Belgian Media Group Demanding Copyright Levy for Internet Access 162
An anonymous reader writes with this tidbit from PC World about Sabam's latest demand for copyright levies: "Sabam, the Belgian association of authors, composers and publishers, has sued the country's three biggest ISPs, saying that they should be paying copyright levies for offering access to copyright protected materials online. Sabam wants the court to rule that Internet access providers Belgacom, Telenet and Voo should pay 3.4 percent of their turnover in copyright fees, because they profit from offering high speed Internet connections that give users easy access to copyright protected materials, the collecting organization said in a news release Tuesday."
Sabam has previously demanded money from truckers for listening to the radio, and wanted to charge libraries royalties for reading to children.
Two-edged sword? (Score:5, Insightful)
From what I remember, in Canada making copies CDs is legal because of the copyright levy on blank CDs. If the media companies get there way with this copyright levy for internet access, will that make all online copyright infringement legal?
Re: (Score:1)
No, shut up. Give us more money.
-- SABAM
Re:Two-edged sword? (Score:5, Funny)
For example: some Canadians got sued for coping "Hurt Locker" (The erotic comedy about two gay shoe store employees and their love of leather uppers.)
The tax was a socialist attempt to remedy the issue but in reality it's just a tax for the sake of tax.
IMHO: I don't even think it's the money Sadam and the other organizations are after, it's more about the distribution control, since it gives them credence to exist at all.
Re: (Score:3)
Sorta... well no, It's still highly illegal and you can get sued for making an illegal copy.
For example: some Canadians got sued for coping "Hurt Locker" (The erotic comedy about two gay shoe store employees and their love of leather uppers.)
This is entirely untrue, in Canada, making copies of AUDIO recoding for personal use IS legal.. This only applies to Audio content, not to movies, etc. This is also why the levy is only on CDs, not on DVDs for example.
Re:Two-edged sword? (Score:4, Informative)
If you borrow your friend's CD and make a copy that's fine, but if you rip that CD (or MP3 from iTunes) and share that copy online, it's illegal.
That's what they are talking about in the article above. Canada has sane laws in regards to copyright, but it's not free-for-all anarchy either.
Re: (Score:3)
I think "for personal use" and "CD" is a pretty clear definition that doesn't include p2p. Apples, oranges, both fruit, right?
Re: (Score:2)
I think "for personal use" and "CD" is a pretty clear definition that doesn't include p2p. Apples, oranges, both fruit, right?
It has been ruled that using P2P is equivalent of me going to your house to make a personal copy using your equipment. Done 'over the intertubes' doesn't change the fact that it is a personal copy for personal use using personal equipment. eg: It is in no way commercial.
IMHO this is very sane and fair copyright ruling. Don't ask me for source, that was decades(~1.4 decades) ago in the Napster era. This has been common knowledge for all Canadian since.
Re: (Score:2)
I should add that, while downloading copyrighted materiel is not illegal, making it available could still get you sued. The original person that make the rip could be sue by the copyright holder. But in practice this never happen because it is extremely difficult to find him, and prove his guilt beyond all reasonable doubt. Also IANAL, but you already know that.
Re:Two-edged sword? (Score:5, Funny)
Sorta... well no, It's still highly illegal and you can get sued for making an illegal copy.
For example: some Canadians got sued for coping "Hurt Locker" (The erotic comedy about two gay shoe store employees and their love of leather uppers.)
This is entirely untrue, in Canada, making copies of AUDIO recoding for personal use IS legal.. This only applies to Audio content, not to movies, etc. This is also why the levy is only on CDs, not on DVDs for example.
Re: (Score:2)
For example: some Canadians got sued for coping "Hurt Locker" (The erotic comedy about two gay shoe store employees and their love of leather uppers.)
Well no one has really been sued yet, people have gotten a notice but that's it. The ISP(Teksavvy) who got the main notice has been fighting tooth and nail against disclosure. And so far it looks like with a bunch of other things going on, they're going to fail in this case.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Two-edged sword? (Score:5, Insightful)
I have content online too. It's only fair to charge them copyright or get a recipcal agreement.
