France Wants To Extend Private Copying Levy To Tablets... But Not If They Run Microsoft Windows

from the say-what-now? dept

Tue, Dec 28th 2010 10:28am — Mike Masnick

Kurata points us to the news that French politicians are debating extending the "you must be a criminal" private copying levy to tablet computers -- but, oddly, the new levy would not apply to tablets running Windows (Google translation from the original French). The tax would apply to any iPad or Android-based device, but apparently Windows tablets won't be counted, since they'll be classified as full computers, while the other tablets are in this new taxable category. Not surprisingly, this has some companies up in arms, with the French-based Archos particularly steamed, since it's producing Android-based tablets, and doesn't like the fact that its government seems to be giving preferential treatment to an American company.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: android, copyright, france, ipad, private copying levies, tablets, windows
Companies: archos, microsoft

50 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

crade (profile), 28 Dec 2010 @ 10:22am

Good for microsoft. Legislation is an easier way to get rid of pesky competition than work is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Jesse, 28 Dec 2010 @ 1:07pm
  
  Re:
  Hasn't that been the business model since like, 1985?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Dec 2010 @ 10:37am

The one thing you can count on to get the French riled up is appearing to give preference to an American company. This will probably go nowhere in this form.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- crade (profile), 28 Dec 2010 @ 11:01am
  
  Re:
  appearing?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Jesse, 28 Dec 2010 @ 1:09pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Grammar Nazi:
    
    Someone who has failed to grasp that forums are not in fact English essays. Language has always varied according to context, just as we use different types of words in a job interview compared to with our mates.
    
    /nice fail tho...
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - crade (profile), 28 Dec 2010 @ 1:50pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      I don't care about grammar, my grammar is un-good :). I just thought "appearing" was being far too kind by leaving the possibility they might not actually *be* giving the preference.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - nasch (profile), 29 Dec 2010 @ 7:46am
    
    Re: Re:
    Please note that actually giving preference to an American company will also result in appearing to do so.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- el_segfaulto (profile), 28 Dec 2010 @ 11:59am
  
  Re:
  I'd argue that they are giving preference to an OS rather than an American company. Windows 7 is a full-fledged operating system, although in honesty I don't know where you draw the line between what qualifies as a "tablet" operating system as opposed to a regular one. Personally I'd rather not see any tablets taxed but c'est la vie.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - crade (profile), 28 Dec 2010 @ 12:06pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Since the OS is the product of the company and no one else can make it, giving preference to the OS and to the company is the same thing.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - vivaelamor (profile), 28 Dec 2010 @ 12:20pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      "Since the OS is the product of the company and no one else can make it, giving preference to the OS and to the company is the same thing."
      
      I think the test would be whether they would apply the same exemption to a tablet shipped with Ubuntu or something similar that has the same capabilities as on a PC.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - crade (profile), 28 Dec 2010 @ 12:21pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Pretty sure you can install linux on an android anyway.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 28 Dec 2010 @ 1:12pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        you can install froyo on an iphone 3g. I'm sure it's possible.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        ethana2, 28 Dec 2010 @ 3:24pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I think you mean Ubuntu. Android and Ubuntu are both linux based OSes. No one is going to bother trying to get Fedora, CentOS, or Suse running on one of these things.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        crade (profile), 28 Dec 2010 @ 3:31pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        It depends on the device I guess. I was thinking gentoo myself.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Doc, 29 Dec 2010 @ 1:50am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        If you've followed the tech news, Android IS Linux. Everything that is now running Android, are running LINUX.
        
        Google are good at making money on FOSS stuff, aren't they
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Marcel de Jong (profile), 29 Dec 2010 @ 2:40am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        it's a nice example of how to make money with open source software indeed. Despite what the naysayers have always said.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Richard (profile), 28 Dec 2010 @ 12:10pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Windows 7 is a full-fledged operating system, although in honesty I don't know where you draw the line between what qualifies as a "tablet" operating system as opposed to a regular one.
    But the tablets don't run Windows 7 - they run Windows CE.
    
    So Microsoft are actually getting an exemption because their operating system for tablets has a similar name to a PC operating system.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 28 Dec 2010 @ 12:21pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      No, they ether run Windows 7 starter or Windows embedded which is Windows 7 slimmed way down but still fully functional (or just full blown Windows 7 depending on the tablet). Windows CE is mostly used now a days for dedicated hardware like ATMs.
      
