No Levy on iPods in Canada

colinemckay writes "The fight over a levy on iPods and other digital music devices ended Thursday when the Supreme Court of Canada refused to hear any further arguments on the matter. That means there will be no levy applied to digital audio recorders such as Apple's popular iPod and iPod Shuffle as well as other MP3 players like iRiver."

Returning The Loonie's

[Anonymous Coward]

"The money is sitting in an account and will be returned to the importers and manufacturers of the products, said Basskin."

I think it should be going to the consumers not the corporations and distributors. I spent way too much on my 3Gen iPod when it first came out. I wouldn't mind an extra $25 in my pocket.

Gee.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Obviously we're disappointed. We felt it was self-evident that those products are sold for the purpose of copying music," said David Basskin, of the Canadian Private Copying Collective (CPCC), the non-profit agency which collects tariffs on behalf of musicians and record companies.

Yes, yes, everyone who owns an mp3 PLAYER, must have bought them to STEAL MUSIC. As opposed to, oh I dunno, LISTENING TO MUSIC.

Next thing we know everyone who owns a kitchen knife must have bought them to KILL PEOPLE.

Is private copying to Ipods now illegal

[Anonymous Coward]

This ruling also puts into doubt the legality of copying music to Ipods.

There is no such thing as fair use rights in Canada. The levy was designed to provide an exemption for copying of audio recordings (the ruling suggests this does not apply to Ipods).

Does this now imply that Ipod's are not covered under the private copying exemption?

Re:Pack of Rats

[a.different.perspect]

Yup, it makes no sense at all. Most obviously, there's a bizarre assumption of guilt in collecting levies on all blank media. Why should the RIAA be paid for me burning my children's photos to a disc? What have I gotten from the RIAA for my money? More interestingly, it means that copyright holders have been reimbursed for any piracy on that media - and that they should have waived their right to seek further damages. And if you've already paid for your piracy, haven't you a license to pirate as much as you want, then? The answer is apparently nope and nope. Which, it is equally apparent, makes no sense. The music industry wants it both ways - being paid for piracy in a way that implicitly legitimizes it while insisting on its illegality. And who can blame them for trying to get as much money as they can? What's astonishing is that they're being allowed to do it.

Re:NOBODY CARES ABOUT YOUR FUCKING IPOD

[Anonymous Coward]

Obviously you care, or else you wouldn't have posted here.

Re:Pack of Rats

[MightyMartian]

It protects us for now. With the Canadian version of the DMCA coming out sometime this year or next, you can be sure we will be at the mercy of the record and movie industry. What do you want to bet that the tariff will remain on blank media?

Some time ago...

[Zzyzygy]

My memory is really foggy on this, but when I was a teenager back in the late 1970's, I had heard that when you buy blank cassette tapes, you paid a one cent [tax|levy|fine] for each cassette. I asked my father (whom worked peripherally with recording studios) about this. He told me that you are paying "the industry" because they think you are going to pirate music with it.

I'm thinking that this is the same or similar situation happening now.

-Scott

Re:No levi in USA either

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

I buy the media labeled 'music' on purpose actually. Then I fire up a bittorrent client, or limewire pro, and get whatever music I want. You know why? 'Cuz Fuck em, I'm not paying twice! If you treat people like criminals, then that's what you get.

Actually I don't feel like you act like a criminal. In my opinion, buying "data" CDs and burning music from P2P on them would be criminal, but you've chosen to pay the CD tax, so you should bloody well be entitled to download 700M worth of music to put on each CD.

On behalf of all Canadians here...

[oldwolf13]

Please shut up.

You're giving us a bad name.

Re:Canadian Release

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait... French People... I'll bide my time.

C'est beau. C'est pas comme si on te voulait ici de toute façon.

Re:Copyright holders aren't crooks, infringers are

[Em Adespoton]

People steal (yes copyright infringement is theft, don't bother with equivocating) music, and the only option the Canadian govt. gives music labels is this lame tariff on media. So music labels accept this as better than nothing, but they're the crooks? Give me a break.

I agree with you 100% that it's the infringers who are the crooks. The difference is, in Canada, not all trading of music is defined as copyright infringement. If you make copies from someone else's CD, this is not copyright infringement in Canada. Ergo, it is not theft. The tarriff is the tool used to enable this kind of copying while protecting the copyright holders. Remember -- copyright infringement doesn't exist until it is legislated to exist. Theft of material goods exists de-facto.

Re:IRiver and XClef vs iPod

[nickrooster]

I think it has more to do with the copious amounts of advertising (and media attention) that the iPod receives. Its feature set is lacking, but the scroll wheel is a treat!
However, the iPod's interface, like any interface, takes time to understand and use effectively. The XClef also has a weird interface with a switch on the side to move up and down instead of the joystick that the iHP-100 series have.
iRiver have changed this in their newest version of the hard disk multi-media jukebox, and they use something different (my friend has one but I have never witnessed directory traversal on it).
So, my question, did you see the new (color) iRiver hard disk players, or the old 100 series joystick dealies?

Re:Pack of Rats

[Deliveranc3]

Amazingly most Canadians can understand this...

Now here is how it works...

few cent levy on blank CD's (More on those specifically designed for Audio.

This money is partitioned up and used to support Canadian artists (Who apply for this funding from the government sponsorship) and some goes to the artists most downloaded from the internet.

See simple.... in exchange it's legal for us to Download.

Except for some reason the Candian record companies are still trying to sue, but with less success than the states.

Yes we are more socialist so American's may not understand it, what they might understand is that this system offers perhaps the best way to produce new music while still allowing for maximum listening.

Re:Pack of Rats

[Emperor Cezar]

If I lived in Canada, why would I want to pay for "you" to download music off the internet?

Re:Copyright holders aren't crooks, infringers are

[TheLinuxWarrior]

Forcing someone to lower their prices under threat of theft if they don't is a vioation of indivdual rights.

I didn't see the previous poster threatening theft if the price wasn't lowered. I saw him giving sound financial advice to a retarded industry.

Sales and quarterly earnings down? Lower prices so that people who couldn't afford to buy before can, and so that others who were unsure if the music was worth the cost have an easier decision to make.

Economics has always been about supply and demand, but unfortunately, the music industry has supply, but isn't creating a price point where consumers wish to buy. Instead of following normal economics and lowering price to generate consumer interest, they scream that we're all pirating their music and we should be forced to pay fines for CDRs and the tools that create CDs. Bullshit.