Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Music Media Your Rights Online

Australian Gov't Lobbied To Implement Media Levies 248

Posted by timothy from the back-scratching-time dept.
TheScream writes "Screenrights has been activly promoting its proposal for a CD-R DVD-R levy (similar to that implemented in Canada, as previous reported on /.) with a 5 minute interview on popular Australian breakfast television show Today. News.com.au reports that Screenrights and APRA "...want a recording levy of between 3 per cent and 10 per cent..." and includes highly debateable mis-truths such as "Every kid does it, so let's facilitate some standards in the marketplace.""
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Australian Gov't Lobbied To Implement Media Levies More

Australian Gov't Lobbied To Implement Media Levies

Comments Filter:

  • So, "everyone" does it eh? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Big Mark ( 575945 ) on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @07:10PM (#5131025)
    Right. Soon we'll be having taxes levied on shower cubicles in recompense for the copyright violations caused by showerees whistling Hit Me Baby One More Time as they clean themselves.

    -Mark

  • Yeah, ok... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by duffbeer703 ( 177751 )
    ...highly debateable mis-truths such as "Every kid does it, so let's facilitate some standards in the marketplace."

    Nobody buys CDs anymore dude... why do you think new releases are $10.99 again? I don't think the music industry should entitled to having the government place a levy on CDRs, but don't try to argue that music piracy isn't rampant.

    • $10.99 my ass. The last time I saw a new release for $10.99 the year was 1989 and I was buying a casette.

      Unless I totally missed the point and that was a joke?
      • I guess you haven't shopped for CDs lately

        http://www.bestbuy.com/mandm/default.asp?m=254&p ro dtype=music
        http://www.samgoody.com/portal/sg_mus ic_home

    • Re:Yeah, ok... (Score:2, Informative)

      by OzPixel ( 559736 )
      $10.99 ? The article is talking about Australia, new CDs are $30-$32 here. (Which is about $US 16-17, at the current exchange rate).

      David.
    • Nobody buys CDs anymore dude...

      We know, shut up! Everyone walks around with their ipods and equivalent. You can't fit shit on a 650M CD-R, duh! 10 gigs? That's a start. Don't let those numb-nuts at the RIAA know, or they will want to tax hard drives.

      Oh no, too late they already want a moderate ... rate ...of ... $2.50 per gigabyte [vwh.net]. I suppose they just want to tax everything because they can.

      I've never "pirated" a piece of comercial music ever. I have made personal copies and I have shared music with friends, but I've never published someone else's work and I'm not part of any music sharing network. I don't have a problem with other people's music sharing networks, and I refuse to pay becuse some shit head in Holywood thinks they are not making enough money.

  • GO home RIAA (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @07:12PM (#5131035)
    Not to mention the FACT that this is a slap in the face of people that have programs THAT THAY MADE to back up not to mention small bisnesses that require acouting records backed up on to CD.
    Hell I wouldent be to surprosed if Micro$soft isnt suporting this as one of the main ways Linux gets spread is from mates with CDs and net conections (I know meany people that wouldn't have even SEEN Linux becuse thay dont have net conections - or god forbid 56k ones)
    Hell even backing up CDs and Games is alowable by law(I FUCKING wish I backed up operation flashpoint CD got snaped by doggy DVD case (happend to a mate of mine too but he still was in warenty))

    And like it will get to the same people whos information you coping - I dont want to give the RIAA (cuse thats who these people are acting on behalf of) if im backing up say CIV 3! Such a fucking arrogant statment there!

    A halirios consicence will happen if these laws are enacted though - every atomican in the country will buy as meany 100cd silos as thay can :)
    (unfoutunetly this will be interpreted as "lost earnings" by the RIAA assholes)

    • Re:GO home RIAA (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Michael Wardle ( 50363 ) <mikel AT mikelward DOT com> on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @11:53PM (#5132874) Homepage

      Hell even backing up CDs and Games is alowable by law

      Er, no it isn't. You're not allowed to make MP3s of copyrighted works (even if you own a copy), you're not allowed to copy your audio CD on to an audio cassette, you're not allowed to record a TV show (even if it's broadcast on free-to-air), and you're definately not allowed to make "backup" copies of software.