Re: (Score:1)
In Belgium, where Sabam is active, there is also a copyright levy on blank CDs. But who's still burning to CD in days of streaming and huge hard disks?
Re: (Score:2)
But who's still burning to CD in days of streaming and huge hard disks?
Me. My car's got a CD player, but no Bluetooth/Line-in.
More like "slippery slope" (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Mod up. Knuckling under "just for this one bully" doesn't end well.
Re: (Score:2)
So a bully of bullies? Next thing you know we'll be in a bully arms race!
Led from a bully pulpit.
Re: (Score:1)
Well, it's good and proper this is being handled by courts and regulatory agencies, rather than that anachronism of elected legislators in a parliament.
Takes the politics out of it.
Re:More like "slippery slope" (Score:4, Interesting)
If we can't get them to stop bothering us, maybe the best thing to do is to get them fighting each other so they're too busy to bother the rest of us.
Re:More like "slippery slope" (Score:5, Funny)
Set some rate, say a 5%...
...negotiate/litigate among themselves on how to divide up that 3%
You work in Hollywood accounting, dont you? Somehow I dont object to this.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Of course not. Why make money on your IP only once when you can charge consumers on their purchases and their Internet connections, and thereby make the same money twice?
In fact, while we're at it, let's implement a global head tax on the basis that if someone is a living, breathing human being, they could be infringing on copyrights. That way we can make the same money three times! The shareholders will love it!
Re: (Score:1)
If there is explicit legislation making an exception to copyright for CDs then it's legal but that has nothing to do with the levy.
Re:Two-edged sword? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Why would you making backups have anything to do with them? Furthermore, what of people who don't even do that? Ah, forget it! Money!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Should I get a discount every time I buy legally? (Score:4, Insightful)
If they are going to charge across the board and assume we are all pirates, perhaps we should get a discount when we do legally purchase something to offset this cost? I'm sure the Belgian Media group has done the math and with so few legal purchases they'd be more than happy to reimburse me every time I do it the right way.
Re:Should I get a discount every time I buy legall (Score:5, Insightful)
If they are going to charge across the board and assume we are all pirates, perhaps we should get a discount when we do legally purchase something to offset this cost? I'm sure the Belgian Media group has done the math and with so few legal purchases they'd be more than happy to reimburse me every time I do it the right way.
Yes, the discount should be 100%. If they're going to assume we're pirates and build their kickback on the basis that we're getting their product for free, we should... get their product for free.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I know of a Sint Maarten outfit that offers that 100% discount.
Re: (Score:2)
No I we should get a royalty on every successful purchase someone makes from their services or the publishers they represent. Since that is obviously one copy we did not pirate ;p
Re: (Score:1)
How does that work in practice? Oh, you want a 10% discount? Well our price just went up 11%.
Re:Should I get a discount every time I buy legall (Score:5, Informative)
TFA doesn't mention pirating. They're complaining that people now use iTunes, YouTube and Spotify, where the money goes directly to the artists or record labels, and not through the little media group that they set up.
Oh yes (Score:5, Interesting)
As a Belgian ISP I would demand 90% of all profit Sabam makes them, since they enable them to sell digital goods..
Greed, plain and pure.. all copyright groups should be shot.
Well... (Score:3)
I'd pay a 3.4% tax if granted immunity from copyright infringment suits.
Re:Well... (Score:4, Insightful)
Uhm... paying a protection racket never ends well. Should I quote a few opinions about a 10th century case?
Re:Well... (Score:4, Informative)
Why quote outdated 10th century case that's probably hard to apply directly when you have so many current cases [wikipedia.org]? In every case, the fees keep expanding with no reduction whatsoever in demands for stronger copyright protection.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
you'd better quote the more recent and accessible 1911 funny Rudyard Kipling poem [wikisource.org].
P.S.: better hurry up and read the poem before it gets retro-actively put under copyright again!
Re: (Score:2)
Michael Longcor made a song out of this one early this century - quite good, if you Kipple...
