About DRM and copying

On Thursday, Mar 10, 2005, at 19:11 Japan, <tidbits-talktidbits.com> wrote:

This is a digest of messages posted to TidBITS Talk.

Initial message Posted by Kirk McElhearn on 07:42am Mar 9, 2005 Posted via email

Here in France, if I buy an iPod, I pay a special tax which _assumes_ that I'm going to steal music.

But do I pay this only on an iPod? No, no... I pay this on _any_ storage I buy: hard disks, USB flash memory, even computers. Blank CDs, DVDs, anything you can write data to.

So, this "tax" tacitly allows me to copy _anything_ I want, since I've paid to do so.

I used to think this up-front tax was an admirable solution, but now I realize the drawback -- as with all such blanket licensing fees, no matter what music you record on your own, the proceeds get divided proportionately among the collecting organization's roster of artists. In other words, as you might want to support indie musicians, the proceeds from this tax mainly go to make the rich stars richer.

Jim Swan Nara, Japan

At 7:42 AM -0800 3/9/05, Kirk McElhearn wrote:
>This says that when I buy a 60 GB iPod, I pay EUR 23.92 (incl. VAT) as a tax
>that is collected by SORECOP, some sort of organization like the ASCAP that
>distributes money to artists. Theoretically...
>
>But do I pay this only on an iPod? No, no... I pay this on _any_ storage I
>buy: hard disks, USB flash memory, even computers. Blank CDs, DVDs, anything
>you can write data to.

This sort of thing drives me nuts. (And it's usually a bad idea to
get me started on taxes of any sort.) First of all, I heartily agree:
if the government is going to assume I'm guilty of using these
materials to commit piracy (what happened to presumption of
innocence?), then darn tootin' I'm gonna break some laws! Of course,
I have no use for pirating music, so I'd probably do it in other
ways, contributing to my already miscreant-leaning mindset. See if I
clean up any street litter!

But also, I go through a fair bit of media, including a few hard
drives (for network backups) and a lot of blank CD-R and DVD media.
And a great deal of the optical media is indeed used for music.
Except that it's *my* music, as in music I composed and/or perform.
It's copyrighted, and in many cases I hold the copyright! (Exceptions
are work- or performance-for-hire, in which case I'm not violating
any copyright laws either because I'm commissioned to do the work.)
The idea that I have to pay a piracy tax to copy content to which I
have legitimate right rubs me in so many wrong ways.

Another irony is that I have to be a member of some performance
rights organizations, and several of those organizations actively
lobby for taxes like these. Drives me up the wall: the idea that I
have to pay membership to an organization which is going to make me
pay a tax based on activity I have every legal right to conduct! Grr.

OK, and some guy just walked by outside wearing a HUGE down parka
with the hood up, running shorts, and flipflops. Clearly, the world
is ending.

End of rant. ;-)
--
Geoff Duncan TidBITS Technical Editor <http://www.tidbits.com/>

At 7:42 AM -0800 3/9/05, Kirk McElhearn wrote:
>This says that when I buy a 60 GB iPod, I pay EUR 23.92 (incl. VAT) as a tax
>that is collected by SORECOP, some sort of organization like the ASCAP that
>distributes money to artists. Theoretically...

At 12:23 PM -0800 3/11/05, Geoff Duncan wrote:
>But also, I go through a fair bit of media, including a few hard
>drives (for network backups) and a lot of blank CD-R and DVD media.

I'm not sure if this applies to DVD media but in the US music CD-R
media (but not Data CD-R media. (yes I know its the same thing, but
look at the labeling next time.) as well as CD burners carry a
licence fee/tax for the same purpose, that goes to the artists.

Nick

At 7:07 PM -0800 3/11/05, Nicholas Barnard wrote:
>I'm not sure if this applies to DVD media but in the US music CD-R
>media (but not Data CD-R media. (yes I know its the same thing, but
>look at the labeling next time.) as well as CD burners carry a
>licence fee/tax for the same purpose, that goes to the artists.