      Perhaps you're getting confused by all this American talk about "fair use". About the only thing I believe we're legally allowed to do is make photocopies of small portions of books for academic purposes. We don't have "fair use" here in Australia in the same way as the USA.

  • legally copy? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by jkcity ( 577735 )
    if they charge you for cd's can you legally copy copyrighted stuff to them?

    anyone know if a charge like this exists in the uk?
    • "if they charge you for cd's can you legally copy copyrighted stuff to them?"

      Ugh is that shitty. Either they charge people that are completely 100% uninvolved, or they double-charge the legitimate customer, all in the hopes of charging the few that haven't paid.

      I was talking with a friend of mine today about a slashdot article a few days ago involving charging ISPs for P2P. He has no interest in MP3s or P2P today. He will develop an interest in it once he starts having to pay for it.

      The real problem here is that the content industries aren't satisfying customer demand. They should be the ones selling MP3s. It baffles me that they're not. Obviously there's a lot of interest there, and instead they're treating everybody like they belong in jail.

      Frankly, I'm against any reparations to companies like this until they start treating us like customers again and start innovating in the area of music and music delivery.

    • Over forty countries have tariffed CD blanks (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @07:28PM (#5131191)
      In the U.S., naturally, we get no rights in return for the tariff, although in some countries copying copyrighted works is permissible to some extent in exchange for the tariff (in Canada and Germany, for example, you are free to copy music that you are borrowing from a friend or library to a disc for personal use, but Napster-type MP3 serving is illegal). I'd bet the U.K. has this type of tariff, given that U.S. copyright laws were almost completely crafted to fall in line with the European laws concerning copyright (i.e.: Berne), which is amusing given the amount of fingerpointing going the other way for things like the DMCA.

      Australia will almost definitely roll over to this type of law given their policies in the past, so anyone living there might want to push their representatives to at least give you something in return.

      • In the U.S., naturally, we get no rights in return for the tariff [...]

        So I wonder how long until someone hauled into court by the RIAA says:

        "But, your Honor! I already PAID them their royalty when I bought the disk I downloaded the music onto. I paid [this amount] extra, according to federal law, and that money was given to them to pay for music I might copy onto that disk. I move to dismiss on the ground that they've already been paid any royalty they were due and thus have no case."
      • UK has the tarrif, which is why you can buy blank CDs for data use, and ones for audio use that include the tarrif and cost more. Of course, no-one buys the audio ones once they work out they are basically the same as the cheaper data ones.

    • Re:legally copy? (Score:2, Informative)

      by Losat ( 643653 )
      if they charge you for cd's can you legally copy copyrighted stuff to them?
      Actually, while the law doesn't say it is legal to copy copyrighted stuff, it does say that the copyright holders agree not to sue individuals who do it for personal use. (I think the holders agree to this by signing up for their share of the "pre-paid royalty.")
      US Title 17 [loc.gov] ... "1008. Prohibition on certain infringement actions No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a digital audio recording device, a digital audio recording medium, an analog recording device, or an analog recording medium, or based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings."

  • What do you expect? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by duncan bayne ( 544299 ) <dhgbayne@gmail.com> on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @07:14PM (#5131048) Homepage
    As long as people consider it the right of Government to steal from others through compulsory taxation, this is the kind of thing we'll be seeing. The only difference between this and compulsorily-funded social welfare is that the money is going to private companies, rather than private individuals.

    • Re:What do you expect? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by cranos ( 592602 ) on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @08:36PM (#5131772) Homepage Journal
      Ummm there is a big difference between Corporate Welfare and Social Welfare.

      Corporate Welfare is where Businesses, a lot of them in no need of a hand out get preferential treatment from the government of the day through tax breaks, relaxed laws and so on in exchange for what amounts to sweet fuck all.

      Social Welfare is where the government supports those members of SOCIETY who are not able to support themselves for any number of reasons, usually in exchange what they get is someone who after they have gotten over their slump gets back into the workforce and starts contributing back to the society that helped him. Sometimes you do get people who take advantage of the system but that happens with every system.