Re: (Score:2)
I'd pay a 3.4% tax if granted immunity from indictment.
FTFY
It won't be good enough (Score:1)
They'll be demanding more soon enough. There's never enough blood for vampires.
When does it end? (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0z79jnz9v60 [youtube.com]
so.... (Score:1)
by that logic the council who built our roads are also responsible for enabling people to go and rob banks or any crime that involves travelling!. Get real.
Better idea (Score:1)
Have these extortionists shot in the streets.
Hello (Score:5, Funny)
Welcome fellow Belgians. We at Sabam, being sociopaths, wish to tax your internet usage, your radio, and yes, even your libraries. You should be pleased that a group of malicious psychopaths like us have latched on to this particular game, because otherwise we'd probably be stalking playgrounds and public washrooms for victims that we could molest, beat and possibly even cannibalize to fulfill our obscene lusts.
So fork over lots of cash to us, or we'll be forced to start fulfilling our other fantasies, and you will never feel safe in a public space again.
Re: (Score:3)
We at Sabam, being sociopaths, wish to tax your internet usage, your radio, and yes, even your libraries. You should be pleased that a group of malicious psychopaths like us have latched on to this particular game, because otherwise we'd probably be stalking playgrounds and public washrooms for victims that we could molest, beat and possibly even cannibalize to fulfill our obscene lusts.
Oh? I just assumed they did both, possibly the same time.
Obligatory Python... (Score:5, Funny)
A New Business Model .. again? (Score:5, Insightful)
While I'm sure they would LOVE for this to be their new business model as it allows them to profit without doing a fucking thing, I am equally sure the majority of Belgians would prefer a different business model for them - called "Out Of Business - Permanently".
Or, perhaps, the Belgians would agree to the "tax" on their internet connections in exchange for the ability to consume any and all content they can reach using said internet connection. Including downloading any material copyrighted by those said organization covers without ever needing to worry about getting sued for infringement. Basically, since Belgians are paying for copyright through a "tax", they are now allowed unfettered consumption.
And fuck Sabam if they want to have their cake and eat it to. Then all of the Belgians should reintroduce the "Out Of Business - Permanently" model to them. It is time for "the people" to take back control from the corporations. Maybe the Belgians can get the ball rolling?
sabam being trolled (Score:2, Interesting)
a few years back there was a troll program to defend the people's rights and they did a concert with fake artists in front of sabam hq. they were actually charged for the concert even though there was no such artist as "suzi wan" and "kimberly clark" or also "ken wood". they are actually made up brand names of toilet paper and blender equipment! it was quite amusing. there is a youtube video of it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZAsa9QmQO8
Efficiency for a price? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
The reasoning of SABAM in this matter follows their tax on radio-broadcasters. Radio stations are obligated to pay SABAM for broadcasting copyrighted songs. So to rationalize their greed, they just followed that logic for internet providers. Since internet providers are now broadcasting a lot of copyrighted material, they should pay for it, just as well as the radio stations are.
It's just a bit sad that at the same time, there's a very steep price for internet streaming radio websites(to the point that you
Copyrighted materials are usually legal (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
All the copyrighted materials that you download from Amazon or iTunes store or elsewhere, all those copyrighted materials that you download through streaming services like Pandora, or things like BBC iPlayer, are perfectly legal and paid for. Shouldn't they charge the post office when I order DVDs or CDs with copyright materials through mail?
Well don't stop there. Charge the guys who make the delivery vehicles as well, because those trucks will be carrying the post with the DVDs and CDs. And box companies as well, because those DVDs and CDs will be placed in boxes for shipping.
Sure there's lots of copyrighted content online... (Score:3)
So unless they are going to take those additional fees and distribute them internationally to absolutely every human being alive who has ever put something copyrighted online, *EVER*... they really should stay away from the issue.
This post is copyrighted by me, for instance. And people can access this post by going on the Internet and reading comments on Slashdot under this article. Will *I* receive even the tiniest sliver of the funds they collect? No? Then they shouldn't be trying to touch that Pandora's box with a pole of any length.