      Ether way, Android is just a specialized front end for Linux. That's still a full blown installed operating system, so the exemption is silly.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 28 Dec 2010 @ 1:51pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        It's worse than silly, it's bass-ackward. It's easier to 'pirate' stuff with Windows OS than with iOS.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Joseph, 1 Jan 2011 @ 10:48pm
  
  Re:
  Would Americans be upset if their government gave tax or regulatory advantages to a foreign company? Yeah, I think they would be.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Dec 2010 @ 11:14am

Of course they shouldn't tax Microsoft tablets! You can do anything on one of those tablets that you can do with any normal computer, unlike the silly Android and iPad toys. Only tax Microsoft tablets if they start taxing all PCs the same way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- crade (profile), 28 Dec 2010 @ 11:58am
  
  Re:
  "You can do anything on one of those tablets that you can do with any normal computer"
  Yeah the exact same thing you can do on android and iPad - run programs written for that OS and hardware.
  Whatever you think excludes Android or IPad from being a "real" computer could be written and released tomorrow if it isn't already, or I could write my own.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Dec 2010 @ 12:25pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Could be, but never will. They're just toys.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Jesse, 28 Dec 2010 @ 1:14pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Yes, that's why mine, along with hundreds of other companies, the entire pharma industry (which has more money than god) Are dev'ing for iPads.
      
      Oh wait, some anonymous zealot from the internet says it's a toy, never mind.
      
      Oh wait, he's just another retard who doesn't know anything about what he's commenting on, were all back on!
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Marcus Carab (profile), 29 Dec 2010 @ 6:37am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Are you a troll or just a fool?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
The eejit (profile), 28 Dec 2010 @ 11:16am

Heh. So France is violating its own antitrust laws in order....to prevent a monopoly.

Swing and a miss!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
PC, 28 Dec 2010 @ 11:22am

Time to sing
It's grrrrreaaaat... to be me. :)

*start-up sound*
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 28 Dec 2010 @ 12:09pm
  
  Re: Time to sing
  Somehow the Windows 95 start-up sound poped into my head. It is now the notification noise on my cell phone.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - nasch (profile), 29 Dec 2010 @ 7:56am
    
    Re: Re: Time to sing
    Oh, you mean this sound?
    
    http://endlessvideo.com/watch?v=CRGZZvxDd-A
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Kevin (profile), 28 Dec 2010 @ 11:28am

Are we really all that shocked
The only thing France has ever done consistently is say "nous nous rendons!" (Google Translation)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
abc gum, 28 Dec 2010 @ 11:48am

The whole idea of remuneration simply because something might be used to infringe is stupid. If creators of content are to be subsidised, then so be it, but do not atempt to foist the responsibility upon those who have nothing to do with the infringement. That is simply bad policy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- vivaelamor (profile), 28 Dec 2010 @ 12:23pm
  
  Re:
  "The whole idea of remuneration simply because something might be used to infringe is stupid. If creators of content are to be subsidised, then so be it, but do not atempt to foist the responsibility upon those who have nothing to do with the infringement. That is simply bad policy."
  
  Kinda reminds me of the UK TV licence. They just don't like calling things a tax.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Dec 2010 @ 3:32pm
    
    Re: Re:
    What would happen to EastEnders without the TV Tax?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - vivaelamor (profile), 29 Dec 2010 @ 12:47am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      "What would happen to EastEnders without the TV Tax?"
      
      The same thing as Coronation Street? It would continue anyway because people like stuff that I find repulsive.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Dec 2010 @ 12:07pm

Seriously, Im confused.
I have the same question in regard to the Canadian blank media fee.

If you pay these fees in advance, fees that say "I am paying a price for potentially being able to place pirated [whatever] on this media."
Shouldn't that mean that you are legally allowed to place the pirated [whatever] on the media?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- crade (profile), 28 Dec 2010 @ 12:16pm
  
  Re: Seriously, Im confused.
  The great lie with these fee's (in Canada at least)
  is that they don't allow the consumer to do anything.
  
  We are paying to allow us to copy things we already own such as copying our records to tape, making MP3s out of CDs we have already purchased or recording the game to watch after work.
  The giant lie is that no one in the country honestly believes creators deserve to get compensated again when we do these activities and the only thing people can contemplate they are paying for is the right to copy things they haven't already fully paid for the right to use. The only reason we have any levy is because politicians make sure people don't understand what it is for.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - abc gum, 28 Dec 2010 @ 1:07pm
    
    Re: Re: Seriously, Im confused.
    "We are paying to allow us to copy things we already own "
    
    Heh - you only bought a license.
    