      I sure as hell would not want to live in a society that let those less fortunate fall by the wayside. Darwinism no longer applies to the human race and it definitly should not apply to our societies.
      • Sometimes so-called "Corporate Welfare" is a good thing. For example, you give a corporation a tax break to set up shop in your town. In turn they provide jobs for the citizens. Cities compete for businesses just like people compete for jobs, which I do not thing is a bad thing.

        Secondly sometimes "Corporate Welfare" is to help an otherwise good business get through bad times. Having the entire US Airline industry collapse after 9/11 would have been a bad idea. Thousands would be laid off and the 1 or 2 airlines that survived would charge much higher rates due to the lack of competition. Not to mention that 9/11 was an unexpected even out of their control.

        The problem with the music industry wanting to tax blank CD's is the fact that it is a crutch. What the industry really needs to do is grow and evolve. Competition should weed out those companies that don't change, and the ones that are left should provide a much better product.

        Instead they blame everyone except themselves. Maybe I'm getting too old, but the music nowadays is absolute crap. It's not that it is too wild or ground breaking or revolutionary. It is just crap. Same boring generic crap. That is why the companies are losing sales.

  • With the huge size, and low cost of hard drive... (Score:5, Informative)

    by saskboy ( 600063 ) on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @07:14PM (#5131051) Homepage Journal
    I wonder when hard drives will be taxed to death by ignorant government goons?

    Most serious pirates I know, don't even put their music on CDs, they just by another hard drive to back everything up.
  • Well, the sudden surge of traffic to .au will probably cause the satellites to melt.

    I can't get there at the moment, anyway. And we're about 3 posts in.

  • Levies suck (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Amsterdam Vallon ( 639622 ) <amsterdamvallon2003@yahoo.com> on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @07:15PM (#5131057) Homepage
    I'm on the official list of objectors about this particular levy law. Don't worry, we've got some pretty convincing evidence to show at the hearing that illustrates that the proposed levies are much too high and should be struck down like a red-headed stepchild.

    It will be interesting to see the outcome. If it passes, the market for blank media and mp3 players will be hit hard.

  • Get Used to It (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tealover ( 187148 ) on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @07:16PM (#5131062)
    This will become law sooner or later. The media companies lobby politicians heavily and usually get what they want, particularly since users aren't typically as well organzied.

    The truth be told, most users are rather ignorant of the politics involved in these areas; Slashdotters are on the oppostite end of the spectrum.

    What I would like to see howerver is a repudiation of anti-copy tactics currently in place by media companies. If you're going to charge users a levy tax, we should be free to make copies. There shouldn't be any impediments in our way. This will require a few courageous politicians to step up and go against the grain.

    Unfortunately for us, courageous and politician are two words that don't often go together.

    • Re:Get Used to It (Score:2, Interesting)

      by _RidG_ ( 603552 )
      "The truth be told, most users are rather ignorant of the politics involved in these areas; Slashdotters are on the oppostite end of the spectrum."

      Despite the fact that Slashdotters are usually indeed aware of the politics relating to today's technology, I think it's safe to say that only under 1% of us* does anything about it. What good is knowledge if you are not putting it to use?

      *Nope, I'm not part of that 1%. Hrmph. I suppose this makes my message rather hypocritical :)

    • Re:Get Used to It (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      This will become law sooner or later

      Unfortunately for APRA, the High Court of Australia rejected a similar scheme in regard to cassettes a while back. APRA knows it, they are just trying it on, but it's unconstitutional.

  • Same opinion on... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @07:16PM (#5131064)
    I have the same opinion on marijuana. Every kid does it so lets facilitate some standrds in the marketplace. Time for legalization ands quality control. You know the makers of marijuana should levy a tax on the RIAA. Without drugs, there wouldn't be as much quality music in the world. I think Mrs. Rosen should write a fat check to Columbia right now.

  • It's not hard to understand (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Amsterdam Vallon ( 639622 ) <amsterdamvallon2003@yahoo.com> on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @07:18PM (#5131076) Homepage
    Listen, if you were making an absolute boat load of money off of other peoples' work, wouldn't you get upset if some newfangled Internet thing came along and disturbed your flow of income?

    All this proves is that all of us, together, can help to stomp out the music executive thieves over time with continued support of decentralized pee two pee programs like KaZAA, Napster, and GNUtella.

