Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Microsoft Windows Apple

France Planning Non-Windows Tablet Tax? 227

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the sounds-brilliant-to-me dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Lots of countries around the world have private copying 'levies,' which are effectively taxes on products that store data, which is put into a pool to be handed out to copyright holders, as a sort of payment for the 'copying' that individuals do. This was quite popular with blank CDRs, for example, but has been expanded in certain countries to cover hard drives, iPods and other such devices. Over in France, they're looking to expand the levy to tablet computers, but apparently if that tablet computer is running Microsoft Windows, it will be exempted from the tax. iPads and Android-powered tablets will have the tax. Why? Well, the argument is that if a tablet is running Windows, it's really a 'computer.' But if it's running one of those 'mobile' operating systems, suddenly it's a brand new category. Not surprisingly, makers of Android tablets — including the French company Archos — are not at all happy about this."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

France Planning Non-Windows Tablet Tax?

Comments Filter:
  • "Planing?" (Score:5, Funny)

    by Ferzerp (83619) on Tuesday December 28, 2010 @04:53PM (#34691178)

    Was the initial design of the tax too rough or too thick that it needed planed?

    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 28, 2010 @04:57PM (#34691206)

      "needed planed"?

      Grammar Nazi, I am disappoint.

      • by HRbnjR (12398)
        Alot of people here aren't known for their superior grammar capabilities ;)
        • by Creepy (93888)

          That was grammatically correct, I believe, just spelt wrong. And yes I used spelt intentionally - it is the equivalent of spelled despite Firefox dictionary not recognizing it OotB (it is a rarely used, yet still correct form). Spelt is also a form of wheat my grandpa used to grow in the US, mainly to sell to the German community in South Dakota, though the majority of his wheat was bread grain like most farmers.

          Planed was obviously incorrect spelling, but was corrected by the time I read the headline.

          • by Artifakt (700173)

            This is Slashdot, please convert your analogy to use Quadrotriticale (A fine Canadian product).

      • by TheABomb (180342)
        What, were you hoping TFA would surrender?
      • Re:"Planing?" (Score:5, Informative)

        by Fnordulicious (85996) on Tuesday December 28, 2010 @06:23PM (#34692144) Homepage

        As a real linguist, I feel I should point out that there are dialects of American English which have a “need Verb-ed” construction which is approximated by “need to be Verb-ed” elsewhere. Thus one can say “the dishes need washed” or “the dog needs walked” rather than “the dishes need to be washed“ or “the dog needs to be walked”. This construction is perfectly grammatical in such dialects, and is possibly spreading so that it will become grammatical throughout much of North America in the next few generations. There’s no semantic difference apparently, it’s a purely syntactic distinction.

        It *is* however dialectal at this point, and hence should be avoided in most written contexts.

    • It wasn't on the level.

  • What is Apple's iPad OS?

    That should matter here.

    • by cyranix (933484)
      ahem... If windows makes it a real computer, I'd love to know what the "entirely new category" is...
      • Not to mention Android isn't an os, it's a platform involving the linux os, some device drivers, and libraries. Moreover, Android and iPad prevent copying because device manufacturers heavily lock those devices down.

    • by h4rr4r (612664)

      The non marketing name for the OS it runs. IOS is actually what runs on Cisco Routers, apple pays to use that name since it fits the i$thing theme they have.

    • What is Apple's iPad OS?

      That should matter here.

      iOS, formerly iPhone OS, is the operating system for iPad. It is related but different and distinct from Mac OS X. The French could make a similar exception for Mac OS X as they have for Windows 7 and iOS and Windows CE would still be taxed.

      • by drinkypoo (153816)

        iOS is provably OSX with some API stuff dropped and some tacked on.

        • Kind of. It's the same XNU kernel as desktop OS X, running more or less the same userland, including the window server. On top of this are the same CoreFoundation (C) and Foundation (Objective-C) APIs for userspace programmers. Just like desktop OS X, your communication with the window server is via the CoreGraphics / Quartz framework and related frameworks like CoreAnimation. iOS uses the same Objective-C runtime as desktop OS X, but does not support garbage collection. It omits a number of legacy API

        • by perpenso (1613749)

          iOS, formerly iPhone OS, is the operating system for iPad. It is related but different and distinct from Mac OS X ...

          iOS is provably OSX with some API stuff dropped and some tacked on.

          and some stuff changed and not entirely compatible anymore.