Re: (Score:2)
well, sure, using spotify is legal. they know that.
but they argue that because that cuts into their local copyright mafia branch profits, the isp's should pay.
I guess the labels didn't want to send them money for music played on spotify so they had to find someone to pay 'em(they get money from radio plays so it's flawless logic that SOMEONE must pay them for streaming music, too, and not just the labels ;D ).
Re: (Score:2)
So unless they are going to take those additional fees and distribute them internationally to absolutely every human being alive who has ever put something copyrighted online, *EVER*... they really should stay away from the issue.
This post is copyrighted by me, for instance. And people can access this post by going on the Internet and reading comments on Slashdot under this article. Will *I* receive even the tiniest sliver of the funds they collect? No? Then they shouldn't be trying to touch that Pandora's box with a pole of any length.
I bet you agreed anything you post to Slashdot is no longer yours. It's pretty common so I would think they now own the copyright.
Re: (Score:2)
No moral high ground (Score:5, Informative)
There's no moral high ground for SABAM. I know Slashdot's readers don't much like ASCAP, but they're my licensing agency and part of my small income as a composer comes from those royalties. Problem is, SABAM has yet to pay (via ASCAP) a cent of the royalties owed me for performances in Belgium for the past eight years. (Same goes for SPA in Portugal, which has never forwarded any royalties due.) Until they actually turn over the royalties they collect in composers' names, they have no excuse to collect them in the first place.
Before you engage in the screw-you comments, please know that I provide all my sheet music for free download and only expect the performance royalties in return. The performers and venues pay those royalties, but Belgium and Portugal just pocket the money.
Re: (Score:1)
But is the sheet you write your music on copyrighted?
Re:No moral high ground (Score:4, Informative)
I don't think anyone except the trolls are going to reply with "screw you"-type comments. I think most people here respect the fact that you're trying to make a living doing what you like to do, and would root for your continued success.
Now, if your continued success was contingent on you trampling over the mostly-dead body of civil rights, then things might turn hostile. But unless you're working for one of these groups, and in fact, you're an executive in one of them, I don't see how that could possibly be.
As they say, you're welcome to make a living doing what you want to do, but you don't have the right to do so. And that applies to engineers, scientists, academia, and artists alike.
Re:No moral high ground (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm always of two minds about this issue. I oppose long copyright terms, draconian prosecutions, DRM and most of the lot of the law since the DMCA.. I also oppose work-for-hire exceptions as permitted under U.S. copyright law (mostly with respect to the transformation of the work into other media, its excerpting and repurposing without compensation).
As a senior composer (yikes!), I made a societal deal five decades ago that my work would be granted a reasonable time to recoup the effort that went into its creation.
The definition of 'reasonable' can be surprising to those whose work is immediate (pop, software, etc.). In my genres (what I call 'nonpop') that time can be very long indeed. Many pieces composed in the 1970s (I'd guess before most Slashdotters were born) are just getting their first performances now as the younger performers discover them. This is a long time -- and I have a lot of trouble believing that such work should drop into the commons even before its first performance. So I appreciate the extension of copyright that recognizes both the longer life of artists now and the longer time to market on certain kinds of art and music.
Re: (Score:2)
If it took you around 40 years to finally start making money off of it, what did you do to earn money in the meantime?
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but you favor taking away money from other people as a tax on unrelated products and then enriching yourself with it, because that's what we're talking about here. And in addition to the numerous taxes that are already levied in Belgium, they now want to impose charges on Internet access.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_copying_levy#Belgium [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Did you do actually anything in those 40 years to promote the music? Or was it just sitting around on some Youtube channel; or in some old audio tapes; or on some old music CDs in a bin in the basement?
How are you deserve any money from work you did 40 years ego, and for which you did not do anything at all since now?
Now I would understand it if you would actively promote the 40 years old music, like write to the younger performers, or offer them your music. But no: you just sit on your ass and wait for the
Re:No moral high ground (Score:5, Informative)
Not sure how much you know about ASCAP. Its stupidities (such as the Girl Scout fiasco) give them a bad name. They've been my licensing agency since 1988. They pass through 90% of the amount collected to me, and I have absolutely no paperwork except an annual tax statement. That 10% they keep is really worth it.