    The RIAA et al. can see ten years down the road and realize that things don't look good for them. Don't worry, we'll all get through this and then the music artists will finally get some penance for their years of hard work, singing, and dancing.

  • So once again.... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Fazlazen ( 626923 )
    ...in the fashion of the Slashdot editors, I'm going to repeat the comments on every other topic like this:

    So, if they charge a levy, don't they end up legitimizing copying, and therefore making it legal for me to make copies with levied media?

    Someone had to do it.

  • Refunds available on application? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by teamhasnoi ( 554944 ) <teamhasnoi@yahoo.cLIONom minus cat> on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @07:19PM (#5131084) Journal
    What? So I'm supposed to send them a copy of the CD that I used to back up my HD? "Here's proof!"

    Sure, that sounds like a great idea. Swamp the law-abiding users with paperwork, so everyone will bend over and take it.

    Of course, the cry that, "We offer a refund!" will be the sound byte, not the 12 page invasive rebate form.

    I think I'll hire the people that sign up for Yahoo accounts all day to fill out thousands upon thousands of applications. I might even break even....

    • I'm sure they'll be happy to give you a refund after you sign a release and install a backdoor that allows the RIAA to "audit" your computer for "unauthorized" files and delete whatever it wants.
      • Presumably you mean APRA, or possibly ARIA.

        It's interesting actually, that it's APRA not ARIA that's behind this...because APRA, the Australian Performing Rights Association actually represents the artists, not the record companies...Any musician can register themselves with APRA, and get a cut of the royalties payed by venues for playing their music (providing, of course that your music is actually played some where). So there's a chance this levy may actually go to some artists, and not just into a record company's pockets.

        ARIA, the Australian Recording Industry Association would be the Australian equivalent of the RIAA, and they're not mentioned anywhere in the article.

  • Hello? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ic3p1ck ( 597610 ) on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @07:20PM (#5131091)
    Maybe someone should tell them that CDR's are not only used for Music burning but for DATA backup!

    And besides that, most people that download mp3s from the internet are not going to burn CDRs from them, they're going to keep it on their hard disks. Thats the whole point of mp3, play it on your PC instead.

    Sign, when will these people get a clue?

    • Re:Hello? (Score:2, Interesting)

      by gr0ngb0t ( 410427 )
      Yeah i watched this on Today this morning before work, and the guy from Screenrights was trying to say that CD sales have fallen because of p2p + the internet, but then he was saying that CDRs should have a levy placed on sales, because people copy legitimately bought cds for others. he almost seemed to be concerned that they were too cheap - he gave an example of being able to walk into the post office and buy 20 cds for $20 - THE HORROR!!!

      when the hard-questioning interviewer asked him how many people were copying cds, the guy had no-idea. when questioned about anything that required specific numbers or figues, he had no idea.

      You could almost tell that he knew he was spouting bullshit. but thats generally what you get on the Today Show :)

      I only watch it to see what the weather will be - honestly.
    • Wise up and smell the coffee. Anyone who tries to argue that the MAJORITY of CD-Rs they use are for data backup are either telling less-than-half-truths, seriously non-informed about what you can put on a CD (can you say DivX?), or legitimate business users. Like always, it'll only be legitimate business users that get shafted, not Joe public.

      I admit it, I go though about 100 CD-Rs a year and about one of those would be for data. The rest are movies and other stuff, usually downloaded from the internet.

      • Re:Hello What!? (Score:2, Insightful)

        by darthpenguin ( 206566 )
        Wise up and smell the coffee. Anyone who tries to argue that the MAJORITY of CD-Rs they use are for data backup are either telling less-than-half-truths, seriously non-informed about what you can put on a CD (can you say DivX?), or legitimate business users. Like always, it'll only be legitimate business users that get shafted, not Joe public.

        Apparently, I'd be telling a "less-than-half-truth" if I told the truth. I go through dozens of cd's every month, and I'd say maybe 1 of them max is for burning mp3 files. The rest? Try these: backing up my personal files (including artwork, papers, programs, music recorded by myself), burning linux distros (many discs right there), and burning (freely downloadable) programs for my friends still on dial-up. I'm not saying that their are no people who really are as you describe them, but I think you are very wrong for making such sweeping generalizations.