Only a (tiny) portion goes to the artist. The majority is supposed to
go to the "rights holders," who are usually not the artists, if it's
distributed at all. Here's the deal as I understand it:

In the US, these "license fee/tax" are royalty funds which are
supposed to be paid by the manufacturers of digital audio recording
gear and media (tapes, CDs, DVDs, anything which can store audio).
The system was set up under the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992.

<http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/17C10.txt>

In reality, these fees are not paid by the manufacturers, but by
consumers, and now I'll just set the ethics and implications of that
aside (shove shove thump!) as a different topic.

Anyway. These royalties, once collected, are divided into two funds.
A third of the money goes to the Music Works Fund, and two-third goes
to the Sound Recordings Fund.

The bigger Sound Recording Fund is for "interested copyright
parties," which theoretically means the artists and the
rights-holders. But the breakdown is amusing. About 2.6 percent goes
in an escrow account jointly managed by the AFM (American Federation
of Musicians, e.g. "The Musicians' Union") and "copyright parties"
for distribution to "non-featured" musicians. Another 1.3 percent
goes into an escrow managed by "copyright parties" and AFTRA
(American Federation of Television and Radio Artists) for
non-featured vocalists. The remainder goes 60 percent to rights
owners and 40 percent to featured artists.

The smaller Musical Works fund is subdivided into a Publishers
subfund and a Writers subfund.

"Interested copyright parties" are supposed to voluntarily work out
how these funds get distributed within the groups, but the reality is
that performance rights organizations like ASCAP and BMI rep most of
the artists clamoring after the Musical Works fund, and big media
conglomerates rep themselves or proxy through groups like the RIAA.
Disputes are handled before a Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel,
which doles things out according to how the recordings were
distributed, which means broadcast and sales.

And there's the catch: the data used in the arbitration process -
broadcast performance and sales - are not collected by disinterested
objective third parties. Instead, they're collected and/or published
only by polling organizations and/or distributors, who have financial
interests in reporting these numbers in different ways. These numbers
are the subject of much controversy, rarely add up, and seemingly
bear little resemblance to any reality with which any living person
is familiar. Without diving in, I'll just note artists who own their
own copyrights seem to have remarkably few metered performances,
while artists who've signed away everything to giant media
conglomerates are astonishingly popular. And the way industry
accounting works, in many cases any money due to the artist goes
straight to the label's pockets anyway to pay off "label debt" owed
by the artist.

Artists do not have to have BMI or ASCAP (or whatever) represent them
at the Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel: they can represent
themselves or appoint some other party to represent them. However, if
you don't represent yourself or appoint someone, you're SOL.

I do know artists who've received money via these mechanisms, and,
no, they could not use the funds to buy a cup of coffee. I haven't
personally seen a penny.

gd
--
Geoff Duncan TidBITS Technical Editor <http://www.tidbits.com/>

Le 11 mars 2005, à 21:23, Geoff Duncan a écrit :

> This sort of thing drives me nuts

And (almost) everybody here in France -- excepted for Mr Pascal
"Universal" NEGRE ;->

There is a lot of discussion about it, here. I will summarize it...
it's difficult for me to explain some subtle things.

Yes, there is a tax on magnetic & optical media -- officially, to
compensate "lost sales" when you make privates copies. To make private
copies is a recognized Right. Not to confuse with the right of making a
security backup of a software piece.

But now, there are more and more "protected" CDs -- which prevent from
making a private copy. And now I will be illegal to circumvent the
protection... whereas you have the "right" to make private copies!

Sorry to summarize so briefly hours of discussion...
No need to emphasize, the tax on magnetic tapes and CDs is officially
to compensate for "private copy", not for piracy... Paying the tax
doesn't allow you for copying copyrighted material!

