Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Media (Apple) Media The Almighty Buck

Dutch Pass iPod Tax 873

An anonymous reader writes "The Register is reporting that in a few short months a proposal to tax all MP3 players in the Netherlands will become law. The levy taxes 3.28 euros ($4.30 US) for every gigabyte of capacity. This means a 60GB iPod Photo will be hit for an additional 196 euros ($258), all of it going to the record industry's copyright collection agencies. And they call file sharers thieves?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Dutch Pass iPod Tax

Comments Filter:
  • by plsavaria ( 823160 ) * on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:06AM (#12380737)
    And I believed the 15$ tax was heavy in Canada...

    I hate to pay a "steal" tax. But if I'd pay 258$ steal tax, I'd "steal"....

  • wow. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by eobanb ( 823187 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:08AM (#12380744) Homepage
    This means a 60GB iPod Photo will be hit for an additional 196 euros ($258), all of it going to the record industry's copyright collection agencies

    I think SOMEONE didn't quite think this through. I don't doubt that consumers will simply revolt, either running across the border to purchase their electronics, or just not buying them, until some idiot politicians receive enough letters and this whole measure is canned.
  • by muntjac ( 805565 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:08AM (#12380751)
    wheres the details? sounds ridiculous and I wager it's not true.
  • Big Deal (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Hank Chinaski ( 257573 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:09AM (#12380755) Homepage
    because it takes like 2 and half hours from e.g. Amsterdam to drive to the next big german city, where a lot of people will be more than happy to sell mp3 players to angry dutch customers.

    and: people will just buy them by mail order, because there is no customs check inside the EU.
  • by joelparker ( 586428 ) <joel@school.net> on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:09AM (#12380762) Homepage
    This is even more reason for an MP3 player to come with a drive bay. You buy it without a drive, then add your own. Makes upgrades a snap, and has no Dutch taxes!
  • by meatflower ( 830472 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:10AM (#12380763)
    I thought it was a joke. Adding $258 to the cost of a 60gb Ipod? Thats not a tax, that is the stupidest thing I've ever heard!
    Like the article says, what happens when we get 100gb, or 200gb ipods (it'll happen eventually), then we're talking about not just doubling the cost of an Ipod but tripling it.
    Don't they realise this amazingly exorbitant taxation will only lead to illegal importing? And I thought the U.S. Government had lost its way....
  • by born_to_live_forever ( 228372 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:10AM (#12380765) Homepage
    There's a similar levy on blank media, in my native Denmark.

    But, I honestly don't see how they can justify having a levy on media that can be used for assumed copyright infringement, and at the same time seek redress for copyright infringement - isn't the levy supposed to be a sort of "shared" payment for the copyright infringement that occurs?

    I mean, they can't have both. Either they have un-levied media, and sue copyright infringers. Or the other way around. Having both is getting paid twice for the same supposed loss.

    And that looks like fraud to me.
  • by Antony-Kyre ( 807195 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:10AM (#12380767)
    The concept of taxing something to offset the effects of illegal activity. I mean, it hurts those who use it for legit purposes. But I guess this is what happens when the special interest groups and the lobbyists get their way. Perhaps we need a higher rate of legislators per number of persons, which would allow grassroot campaigning.
  • by ABeowulfCluster ( 854634 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:13AM (#12380784)
    not 'pass' tax. Hasn't been passed yet.
  • Great move (Score:5, Insightful)

    by LemonFire ( 514342 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:14AM (#12380791) Homepage
    This is really great news!

    It's always great to see how the recording industry penalizes a system that allows people to legally listen to music.

    I'm sure that the record industry's copyright collection agencies will hand the money gathered through this tax to needy musicians.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm all for musicians being able to make a living, but penalizing a system that encourages people to buy music online is just plain stupid.

  • Re:The result... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by khellendros1984 ( 792761 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:15AM (#12380800) Journal
    mmmmmmmm.....iPot.....
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:16AM (#12380806)
    Not really. That's what's called a government.