    I do not recall any content which restricts, via EULA or otherwise, the medium upon which it can be transferred to.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - crade (profile), 28 Dec 2010 @ 1:23pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Seriously, Im confused.
      "Heh - you only bought a license."
      There is no license. What you buy is a copy of a sound recording. What you are allowed to do with it is restricted by the copyright act, not by a license agreement.
      
      The restrictions were in the copyright act because copying didn't used to be required for regular use of the copy as often as they are now. The restriction was the default (you can't make copies of anything for any reason ever period) and was taken out with the private copying exception (you can now make private copies for your own personal use, but not distribute them in any way) when they put the levy in.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 28 Dec 2010 @ 1:40pm
      
      Re: You Only Bought A Licence
      Where does it say in the record shops and video shops that they are only selling licences?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - abc gum, 29 Dec 2010 @ 6:27am
        
        Re: Re: You Only Bought A Licence
        The intent was to make light of licensing claims by the music industry. I have yet to encounter said license when purchasing a CD, so I guess it is just hot air.
        
        For example:
        "When you buy a CD you own the physical product, but you are only licensing the music"
        
        http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/letters/beyond-small-print-copyright-breaches-are-plain -theft/2009/08/09/1249756207131.html
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Marcus Carab (profile), 28 Dec 2010 @ 12:25pm
  
  Re: Seriously, Im confused.
  Shouldn't that mean that you are legally allowed to place the pirated [whatever] on the media?
  
  In fact, yes. It has created a ridiculous legal vortex here where if you have material for personal uses on leveed media then it is not infringement - however it is on any other media.
  
  So if I download an album from an unauthorized, I am infringing - but then if I burn it to a CD (leveed) and remove it from my hard-drive (not leveed) I am no longer infringing. It's rather bizarre and to my knowledge there are a lot of questions about the details that have yet to be sorted out in court.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Dec 2010 @ 12:39pm

What about a dual-boot tablet, with both Linux and Windows on it? Would it be exempt from the tax because it had Windows?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- senshikaze (profile), 29 Dec 2010 @ 4:13am
  
  Re:
  if it came with window, then yes.
  
  Are there places that will sell pre-dualboot computers from the factory? that would be cool.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bernard, 28 Dec 2010 @ 1:21pm

I think the French are counting on the Windows tablets not actually functioning properly, therefore you couldn't copy anything if you wanted to.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
joe, 28 Dec 2010 @ 5:42pm

toys? yea, but not some GNU/Linux varients
All tablets are toys. The limitations are just sick. However some of the GNU/Linux variants potentially are a bit more functional on the tablets than the OS on the iPad and MS Windows variants. Free software is undoing infringement not encouraging it. If anything a tax should be levied against Microsoft and Apple because those who purchase have shown a willingness to use non-free software. Something they will have to pay for and might infringe.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Marcus Carab (profile), 29 Dec 2010 @ 6:39am
  
  Re: toys? yea, but not some GNU/Linux varients
  What is your definition of "toy" exactly?
  
  Plenty of people are using tablets to enhance their productivity in all sorts of fields. A tablet is not the same kind of tool as a desktop or a laptop, but it is still a tool.
  
  Just because you can't see how one would be useful to you doesn't mean they are "all toys"
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
SImon, 28 Dec 2010 @ 9:01pm

Tax Microsoft....
One should get a 30% discount for not using windows on any piece of computer hardware.
Until one gets the same level of software support for non Microsoft OS's, from the hardware manufacturers, one shouldn't be expected to pay as high a price.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Woadan, 29 Dec 2010 @ 10:17am

It's an interestingly cynical logic at work here, but logic it is.

Android tablets and the iPad use a smartphone OS, while the Windows tablets use Windows 7 (or, previously, Vista or XP), a computer OS. It's the exact same OS as otherwise, but with added functionality.

In Windows XP, it was an actual add-on to the OS from MS. In Vista and 7, it's functionality that is turned off by default for workstations/desktops/notebooks. You just go to the Control Panel and turn it on.

Even though I think it is cynical, the distinction is being drawn around the OS, so there is a logic to it involved.

Wonder if MS was behind the distinction?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
hippie, 30 Dec 2010 @ 11:33am

Micro$oft
... i know what to do ... i don't use Micro$oft products ... and yes it's possible to live that way ... cheers from Paris.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
prax, 3 Jan 2011 @ 6:48am

To the Micro$oft fans who consider their normal computers..

Have a look at top500.org

I am writing this on a linux mint machine where win7 x64 was crashed almost every hour (for strange driver issues though)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]