(-8 Dom sur son aïcebouque

On 3/14/05 7:50 AM, "Nicholas Barnard" <nickinmff.net> wrote:

> At 7:42 AM -0800 3/9/05, Kirk McElhearn wrote:
>> This says that when I buy a 60 GB iPod, I pay EUR 23.92 (incl. VAT) as a tax
>> that is collected by SORECOP, some sort of organization like the ASCAP that
>> distributes money to artists. Theoretically...
>
> At 12:23 PM -0800 3/11/05, Geoff Duncan wrote:
>> But also, I go through a fair bit of media, including a few hard
>> drives (for network backups) and a lot of blank CD-R and DVD media.
>
> I'm not sure if this applies to DVD media but in the US music CD-R
> media (but not Data CD-R media. (yes I know its the same thing, but
> look at the labeling next time.) as well as CD burners carry a
> licence fee/tax for the same purpose, that goes to the artists.

Yes, that's for hardware and media for "living room" CD burners. AFAIK, not
many of these are sold. But you do pay considerably more for media for that
reason.
 
 
Kirk
 
          Author of: The Mac OS X Command Line: Unix Under the Hood
               - - - - - -
             Read my blog: Kirkville -- http://www.mcelhearn.com
          Musings, Opinion and Miscellanea, on Macs, iPods and more
       Kirk McElhearn | Chemin de la Lauze | 05600 Guillestre | France

On 3/14/05 7:58 AM, "Domi" <tbdomifree.fr> wrote:

> No need to emphasize, the tax on magnetic tapes and CDs is officially
> to compensate for "private copy", not for piracy... Paying the tax
> doesn't allow you for copying copyrighted material!

Wrong. It allows you to make private copies of any material, whether it's
yours or under copyright. Why would you have to pay to make a copy of
something that's yours?

This is why someone recently was found not guilty of piracy in France, after
being caught with 488 movies he had downloaded - he did not sell these
films, but only used them for viewing in his own home. The judge was right
to let him go - after all, he paid the tax!

Let me give you an example of this tax - it so happens I need some blank
DVDs these days. At Amazon FR, 25 Memorex DVD-Rs cost EUR 89.90

http://www.amazon.fr/exec/obidos/tg/browse/-/11081641

At Amazon US, the same costs $16.84

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B0001MKU02

(Well, almost the same - the US discs are 8x, the FR are 4x).

At current exchange rates, that's $120 in France (and that's the cheapest
brand on Amazon; others are much more expensive), and $17 in the US. See the
difference?
 
 
Kirk
 
            Author of: How to Do Everything with Mac OS X Panther
               - - - - - -
             Read my blog: Kirkville -- http://www.mcelhearn.com
          Musings, Opinion and Miscellanea, on Macs, iPods and more
      Kirk McElhearn | Chemin de la Lauze | 05600 Guillestre | France

Le 14 mars 2005, à 09:45, Kirk McElhearn a écrit :

> Why would you have to pay to make a copy of
> something that's yours?

For instance, you have a CD of music, regularly bought.
You want to have a security copy.
You want to hear it on a tape in your car.
You want to hear it on your iPod in the street ;-)

(-8 Dom sur son aïcebouque

On 3/14/05 2:07 PM, "Domi" <tbdomifree.fr> wrote:

>> Why would you have to pay to make a copy of
>> something that's yours?
>
> For instance, you have a CD of music, regularly bought.
> You want to have a security copy.
> You want to hear it on a tape in your car.
> You want to hear it on your iPod in the street ;-)

My question is, why would you have to _pay_ a tax to make such a copy? You
own the music already - there's no reason to impose taxes for fair use
copying.
 
 
Kirk
 
            Author of: How to Do Everything with Mac OS X Panther
               - - - - - -
             Read my blog: Kirkville -- http://www.mcelhearn.com
          Musings, Opinion and Miscellanea, on Macs, iPods and more
      Kirk McElhearn | Chemin de la Lauze | 05600 Guillestre | France

Le 14 mars 2005, à 14:37, Kirk McElhearn a écrit :

> My question is, why would you have to _pay_ a tax to make such a copy?
> You
> own the music already - there's no reason to impose taxes for fair use
> copying.

