Germany Increases 'You Are All Pirates' Tax On Solid State Media By 2000%
from the how-not-to-win-friends dept
Techflaws alerts us to an announcement by ZPÜ, the organization responsible for setting the levy on storage media in Germany, that fees will rise rather significantly (German original). For a USB stick with a capacity greater than 4 Gbytes, the tax would increase from 8 eurocents (about 10 cents) to 1.56 euros (about $1.93), a rise of 1850%; for a memory card bigger than 4 Gbytes, the fee would go up from 8 eurocents to 1.95 euros (about $2.42), an increase of 2338%.
No justification for such a huge jump was offered, but since one of the constituent members of ZPÜ is the German music collection society GEMA, which seems to have an unlimited sense of entitlement when it comes to demanding money from the public, that’s hardly a surprise.
In particular, no rationale is given for including memory cards, which are used almost exclusively in cameras to record content produced by end-users — so the idea that the levy is somehow justified as a way of compensating creators for revenue supposedly “lost” by piracy is manifestly absurd.
Basically, this outdated and insulting approach treats all Germans using digital storage as if they were pirates. Of course, arbitrarily imposing 2000% tax hikes on storage is probably the quickest way to turn them into something much more dangerous to GEMA and its friends: ardent supporters of the German Pirate Party….
Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and on Google+
Filed Under: germany, pirate party, storage, tariff, usb
Companies: gema
Comments on “Germany Increases 'You Are All Pirates' Tax On Solid State Media By 2000%”
Wow.
Real Person: “But, I need this to backup and transfer my data!”
Collections: “Yeah, to back up and transfer your DIRTY PIRATE data!”
Sharing now legal?
Does it mean that non-commercial copying now becomes legal?
If there is a private levy, how can file sharing be illegal?
Re: Sharing now legal?
not legal, but ethical
Re: Sharing now legal?
i suppose so – if you pay a fee for somethig you are then allowed to recieve that thing.
Music is free from now on in Germany.
Re: Re: Sharing now legal?
This is not a tax to compensate for piracy this is a tax to steal money from the public without good reason without giving nothing in return.
When some artist or company claims people get things without paying they should be reminded that people already paid for it, in the form of various taxes(levies) and asked why that is not compensation enough.
Re: Sharing now legal?
Non commercial copying is kind of legal already.
You are allowed to share originals with a few friends. This doesn’t extend to download sites, peer to peers and copies of copies (afaik).
No justification for such a huge jump was offered, but since one of the constituent members of ZP? is the German music collection society GEMA, which seems to have an unlimited sense of entitlement when it comes to demanding money from the public, that’s hardly a surprise.
And speaking of huge jumps…..
This is a new low for you Moody, or is now just Charlie McCarthy?
Re: Re:
I’m totally convinced by your argument.
Re: Re:
It’s not a huge jump – it’s an assertion based partly on past actions, and partly on GEMA being the most entitled assholes in the world.
And I include Metallica there.
Re: Re:
are you implying that the jump Glyn made was very low as in it wasn’t very big and made sense? (Because that’s kinda what happened)
You mean aaarrrrrrdent supporters of the German Pirate Party….
Tsk, tsk. You didn’t notice that the Lib-Ray standard Kickstarter campaign suddenly managed to raise the last 2K just in time? That was GEMA, making sure it has justification (Lib-Ray will be a way to distribute (possibly infringing) HD content, based on memory cards…).
Public Choice Theory
The ability and use of large companies to influence economic policy law, thus benefiting at the expense public of the public.
Why compete for a chance at someone’s business when you can make it illegal for every member of the public not to pay you.
Re: Public Choice Theory
Sorry about the schizophrenic spelling.
Re: Rebellion Coming Soon
Why compete for a chance at someone’s business when you can make it illegal for every member of the public not to pay you.
That remark may sound flippant, but sadly this is exactly the way much of the world under Corporate Fascism is headed.
You will simply be taxed to support the corporate state, no matter how miserable, unproductive, obsolete and undeserving the bastards are. Its called corporate welfare.
Look at what happened with Wall Street under the US model of Corporate Fascism. Hundred of billions of dollars were simply expropriated (stolen) from the taxpayers and given to the Wall Street failure system (who soon rewarded themselves with billions in bonuses for their failures). Meanwhile, many people lost everything. How much did that theft cost individual people?
Their government slaves may have managed to head off the mass hangings of the rich robber barons, but only for a few years. Mark these words: outrageous thefts like these will be punished, through revolution if necessary.
Re: Re: Rebellion Coming Soon
At least part of this failure were the removal of regulations which had worked perfectly well since the 1930s which had restricted investment banks from literally gambling on closed investments that, in the end, turned out to be worthless helped along by their good friends at the bond rating agencies.