    Taxation without representation? Hmm... Maybe there'll be a Rotterdam iPod party. I'd buy that for a dollar.
  • by hruske ( 791821 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:16AM (#12380809)
    ... how can people get fooled n-times. First you pay tax when buying DRM protected music, that can't be played on your player (remember the BBC story about britons being frustrated with DRM?), then you pay tax *just in case* the music you store on your player is stolen. I mean WT*!! Isn't it enough to have to pay a very similar tax for all storage devices?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:21AM (#12380840)
    No the US doesn't, but it seems like this is a "we need compensation" type of deal. It would be like saying, hey Poland, we know that more than half of the software you sell is pirated, so now we are going to put a tax on CD-ROM drives. This is nothing more than extortion.
  • Re:wow. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Kevertje ( 681938 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:26AM (#12380867)
    That's exactly what will happen. 258$ will actually make it worth their while to drive to Germany to buy their mp3-players. And since borders are open in Europe, there is nothing the Dutch government can do about that.

    If they expect something like this to work, it needs to be worked out on a European scale, not just a national one...
  • by vrai ( 521708 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:29AM (#12380877)
    But why has all this money go to the corporate major label?
    Because they were the ones who paid the politicians to draft, advocate and pass the law. Don't make the mistake of thinking that only the US suffers from this problem. Any country with a large, highly centralised government (which is pretty much the entire Western World) is going to suffer from the same issue.

    The only solutions are to reduce the power of the government, and/or to move these powers to more regional authorities (thus increasing the cost require to influence the entire nation).

  • Apple/iPod... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by The New Andy ( 873493 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:32AM (#12380900) Homepage Journal
    Since this isn't an iPod specific law, why is this in the Apple section?
  • by Nogami_Saeko ( 466595 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:42AM (#12380933)
    Well, they "tried" to get a "per gigabyte" dollar value, but the CPCC got turned-down.

    Personally, if it passed, I'd just buy in the US and bring it into Canada (Canada Customs does NOT apply levies to purchases, just taxes). This sort of thing makes Canadian Retailers scream bloody murder.

    But the fact remains, the music industry can't have it both ways. If I pay the "MP3 player/media tax", then I have no moral issue at all with downloading or sharing files. If they want to revoke the levy, then I won't download. Simple as that.

    If they try and increase the levy AND ban file sharing, I'll buy my media/MP3 players out of the country AND still share files.

    N.
  • by spectrokid ( 660550 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:47AM (#12380951) Homepage
    There's dude, like, dude, TONS of germans, belgians and french, dude, hopping over the border to get hold of the more, like, exquisit Dutch agricultural products. And dude, I'm not talking, like fucking tulips here, right? So like, I guess the dudes just got themselves a whole new currency to pay with.
  • by Asmodai ( 13932 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:50AM (#12380969) Homepage
    You are right, the Dutch article/news mentioned iPod in particular because it is the predominant player in the market.

    But the news mentioned further that it goes for all players, and then it might also get applied to:

    USB keys, hard disk drives, cellular phones.

    But it is plain idiocy. I *CAN* use an USB key for storing illegal content, yes. But what about my recovery tools for systems I do administering for?

    I swear, where the photo industry has seen new opportunities now that digital photography is a hard reality the music industry is still a bunch of clueless morons living in the early 1920's.
  • by Shisha ( 145964 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:50AM (#12380973) Homepage
    You know what? If I bought an mp3 player in Netherlands and got taxed under the new law, I would feel it's my legal right to copy, distribute and share all my mp3s on p2p networks and also to download as many as I like. Because, after all, I already paid the music industry.

    But the whole thing is just utterly ridiculous. I don't download any music of p2p now, but I had to pay a tax like this I'm sure I'd start just to stir things up a bit.

    Btw. or I could buy the iPod in some other country.
  • by skingers6894 ( 816110 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:53AM (#12380983)
    Am I wrong in thinking the following?

    Guy puts a song on his server, gets hauled into court and is ordered to pay the RIAA (or the equivalent in whatever country we are talking about this week) for the lost revenue ie "damages"

    However, said country has a law in place that assumes all MP3 player owners will steal music and preemptively compensates the industry when the user buys the player. How then could the industry argue that people who share music are depriving them of revenue - they've already had it!
  • by Kjella ( 173770 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:53AM (#12380988) Homepage
    Within two years, as disk drive sizes move to terabyte class on notebooks, and petabyte levels on home DVRs, the tax will come to far outweigh not just the cost of the drive, but the cost of the device.

