month?

In order to compensate consumers for overpaying, we can download and copy anything we want royalty-free.

If it works out well, we can do it every year.

Don't forget: copyright isn't your enemy, RIAA/MPAA and organisations like them who abuse copyright, are.

As someone who produces something worthwhile myself, I don't want everything I did copied around for a month, thanks.

Re:

[mpe (36238)]

What they did is the best they could do. Manifacturers/retailers/importers get back the money and they can pass the savings on to their future customers. Of course they won't, since it's not how business works, but that's a completely different matter.

Since this "functions like a tax" then maybe the better thing to have done with it would have been to give it to the Canadian Government, like other taxes...

Re:

[aussie_a (778472)]

Right, always finding something bad even in a good news, aren't you Mike.

Well here in Australia we have centrelink which pays out money to various people due to various things (single-mother's benefits, old-age pension, dole, etc). If the government overpays then they take it out of the money they owe in the future. I don't know why the Canadian government doesn't do the same in this case. Oh, that's right. Its because the money goes to corporations not private individuals. I guess they're more important.

How on Earth would this "return in the hands of the consumers" be organized.

Pay it back to the government who then puts it to use in public services.

simple

[nanosquid (1074949)]

How on Earth would this "return in the hands of the consumers" be organized.

By suspending the levy entirely until the overpayments have been made up for.

So, maybe this IS the solution?

[Maury Markowitz (452832)]

So we pay a little more for CD's, and that money goes to the copyright holders (we hope).

Umm, maybe this isn't such a bad idea? After all, there is a TV Tax in the UK for the same reason. Everyone complains about it, but not *that* much.

Maury

Re:So, maybe this IS the solution?

[Grendel70 (1000350)]

As I recall, when this levy on recordable media was put into effect, the purpose was to ensure that the artists would get the money to offset loss of revenue due to copying of recorded works. As such, I've never really had a problem with paying a few extra cents per blank disk providing the collected revenue went to the right place. (Of course it the system didn't address the difference between media purchased for burning data etc. but then, no system is perfect.) I find it interesting that nowhere is there any mention of giving the surplus cash to the people that deserve it.

Re:

[kent_eh (543303)]

Damn, where are my mod points when I need them.

The recording industry suits got the levy put in to compensate the "poor starving artists", yet the money ends up in the pockets of the same industry people, and not the artists.
Is anyone surprised...
Anyone?
anyone??
Buhller?

At least the existence of the levy gives us Canadians tacit approval to download.

Re:So, maybe this IS the solution?

[Trails (629752)]

"it is not for us to determine who, in the supply chain leading to the final consumer, will be the ultimate beneficiary of these refunds."
- CPCC

Re:

[dave420 (699308)]

It's not a tax but a license. The money goes to the Licensing authority, which then passes it on to a company which then spends it to make more programming. It has nothing to do with copyright.

Re:So, maybe this IS the solution?

[SuperMario666 (588666)]

Which copyright holders? Who gets to pick? Do we really want government (even the Canadian government) deciding who is rewarded for producing content?

Re:So, maybe this IS the solution?

[suv4x4 (956391)]

So we pay a little more for CD's, and that money goes to the copyright holders (we hope).

Umm, maybe this isn't such a bad idea? After all, there is a TV Tax in the UK for the same reason. Everyone complains about it, but not *that* much.

Maury

Oh even better, it's a great idea. Pure capitalism economics forces in place.

So you buy blank CD-s and copy hard metal all day long, and the fee you paid goes to... Britney Spears' come-back album. Since according to "statistics" she has much larger market share than anyone.

Of course it's even worse than this, since right now the actual singers don't see a single cent from the blank media fee. It goes back to RIAA (and equivalent in other countries) and the labels.

What solution?

[Opportunist (166417)]

We pay that "copyright mafiaa tax" too, but that doesn't mean we actually may copy anything. We still are not allowed to remove or circumvent copying restrictions to actually execute our right to create a backup, we still have no right to actually burn copyrighted content on those media, so I wonder what this "tax" is based on.

In fact, we pay for nothing.

Re:

[vertinox (846076)]

So we pay a little more for CD's, and that money goes to the copyright holders (we hope).

Why would you pay copyright holders anything when you don't use the blank CDRs to copy copyrighted material?

What if you simply used those CDs to burn Linux distro's or make fair use backups? Why should you pay the tax?