Music Companies decided that they were _lost sales_ ;->


(-8 Dom sur son aïcebouque

On 3/14/05 7:07 AM, "Domi" <tbdomifree.fr> wrote:

>> Why would you have to pay to make a copy of
>> something that's yours?
>
> For instance, you have a CD of music, regularly bought.
> You want to have a security copy.
> You want to hear it on a tape in your car.
> You want to hear it on your iPod in the street ;-)

Either way, why are you paying for it. It's not like there's any universe
where you're going to buy 4 copies of the same CD just for this.

--
John C. Welch Writer/Analyst
Bynkii.com Mac and other opinions
jwelchbynkii.com

On Mar 14, 2005, at 8:07 AM, Kirk McElhearn wrote:

> At current exchange rates, that's $120 in France (and that's the
> cheapest
> brand on Amazon; others are much more expensive), and $17 in the US.
> See the
> difference?

It's worse than that -- I picked up a spindle of 25 Sony DVDs for $10
the other day.

What's to stop you from stocking up next time you're in Italy? I'd
have figured the common market would have made major inroads on this by
now.

Best,
Jeff

>On 3/14/05 7:58 AM, "Domi" <tbdomifree.fr> wrote:
>Let me give you an example of this tax - it so happens I need some blank
>DVDs these days. At Amazon FR, 25 Memorex DVD-Rs cost EUR 89.90
>
>At Amazon US, the same costs $16.84

This is one of those blatant instances where buying from an Amazon
that isn't in your country is a good idea. I've purchased a few
items from Amazon.co.uk because they weren't available in the US.
Amazon nicely carries over all the information between all the sites,
as long as you use the same logon.

See how silly laws like this get once you get into an international
marketplace?

Nick

On 15 Mar 2005, at 8.00 am, Kirk McElhearn wrote:

> You own the music already - there's no reason to impose taxes for fair
> use
> copying.

But not everywhere has such a thing as 'fair use copying' -- here in
Australia, for example, I'd gladly pay a tax on blank media if it means
I'm legally allowed to have something on my iPod other than just
silence... or allowed to record television programmes that are on when
I'm not home so I can watch them later... or...

David

On 3/16/05 4:53 PM, "Nicholas Barnard" <nickinmff.net> wrote:

>> Let me give you an example of this tax - it so happens I need some blank
>> DVDs these days. At Amazon FR, 25 Memorex DVD-Rs cost EUR 89.90
>>
>> At Amazon US, the same costs $16.84
>
> This is one of those blatant instances where buying from an Amazon
> that isn't in your country is a good idea. I've purchased a few
> items from Amazon.co.uk because they weren't available in the US.
> Amazon nicely carries over all the information between all the sites,
> as long as you use the same logon.
>
> See how silly laws like this get once you get into an international
> marketplace?

I just checked on Amazon UK:

 This item can only be delivered within the UK and Republic of Ireland

And the price is about 1/3 the price in France... This said, I've got a
British friend who goes back there every now and then... I'll have him bring
some back next time.
 
 
Kirk
 
            Author of: How to Do Everything with Mac OS X Panther
               - - - - - -
             Read my blog: Kirkville -- http://www.mcelhearn.com
          Musings, Opinion and Miscellanea, on Macs, iPods and more
      Kirk McElhearn | Chemin de la Lauze | 05600 Guillestre | France

> But not everywhere has such a thing as 'fair use copying' -- here in
> Australia, for example, I'd gladly pay a tax on blank media if it means
> I'm legally allowed to have something on my iPod other than just
> silence... or allowed to record television programmes that are on when
> I'm not home so I can watch them later... or...