    You're telling me that in two years, we'll have 1000GB laptop drives (~10x up) and 1000000GB desktop drives (~2000x up)? Man, Moore must have been a pessimist. Particularly since HDDs have been slowing down *greatly*. Since the first 3x83=250GB HDDs came in 2003, the GB/platter count has been inching along (as far as computers are concerned, at least) with Seagate leading the pack with 133GB/platter. The only real "growth" has been from pushing the number of platters back up to 5 (The IBM GXP75 series had 5*15GB), leading to 5*100GB HDDs. Even hitting 1TB in 2007 seems optimistic just about now. I'd guess more like 800GB, unless there's a "TB race" on the way there was a "GHz race".

    Kjella
  • Re:An idea.. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by jim_v2000 ( 818799 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:58AM (#12381009)
    Build a better mousetrap and they build a better mouse... If they sold the drives separately, it would likely still qualify as an MP3 device, since it's purpose would be to store mp3's for an mp3 player. And even if it didn't, they'd probably modify the law so it did.
  • by Adrilla ( 830520 ) * on Friday April 29, 2005 @03:58AM (#12381012) Homepage
    addendum: I shouldn't say another piece of music. What I should say is; another piece of RIAA owned music. I wouldn't want to be a hypocrite and charge the innocent independent artists for the sins of the RIAA and their various counterparts.
  • ridiculous (Score:3, Insightful)

    by __aahlyu4518 ( 74832 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @04:04AM (#12381040)
    As I (in the Netherlands) still have the right to make a copy for personal use, this is a ridiculous proposal. I have NO illegal mp3's. All the music on my player, I have already paid for.

    There are allready taxes (small, but they are there anyway) on CDR(W) tapes etc... for the same purpose. People should start demanding those taxes back when they can prove that they burned data/audio on it they have either already paid for or does not require any payments (backups, linux distro etc). Better yet... remove these taxes altogether... as they are demonstrating the hideous way the world is turning into : a 'firewall' concept. Deny everyone, not only the 'bad' people, but also the good), and let the good people demand access, then grant them access.

    People are not computers. Rules (Laws) should be trying to prevent or punnish bad things, not to hinder good things.

    Put extra money into catching the bad guys, but don't get to much in the way of the good guys.

    I don't have anything to hide, but that doesn't mean you can invade my privacy.

    I don't have illegal music, so don't tax me like I do.
  • by tricorn ( 199664 ) <sep@shout.net> on Friday April 29, 2005 @04:07AM (#12381056) Journal

    Good grief, if they applied that to regular hard drives, you'd be paying $160 for the drive and over $1000 in music taxes for a 250GB drive! Drives are up to 500GB now, and are expected to be up to a TB in 2006, that would be a $4000 tax!

    While they're at it, why don't they just tack on a 10 cent tax per sheet of blank paper...maybe the book industry should claim that the reason sales of books are down is because of Internet file sharing.

  • by X0563511 ( 793323 ) * on Friday April 29, 2005 @04:15AM (#12381098) Homepage Journal
    Guess it's time to start marketing OGG players?
  • by masklinn ( 823351 ) <slashdot DOT org AT masklinn DOT net> on Friday April 29, 2005 @04:17AM (#12381105)
    The levy system is the opposed measure set up to make this legal.
    Since it's already legal, i guess you meant "to extort some money without getting raped trying to mess with the current laws".

    If this tax comes live, I guess the Belgian and German MP3-player markets will suddenly flourish while the neder??? (how do you spell "something from Nederlands"?) will drop to death.

    Good for germans & belgians, I guess...
  • by atomico ( 162710 ) <miguel.cardo@gmai l . com> on Friday April 29, 2005 @04:23AM (#12381130) Homepage
    I'm afraid they want to have it both ways... and, seeing how willing are European politicians to sell their vote to corporate interests, they will succeed:
    • People will have to pay an outrageous tax for all digital storage, no matter what they use it for. Guilty by default, the modern law principle.
    • Record companies will keep on suing filesharers.