Because of the genre of music I write, almost 100% of my royalties come from live peformances, not airplay. In the U.S., airplay royalties are by random checks of logs. That radio issue is not their doing. ASCAP and BMI are still operating under a 70-year-old court order allowing them to represent composers and authors and their publishers collectively. Every change has to go back to the court for approval. In other countries, every airplay generates royalties (such as these $.90 and $1.50 amounts I get from Sweden and Finland every three months). Although my music has been heard thousands of times on the air (and on cable -- the Discovery Channel's "Deadly Women" series includes a clip of my music), I've never been caught in a log check. Unlucky me.
Re: (Score:3)
I've been a publisher since 1969. Our scores were always produced and distributed at low cost in expectation of performance royalties. We work for the long term, not the short one.
Royalties have never, historically or presently, been supplementary.
Re: (Score:3)
I have no problem with performance royalties. What we're talking about here is agencies that demand money on the sale of unrelated products (Internet services, media, devices) and then funnel that money to you. What moral right do you have to try force me to pay you money (which is what you're arguing here), even though I think your product is crap and would never buy it, consume it, or even bother to pirate it?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I believe the term is "civilization".
Nonsense. These people are trying to make everyone pay because some people are 'pirates'. If that's your idea of civilization, then you and other like-minded people should go start your own country away from the rest of us and then you can have all the draconian copyright laws that you wish.
Re: (Score:2)
And this sort of collective punishment won't help pay for anything I consider truly important, so comparing it to collecting taxes for public education is, I believe, extremely ridiculous. If they can do this sort of nonsense, then I demand a levy on every single product that is for sale because I feel I'm not earning enough money. Give me free money! It's civilization!
Re: (Score:2)
So you put the title "composer" on your shingle and all of a sudden you fancy yourself a contributor to civilization and the world owes you money? I don't think so. Contributing to civilization requires skill and artistry, and if you actually had those, you'd be able to make a living at it without stealing other people's money.
Re: (Score:2)
BTW, even if we wanted to have public funding for people like you as part of "civilization", we should pay for it through taxes, as an explicit budget item, and the costs should be born equally by everybody. Let's drop the pretense that these copyright fees on specific devices and services compensate you for illegal copies of your works.
And, actually, right now, we are paying for you several times over, first through the commission and performance of your works through often publicly funded organizations, a
sounds like a plan (Score:1)
not a new idea but usually not well thought out. (Score:2)
There are different countries that do have levies for copy-written works. Canada has/had levies on different writable material like blank music cds cassettes and that sort of thing, they also wanted it to apply to ipods but thankfully itunes proved that content could generally be purchased legally so they didn't. I think that's a good case to look at here. If all you could use your internet connection for was piracy or the majority of people were using it for piracy then maybe I would be OK with this. B
Honestly (Score:2)
The Belgians love waffles!!
Fee for "Access"? (Score:2)
they should be paying copyright levies for offering access to copyright protected materials online
Access doesn't imply use. Should record stores pay an additional percentage of their profits simply for providing "access" to people that don't end up buying anything? I haven't, and don't intend to, ever buy or unlawfully download digital content over the Internet (I just don't have that need) so why should some of the money I pay my ISP go to an industry I don't use, simply because they cling to an outdated business model?
Okay, for you youngsters, a "record store" is an actual place you can go to, walk
Which is cheaper? (Score:4, Funny)
Every Belgium citizen paying a 3.4% tax year after year, or Belgium citizens pooling their money to hire a hitman to kill every last top-dog in this organization?
Dear SABAM, (Score:2)
Pirate Cinema makes some dire prediction on this (Score:2)
Just read http://www.amazon.com/Pirate-Cinema-Cory-Doctorow/dp/0765329093 [amazon.com]
There isn't really much more to say about it...
Executive summary: allowing this is a really bad idea because it sets a legal precedent.