          Just curious but how is all this different from "related but different and distinct from"? I'm not sure where we are disagreeing.

  • by Iphtashu Fitz (263795) on Tuesday December 28, 2010 @04:59PM (#34691228)

    So because it's a computer it's unable to distribute copyrighted materials? Now that is some pretty twisted logic right there.

    And what the hell does a "clean operating system" mean?

    From the Google translation of the French article:

    "Windows 7 will not be affected by the fee for private copying, which by definition is adopted touch pads "provided with an operating system for mobile devices or a clean operating system".

    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 28, 2010 @05:01PM (#34691258)

      Yea, I think you fail more than them if you run an article through Google Translate and then complain about the writing because you don't understand something.

    • by Lunix Nutcase (1092239) on Tuesday December 28, 2010 @05:10PM (#34691356)

      And what the hell does a "clean operating system" mean?

      It means you're relying too heavily on a shitty machine translation that just picked the first meaning of "propre" it could find.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      In the french text it says "d’un système d’exploitation propre". In this context "propre" means "of it's own". So if it has an operating system for mobile devices or it has it's own operating system (so develloped with the touchpaddevice in mind) it is taxable. Since windows seven is develloped for personal computers this supposedly does not apply.

      • In this context "propre" means "of it's own". I was about to point that out, but it seems you beat me to it. ;-)

        To everyone else: never forget that translators are never flawless, humans and non-humans alike.
    • by Yvanhoe (564877)
      The rationale is that computers make illegal copies on CDs and USB sticks so CDs and USB memory sticks must be taxed proportionally to their the space of storage they offer. Of course this is already silly and was created at the time where CDs were the most common movable storage devices. In order for it to not look too silly, it was made so that the tax would not target computers, as a 100 GB HD would make the tax ridiculously high. Then it was extended to devices that could be plugged to computers and pro
      • by dunng808 (448849)

        The rationale is that computers make illegal copies on CDs and USB sticks so CDs and USB memory sticks must be taxed proportionally to their the space of storage they offer.

        [snip]

        I thought this was too devious for Microsoft to dream up on their own. But is it possible for the French government (or any government) to be more devious than Microsoft? Reminds me of a visit to the optometrist: which is better, #1, or #2?

        • by Yvanhoe (564877)
          Actually France is showing the finest mix of incompetence and corruption in the latest internet/copyright laws.
    • "And what the hell does a "clean operating system" mean?"

      Linux doesn't qualify as a "clean operating system"? In whose twisted world? (Besides the French?) In any case, perhaps they felt that Microsoft's own tax on OEM systems (in which the "privilege" of selling a system pre-bundled and non-opt outable Windows install cost is born by the consumer, thanks Bill) was tax enough?

    • by Creepy (93888)

      Probably because Windows tablets will probably include heavy handed DRM out of the box and the French think that will keep people from sharing... um, er stealing.

      • Probably because Windows tablets will probably include heavy handed DRM out of the box and the French think that will keep people from sharing... um, er stealing.

        You seriously want to use that argument when it is being compared to the likes of iOS? Sheesh!

    • Please. He's complaining that they fail because Google translations of their language don't make sense to him?

    • And what the hell does a "clean operating system" mean?

      No grep, touch, strip, finger, mount or fsck.
      That's why Apple's OS is X rated.

  • by GreatDrok (684119) on Tuesday December 28, 2010 @04:59PM (#34691232) Journal

    Devices like the iPad are just holders and consumers of media. A Windows PC is the usual culprit when it comes to actually defeating copy protection and doing the duping. This seems bass ackwards to me as they should be taxing the computer, not that they should be taxing either.

    • Well, not to put too fine a point on it but there are hundreds of apps that allow content creation on the iPad. My current favorite is the Korg iMS-20 sequencer. There's also the full complement of Apple apps such as Pages, Numbers and Keynote. Also, don't lawmakers ever consult a real technical person when it comes to stuff like this? The Android and Apple mobile OSes and the devices they run on ARE computers. Sheesh.
      • OP knows that, he was just trolling. YHBT and DFTT and all that.

      • by jc42 (318812)

        Also, don't lawmakers ever consult a real technical person when it comes to stuff like this? The Android and Apple mobile OSes and the devices they run on ARE computers. Sheesh.