    We already have to pay a levy on blank CDs in most European countries today, same as it was with blank magnetic media before.

    And of course, iPod sales in the Netherlands would suffer a huge drop... in such a small country, you can never be far away from the border.
  • so? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by torpor ( 458 ) <ibisum&gmail,com> on Friday April 29, 2005 @04:25AM (#12381138) Homepage Journal
    it was in the netherlands that i purchased the cheapest and coolest mp3 player i've ever seen.

    5 euro's.

    it didn't come with storage; it uses SD cards. so no tax applicable here.. because i just add my own 1gig SD cards, and away we go ..

    all this means is, in the netherlands, mp3 playing capability won't be paired with storage.. it'll be a user-add.
  • by doctormetal ( 62102 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @04:26AM (#12381142)
    You know what? If I bought an mp3 player in Netherlands and got taxed under the new law, I would feel it's my legal right to copy, distribute and share all my mp3s on p2p networks and also to download as many as I like. Because, after all, I already paid the music industry.

    But think about the enormous economical losses of this tax. People will stop buying MP3 players in the Netherlands. Instead they will be buying in Germany or Belgium. Same thing for the DVD tax: I buy all my DVD_Rs from Germany, not in the local shop.

    Most resellers are very afraid of this kind of taxes.
  • by john-da-luthrun ( 876866 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @04:29AM (#12381157)
    The single market in the European Union means that people living in the Netherlands can just buy their iPods, blank CD-Rs etc from a country like the UK, which doesn't impose taxes like this. Which is one reason why I bet the proposal will end up either being dropped, or else watered down sufficiently to create less of an incentive for shopping around.

    My worry is that the UK will end up being forced to adopt similar levies in the name of "harmonisation", which would be ruinously expensive for those of us who only buy blank CD-Rs to use for data rather than music.
  • by djmurdoch ( 306849 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @05:22AM (#12381341)
    Why do you find this scary? I think it's tremendous news that I'll have a petabyte (one million gigabytes) in my DVR in a couple of years. So what that those Dutch guys will have to pay $4,300,000 for one? I don't live there.

    Or maybe the Register got some of the details wrong in this article...

  • by sangdrax ( 132295 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @05:23AM (#12381343)
    Regular taxes are used to pay cops. This doesn't mean I'm entitled to commit a crime proportionally to the amount of tax I pay.

    The problem is, there is already tax on CDs and DVDs. It's just a few cents, so while some cry about the injustice, most don't really care. So it's only natural to extend this towards MP3 players as they perform the same function of carrying music.

    This is just a proposal, and it seems like the proposers were thinking about flash-based players, not about harddisk-based MP3 players, as the price is $4 per gig. They have no choice to adapt the proposel, since killing the harddisk-based MP3 player market (maybe along with several other markets such as harddisk recording VCRs; i actually don't know those are covered as well) is clearly not the idea.
  • by masklinn ( 823351 ) <slashdot DOT org AT masklinn DOT net> on Friday April 29, 2005 @05:33AM (#12381365)
    Good idea.
    Dammit, english is tough
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 29, 2005 @05:48AM (#12381400)
    But this is different. It's like you would be put to jail for 3 months for shoplifting you are able to do, since you've got hands.

    If you've already been to jail for 3 months for it, wouldn't you do the shoplifting? :)
  • by nahdude812 ( 88157 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @06:08AM (#12381454) Homepage
    I'd completely go for the iPod tax.

    Now I've paid for music, it's no longer illegal for me to go out and download it.

    I know that's not really how it'll work legally, but I've always strongly felt that if any standard tax is passed on devices for listening to music, then anyone in possession of such devices are free to access all the music with out limit. Why else have a tax if not to remove the individual purchase rate.

    I'd gladly give up $200 one-time for indefinate no-further-charge unlimited access to all the RIAA (or whatever it is in the Netherlands) music.

    All that said, it is a mockery of justice to have ANY corporation able to levy a tax on citizens for any reason. If this was a tax so the government could afford to cover the legal costs that *it* is incurring, then it falls well within what most standard taxes are for. But if it's a tax that presumes purchasers of a consumer device are going to use it for illegal ends, and compensate the, erm, "victims" in advance, then you've just created a "Guilty until proven innocent" model.

