Canada's Copyright Board Shuts Down Industry's Request For 'You Must Be A Criminal Tax' On MicroSD Cards
from the moore's-law-is-a-constant,-your-blank-media-levy-shouldn't-be dept
The Copyright Board of Canada (CBC) is hastening the demise of the "you must be a criminal" tax on blank media, at least in Canada. Granted, it's chosen to allow the $0.29 per blank CD tariff to continue until that media form's eventual demise, but it seems to be offering that to the CPCC (Canadian Private Copying Collective) in lieu of something it wanted much, much more -- a tariff on microSD cards. (It could also be a form of stasis -- something easier to maintain than uproot. The decision points out that levies on cassette tapes continued all the way through 2009.)
Even though it is allowing the levy on CDs to continue, the CCB points out how ridiculous this action is.
Blank CDs are low-price, low-margin goods. Increasing the per unit levy on them probably leads to an increase in price. Triggering an increase in the price of a good close to or at the end of its life cycle through an external factor such as a levy imposed by a government agency seems absurd.Absurd? Absolutely. But there's nothing about applying a "you must be a criminal" tax to blank media that isn't.
There are several problems inherent in the CPCC's tariff demands, not the least of which is the application of static rates to technology that increases in capacity while dropping in price. Here's what the CPCC proposed back in 2011:
CPCC proposed to maintain the current rate of 29¢ per blank CD and to set rates of 50¢ per microSD card of one gigabyte or less, $1.00 per card of more than one but less than eight gigabytes, and $3.00 per card of eight gigabytes or more. It argued that both blank CDs and microSD cards qualify as audio recording media and that the proposed rates are reasonable.And here's what's wrong with that proposal according to Michael Geist:
The financial impact of the levy would be significant. A 2GB SD card currently sells for about $6.00 and this would add an additional dollar or almost 15% to the cost. Given that the levy would remain static (or even increase) but the costs of SD cards are dropping by roughly 30% annually, the percentage of levy in the overall cost would likely gradually increase over time. Moreover, music plays a small role in the use of memory cards. A recent report indicates that digital cameras are the primary market for SD cards with smartphones the second biggest (and fastest growing) market. Music is a small part of the equation, yet the CPCC is demanding payment for every memory card sold in Canada regardless of its intended or actual use.Geist wrote this back in 2011 when the CPCC was pursuing a tariff on nearly every form of blank media. Since then, prices have continued to drop and storage capacity has expanded, which would make the tariff the most significant portion of the purchase price if allowed. And, of course, the CPCC was basing this on the assumption that consumers primarily buy media cards in order to store pirated content, something that clearly isn't true. (This argument is also deployed by entities like the MPAA in reference to other technological advances -- for instance, it expressed concern that faster internet speeds will just help people infringe more efficiently.)
The CPCC must have at least partially understood the uphill battle it was fighting as it abandoned every other form of memory except microSD cards in September of 2011. Then the Canadian government gave it the shaft when it excluded microSD cards from tariffs with legislation enacted on October 18, 2012. What all this activity boils down to is the CPCC fighting for a chance to collect a retroactive tariff on microSD cards sold between Jan. 1, 2012 and October 17, 2012.
Even in that limited window, the CBC has chosen not to allow CPCC to pursue this tariff, primarily because the costs of determining what amount should be collected and the collection efforts themselves would far outweigh the income received, especially since the CCB would not allow the CPCC to use its outdated methodology (see above) to determine the levy rate.
[T]he royalties generated would most likely be relatively modest, and certainly less than what CPCC proposed for the following reasons. CPCC’s proposed rates rely on the Stohn/Audley model which determines royalty rates as the product of a price per track and the number of tracks copied onto the blank media. The price per track is the same for both microSD cards and blank CDs: one cannot expect it to be higher for the former than the latter. But because of its reliance on the number of tracks copied, the model tends to generate high royalty rates for microSD cards. Having decided to abandon the model for blank CDs, we would not use it either to set a levy on microSD cards. As a result, a strong possibility exists that the amounts to distribute would be less than the costs entailed in collecting and distributing the levy…The CBC does note, however, that its decision not to certify this tariff doesn't completely shut down every avenue the CPCC might want to take in pursuit of fees it clearly believes it's owed. It offers up this possible angle, which seems to contain a bit of a jab in the direction of industries that have tried to litigate themselves back into profitability.