Yessbutt....

To whom is the tax payable? If I buy the new album by, say, The Rainmakers*
(sad to say, they've not put out a new album in several years, but I live in
hope) on iTMS, I have it on my hard disc. It will, needless to say, find its
way onto my iPod within seconds, which, legal or not, I'm bloody well doing.

All well and good. But then it's time to make a CD of it to play in the car.
Yes, I know, there's no shortage of iPod-car interfaces, but let's ignore
the geek solutions and think this one through. I go to the shop and buy a
nice new blank CD-R and put it into the rather outstanding Sony DVD burner
that my wife bought for me for Christmas (outstanding because it'll burn
said album in under 90 seconds, which isn't too bad, and it'll also burn
double-layer DVDs, which is rather special). According to what's being
proposed, I'll be paying a tax on said blank disc, and taxes, by their very
nature, go to the government.

Wait a moment. I'm paying this money, supposedly, to protect the
intellectual property of the artist, and yet the money I'm paying is making
its way into the national exchequer. Where does it go after that? Who
distributes it? Since the government has no idea what I'm going to put on
the disc, it doesn't know to give the money to Bob Walkenhorst or Pat Tomek,
rather than, say, Mick Jagger, who doesn't need the money but gets mentioned
right now because I have "Stray Cat Blues" playing on my iPod even as we
speak, or Britney Spears, a putative "musician" who *really* doesn't deserve
a penny from any music lover anywhere.

But presumably, the money will be divvied up among all "artists." We'll end
up with some bizarre kind of socialism where the bigger sellers are paid a
large chunk of whatever tribute is imposed on blank media purely because
they've sold more records**, and the smaller sellers who really wouldn't
make much money from record sales otherwise will get a cut. But who decides
how to distribute the money? How many records do you have to sell before you
get a piece of the action? If I make a dozen copies of the album I've just
downloaded, how is this reflected in the band's take?

Basically, I don't get it. I'm sure there's someone reading this who can
understand this (actually, I'm not convinced that anyone's actually bothered
reading this far, but I'll flatter myselfŠ), so I'll look forward to an
explanation.

Right, then. It's back to work for me. Got taxes to payŠ

Biggles

*Sadly not available at iTMS, but if you can get hold of it, "The Good News
And The Bad News" is probably the best thing they've ever done.

**For those reading this young enough not to remember, they're the black
round things that used to have music on them. Have a grown-up explain to
you.

On 3/18/05 11:06 PM, "Big Steve" <bigstevemacearthlink.net> wrote:

> To whom is the tax payable? If I buy the new album by, say, The Rainmakers*
> (sad to say, they've not put out a new album in several years, but I live in
> hope) on iTMS, I have it on my hard disc. It will, needless to say, find its
> way onto my iPod within seconds, which, legal or not, I'm bloody well doing.
>
> All well and good. But then it's time to make a CD of it to play in the car.
> Yes, I know, there's no shortage of iPod-car interfaces, but let's ignore
> the geek solutions and think this one through. I go to the shop and buy a
> nice new blank CD-R and put it into the rather outstanding Sony DVD burner
> that my wife bought for me for Christmas (outstanding because it'll burn
> said album in under 90 seconds, which isn't too bad, and it'll also burn
> double-layer DVDs, which is rather special). According to what's being
> proposed, I'll be paying a tax on said blank disc, and taxes, by their very
> nature, go to the government.

In France, it goes to a group similar to the ASCAP, who then distributes the
moneys according to centuries-old, arcane methods. I think it was Geoff who
posted a message a few days ago giving more details about that.
 
 
Kirk
 
                Co-author of: Take Control of Panther Vol. 1
               - - - - - -
             Read my blog: Kirkville -- http://www.mcelhearn.com
          Musings, Opinion and Miscellanea, on Macs, iPods and more
      Kirk McElhearn | Chemin de la Lauze | 05600 Guillestre | France