    Personally I have a 40g iPod which is about 2/3 full. Every single bit of data on it is something which I have a right to place there. I do believe in paying for music (though actually most of what I have on there is audio books -- which I've paid for). This sort of law would charge people like me, who are wholly operating within our rights within the law, for the crimes of others, with the presumption that I'm too weak minded to resist the temptation to break the law.
  • by schlick ( 73861 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @06:18AM (#12381488)
    Since this is not an EU tax all they have to do to avoid it is go to another country to buy it. The train fare is less than the tax and you get a vacation out of it... Itdiots.

  • by NoMercy ( 105420 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @06:31AM (#12381522)
    Put a insanely large tax... on what may be your future primary income source. Genius DOH.
  • by Mac Degger ( 576336 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @06:45AM (#12381565) Journal
    I just wanna point this out, 'cos I think many will not have noticed this explicitly: in the US, content sellers (like disney) have been buying legislation. The odd thing is that this industry, while being a multi-billion dollar industry, is factors smaller (in revenue, fedral income from taxes and employment) than the hardware industry...and still they get legislation which favours their small (relative to the hardware industry) segment of market.

    So whilst the conspiracy theory might not make sense...it is one which is correct (just ask senator disney or the **AA).
  • Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @07:23AM (#12381704)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Well, they can tax all thety want, but how are they gonna collect the taxes?

    I mean, there's no more customs between countries in "Europe" so what's to prevent people from having their iPods shipped from Belgium or Germany or Dänmark???

  • by A beautiful mind ( 821714 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @07:28AM (#12381721)
    On an interesting sidenote, for example Hungary already has this proposed dutch system, and it sucks.

    There is a lovely organization called Artisjus, which managed to put a tax on every cd, dvd, memory card (like the ones used it _cameras_). This essentially doubles their price, and they are doing this on the grounds that it's a compensation for the losses in piracy. Now, the further outrageing thing is, that this is only about music. They collect the money and check the current music market from _their_ statistics and distribute _some_ of the money that way.

    The bad thing about is that they are assuming that people are breaking the law in advance! The bad thing is that they don't assume people make backups of personal data, burn any other legal things, which _does_ happen. Also, if people burn software or movies to the cd/dvd, shouldn't the movies industry get compensation by the same logic? Or if i burn a linux dvd, shouldn't i GET MY MONEY BACK? It's all or none. Another outrageous event was when they added the memory cards, which are 90% used in cameras. Sure, someone will pirate mp3s in that...

    The irony in that, people would assume that they can pirate legally then, since they got the price paid for it already, well, wrong. There is another nice organization in Hungary, called ASVA, which goes after even legal "piracy". In hungary you can download music and videos, as long as you don't upload. Still, this ASVA goes after people, not just those who for example run ftp servers, but the common downloaders aswell. They "teach" and "lecture" the police about the dangers of violating IP, and basically bribe the police. It is a sad and outrageous legal state.

    This is honestly a fucked up system, which is there in Hungary, and i don't wish the dutch to have this, further more, when we have an example that some people have done it already, so don't discard that proposal on "it won't pass" or something right away. This thing needs to be fought, and burned to the ground. Also some EU action against that kind of thing happening in Hungary would be good.
  • by indifferent children ( 842621 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @07:45AM (#12381806)
    The only solutions are to reduce the power of the government, and/or to move these powers to more regional authorities (thus increasing the cost require to influence the entire nation).

    Yeah, the city government in Chicago weren't corrupt. And the corruption at our federal level is nothing compared to many county and city governments in Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana,... The corruption in Florida was so bad that we passed a 'Sunshine Law' to prevent out-of-the-public-eye meetings of government decision makers. There is some question as to whether three city councilmen are allowed to have breakfast together.

    Our national politicians are pandering to corporate interests, but most of this is above board, "We worship your ability to earn money, let us kiss your ass." rather than actual corruption (aka pay-for-performance). As long as campaign contribution caps are not being violated, is it right to call this 'corruption'?

  • by The-Bus ( 138060 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @08:47AM (#12382183)
    Actually, it's more like:

    2) Profit??

