Proposes $5 monthly tax on internet connections in exchange for allowing users to share music for free on P2P and file-sharing networks.The Songwriters Association of Canada has announced a new proposal calling for the legalization of sharing music on P2P and file-sharing networks. In "A Proposal for the Monetization of the File-Sharing of Music," as they refer to it as, the SAC wants to make it legal to share music with others online. In return, it proposes that a $5.00 "licensing fee" be added to every internet subscription bill each month. The songwriters argue that this revenue generated by legalizing both the uploading and downloading of music will help offset the current losses associated with illegal file-sharing and in fact lead to a significant new source of income for music creators and the record industry. Revenue generated by the licensing fee will distributed based on a sampling of file-sharing activities at the time. The SAC would track internet and wireless file sharing activity on a census basis. Virtually all sharing on the internet and wireless devices would be tracked. The SAC also says that existing music sites like iTunes and PureTracks would continue to be licenced directly by Creators and rights holders and would continue to develop the attractive “value added” services and security features that keep them distinct from file-sharing activities. It also states that it is not opposed to the legal protection of Technical Protection Measures (TPM) or “digital locks”, however it believes the obvious "economic benefits" of the $5.00 per month licensing fee model make such protection measures obsolete. "Given the consumer aversion to TPM’s, we believe their use will inhibit the success of recordings in which they are embedded, and they will simply fall out of use," it notes.
Aside from the claim that "Canada has given the world some of the greatest music ever produced," which I hope isn't a reference to Celine Dixon or Bryan Adams, at first glance the idea seemed pretty darn good to me. I mean only $5 bucks each month for all the music you want to cram onto your PC's HDD? But, then I read a couple of responses to the proposal and I had a change of heart. Here's a sampling of just a few:
I think each of these guys make a really good point about why it may not be such a good thing after all. We currently pay a hidden tax on everything capable of storing music, irregardless of whether or not it's even used for such a purpose. Buy a blank DVD-R to back up data. Tax. Memory card for your phone. Tax. Even media players were taxed for a time in Canada up until 2004. The point is that it won't be just this tax that file-sharers will have to pay, it will be in addition to all the existing taxes on memory and blank media. Also, what's to prevent movie and software lobbying organizations from demanding their own $5 licensing fee? Unless the $5 allows all types of content to be shared legally online then I think this proposal may be a tough sell to Canadian internet subscribers, especially those who don't even use P2P or file-sharing programs. Looking for more stuff to watch or download?
|
 
|
|
Just My opinion, could be wrong, But probably right !
This what I thought at first, however if they gave P2P legal protection then you would see people downloading more then $5 of music every month. Although I'm still uncomfortable with making people pay for a luxury service they may or may not use.
"Sure - The Songwriters Association of Canada want their $5. Then the movie people will want THEIR $5. Then the gaming people will want THEIR $5. The recipe people will want their $5. ETC, ETC."
This is what I find to be a big problem with the whole thing. It starts off as $5 for the music industry, but then the movie and software industries will want to get a piece of the action and they will probably want more then $5 (since its more expensive to make movies and software). So it may end up a $20-$40 per month tax, that could double the price people pay for internet service. Most people these days can't afford that.
"Given the consumer aversion to TPM’s, we believe their use will inhibit the success of recordings in which they are embedded, and they will simply fall out of use,"
Well finally someone admits that DRM (or TPM in this case) is hated by consumers and devalues a product. I wish I had him saying that on tape. Maybe I'd make it into a nice techno-mix...lol
Just how would you make this kind of thing optional??? You would have to look at every bit of data a consumer downloads/uploads and then check it against a list of copyrighted material. Its just not something possible, nor something I want to ever be possible.
Look at it this way: if you pay the $5, you do what you want with your music and you're guaranteed to be safe from CRIA and the likes. If you don't pay the $5, you had better be looking over your back all the time.
As far as what other industries might say, give them the same rules. make them PROVE they should be making a certain amount per year that they arent with legalized p2p. adding an extra $1 or $2 per major industry might not end up being that costly to the average customer.
Another idea i had while posting this is if its a government fund that gets split up between copyright holders. that way, no one is saying "me too!" and making the tax go up and up. Just make everyone make a large pool of money that the copyright holders can dip into.
realisticly speaking though, i dont think it would ever work. the CRIA would not settle for less than $5 per person, and making a big pool would get everyone jumping in at the same time causing all sorts of hilarious fights. and all that mess without even considering the non-filesharers and their feelings.
"The SAC would track internet and wireless file sharing activity on a census basis. Virtually all sharing on the internet and wireless devices would be tracked."
In the U.S. that would be open season for the F.B.I. to tap into everyone.
Sure, songwriters get paid, then performers, then movie distributors, then screenwriters, then actors, then someone else needs their cut. But aren't the labels paying them now?
Let's face it. People are fed up with getting screwed and they've stopped buying their music. Celiene who? Indie is not just a genre. They are better anyway. I don't miss labels or their big heads.
THAT would be a much better idea. then again, from their standpoint, they wouldnt be making money from the people that arent downloading music. its legalized stealing for both P2P and the CRIA.
Our home and native land!
True patriot love in all thy sons command.
With glowing hearts we see thee rise,
The True North strong and free!
From far and wide,
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
God keep our land glorious and free!
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
but i cant really say that this is a solution to "legal downloading"
they had their chance and blew it --Oink R.I.P.-- so they are too late......i think
people will just not do it because they know they can get it free :P