        I honestly don't see any strengths in these pro-taxation arguments anyways. For example, before I purchased an iPod, I carried around a cd player almost everywhere I went. There is no way that I would be carrying my original discs with me, as they get scratched, bent, warped, etc. So I'd make a backup of my cd, and carry that around instead. Why should the recording industry get more money off of that? It's plain theft! No one should be taxed for carrying around their music in a different format, be it carrying them on an iPod or burning a cd. On the other hand, if in the US they actually legalized copying audio due to the levy similar to Canada, it's a bit more justifiable than if they do it just to recover their "losses".

  • Share the love. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Prince_Ali ( 614163 ) on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @07:20PM (#5131098) Journal
    They should give a percentage to go to free software development. I don't particularly like most open source software, but a lot of people use a lot of CD-Rs to burn Linux distros. It only seems fair that they get a chunk.
  • So the industry wants a 3 - 10 % penality on a presumption of guilt (which will clearly be paid by the innocent as well), and they also want to Subpoena information on ISP subscribers and shut down downloads [slashdot.org]. How can they have it both way?

  • So what should they do? (Score:5, Informative)

    by mpawlo ( 260572 ) on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @07:22PM (#5131114) Homepage
    Levies are not good, but what should music companies aim to do? I just wrote a short piece on a related matter in light of the Verizon decision [harvard.edu]. Some of you might find it interesting.

    "Greplaw's editors, although we are reporting indepently of each other, often tend to criticise the RIAA's efforts to stop illegal music trading online. One may still wonder what a proper action might be."
    (---)
    "The Internet is a new kid on the music industry's block. From the right holders' perspective the digital domain is often presented as a problem and not an opportunity. In this column, I have identified five possible ways for the music industry to treat this new kid on the block."

    Read the entire article [harvard.edu].

    Regards,

    Mikael

  • quatrain (Score:3, Funny)

    by bobtheprophet ( 587843 ) on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @07:22PM (#5131119) Journal
    A tax on cd-rs, they say, and piracy they condemn
    To me, the whole thing seems rather odd
    Do they think of those who have legit uses for them?
    NO, those INSENSITIVE CLODS!!!!

  • Levy the AOL CDs! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Fazlazen ( 626923 ) on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @07:32PM (#5131223) Journal
    What they really need to do is levy the AOL CDs that keep clogging my mailbox [nomoreaolcds.com]! Now that's a law I would get behind!
  • I watched some of the report on the today show this morning, they were spewing so much rubbish I had to turn it off. It was a one sided reported that basically said two things: 1. All kids are pirates 2. Everyone who buys CD-R, does so to pirate CDs An interesting note, is that they had already tried to get the levys on CD-R through the court system but it was thrown out because it was a tax.

  • APRA can shove it (Score:5, Insightful)

    by EverDense ( 575518 ) on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @07:41PM (#5131325) Homepage
    "There's nothing novel in this," Mr Lake said. "Forty-three countries including the US, Canada and most EU nations have enacted private copying royalty schemes."

    ...and knowing full well how myopic and sycophantic our current Australian goverment are, it will be implemented here as well.

    Why the hell should I pay money to APRA when I burn copies of music that I wrote and produced?

    My music is art for art's sake (I give my music away for free) and now I may have to give money to record companies, AND the artists whose music I despise the most... and don't bloody listen too!

    • Re:APRA can shove it (Score:2, Interesting)

      by 0-9a-f ( 445046 )
      Simple solution - if it is to be a tax, you can claim a rebate at tax time. Something along the lines of:

      Tax Return 2003-2004
      Rebates - Other

      CD-Rs purchased: 5000

      Tax paid per CD-R: $ 0.04
      Total tax paid: $200.00

      CD-Rs used to publish stolen music: 0
      CD-Rs used to backup licensed music: 3
      CD-Rs used to publish personal art: 4997

      Tax rebate claimed: $200.00

      (Something I've found necessary with some of my CDs, is that my CD-ROM drive can read them, although my sound system cannot - probably due to scratches, etc. I have made copies of these few discs so that I can actually listen to the music. Don't know why I should be taxed for that?!)

      Go bite yourselves, music industry moguls!

