German Court Sets Copyright Tax on New PCs 428
graemee pastes: "The District Court of Munich has ordered Fujitsu Siemens Computers to pay a copyright levy on new PCs. The landmark decision, announced on Thursday, ends a nearly two-year dispute between the largely Germany-based computer maker and the country's VG Wort rights society, which has sought compensation for digital copying. VG Wort had filed a suit against Germany's largest PC maker, Fujitsu Siemens, seeking 30 euro (US$41) for each new computer sold in the country. The court agreed to a 12 euro copyright levy."
Independent labels and copyright taxes (Score:4, Interesting)
Sounds like a bargain! (Score:5, Interesting)
You pay tobacco tax and you're legally allowed to smoke it.
So if you pay a "digital copying tax" on a computer, you must be allowed to do digital copying on it, surely?
Out of curiosity, if you built a pc from scratch, which component gets this tax, or is it split up between all of them ?
Parts? (Score:5, Interesting)
As assinine as this is overall, I would much rather pay a $50 tax on any computer than have the media industries completely destroy or cripple beyond recognition the internet and anything remotely interesting that computers can do.
Re:Sounds like a bargain! (Score:1, Interesting)
Stichting Thuiskopie (dutch) [cedar.nl]
Logically, yes... (Score:3, Interesting)
However, in order to make a digital copy, or a copy of anything, you don't need to pay anything. Nothing, no tax, zilch. Assuming, of course, that you already own the source material you're copying.
I just don't see how you could justify a tax for copying, because you're either going to be copying illegally obtained material (in which case you can't really tax it, because it would legitimise the crime - you really can't tax something which is illegal to start with), or you're going to be copying something you own already (transferring an LP of yours to CD, recording your own work to a CD), or something that you have permission to copy (GPL files etc.)
It just doesn't work, and doesn't make sense. Perhaps somebody in Germany will follow Canada's example, and scrap it. Soon.
Re:Sounds like a bargain! (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, that's the point. In Germany, copying for private purposes is explicitly allowed by law. There are many court cases setting the limits, of course. However, the "Privatkopie" right is quite broad, and it does include making a few (the generally agreed limit is 5 or 6 in total) copies for friends.
Re:Free downloads in Germany.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Pay up, but don't you dare make copies! (Score:4, Interesting)
I think this is really a fine display of greed. Make everyone pay but give nothing in return.
Seperation of powers? (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm surprised that people aren't more upset by the fact that you had here a court creating law. While on the face of it I think the ruling is bogus, I'd be a little bit more upset that judiciary just created a new tax, something that is clearly the job of a legislative body. They've basically usurped the process by which a law is passed, and all the checks and balances built into the system.
European community / workaround (Score:2, Interesting)
Here in france we have the right of "Private copy" but since 1-2 years we have a tax on every kind of media allowing storage of music (CD/DVD, HardDisk, FloppyDisk, Memory Cards, ...) The reason is a compensation of the loose of profit generated by the "private copy" right allowed by law.
Actually European Laws permit us to buy these taxed stuff elsewhere in Europe without paying the french tax if and only if the equivalent tax is paid by the provider in his country. The point is that German people can buy their computer in another country to bypass the tax as french people can buy their blank media in Germany or England where there's less or no tax on blank media
Re:Logically, yes... (Score:3, Interesting)
As an amusing side note, and an example of sticking it to the man, we had a local drug dealer here who got caught by the police, and sent to jail. The tax department wanted to tax him on his ill gotten income, and this guy, enterprising fellow that he was decided that if they were going to tax him he could claim a deduction for a deal which went sour and lost him $2,000,000. The tax department took him to court and lost.
This needs to be exposed. (Score:5, Interesting)
And people will ask questions about it. Then you explain it (in the FAQ or a brochure) and point people toward the government.
Re:May I be the first to... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Germanic vs. Roman law (Score:2, Interesting)
Strict liability - Did everything possible to prevent the result that happened, but will be held liable anyway
And this "strict liability" is what has scared some people away from writing songs at all. Learn why [slashdot.org]
Re:This makes sense, this is good, stop ranting (Score:3, Interesting)
A charge such as this *assumes* that every person that owns a PC is going to use it to make copies (legal, private, or not) of media to which they do not own the copyright, *and* that their is some obligation on their part to pre-compensate those who would claim damages as a result. Neither of those is true in any sane society.
May I be the first to... (Score:2, Interesting)
They are effectively taxing on the basis of potential, rather than executing their obvious duties as lawmakers in overhauling the copyright laws made obsolete by ubiquitous technology. Not only is this entirely against the public interest -- the very foundation of the copyright institution -- but, it is, also, taxation which neither funds public infrastructure nor implements a public service. This is entirely unethical, morally bankrupt, and represents an astounding and inexcusable level of incompetence after ignorance. What manner of deliberation would not lead to the conclusion that this half-headed logic opens up a Pandora's Box, short of none?
Using potential infraction of the law, or even the past infractions of a vast multitude, as a compelling basis upon which to preemptively adjudicate for any crime, which may occur in the future, is maddeningly ludicrous.
Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden...
Re:This makes sense, this is good, stop ranting (Score:4, Interesting)
[...]
[...] As somebody who has lived in Germany [...]
How long ago did you left? In the meantime, things got worse regarding copyrights... you know, corruption by lobbies, masked as 'international pressure', 'germany has to stay competitive' (wtf!) etc...
The right to a 'Privatkopie' only exists on paper now. The new copyright law implemented a few years ago specifically forbids cracking copy ''protections''. What if you want to make an allowed copy of such media?
Germany's attorney general Brigitte Zypries said that there is no right to personal copies in copyright law ("Das Urheberrecht kennt kein Recht auf Privatkopie", see e.g. this German c't computer magazine article [heise.de]).
IMHO, such laws show how corrupt our goverment became.
Interesting opininions on slashdot (comparing copyright violation to drugs and to rape) let me strongly suspect, as another poster in a previous thread said very well: 'meme injection by *AA astroturfing agents'.
So now its legal to download! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:This sets up a nasty loop (Score:3, Interesting)
It's like saying that the city _lowering_ the speed limit in certain areas is only encouraging people to break the law in those areas more frequently by speeding.
Get a grip.... the levies are insignificant compared to the impact that other everyday things like inflation would have on the prices anyways.
Although I live in a socialist country, so perhaps I have a higher tolerance for this sort of thing.
Pre-paid fines... (Score:3, Interesting)
By the same logic we should all do some pre-time in jail, because we *may* commit a crime in the future.
Or we could pre-pay some traffic fines, because we *may* speed in the future.
If I'd buy a computer in Germany, and I could honestly say that I will not copy anything illegal, I would refuse to pay this fee.