        Actually, it could just be a case of an old and well-documented attitude in the computer market: it's only a real computer if it comes from IBM or Microsoft. Everything else is a toy used only by academics and techies.

        It could also be an example of a phenomenon that's now rampant in the US, and may be starting to infect Europe: The richer you are, the lower your taxes are. Actually, that may not be a very new phenonenon. The change may be that now in the US, the right-wing part of the political spectru

    • by GIL_Dude (850471)

      Devices like the iPad are just holders and consumers of media

      Actually I think that may really be the whole point. Levies of this type (as the summary says) have typically been applied to things like CD-R, blank DVD, music players, etc. - because of the fact that they ARE holders of (often copyrighted) media. I don't agree with these levys at all; I think they are very misguided, but I can see how they got into a quagmire trying to define what is "like a CD-R" (holds content) and ended up getting it a bit wrong.

    • Devices like the iPad are just holders and consumers of media.

      That's precisely the logic they're using. They seem to think that, to copy something, you need some medium to copy it too - like tapes. So the more you copy, the more tapes you buy - and therefore the tax on tapes is indirectly a tax on how much you copy.

      That logic still made some (albeit little) sense when it was applied to CD-Rs, but then they also started to classify everything with storage as a potential target for copying. Except computers, because, well, they obviously aren't like a tape or a CD or a

    • Devices like the iPad are just holders and consumers of media

      No, the iPad is a tablet computer, albeit one that Apple designed to thwart attempts by its users to control. Hard drives and SSDs are holders of media, people are consumers of it, who use software to aid them in that consumption. Dividing tablet computers into different classes based on what some corporation thinks you should use it for is not a game I want to play, and it is frankly counter-productive. The sooner we start calling the iPad what it is, the better.

      A Windows PC is the usual culprit when it comes to actually defeating copy protection and doing the duping

      As are a number of other systems -- r

    • So... a tax allegedly levied to compensate for copying exempts the platform that most copying takes place on?

      France has finally fully shifted into Bizarro world.

  • Maybe we could have gotten a more inflammatory article title to stoke the inevitable posting flamewar. Such as: "France to Apple Fans: Your iPad is a Toy, Not a Real Computer Like A Windows Machine."

    Which is pretty much what the summary says. I'm sure that'll go over well.

    • Re:Article Title (Score:4, Insightful)

      by matazar (1104563) on Tuesday December 28, 2010 @07:23PM (#34692778) Homepage

      Not to provoke further, but an I don't consider an iPad a 'real computer'. It's running the same OS as an iPhone.
      I also wouldn't consider a tablet running Windows Mobile xx (or Windows Mobile CE) a real computer anymore than my phone (which is not a real computer).

      If they are taxing iPads, they better be taxing Windows Mobile devices, along with Android devices. If they aren't taxing Windows 7 (XP/Vista) devices, then they shouldn't be taxing systems running Mac OSX or systems with whatever the Google operating system is called nor anything sold with Unix/Linux on it.

      The tax is stupid, but as long as it follows the same rules across all platforms then people should be upset about that, not comparing iOS to Windows 7...

      Of course, the linked article doesn't actually give versions of windows this applies to, which is an important point.So I assume this is just to start a flame war because someone said their iPad is not a real computer...

  • From TFA comments (Score:4, Insightful)

    by C_amiga_fan (1960858) on Tuesday December 28, 2010 @04:59PM (#34691238)

    "Good for microsoft. Legislation is an easier way to get rid of pesky competition than work is."

    That's about right..... and no this isn't just an anti-MS slap. Lots of Megacorps do the same thing, like how McDonalds bought an exemption from the health insurance requirement. Don't play on an even field IF you can get lawmakers to give you special exemptions or favorable laws.

  • Not buying it (Score:4, Insightful)

    by DoofusOfDeath (636671) on Tuesday December 28, 2010 @05:00PM (#34691246)

    This has the smell of something that's so moronic that (for real) it will never get very far.

    That, and I'm sure makers of non-Windows devices will be exercising the EU court system like it's going out of style.

    • It's France's Sarkozy government. His cabinet is made of such a clowns that this is perhaps the most well thought law that they have in the pipeline for the next year.

      • by godrik (1287354)

        That's so true... I'm french... And I am crying... I hate Santa for not bringing France the resignation of the president...