Re:

[yabos (719499)]

The courts ruled downloading was legal but sharing is illegal because you are breaking copyright by providing the files. This is exactly how it should be. God only knows how much money I've had to pay to these greedy bastards. They even put the levy on portable music players.

Interesting side note: I was listening to the radio once and they were asking the question "How much music on portable music players is actually paid for?" The answer was around 2% and the rest was pirated or ripped from CDs.

What about the artists?

[pembo13 (770295)]

You know, those guys they always talk about as the losers of piracy.

The collective?

[hexed_2050 (841538)]

The collective has aggressively targeted..

Who wrote this? Am I going to be assimilated?

h

Will trade CD-Rs for Meds.

[Hohlraum (135212)]

Lets make a deal.

License to pirate! Whee!

[Winterblink (575267)]

Since I'm overpaying via the levy, maybe they won't mind that I just never buy a DVD or CD ever again and just pirate them all? I mean seriously, the fact that they are taxing me on that no matter what I used the media for (backups anyone?) really chafes.

The grey Market in Canada (Quebec specificly)

[dforreal (1078047)]

The Grey Market in Canada, at least here in Montreal is pretty weak for any sort of goods. People don't seem to grasp the concept of depreciation and try to sell used goods at new prices and aren't open to negotiation. Considering the inflated retail prices relative to the US (which is only a half hour away)and insanely high sales tax (15%) one would think that the grey market would thrive.

Once again

[MikeRT (947531)]

The most efficient mechanism for allocating resources is the free market, not collectives or the government!

Re:

[Opportunist (166417)]

Free market? Where do you live?

Next you want freedom for all and a government representing the people. Jeesh, the youth of today...

"black market for blank CDs has not materialized"

[unity100 (970058)]

just wait for some illegal immigrants to read what you just said.

Set us up?

[Himring (646324)]

Michael Geist has up a post on his site

He set us up the post?

If only the Dutch rightsgroup would open this up

[MadJo (674225)]

If I'm not mistaken, "Stichting 'De Thuiskopie'" was asked to open up the books last year, they still have to do that.
Right now, it's a very murky picture.

We pay a copyright levy on CDs, cassettes, videotapes and DVDs (and we have a 0-levy on mp3-players, meaning that there is technically a levy on mp3players and portable storage devices, but it's 0. They wanted to increase this amount earlier this year, but that was thwarted (thankfully))
But we have absolutely no idea how many is being received by that org

Mixed thoughts

[Fastolfe (1470)]

I have mixed thoughts on this. This levy was charged to the manufacturers/importers/retailers, right? The consumer made a free market exchange here. They thought the price was fair for the product, and they paid for it. Why should consumers get reimbursed?

If the government retroactively reduced corporate income taxes for last year, should consumers expect checks in the mail for all of the purchases they made? These are all business costs that factor into the price.

Now don't get me wrong: I completely disagree with the purpose of the levy to begin with. But I'm not sure how consumers must necessarily be the ones to benefit from this. Kudos to the corporations that do pass their relief onto their customers, but I don't understand how people are jumping to the conclusion that there's a legal obligation to do that.

It might have made more sense for them to make the adjustment, and simply deduct it from future sales. Consumers get "reimbursed" by virtue of (hopefully) lower prices in the near future, until the surplus is exhausted.

As a Canadian

[DaveCBio (659840)]

May I say welcome to the nanny state! I am all for out healthcare system, but the government in this country goes way too far to try and prop up our "culture" and things like "multiculturalism". It goes from annoying to downright infuriating knowing my tax dollars prop up crap like this. It's just another bureaucracy that is useless and yet is held up as some kind of icon for social responsibility like the gun registry.

Well, get your money's worth

[Bullfish (858648)]

And download enough to cover the overpayment. Consider it like a credit.

Re:As a record store owner.

[dattaway (3088)]

Sounds like a good business, but who is going to buy a HUGE CD when alternatives like SD chips are much more portable and more resistant to abuse? Who buys cassette tapes anymore? Is the decline of reel to reel tapes and vinyl due to piracy?

You need to have a good business plan. Don't blame others for your lack of technological vision.

Re:As a record store owner.

[DrRobert (179090)]

Sales of vinyl have been increasing year-over-year for the last 10 years according to several music mags. It is a small percentage, but it is increasing.

Re:As a record store owner.

[dattaway (3088)]

Sales of vinyl have been increasing year-over-year for the last 10 years according to several music mags. It is a small percentage, but it is increasing.

