Charlie Angus proposes amendments to the Copyright Act that “will ensure that artists are getting paid for their work, and that consumers aren’t criminalized for moving their legally-obtained music from one format to another.”
The so-called “iPod tax” is resurfacing in Canada with news that New Democratic Party MP Charlie Angus has introduced a a pair of proposals to amend the country’s Copyright Act.
One would extend the Private Copying Levy, first established back in 1997, to portable media players like iPods. Specifically, C-499 says the tax will cover any “device that contains a permanently embedded data storage medium, including solid state or hard disk, designed, manufactured and advertised for the purpose of copying sound recordings, excluding any prescribed kind of recording device.”
This would finally give consumers some much needed control over legally purchased products while simultaneously opening up a new revenue stream for artists in the downloading age.
“Artists have a right to get paid and consumers have a right to access works,” he says in a press release. “This is what balanced copyright is all about. The government has declared their intention to update the Copyright Act. If they are serious then we need to update key elements of the act like the copying levy and fair dealing.”
The other is a “fair dealing” motion (M-506) that would allow reasonable use of copyrighted materials for innovation, research and study.
It states:
29. Fair dealing of a copyrighted work for purposes such as research, private study, criticism, news reporting or review, is not an infringement of copyright.
Angus said that after years of talk, it’s time parliamentarians got serious about updating our copyright laws.
“Digital locks and suing fans are not going to prevent people from copying music from one format to another,” he said. “The levy is a solution that works. By updating it, we will ensure that artists are getting paid for their work, and that consumers aren’t criminalized for moving their legally-obtained music from one format to another.”
However, the renowned Canadian academic and law professor Michael Geist, though “supportive” of the fair dealing proposal, finds the iPod tax troubling. Why? Because the device definition is vague enough that it could also cover smartphones and PCs.
“While the CPCC (the private copying collective) may not target all of these devices, there is nothing in the bill that prevents them from doing so,” he says.
Geist also worries that since video recordings are not included it could mean the introduction of a new tax at a later date, pushing it perhaps to upwards of $100 or more.
Most important of all, though a noble experiment it is, the iPod tax would only cause consumers to purchase iPods and other devices covered by the tax outside of Canada where it didn’t apply. As for how much it would be one can only guess, but the last time around was in the $75 range.
The Canada’s Private Copyright Collective (CPCC) has been pushing for a similar levy as far back as 2007, but those efforts were defeated early last year by the country’s Federal Court of Appeals.
Stay tuned.
jared@zeropaid.com
[Hat Tip]
If they charge us $75 on the player, its only fair that they state in the law that content shifting is fair use, and ban digital locks. Otherwise this law is unfair to consumers since we are being locked out of placing content on our devices but at the same time being charged for that form of use.
It doesn’t mention DRM, but yes, that had be better be the case.
It ought to also legalize P2P for $75 would buy an awful lot of iTunes singles.
The funny thing is that it’s sad state of affairs when the public’s being asked to pony up extra cash just to be able to do with it as you please.
Imagine if car manufacturers tried to dictate when and where you could use a car you bought and paid for.,
It’s ridiculous.
Devil horns shown with fingers is he a NDP or a freemason. Its fine with me I don’t like apple business model. All I need is here:
http://www.anythingbutipod.com/
I am aware of the fact that the blank media tax worked against CRIA when they argued in court that their flimsy evidence was sufficient to break all sorts of privacy laws to go after file-sharers years ago. I can see this being a second barrier for copyright industry bully tactics, though that won’t stop them from demanding the ability to jail an entire generation for being customers.