    Because I doubt they will see more than $10,000 of this iPod tax.
  • Re:Not in the US (Score:3, Insightful)

    by TGK ( 262438 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @09:18AM (#12382474) Homepage Journal
    I'd be all for that too, but you'd never get an iPod [aka luxury] tax tossed through congress to pay for something populist like health care.

    That said, I just don't get this. Lets say there's a tax on MP3 players. That's fine, there's a tax on cigeretts too. But the taxes on cigeretts go to support publicly funded health care systems like Medicade which are designed to assist people who are dieing of things like lung cancer.

    See how that works? Buy cigeretts, pay a tax, help fund your care when you have lung cancer. Have health insurance (through the government after your funds are exhosted) when you are dieing.

    But when I pay taxes for an MP3 player (hypotheticly speaking) what do I get? Nothing. The money goes to the music people and I'm left out in the cold.

    So let me rephrase your quip.

    -shrug- I'd accecpt an iPod tax if I was given blanket copyright immunity for the device.

  • Not quite. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Mr. Underbridge ( 666784 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @09:20AM (#12382489)
    -shrug- I'd accept an iPod tax if we got universal health care.

    1. If universal health care worked as well in the US as universal education, I want no part of it. 2.You might have a point if the money from the iPod tax went to universal health care in any of those countries. It doesn't. It goes to the recording industry.

    Anything else?

  • Re:An idea.. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Tlosk ( 761023 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @09:30AM (#12382590)
    Then they throw your ass in jail when you don't have the tax stamp on your hard drive that's in the MP3 player you're listening to in public.

    I'm not saying it's something you couldn't get away with, but just see tax stamps on cigarrettes, lots of people try to avoid the insane taxes the gov puts on them, and lots of people go to jail for smuggling untaxed packs or for buying them.

    The sad part is the costs associated with administering a tax like this soaks up most of the revenue it generates. Total freaking waste, and just makes people pissed.
  • Crazy Dutch (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Provos ( 20410 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @09:39AM (#12382675) Homepage
    And we thought it was only Goldfinger who was a crazy dutchman...

    Still, given the location of the Netherlands, would you rather spend Eu. 258 on the tax, or Eu. 100 to go to Belgium or Germany and buy it there?

    Hell, wait til you're on holiday anywhere else in the european union.
  • by WIAKywbfatw ( 307557 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @09:57AM (#12382858) Journal
    Those are items that are illegal in Britain. Unless iPods become illegal in Holland then your barking up the wrong tree.

    Under EU law, you cannot stop someone from buying something in one country for use in another. Of course, if it's actually illegal to possess that something in the country that the goods are going to then you'd have to be an idiot to do it, but the flow of the goods must be unimpeded in terms of trade restrictions - that's what the whole single market is about.
  • by mikvo ( 587789 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @10:33AM (#12383269)
    So are the artists actually compensated, or do they really only get compensated for direct sales of their own music? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'll bet the artists themselves don't see a penny from these levies.
  • by grub ( 11606 ) <slashdot@grub.net> on Friday April 29, 2005 @11:36AM (#12383953) Homepage Journal

    And if people didn't pirate copyrighted stuff, then organizations like the RIAA, MPAA, etc, wouldn't exist....

    The RIAA, MPAA, etc existed long before portable MP3 players and broadband networking. Did they have fake vinyl back in the 70s?
  • by Ryosen ( 234440 ) on Friday April 29, 2005 @01:22PM (#12385375)
    >> And in both cases, it's because other countries interfere with the market while America leaves it alone.

    Hopefully you're being sarcastic. Otherwise, something tells me that you've taken a few too many of those presciptions. You need to put the pills down and just slowly back away from the counter.

    Seriously, the whole reason that prescription drugs can cost many times more than their Canadian counterparts is *because* America tampers with the market. The US government extends an unfair level of protection to the pharmaceutical industry that allows them to gouge American citizens. Other countries do not allow them to do this and thus, prices are more affordable.

    Swinging back to the topic at hand, if America didn't cottle the media industries (**AA), stories like the headline above wouldn't be happenning. It's only through America's tampering and corruption that the RIAA feels so emboldened.

"If anything can go wrong, it will." -- Edsel Murphy

Working...