    • If I understand the US Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 (which of course means nuts to you in Australia, but they might write in a similar procedure if they pass this bit of barbarism) anyone with a recording distributed during a calendar year is eligible to make a claim against the tax revenues on DATs.

      I've had tapes, vinyl and CDs out for years, but never bothered. I always meant to just to make the political statement, but because I'm fundamentally a slacker musician I never got around to it...

  • Let the Entertainment Industry Own Everything (Score:5, Insightful)

    by serutan ( 259622 ) <snoopdoug@@@geekazon...com> on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @07:43PM (#5131344) Homepage
    We might be able to get the entertainment industry off our backs if we just go ahead and give them some money every time anything happens that could possibly involve proprietary material. In Finland they want to collect royalties from daycare centers because workers sing songs to the kids. No problem. Just institute a daycare tax payable to the recording industry. Churchgoers singing hymn-ized pop songs during services? Fine, just fork over some of that collection plate to the RIAA. Cab drivers playing CDs with passengers present? Gas tax! People going to the bathroom during commercials? Water tax! [You do flush, don't you?] In fact, the simplest thing would be to collect an ongoing daily entertainment tax from everybody to cover any copyright infringement we might commit during ordinary activities. Then maybe the entertainment industry would finally ** SHUT THE FUCK UP ** and leave us alone.
  • Putting a tax/levie on CDRs because of widespread piracy is like placing a tax/levie on mugs/china cups because of rampant tea theft and smuggling.

    Guess what? Some of us drink coffee!

  • I watched it. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Slurpee ( 4012 ) on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @07:52PM (#5131433) Homepage Journal
    I actually watched the broadcast, and it was disgusting.

    The shmuck claimed that "every family" does it, as does "every kid". When asked how much it would be, he said they have no idea yet, but wants it to be worked out in consultation. Obviously thats a lie, as other posts point out they want anywhere from 3-10%.

    He pointed out that this levy would make it OK, but not for those who do wholesale copying.

    What was worse is the show didn't have anyone else on there representing the other view.

    My question is: If a levy is set, does this mean I am free to download any mp3 I wish? Could I borrow all of my friends CDs and have hundreds of thousands of mp3s legally? Cause if it does, bring it on! I will never buy a CD again!

    At the moment I don't mp3 illegally (IE I buy my own CDs and mp3 them, but not others), but if it was made legal through the levy, I would certainly burn hundreds of CDs from friends.

    • Re:I watched it. (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Sandcastle ( 563801 )
      I saw it as well, and was jumping up and down screaming at the TV. What a schmuck. He didn't just hint that the levy would then make it OK to copy CD's etc., that everyone "is doing already", he actually said it would be. I've been searching for a transcript of the show all morning, but work has banned the website during working hours.

      I'm sure that even if they allowed the levy, it wouldn't change copyright law. I doubt their groups have the power to try and do that, so I'm just so furious that he presented it this way.

      What's more, while Australian music is becoming more and more popular lately, the great majority of our music is still produced in America. How do they expect a charge on every CD-R used in Australia should only go to re-imburse Australian organisations? It pisses me off, and I'm Australian.

      Just as a side point, I found out the other day that there really isn't any sort of fair use for taping TV in Australia. The advice [copyright.org.au] from the Australian Copyright Council website says explicitly it's not even allowed in order to watch the show later the same day!!! Do they really think they'll be able to change the laws so copying/trading music is perfectly legal as long as CD-R's are taxed? No matter what they raise the price to, it can only mess things up. All money will go straight to the companies, not the artists, as there will be no way to track what's being traded anyway....!

      Sorry, my posts are usually more structured, and less like a giant rant, but man that interview this morning ticked me off!!!

  • "highly-debateable mis-truths"? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Wakko Warner ( 324 ) on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @07:54PM (#5131446) Homepage Journal
    Cut the marketing bullshit. They're lies. Not all the kids on the entire Australian continent burn ill-gotten music to CD or DVD. If I can find one kid who burns perfectly legal CDs all the time (hey, there goes one now), I've proven this statement false.

    Call a spade a spade and call bullshit when you see it from now on. This site doesn't need to put a spin on such blatantly false crap.

    - A.P.