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 28, 2010 @05:05PM (#34691286)

    Canada has had a copying-tax for many, many years. It's worked very well for the executives of the RIAA and the CRIAA [michaelgeist.ca]:

    Canadian Recording Industry Faces $6 Billion Copyright Infringement Lawsuit

    Monday December 07, 2009
    Chet Baker was a leading jazz musician in the 1950s, playing trumpet and providing vocals. Baker died in 1988, yet he is about to add a new claim to fame as the lead plaintiff in possibly the largest copyright infringement case in Canadian history. His estate, which still owns the copyright in more than 50 of his works, is part of a massive class-action lawsuit that has been underway for the past year.

    As my weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes, the infringer has effectively already admitted owing at least $50 million and the full claim could exceed $6 billion. If the dollars don't shock, the target of the lawsuit undoubtedly will: The defendants in the case are Warner Music Canada, Sony BMG Music Canada, EMI Music Canada, and Universal Music Canada, the four primary members of the Canadian Recording Industry Association.

    The CRIA members were hit with the lawsuit [PDF] in October 2008, after artists decided to turn to the courts following decades of frustration with the rampant infringement (I am adviser to the Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic, which is co-counsel, but have had no involvement in the case). The claims arise from a longstanding practice of the recording industry in Canada, described in the lawsuit as "exploit now, pay later if at all." It involves the use of works that are often included in compilation CDs (ie. the top dance tracks of 2009) or live recordings. The record labels create, press, distribute, and sell the CDs, but do not obtain the necessary copyright licences.

    Instead, the names of the songs on the CDs are placed on a "pending list", which signifies that approval and payment is pending. The pending list dates back to the late 1980s, when Canada changed its copyright law by replacing a compulsory licence with the need for specific authorization for each use. It is perhaps better characterized as a copyright infringement admission list, however, since for each use of the work, the record label openly admits that it has not obtained copyright permission and not paid any royalty or fee.

    Over the years, the size of the pending list has grown dramatically, now containing over 300,000 songs. From Beyonce to Bruce Springsteen, the artists waiting for payment are far from obscure, as thousands of Canadian and foreign artists have seen their copyrights used without permission and payment.

    It is difficult to understand why the industry has been so reluctant to pay its bills. Some works may be in the public domain or belong to a copyright owner difficult to ascertain or locate, yet the likes of Sarah McLachlan, Bruce Cockburn, Sloan, or the Watchmen are not hidden from view.

    The more likely reason is that the record labels have had little motivation to pay up. As the balance has grown to over $50 million (Universal alone owes more than $30 million), David Basskin, the President and CEO of the Canadian Musical Reproduction Rights Agency Ltd., notes in his affidavit that "the record labels have devoted insufficient resources to identifying and paying the owners of musical works on the Pending Lists." Basskin adds that some labels believe addressing the issue would be "an unproductive use of their time."

    Having engaged in widespread copyright infringement for over 20 years, the CRIA members now face the prospect of far greater liability. The class action seeks the option of statutory damages for each infringement. At $20,000 per infringement (the amount owed on some songs exceed this amount), potential liability exceeds $6 billion. These numbers may sound outrageous, yet they are based on the same rules that has led the recording industry to claim a single file sharer is liable for millio

  • What I don't understand, you pay a tax on any digital media to compensate for artists loss of revenue and then you go after people for copying materials via hadopi.

    I think we should have one, but not both?

    Sounds to me like double jeopardy.

    What do you think?
    • Why not take the same approach with the music industry that we took with the typewriter, camera film, and buggy-whip industries?
      • Why not take the same approach with the music industry that we took with the typewriter, camera film, and buggy-whip industries?

        I parsed your post like this:

        Storyline is about copyrights
        - typewriters can be used to copy text
        - camera film can be used to copy images
        hmmm, so far this about old methods used in the past to copy things
        buggy-whips? WTF?

        • Oh, my apologies. The real point was about industries that died in the face of new technology, not about the ability to copy things. I suppose I should be more careful next time!
    • by Kjella (173770)

      Sounds to me like double jeopardy.

      What do you think?

      No. Double jeopardy has a specific legal meaning, and this is not it. Some forms of private copying may be legal but taxed while others can be illegal under Hadopi, at best you have a conflict between two laws/regulations that need resolving. In any case a tax is not a legal punishment, and double jeopardy means being punished twice by the legal system for the same crime.

