Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > 'Storage Tax' for 'right to copy'?

Reply
Thread Tools

'Storage Tax' for 'right to copy'?

 
 
Evil Bastard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-08-2005

I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange for
the rights to:
- freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
- burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use

(*) There'd need to be some clarification of which works are 'fair game'
for download/copy. Possibly this category could exclude works which are
out of the peak of their life cycle - eg movies at pre-release or
premier screening phase, or songs in the top 20, but allow
anything/everything else.

This could be a huge win-win for consumers and publishers.

Consumers could have inexpensive and legal access to a vast abundance of
material, while publishers/artists could earn a passive income without
the massive marketing/distribution costs they have historically incurred.

This would also do away with the frustrations of the 'legal downloads'
biz - with its relatively high cost per song/video, its DRM and other
stupid restrictions and complications.

Many artists will flourish if their work is allowed to spread virally,
without needing to be 'pushed' via heavy marketing outlay.

A good precedent for this is the APRA regime for performing 'cover'
versions of songs in live venues, and recovering bulk royalty payments
from live venues - this regime worked really well for everyone during
the 'pub rock' boom of the 70s/80s. Applied to P2P, there could be some
kind of monitoring which works are being trafficked and how much, to
determine each artist/publisher's deserved share of the tax take.

Thoughts?

--
Cheers
EB

--

One who is not a conservative by age 20 has no brain.
One who is not a liberal by age 40 has no heart.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Harry
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-08-2005
Evil Bastard wrote:

>
> I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange for
> the rights to:
> - freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
> a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
> - burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use
>


Maybe you should also be allowed to steal freely provided you pay some taxes?

Perhaps you should try stealing from some *friends* and sharing the
proceeds with some other *friends*. With friends like you we can
all have everything for free! Whoopdedoo!

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
-=rjh=-
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-08-2005
Evil Bastard wrote:
> I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange for
> the rights to:
> - freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
> a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
> - burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use
>
> (*) There'd need to be some clarification of which works are 'fair game'
> for download/copy. Possibly this category could exclude works which are
> out of the peak of their life cycle - eg movies at pre-release or
> premier screening phase, or songs in the top 20, but allow
> anything/everything else.
>
> This could be a huge win-win for consumers and publishers.
>
> Consumers could have inexpensive and legal access to a vast abundance of
> material, while publishers/artists could earn a passive income without
> the massive marketing/distribution costs they have historically incurred.
>
> This would also do away with the frustrations of the 'legal downloads'
> biz - with its relatively high cost per song/video, its DRM and other
> stupid restrictions and complications.
>
> Many artists will flourish if their work is allowed to spread virally,
> without needing to be 'pushed' via heavy marketing outlay.
>
> A good precedent for this is the APRA regime for performing 'cover'
> versions of songs in live venues, and recovering bulk royalty payments
> from live venues - this regime worked really well for everyone during
> the 'pub rock' boom of the 70s/80s. Applied to P2P, there could be some
> kind of monitoring which works are being trafficked and how much, to
> determine each artist/publisher's deserved share of the tax take.
>
> Thoughts?
>


I think it is a bad idea for two reasons:

1 - why should I subsidise other people's "free" music? Since I don't
download and burn commercial music I have no interest in subsidising
others who do this. I mostly use CDs for backups, distributing software,
photographs and for trying various Linux distributions.

2 - you are well out of date, who uses CDs for music anyway? Music that
I do download never makes it onto CD; it is much easier to manage on a
fileserver. In fact every CD I buy goes onto the fileserver immediately
anyway (not that I even buy many these days).
 
Reply With Quote
 
thingy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-08-2005
Harry wrote:
> Evil Bastard wrote:
>
>
>>I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange for
>>the rights to:
>> - freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
>> a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
>> - burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use
>>

>
>
> Maybe you should also be allowed to steal freely provided you pay some taxes?
>
> Perhaps you should try stealing from some *friends* and sharing the
> proceeds with some other *friends*. With friends like you we can
> all have everything for free! Whoopdedoo!
>


Not quite the same argument. The cost of distribution, & re-production
is just about zero, the artists get their % from the % put on CD-rs, so
there is no stealing.