  • If music was harder to copy, would music publishers be less eager to tax media? Ever since the NES in 1985, video games have had some sort of copy protection. Have game publishers been persuing media levies as vigorously?
  • They'd better watch out, or we'll send a bunch of blokes from Boston who will throw all their tea into the harbor!

  • I thought (Score:4, Insightful)

    by The Analog Kid ( 565327 ) on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @08:01PM (#5131497)
    P2P wasn't the music industries biggest problem. Do you think that this will really help solve the problems, are people going to buy more CDs because of this. So 5 - 10 cents per CD well a pack of 30 is at the most going to make them $3.00, while the music cd cost $10 - 20. I don't see how your going to recoupe yourself. Also the crap that the RIAA and other organizations like them is trying to pull isn't going to make people want to jump and buy a CD either.

  • Could be improved (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Pseudonym ( 62607 ) on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @08:16PM (#5131615)

    Speaking as ain Australian, I am willing to support the proposal on three conditions:

    1. People who do not infringe copyright get a rebate.
    2. Independent artists get a cut of the levy.
    3. In return, we get the legal right to pirate CDs and DVDs.

    I've never copied a audio CD or DVD in my life. I have made compilation CDs for two schoolteachers based on CDs that they own for educational purposes (I believe this is legal), but I'm willing to try if this becomes law. I promise to make it fair by adding up the levies that I have paid on blank CDs and only pirating CDs worth up to the value of the levy. When I've effectively paid for a CD, I figure I deserve a copy of it.

    What do you think, APRA?

    Incidentally, I'm not quite sure how you calculate what is a fair levy to pay for losses which are, in the admission of the CEO of Screenrights, "incalculable". I'd like to see how they managed to work it out.

    • This is the sticky point that nobody seems to notice: how do you prove yourself as not guilty under a law that assumes everyone is guilty until proven innocent?

      You contact them and tell them that you're an upstanding individual who completely supports copyright law and doesn't pirate media in any form, and their response is, "Prove it."

  • The AUS Supreme Court knocked this back last time (Score:3, Interesting)

    by StArSkY ( 128453 ) on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @08:16PM (#5131618) Homepage
    This has been before the supreme court before, and it was knocked back becasue the court said that it is in affect adding a TAX on media for a party other than the government.

    As such this will NEVER get passed into law now, as it would take a serious cahnge in what is now precedent.
  • "Every kid does it, so let's facilitate some standards in the marketplace.""
    Kids (have sex | burn CDs | drink alcohol) whether they admit it or not, and they know they do it. (Condoms | Blank CD-R's | alcohol ) are fairly available, too. Society promotes all these items. Therefore, how is the consumer supposed to differentiate this tax from any other "sin tax" used to raise revenue? Maybe there should also be an "intercourse tax" on birth control.
  • They're worried about pirate DVDs and movies being distributed over P2P in DivX format.

    Sheesh! This is not the RIAA again. It's the MPAA - or at least the Aussie versions.

  • Do something about this (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Woko ( 112284 ) on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @09:07PM (#5131991)
    It doesnt take much time to send off an email to your local federal representative [aec.gov.au] about this otherwise they'll only hear APRA's side of the story.

    They may donate $$$, but everybody has to vote.

    The Australian had a negative editorial [news.com.au] on this proposal, so not all of the media lobby is behind it.

  • Sell "music" not CDs (Score:5, Interesting)

    by AnotherBlackHat ( 265897 ) on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @09:44PM (#5132211) Homepage
    Why not sell CD-RWs with a song pre-recorded on them (this should work in Canada too.)
    I can see three advantages;
    1. You beat the tax (I'm assuming they include an exemption for pre-recorded media like Canada and virtually everybody else.)

    2. You become a music producer, so you can collect the tax that your competitors pay.

    3. You probably have the number one song on the charts, since people will buy far more than
    one copy of a CD-RW- basically free advertising.

    You could probably sell the title track for money too -
    Coke would pay to have the number one song in Australia be a commercial for their product,
    especially if they got to pick the name of that song.