    • It's interesting, but you missed another point.
      Way before the HADOPI mess, copying of CD/DVD/YouNameIt was already prohibited, because you'd have to circumvent some kind of protection (yes, breaking DVD CSS is illegal here, although totally stupid).
      So, for a long time, it was illegal to made a private copy of almost any media, and yet we were paying for it. Now, they want to extend this tax without any reasoning behind it.
      In short, the french government doesn't even try to hide anymore when raising a new
    • Is more akin tho the media cartel eating his cake, forcing the artists to buy them another one, then forcing taxpayers to buy them another one, even if they are not consumers of their products. Despite what narrow minded people believe, tablet computers can be used for far more useful things than to listen to music or playing videos. If they want so badly these kind of levies, then lawmakers must abrogate all laws punishing non commercial copyright infringement since copyright holders are already compensate

  • Fuck the French.
  • This is why these taxes were ridiculous in the first place. Take money from one industry or product to give to another for the crimes that might leverage the first's? This should immediately freak any sane uninterested party right the hell out.

    It is really not the place of good government to make "crimes" (unproven) right by stealing from one industry to placate another. If your government does this (and yours probably does), your government is corrupt.

  • See, see!? Some tablets are more equal than others!!1!one!eleven
  • Define Computer (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Archangel Michael (180766) on Tuesday December 28, 2010 @05:15PM (#34691402) Journal

    If you design a piece of hardware, capable of running Windows 7, but DOESN'T is it a computer? What if it runs Windows 7 in a VM on another OS?

    I hate governments more each day.

  • I do not think it means what you think it means.

    .
  • Sarkozy isn't an MS shill, he's a shill for the french equivalent of the RIAA. This seems like an extension of the tax they put on mp3 players, as it is based on the internal storage capacity of the device.

    "The scale ranges from 0.09 euros for models with up to 128MB of 12 euros for those with 64 GB

    Article linked from TFA [google.com]

    Thus I suspect 'mobile/clean operating system' is meant to refer to any operating system that can run on a mobile device, and then be used to play music that you probably stole. We all know how the copyright cartels think, why would they intentionally exclude windows users?

    • Thus I suspect 'mobile/clean operating system' is meant to refer to any operating system that can run on a mobile device, and then be used to play music that you probably stole.

      No, that's not what is being meant and the "clean" part is a mistranslation by Google Translate. What they are saying is that there are "mobile OSes" (aka android) and "proper OSes" aka (Windows) and thus they are only going to tax the mobile OSes not what is considered a "proper" OS.

      • Consider their viewpoint. They would tax every single means of data storage if they could. People would (rightfully) balk at the idea of taxing any hard drive, or their laptop, but they presently pay a bs tax on MP3 players. So there is a clear line there. So they're thinking "What if they just bought an iPad instead? We can't tax those!" and trying to move tablets and 'mobile devices' to the taxable, 'MP3 player' side of that line.

        Ask yourself: Why would they intentionally exclude tablets running Win
    • by robot256 (1635039)
      Who is actually getting the payout from the "mobile OS netbook tax"? Are they applying it to non-Windows machines under the assumption that you will install an illegal copy of Windows on it? Or does it even matter?
      • Who is actually getting the payout from the "mobile OS netbook tax"? Are they applying it to non-Windows machines under the assumption that you will install an illegal copy of Windows on it? Or does it even matter?

        I can't find anything about how the existing tax on media, USB sticks, and MP3 players is disbursed, but I doubt it's going to Microsoft. I think they're just trying to add 'tablets' to that list of things get a levy on behalf of whatever copyright think-tank writes their laws, because everyone is, apparently, assumed to be a criminal.

    • by jedidiah (1196)

      It's not just the copyright cartels.

      If your stuff isn't in an Apple approved format, the Apple fanboys will happily repeat the pro-RIAA rhetoric.

      They love to accuse you of stealing.

  • Nothing to see here or much to discuss, really, this is just another case of crony capitalism.

  • In the US(at least for people who aren't suspected of terrorism, or in one of the other undesirable categories) we have a constitutional guarantee of due process of law, presumption of innocence in trial, and such. My understanding is that the EU is, if anything, even more expansive in declaring assorted things to be human rights(if occasionally at the expense of some of the ones that we get touchy about, like free speech...)

    How does a "copying" levy, applied more or less indiscriminately to virtually al
  • by n6kuy (172098) on Tuesday December 28, 2010 @05:39PM (#34691636)

    ... even in France.