The banks in the United States and elsewhere, see the UK, somehow became economic drivers as if they produced any “real” product of value. Which is odd as they are supposed to be loaning and “investing” money belonging to their depositors.
Now, I can understand the US and world economies going south if, say, Microsoft announced it was closing shop tomorrow due to bankruptcy or too many debts but that should NEVER happen in the banking sector which is, ideally, servicing the other sectors of the economy. Banking is a service industry not a production industry.
What happened is the failure of turning banking into a rebirth of mercantilism, which may be a form of facism, where the failure of the merchants can bankrupt and entire national or global economy.
And while all this was happening we were told that the market was self correcting, totally transparent and would police itself. Ideally it should do all that but in this case the banks and rating agencies decided they could do what they wanted with investments in things that no one knew what was in them.
How much did this cost real people? In far too many cases it cost them everything.
Arbitrage
Surely Germans will be able to purchase their SSM abroad, yes?
Oh. Right. That only works for tech companies.
Re: Arbitrage
Nope, you can mail-order in Luxembourg or the Netherlands.
Re: Re: Arbitrage
In NL we have similar levies.
At least on discs we do have them, and there was talk of including hard drives and mp3-players as well. Not sure about the storage cards.
Re: Arbitrage
>> Surely Germans will be able to purchase their SSM abroad, yes?
Absolutely, if they are prepared to pay higher postage instead copyright tax.
Re: Re: Arbitrage
As a matter of principle, I would be willing to pay higher postage in order to avoid paying an unfair tax.
Re: Re: Re: Arbitrage
No taxation without justification!
I suspect their reasoning for including memory cards was that video cameras relying on them can be used for recording movies in theaters… though it could just be that they figured out that ANY storage device in theory can be packed with pirated material (hence they closed the possible loophole of using memory cards instead of USB sticks)… In that case they’re probably paranoid.
This is nothing new they did it long ago in Canada, they probably still are. To be fair about your headline though, it’s hard to find any computer user who hasn’t pirated something, so yes, everyones a pirate.
Re: Re:
Well the way I read it, that makes it legal to download anything and everything as long as you put it on a SSM at some point. Ain’t paying for nothing.
Re: Re:
I am one of those pirates that downloads something, and if I like it enough to keep it, I go buy it, else it gets removed.
Re: Re:
We’ve been paying this “tax” to CAPAC, the Canadian royalty collection group, since the days of floppy disks, at least the last round of them that held a fair amount of data. The regulations of the Act that empowered all of this silliness is regularly updated as new tech comes on the market to cover them as well. After all, think of the musician, think of their children, think of Nickleback not being able to make all the money they do. Enough to afford homes in the most expensive postal code in Canada, West Vancouver. (Which is on the North Shore not west of the city of Vancouver at all just to confuse those who have never lived there.
What would we ever do if we couldn’t do this?
And yes, I suspect everyone has pirated whether they were aware of that little detail or not. So in some way we are all pirates. Just not in the ways the recording and movie industries would have us believe we all are.
Someone on Heise quotes a statement from a GEMA spokesman which is also quite funny:
“The old fee was set in 2007/2008. The rapid development of compression algorithms e.g. for saving movies und the increased capacity of storage media demands adjustments of the fee”.
So, 8 GB now is more than it was in 2007? And efficiency of compression algorithms increased by 2000%?
Re: Re:
Well, duh! The paradox crumple zones on memory cards have been improved over a googol percent! I mean, seriously, get with the times!
Re: Re:
“The old fee was set in 2007/2008. The rapid development of compression algorithms e.g. for saving movies und the increased capacity of storage media demands adjustments of the fee”.
I read that as: ‘There have been technological developments that make it cheaper for us to distribute content. Therefore we have to charge the end user more money.’
They should just start collecting cameras, flash cards, video cameras, computers, DVDs, and anything that would allow an end-user to generate his/her own content.
You know
for the children
and the artists.
Re: Re:
Same thing
[troll]
Now see, that is where you’re wrong. It’s the copyrighted and patented collection of algorithms and hardware producing the picture. High time that this is recognized and the people responsible getting their rightful pay-per-pic.
[/troll]
WTH
2000%….. what the hell? there is no such thing as 2000%
100% is the maximum in percent..
please learn some maths before posting an article.
Re: WTH
Are you slow or something?
Re: WTH
I’m pretty sure 2000% is 20x more than 100%. But that’s just me.
Re: WTH
You should learn some maths yourself before posting such an idiotic comment. In this situation 2000% is a valid percentage.
Re: WTH
Actually, you’re rather wrong. A 100% increase is doubling the original number, so 2000% increase is equivalent to 20 times the original number. Open your calculator program, punch in 195 (representing the 1.95 Euro), then divide that by 23.38 (2338%). The number should be about 8.3-8.4 which when rounded down becomes the original 8 eurocents that was the old tax on solid state media.