    -- this is not a .sig

  • It's a lame excuse to rake in money (Score:3, Interesting)

    by RodgerDodger ( 575834 ) on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @09:58PM (#5132273)
    If this goes before the government for real, there's a few points I'll be talking to my MP about:

    1) The money better go to the artists, not the record companies. After all, what expenses do the record companies have for stolen music? (Well, maybe advertising)

    2) The money had better go to the artists in a proportional matter. So some mechanism for working out which artists get copied the most better be decided on. Don't look at what's selling well; arguably, that's what's being copied the least.

    3) I should be able to take a CD that hasn't been used for copying music, and get a refund on the levy. Not sure how this would work for CDRWs, but that's not my problem.

    4) Fair use rights should be encoded explicitly in law. They are there in Australia's copyright legisilation implicitly (and have been upheld in court), but let's end the legal challenges, okay?

    5) Copy-protected CDs should be illegal; after all, by paying the levy on the media, I've explicitly paid for the right to copy music on to it, haven't I?

    6) I should have the right to return a CD that I don't like to the distributor (ideally, to the store), and get a full refund on the price.

    7) People who use that lame excuse that CD sales were down last year should be shot unless they immediately point out that so were new titles and that sales/title were actually up in 2002, same as every year in the last 10.

  • Don't complain! CALL your MP (Score:4, Informative)

    by divereigh ( 137838 ) on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @10:28PM (#5132437)

    I can't believe the number of comments based around "this is going to happen, there's nothing we can do". Yes there is: CALL (don't fax, write or email) your MP (Member of Parliament). I just called mine and he wasn't aware of it, but was definately interested.

    How do you get the number? First find out the name of your MP [aec.gov.au]. Then put his/her name into the search engine here [gold.gov.au]. Call the number displayed. Most likely you will get straight through - at least to a knowlegable side-kick.

    Be brief, just let them know what's going on - send them a copy of the URL. Give them your name and address and ask for an update.

    Hopefully we'll get some democracy going on this.

  • New Zealand may follow suit (Score:3)

    by NewtonsLaw ( 409638 ) on Tuesday January 21, 2003 @10:34PM (#5132485)
    Last month the New Zealand Government published a position paper [med.govt.nz] on proposed changes to its copyright laws.

    Burried deep inside the paper is the following in respect to users engaging in "format shifting" (ie: copying their legally-purchased CDs to tape or MP3):
    • Should format shifting of sound recordings for personal use be a permitted act?
    • If so, what limitations should apply?
    • Is there any economic loss to copyright owners arising out of format shifting of sound recordings for personal use?
    • If so, should a levy scheme apply to remunerate copyright owners for potential lost revenue?

    (the emphasis is mine).

    It should be noted that there is no fair use exclusion for NZers - any copying of music, even just backing up your CDs or creating a compliation disk from legally-purchased disks is illegal.

    The hinted-at levy in the position paper would be solely to reimburse the music industry for the losses they would be incurring when users ripped their own CDs to MP3 for use on their own MP3 players or PCs.

    Besides which, it leaves consumers asking: in these days of copy-protected CDs, how can the industry even think of collecting a levy for something that they've made it impossible to do?

    And you think the Canadians and Aussies have got it tough?

  • Everytime a bell rings... the Riaa gets .50 cents
  • ..I have no idea why anybody pays twice the price for Michelin tires, while Bridgestones on my BMW and Kumho's on my girlfriends Honda work just freaking awsome, thank you..

  • Fair turnabout for the media storage companies (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Paladiamors ( 643652 ) on Wednesday January 22, 2003 @01:53AM (#5133290)
    Imposing the levy on the CDRs and any other form of media storage device to cause sales to drop significantly. This of course should lead to losses in sales and profits for these companies. Now, it would definately be poetic if these companies sue the Record industries back for losses in sales caused by the levies and the damage to their business, in exactly the same manner in which the Record companies sued the P2P software companies to shut them down.

    My 2 cents.

    Paladiamors
  • Now when the RIAA comes calling, we can show them our receipt to prove we already paid our MP3 taxes and send them on their way.
  • I'd agree to the levy.

    Obviously, the same bill should make it perfectly legal to copy any copyrighted CD or DVD music made by recipients of the levy, because after all they're receiving dues for it, aren't they?

Slashdot Top Deals

This restaurant was advertising breakfast any time. So I ordered french toast in the renaissance. - Steven Wright, comedian

Close