The argument is you pay a lot more for CD-r blanks instead of paying
directly for a "real" CD. I have issues with that, but Canada etc does
this sort of thing on a smaller scale.

regards

Thing

 
Reply With Quote
 
thingy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-08-2005
-=rjh=- wrote:
> Evil Bastard wrote:
>
>> I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange for
>> the rights to:
>> - freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
>> a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
>> - burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use
>>
>> (*) There'd need to be some clarification of which works are 'fair game'
>> for download/copy. Possibly this category could exclude works which are
>> out of the peak of their life cycle - eg movies at pre-release or
>> premier screening phase, or songs in the top 20, but allow
>> anything/everything else.
>>
>> This could be a huge win-win for consumers and publishers.
>>
>> Consumers could have inexpensive and legal access to a vast abundance of
>> material, while publishers/artists could earn a passive income without
>> the massive marketing/distribution costs they have historically incurred.
>>
>> This would also do away with the frustrations of the 'legal downloads'
>> biz - with its relatively high cost per song/video, its DRM and other
>> stupid restrictions and complications.
>>
>> Many artists will flourish if their work is allowed to spread virally,
>> without needing to be 'pushed' via heavy marketing outlay.
>>
>> A good precedent for this is the APRA regime for performing 'cover'
>> versions of songs in live venues, and recovering bulk royalty payments
>> from live venues - this regime worked really well for everyone during
>> the 'pub rock' boom of the 70s/80s. Applied to P2P, there could be some
>> kind of monitoring which works are being trafficked and how much, to
>> determine each artist/publisher's deserved share of the tax take.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>

>
> I think it is a bad idea for two reasons:
>
> 1 - why should I subsidise other people's "free" music? Since I don't
> download and burn commercial music I have no interest in subsidising
> others who do this. I mostly use CDs for backups, distributing software,
> photographs and for trying various Linux distributions.
>
> 2 - you are well out of date, who uses CDs for music anyway? Music that
> I do download never makes it onto CD; it is much easier to manage on a
> fileserver. In fact every CD I buy goes onto the fileserver immediately
> anyway (not that I even buy many these days).


1) I agree, I do not download music, I dont see why I should heavily
subsidise the people who do.

I also fail to see why a Linux, or BSD user should pay a music tax to
make install cds and why anybody should pay a music tax to do backup to
CDs, that is unfair.

If I did downlaod I would be happy to pay $1~2 per song that saves me
getting the 8 or 10 other crappy songs on the album I dont want and
doing my own "best of" mix on a CD is then way easier.

What I would consider unfair is to pay for a CD that I was copying music
to off my vinyl records or to make best of sets off a collection of CDs,
Ive paid the artist, once, that is fair. This is one of the things that
really gets my goat, So I could either "break the law" and carry 1 or 2
cdrs of my favourite mixes or carry 10~20 originals with the danger of
damage and theft just so some fat suit gets to make even more money,
sorry that is not fair.

2) Media centres are the way to go, want to go out? just squirt songs
onto the ipod / phone and you are off...

regards

Thing



























 
Reply With Quote
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-08-2005
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Harry <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Evil Bastard wrote:
>
>> I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange for
>> the rights to:
>> - freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
>> a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
>> - burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use

>
>Maybe you should also be allowed to steal freely provided you pay some taxes?


And so another USENET debate descends into a typically emotive morass.

I thought EB made a point worthy of some thought, and here all you can
think of doing is responding in a mindless knee-jerk fashion, and push
your "close-mind" button by using the word "steal" to pre-empt further
debate, thereby suggesting that anybody who believes EB has a valid
point must ipso facto be advocating criminality.

You suck.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Waylon Kenning
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-08-2005
T'was the Sun, 09 Oct 2005 10:21:01 +1300 when I remembered Lawrence
D'Oliveiro <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> saying something like
this:

>And so another USENET debate descends into a typically emotive morass.
>

<snip>
>
>You suck.


Uh, did you just comment about someone turning a debate into emotive
morass, then said the person sucked?
--
Cheers,

Waylon Kenning.
 
Reply With Quote
 
steve
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-09-2005
Evil Bastard wrote:
> I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange for
> the rights to:
> - freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
> a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
> - burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use


I have hundreds of writeable CDs and perhaps ONE of them contains any
music I have captured from CD to play on my lounge DVD player.

I'd not be happy with the assumption that most discs are used to copy
music.
 