Then there’s things like getting a 150% boost out of a CPU via overclocking it, or redlining an engine to get 130% nominal power output…
Re: WTH
math… its hard.
Re: WTH
You fail math harder than I do, good job.
Re: WTH
not sure if trolling or just plain dumb =o of course there can be percentage levels above 100 -_- instead of a 1 ratio
Re: WTH
That only works with reductions, i.e. you cannot have more than a 100% reduction in something, which takes it to 0. Except when you might be talking about an initial level which can be dropped below, although that’s straining it.
Gosh, maths is hard. 🙂 Better not comment until you’ve learned some!
Re: Re: WTH
Just don’t ask him what the square root of -1 is. 🙂
Re: Re: Re: WTH
i know, I know, I I I I know
Re: Re: Re: WTH
i
Re: WTH
Sure there’s 2000%
If I invest 100 dollars in something and get a 100% return on that investment, I can withdraw my original 100 dollars and have 200 dollars.
Now, if the return is 2000% and I withdraw my original 100 dollars, I would have… I believe around 2100 dollars.
See? Math ain’t hard.
Re: WTH
hmm? So what is this “percent” thing? Last I know it’s “1/100”, and can be treated as a unit. So it’s perfectly fine to have 1 Gajillion percent (1Gajillion%) cos that only mean 1 Gajillion * 1/100. Whether it’s sensible or not depends on context.
Like, I very much support a 300% tax decrease, cos that means someone will be paying me 2x of my current taxes.
Re: WTH
You can’t have more than 100% of a thing, for example when you say I gave 110% effort, no you can only give %100. But when talking about relative “volume”, 2000% just means 20x.
Re: Re: WTH
That’s only true with things where there is a ‘totality’. I cannot have more than 100% of one apple (unless it expands somehow). So if I can only give a certain amount of effort, then yes, logically I couldn’t give more than 100%. However, language being the imprecise thing it is, we tend to miss out useful words like “100% of normal” (where extraordinary measures might be taken).
Besides, 100% of what I might do in one circumstance might only be 90% of what I’d do in another.
Besides, this is really a form of hyperbole, not maths. The ‘illogic’ of it is part of the point. Please take it up with the English teachers, not the mathematicians.
Re: Re: Re: WTH
“Hey, I used to play bass for ‘100% Of Normal'”
Re: Re: WTH
“You can’t have more than 100% of a thing, for example when you say I gave 110% effort, no you can only give %100. But when talking about relative “volume”, 2000% just means 20x.{“
wow. ok, in a sense, you are right, you can’t have more than 100% OF ONE THING. But you CAN have a multi-hundred percent INCREASE of those things.
If you have 1 apple, and you then take 4 more from me, how much more do you have? Your 1 apple is your 100% starting point. You now have 5 apples. Tell us again what 5 times 100 is?
We are talking about multiplying the number of apples, not sub-dividing an apple.
When you figure out how math and economics work, come back and we can have a proper conversation.
Re: WTH
100% is the sum of all the parts.It cannot be more.
If you have 10 pennies you have 10% of a dollar.If you have 130 pennies you do not have 130% of a dollar.You have 100% of a dollar and 30% of another dollar.
Retail markup is very different.
If you have an item that cost you a dollar and decide to mark it up 30% and used the math I see here, you would sell that item for $1.30.But if you decide to mark it down 30% it would then be $.91.you would lose $.09 and soon be out of business.To obtain a proper markup you would need to divide the original amount by the compliment of the markup amount.
100 marked up by 30% is 100/70= a sale price of 1.43.
to verify…1.43*30=42.9….1.43-43=100
Get you slide rules out!
Re: Re: WTH
Yes, you can use it that way. We don’t normally count money in individual, specific coins – we talk about collections of them as cost or payment. So using “130%” of an original dollar cost makes perfect sense. It’s irrelevant if you pay with a dollar and three 10s, or with 13 dimes. The quantity (cost) has gone up by 30%.
And yes, the behaviour of percentages varies if you are going up or down. You can’t practically sell anything for more than 100% less (which would be free) – anything else would be paying someone to take it, effectively. Also, because it is based on reciprocals, you can’t really compare 70%*(100%+30%) with (100%-30%). Those are mathematically two totally different calculations. But that extremely basic high school maths.
Re: Re: Re: WTH
Yes I’m aware that we don’t count money in “individual specific coins”.(except for coinstar and banks)and it is relevant if your using a vending machine.
I used pennies only as an example.
If you add $.30 to a dollar you don’t get 130% of a dollar.You get a dollar and thirty cents,or $1.30.
Also in my example the cost doesn’t go up, only the price does.The cost is still a Dollar.
My example relates to markup in a retail setting.