And everyone in Belgium should pay a speeding fine (Score:2)
And I want a pony. (Score:2)
Sabam has previously demanded money from truckers for listening to the radio, and wanted to charge libraries royalties for reading to children.
And I want a pony, and a brand new Bugatti Veyron 16.4 Super Sport [wikipedia.org], and a solid rhodium toilet.
Re: (Score:2)
The difference is: you don't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting it, they do.
Solution? (Score:2)
FTA:
>>the Belgian association of authors, composers and publishers,....
Ok, so we block all references to anything named by those authors, composers and publishers, so no trace of them exist on the internet (in Belgium anyway) so no one can pirate their stuff.
No?
Slippery slope (Score:1)
I got to thinking... (Score:2)
And the idea behind government is to protect us from these kinds of things and make the playing field fair. In a legal sense. This is the very definition of a lawful and good society vs a tyranny or oppressive one.
that's nothing new (Score:2)
In several European countries, people already have to pay a significant fee on printers, computers, and cell phones, money that then is funneled to select publishers and other copyright trolls.
about time (Score:2)
Those freeloader children getting stories read to them from the library without paying royalties? The monsters! Every time my parents read me a story we put a nickle in a jar, how could ignore the poor Belgian company?
Money for nothing (Score:1)
I would not mind paying small extra copyright fee as long as it grants me right to download latest tv shows, movies, etc.. But somehow i think there up to money for nothing again. Too bad content industry cant modernize there business models to better serve modern consumers. I think it joke that i have to wait 6 months or more before tv shows become available here in scandinavia.
Yep did try netflix, even thats lagging behind badly.
Funny acronyms (Score:1)
But, why do they then choose acronyms that are so easy to make fun of?
ASCAP: Ass-Cap (put a cap in yo ass)
SABAM: Sa-*BAM* (like punching someone in a Batman comic book)
I'm sure there are fun mis-pronunciations for the equivalent associations in other countries as well. Anyone from other countries want to contribute more?
No 'Net For You (Score:1)
I think a simple solution to this asshattery should be a policy, or a law, among all Belgian ISP's and Wireless providers to refuse to take on SABAM, their members, and their families as customers. If they cannot get internet service, besides begin really fucking funny, it should send a clear message to the rest of the world.
Also, given this level of mental retardation, what are the laws in Belgium surrounding having someone committed to mental illness facility. Surely they qualify?
Thoughts?
We should be suing Sabam (Score:2)
Yes, we should be demanding a large share of their profits for:
-- Allowing them to live on OUR planet;
-- Breathe OUR air;
-- Drinking OUR water and then contaminating it by pissing it out;
-- Tolerating their greed, foolishness, short-sightedness, and stupidity; and
-- Poorly mimicking the behavior of politicians.
These people truly are a waste of skin.
FOAD (Score:2)
That's a nice internet you got've there (Score:2)
shame if anything were to happen to it..
Re: (Score:3)
Do we actually have to kill these maggots to stop all this non-sense? They want to eat us alive.
yes but thats illeagle and nukes from orbit won't do it they are the only thing left that will survive it
Re: (Score:1)
High quality video and music files in open formats that will play on multiple platforms cannot be "legally purchased", so this is moot. Requiring that someone buy a product from company A (i.e., a blu-ray player, or DRM-supporting playback device), so that they can use a product by company B (the actual content), is called collusion and is illegal in many jurisdictions.
The laws don't apply to big corporations though.
Re: (Score:2)
The ruthlessly filthy evil monsters that rule Belgium today still teach schoolchildren about the 'glories' of Belgium rule in Africa. The Belgium Holocaust in the Congo rivals the communist Holocausts in the USSR and China as the greatest Holocaust of the 20th Century.
[citation needed]
I've been raised in Belgium and I was taught of these horrible massive killings made first by the King's people and then the Belgian authorities.
Re: (Score:1)
This is a shitty attempt at a google bomb.
Hell, First-posters are more meaningful.
Re: (Score:1)
Is "both" an allowed response?