Reply With Quote
 
MarkH
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-09-2005
Evil Bastard <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:4347b8cd$(E-Mail Removed):

>
> I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange
> for the rights to:
> - freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
> a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
> - burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use


I would much rather see new download sites for MP3s, Movies and TV
programs. They should have very fast download speeds with mirrors all
over the world and should contain all available content including the
latest movies just released and TV programs aired this week. The
quality should be high and free of glitches.

I would happily pay in US$ around $0.50 per song, $1 per TV program and
$2 per movie. This could easily provide a tidy profit for all involved
due to the very low cost of providing the bandwidth (3-6MB per song,
350MB per TV program and 700MB per movie - all very high quality).

Once set up then I would have no problem with some heavy punishments
going out to those that setup illegal pirated download sites.

I would happily pay $20 with my credit card for $20 credit with this
legal download site, after downloading $20 worth of content then I can
pay again.

I have already tried to join Napster, but with no success (I don't think
that they accept overseas CCs). It doesn't seem too bad to pay US$1 per
song if they can provide good content that I want.

As long as the artists receive about 50% of the money collected then
they could make quite a tidy profit - especially for the musicians that
skip the recording label and offer the music to the site themselves.
(How much do the musicians earn for each CD sold now?)


On the idea of paying a piracy tax on CDs and DVDs, how do I claim a
refund for the failed burns (like when the Knoppix CD didn't work due to
a corrupted .iso file, after redownloading and burning again it worked
fine) and non pirated materials. I pay for the internet connection that
I use to download the Linux .iso files, I pay for the blank CD and DVD
disks - why should I pay more?

I notice that Debian Sarge is available on 14 .iso files - a piracy tax
on CDs would make it cheaper to use the network install, unless you need
to install on a large number of PCs.

Basically I am completely against the idea of taxing CDs and DVDs just
in case they get used for writing pirated content. It would only
encourage people to back up to a 2nd HDD instead of DVDs anyway.


--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 5-September-05)
"The person on the other side was a young woman. Very obviously a
young woman. There was no possible way she could have been mistaken
for a young man in any language, especially Braille."
Maskerade
 
Reply With Quote
 
XP
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-09-2005
On Sun, 09 Oct 2005 03:39:40 GMT, MarkH <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Evil Bastard <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
>news:4347b8cd$(E-Mail Removed):
>
>>
>> I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange
>> for the rights to:
>> - freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
>> a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
>> - burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use

>
>I would much rather see new download sites for MP3s, Movies and TV
>programs. They should have very fast download speeds with mirrors all
>over the world and should contain all available content including the
>latest movies just released and TV programs aired this week. The
>quality should be high and free of glitches.
>
>I would happily pay in US$ around $0.50 per song, $1 per TV program and
>$2 per movie. This could easily provide a tidy profit for all involved
>due to the very low cost of providing the bandwidth (3-6MB per song,
>350MB per TV program and 700MB per movie - all very high quality).
>
>Once set up then I would have no problem with some heavy punishments
>going out to those that setup illegal pirated download sites.
>
>I would happily pay $20 with my credit card for $20 credit with this
>legal download site, after downloading $20 worth of content then I can
>pay again.
>
>I have already tried to join Napster, but with no success (I don't think
>that they accept overseas CCs). It doesn't seem too bad to pay US$1 per
>song if they can provide good content that I want.
>
>As long as the artists receive about 50% of the money collected then
>they could make quite a tidy profit - especially for the musicians that
>skip the recording label and offer the music to the site themselves.
>(How much do the musicians earn for each CD sold now?)
>
>
>On the idea of paying a piracy tax on CDs and DVDs, how do I claim a
>refund for the failed burns (like when the Knoppix CD didn't work due to
>a corrupted .iso file, after redownloading and burning again it worked
>fine) and non pirated materials. I pay for the internet connection that
>I use to download the Linux .iso files, I pay for the blank CD and DVD
>disks - why should I pay more?
>
>I notice that Debian Sarge is available on 14 .iso files - a piracy tax
>on CDs would make it cheaper to use the network install, unless you need
>to install on a large number of PCs.
>
>Basically I am completely against the idea of taxing CDs and DVDs just
>in case they get used for writing pirated content. It would only
>encourage people to back up to a 2nd HDD instead of DVDs anyway.




There is still a copying Tax on Tapes here.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Advertisments