True, but I haven't noticed a change in the number of joggers running down the street with phonograph players in their hands.

Cut & Paste troll alert...

[advocate_one (662832)]

n/t

Re:

[slughead (592713)]

They have fought the War on Drugs with skill, so why not the War on Piracy?

Why not? Because losing 1 social 'war' is bad enough.

I do agree with the part of your post about punishing pirates, but I don't think it goes far enough. I think we should incarcerate them for 10 years in a windowless room, then suddenly let them walk out of prison, but as they walk out there's a trap door and they fall into a gigantic meat grinder which slowly grinds their flesh and bones into cat food over the course of a couple da

Re:

[Dunbal (464142)]

Old copypasta is olllllld, troll.

Re:

[pegr (46683)]

Beautiful! Is there a matinee this weekend? I'd like to bring the kids...

Re:

[Opportunist (166417)]

I've seen this note being circulated for, I think, 5 years now. It doesn't get better with time, actually, it gets more and more pathetic. But even as a cookie-cutter template "think of the small record store owners" tear-squeezer, lemme take this opportunity to answer. Once, and for all.

First and foremost, when you invest in a dying business, you're the only one to blame if it goes south. The CD market is dwindling. Copying may play a role, but the bigger problem is that music and clothing, which has been

An Alternative perhaps...

[Ajehals (947354)]

Here is an alternative - Ive been seeing the origional one pop up so regularily that I am surprised no one else has messed around with it yet... - I had to... appologies to the copyright holder of this much used piece, this derviative is intended as a parody...:

My business faces ruin. Software sales have dropped through the floor. People aren't buying half as many products as they did just a year ago. Revenue is down and costs are up. My store has survived for years, but I now face the prospect of bankruptcy. Every day I ask myself why this is happening.

I bought the store about 12 years ago. It was one of those little software stores that sell well known, major software releases that everyone uses, even the people that don't them. I decided that to grow the business I'd need to aim for a wider demographic, the family market. My store specialised in family software - stuff that the whole family could use. I don't sell sick stuff like violent games or gambling simulations , and I'm proud to have one of the most extensive education sections that I know of.

The business strategy worked. People flocked to my store, knowing that they (and their children) could safely purchase software that worked without coming accross profanity or violent games. Over the years I expanded the business and took on more clean-cut and friendly employees. It took hard work and long hours but I had achieved my dream - owning a profitable business that I had built with my own hands, from the ground up. But now, this dream is turning into a nightmare.

Every day, fewer and fewer customers enter my store to buy fewer and fewer titles. Why is no one buying software? Are people not interested in compters? Do people prefer to use pen and paper, outsource;? I don't know. But there is one, inescapable truth - Free and Open Source Software (F/OSS) is mostly to blame. The statistics speak for themselves - seven in ten webservers now run F/OSS. On The Internet, you can find and download replacements for thousands of dollars worth of software in just minutes. It has the potential to destroy the software industry, from lower management, to upper management to stores like my own. Before you point to the supposed "economic downturn", I'll note that the book store just across from my store is doing great business. Unlike software, it's harder to make F/OSS books and distribute them over The Internet.

A week ago, an unpleasant experience with these F/OSS'er communists gave me an idea. In my store, I overheard a teenage patron talking to his friend.

"Dude, I'm going to put Debian on my PC instead of this Vista junk, I'll download it right away."

"Yeah, dude, that's really lete [sic], you'll get lots of respect."

I was fuming. So they were out to destroy the software industry from right under my nose? Fat chance. When they came past the counter to leave, I grabbed the little shit by his shirt. "So...you're going to use unamerican, communist F/OSS replacements to good honest god-fearing proprietry software and tell your friends about it, punk?" I asked him in my best Clint Eastwood/Dirty Harry voice.

"Uh y-yeh." He mumbled, shocked.

"That's it. What's your name? You're blacklisted. Now take yourself and your little bitch friend out of my store - and don't come back." I barked. Cravenly, they complied and scampered off.

So that's my idea - a national blacklist of F/OSS'ers. If somebody cannot obey the basic rules of society, then they should be excluded from society. If F/OSS'ers want to give stuff away for free, with the source code and divert cash from the software industry, then the software industry should exclude them. It's that simple. One strike, and you're out - no reputable software store will allow you to buy another title. If the F/OSS'ers can't buy the software to begin with, then they won't be able to make alternatives and give them away free over The Internet, will they? It's no different to doctors blacklisting poor people from access to non-emergency medical care.