  • MS is going to announce an OS for ARM-based tablets, Lots of people have assumed that it will be a derivative of the desktop OSes. However, it seems more likely that it would be a derivative of WIndows CE (like Windows Phone 7). Until more details come out, we won't really know.

    If it is CE, why should MS be treated differently from other OSes?

  • Everyone knows it is much easier to pirate music and films on a real computer compared to a tablet.

    If anything the tax should be the other way around.

  • This is important... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by benjamindees (441808) on Tuesday December 28, 2010 @06:07PM (#34692002) Homepage

    This is one of the most important things for supporters of Free Software to understand: businesses are subsidized by the tax code. All businesses, even the terrible ones. Especially the terrible ones.

    It doesn't matter which country you're talking about. The economies of nearly every Western government are equally hosed up in the same ridiculous way. Tax agencies assume that everything an individual purchases is consumed, and that everything a corporation purchases is an investment. As far as taxing authorities are concerned, a Windows computer is an investment. It is capital. It fits the obsolete model of production that governments know: labor + capital == profit. When you buy anything as a business, you write it off your taxes and pat yourself on the back.

    A non-corporate, non-business operating system, on the other hand, is a toy. It's a distraction, a hobby. Governments consider it not to be an investment, but a consumer item. Same goes for an Android phone. It's assumed to depreciate in value. A Windows phone, though, is for business. It's assumed to produce value. Nevermind the fact that most Windows phones are unproductive toys, or that most Windows computers are inefficient cludges. Nevermind the fact that free and open source software can be orders of magnitude more efficient and productive than proprietary, closed source software. Windows is a capital investment. Free software is a toy.

    The result should be obvious. Responsible, non-consumer individuals are punished. Wasteful, non-producing companies are subsidized. Long term investments in things like open standards are discouraged. Short term speculation is encouraged.

    It really is as simple as that. Governments don't consider it further. The idea of a Windows computer running a nuclear power plant, therefore, seems perfectly natural. Debian? A toy. Red Hat? One of the most expensive operating systems ever. They are 99% the exact same code. One is a tax write-off produced by a legitimate company. The other is a toy produced by a bunch of hobbyists. In the US, we see all of these crap small businesses that can no longer afford their rent. Corporate real estate is about to take a dump all over itself. Banks are over leveraged, and it turns out they own no real assets. They were subsidized. They bought a bunch of consumable junk like Windows computers, shoddy houses and uninsulated office buildings, wrote it off as a brilliant investment, and waited for the profit to roll in. Unfortunately, everyone else did the same, all the real assets went overseas, and now the US economy is utter crap.

  • A tablet running Windows is actually a computer?

    Really?

    Windows is what makes a computer, huh?

    You go France, no wonder we make fun of you these days.

  • Why not add a tax to all paper products and writing implements while you're at it? After all someone might COPY something from a book, newspaper or magazine, and OH NO we can't have that now can we? After all, if an MP3 file, which uses lossy compression and is therefore an inferior, degraded copy of sounds is an illegal copy for which you get the living fuck sued out of you, then something you write down on a piece of paper that someone else copyrighted is also a degraded but still illegal copy, right? Why
  • Makes sense (Score:2, Funny)

    by lahvak (69490)

    From what I have heard about Windows 7 on a tablet, these people are unfortunate enough to have to run Windows on their tablet. Surely you wouldn't want to make them even more miserable by making them pay a tax on it. I am glad that French lawmakers show some compassion with the unfortunate victims.

  • Aside from the obvious that as someone else stated these laws assume that anyone buying these products is guilty or that the innocent must help pay for all those evil copyright infringers there's a couple things that I've never understood. If governments are collecting this tax money, who or what organization are they turning it over to that decides what artists get reimbursed and by how much for the illegal copying of their works? Do artists / studios have to file paperwork stating that their works were il

  • So, the tax is also on iPods, even the nano, Shuffle and classic. Can someone explain how you use one of those devices to pirate music? I know how to do it on any Windows PC, but last time I checked there was no Kazaa, LimeWire, Bittorrent or for that matter any 3rd party apps whatsoever on those iPods.

  • Windows won't be taxed because they figure you've suffered enough already.

No hardware designer should be allowed to produce any piece of hardware until three software guys have signed off for it. -- Andy Tanenbaum

Working...