When taken as a whole, the circumstances of this case make any attempt at certifying a fair and equitable tariff for microSD cards impossible. The determination, implementation and enforcement of any potential tariff will almost inevitably be largely futile, certainly unfair and considerably disruptive. This is an exceptional situation, one that lends itself to the proper exercise of our discretion to refuse to certify a tariff not because of a lack of evidence, but because any tariff we would set would be, under these very special circumstances, manifestly unfair and inequitable.
Private parties are free to litigate even when this makes no economic sense. An application before the Board is not a civil cause of action.So, there's that, if the CPCC wants it. The consumer certainly doesn't and probably doesn't appreciate being charged a "pirate tax" for media that very possibly will be filled with content of their own creation.
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: canada, copyright levy, microsd
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
If you are going to be treated like a criminal, you may as well be one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
With all the licenses I have purchased in my lifetime, all the levied money I have paid, I figure I have a right to a set of google glasses with open access to the labels library of music up to the year 2000. sony can foot the bill for the glasses as an apology for the root-kit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Does this count as piracy credit so that I can now feel free to pirate an equivalent amount of music as I purchased?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
In addition, what about people like me? I intentionally avoid giving money to businesses who engage in practices I disagree with. These laws force me to subsidize those businesses.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yep, that pretty much nails it on the head.
When I was in university, I used to buy 6-8 CDs a month. And then I got a car with a CD player instead of a cassette deck (yes, I'm dating myself)
When I got nailed with the "you must be a criminal" levies on buying blank CDs to make mix CDs, and then had a huge levy (~$30 as I recall) on the first gen iPod... well, if they want to treat me like a criminal, then I might as well download my music anyways. And my CD buying rapidly decreased as a result.
Not that this legally justifies my actions of course. But if you want to treat people like criminals, don't be surprised if start acting like it as well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
signed,
the inernet
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Which is pretty much like a cop going on a murder spree "well, criminals clearly brought it upon innocent bystanders by doing crime and stuff, it's their fault that now I kill indiscriminately" (obviously, he'd be talking about jaywalking).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How much?
Here in the UK, if you buy a spindle of 50, they are 8p each, I make that 10 Canadian cents. That’s 290% of the product value!
Who the hell agreed to that?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How much?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: How much?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Only in certain limited circumstances...
That only applies to CDRs specifically labeled for music use.
It's pretty trivial to avoid those.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How much?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How much?
Spindle and bulk pricing is the modern price and the static price point has never dropped to meet that modern price
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How much?
Fun fact: there is no levy on blank DVDs, so blank DVDs are notably cheaper than blank CDs here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anyone who is successful, owes us money.
Anyone who makes money, only does it by stealing from us!
It is nice to see some pushback finally, as they try to apply nonsensical systems of old to new things.
Who knows, if they get told enough maybe they'll update their playbook to the 1980s.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Who pirates onto CDs or MicroSD cards anyway?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Who pirates onto CDs or MicroSD cards anyway?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Who pirates onto CDs or MicroSD cards anyway?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Who pirates onto CDs or MicroSD cards anyway?
Sure you can. There are all sorts of ways to go about this since laptop hard drives are 2TB now.
Tech advances.
Although I still dig my aging 500M Archos.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Criminality Taxes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Criminality Taxes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ONLY reason to get rid of levies
FUCK THE SPYING SACKS A SHIT USA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ONLY reason to get rid of levies
Oh well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
and consumers dont mind paying a levy
the rest of us would like some fuckin peace
and HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: and consumers dont mind paying a levy
Also, what illegal sales are you talking about?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: and consumers dont mind paying a levy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wrong Target
Pirates do not steal, they infringe. Leeches are directly taking real money they haven't earned.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wrong Target
They should be done away with. But I would settle for some extremely hefty penalties that make it cheaper for them to get their house in order and do proper bookkeeping and accounting of exactly what they own and from who they collect, and how much the artists get paid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
makes more sense than THEIR scheme...
...and would give better results for society ! ! !
art guerrilla
aka ann archy
eof
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Levy vs. lawsuit
Doesn't the payment of the levy inoculate the consumer from being sued? Or do they only sue based on the distribution and not the actual copying?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147220
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Right idea, wrong perp.
As far as the responsible parties go: I think "scrutiny" would be letting them off easy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Remember those, in the last days of record stores? Sold near the cash register, marked up because of the royalties paid to music industry? They had great little descriptions on them "Designed for premium audio experience" and "bit-perfect recording for when it matters for your sound experience".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Same hypothesis in the UK, but my CD-Rs heartily disagree with it every time they happily store the open source freeware I put on them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Root of the Problem
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
End of life cycle
At this point the only advantage of the technology is to be found in the flaws in the technology.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]