130% is not a 30% markup of a $1.00…$1.43 is.Do the math!
But you are correct in that I did use two different calculations…one to find the markup and one to discount it.
If you try and do a 150% markup you can’t because there’s no compliment.You can set your selling price anywhere you want,but if later you decide to discount your merchandise back to your cost to get rid of it you may wind up losing money.
Really simple and basic math that I learned in the second grade.
Re: Re: Re:2 WTH
“130% is not a 30% markup of a $1.00…$1.43 is.Do the math!”
Pardon my apparent stupidity, but I’m afraid I don’t understand this. I thought 130% of 100(i.e. $1) was 130 i.e. $1.30?
How can you say that 100 plus 30% equals 1.43? Sure, 70% of 143 is (roughly) 100, but you don’t start from 143..
What might be confusing me is the switch between “130%” and “$1.43” but even when I look at them separately, I still see errors. “130% is not a 30% markup of $1” – well, it is, actually.. “a 30% markup of $1 .. is $1.43” – well, it’s not though. It’s $1.30.
Granted, it’s been a few years since I had to memorise it, but to me, it doesn’t seem right.
Also, to the original AC – you’re stupid and you should be ashamed. Not only for the original comment, but for making me confused.
Re: Re: Re:3 WTH
LOL…Sorry I confused you.
If we do it your way 30% of a dollar is .30. add that to the dollar and you get $1.30. So far we’re good.
If We do it my way We get 1.43. so far you’re not so good.
But the difference is using a percentage to mark up and down and not a dollar amount. (cost / the compliment of the percentage. 30% mark up = 70% compliment…40=60 etc.
If we decide to have a sale and want to reduce the price by 30% (not $.30)so as to not go below our cost of $1.00
Your sale price would be $.91 ($1.30-30%=$.91)
My sale price would be $1.00 ($1.43-30%=$1.00)try it.
This distinction may not be very important when your talking about a few items at a dollar each.
You may want to try it out on a Million dollars worth of inventory and see how much money you lose doing it your way.
(add six zeros and see what you wind up with.
The next time you go to the supermarket look at all those sale signs in the isles and you can see where a simple chain wide $.09 mistake can really add up.
It gets even more costly when you do a 50% or more mark up and do it your (and just about everybody’s) way.
Hope this helps
Re: Re: Re:4 WTH
Ohhh, I get it now. Yeah, that helps.
Re: Re: Re:4 WTH
You seem to have gotten the conversation about general percentages mixed up with some mythical dime store with some really odd, unstated assumptions.
Firstly, who gives a **** whether someone loses money on some mythical markup/markdown? We’re discussing whether percentages can go over 100%. The simple answer is: they can.
As for your examples, can people mess these up in shops? Sure. So they need to be careful. But you’re hypothesing a load of assumptions that are faulty (like a 30% markup followed by a 30% markdown) and completely out of nowhere.
Percentages are very very very simple. What complicates them a little is when they are applied in sequence. However, all that is is very very simple multiplication/addition, with the standard rules of mathematics applied. I.e. multiplication/division happens before addition/subtraction, and the use of brackets overrides that. With some careful thinking, you can also look at how addition/subtraction is ‘identical’ to multiplication/division (1 + 1 = 2 * 1). Regardless, anyone running a shop who can’t do this simple maths either needs to finish elementary school, or stop mucking with the prices!
The only difference with percentages is that the decimal place has been moved a bit, and a new (obviously confusing) symbol has been added.
Re: Re: Re:2 WTH
You can set your selling price anywhere you want,but if later you decide to discount your merchandise back to your cost to get rid of it you may wind up losing money.
I’m hoping you’re just misunderstanding one thing. That is you seem to have an expectation that increasing something by 30% and then decreasing it by 30% should get you back to the same number. This is not correct. 130 is a bigger number than 100, so 30% of 130 is going to be bigger than 30% of 100. So you’re subtracting a bigger number than you added, and naturally you’ll end up with a smaller number than you started with.
If you think about it, it wouldn’t make any sense for 30% of 130 to be the same as 30% of 100.
Re: WTH
Oh you.
Re: WTH
Yes because the max you can multiply anything is by 100.. nothing more… *rolls eyes*.. learn math stupid.
ve may bay gia re
lets all press the button and send the bot buhbye
'You Are All Pirates' Tax
I wonder if it’s really wise to call this a piracy tax. After all, isn’t the official motivation for this tax the same in Germany as in Sweden, i.e. a way of “compensating” copyright holders for copyright exemptions that allow certain private copying?
I’m sure the copyright industry would love to have rules that say that they should be compensated for piracy too (not just legal private copying), but should we really legitimize that viewpoint by naming the tax like you did? Isn’t it much better to educate people and tell them that the tax isn’t used for what it’s supposed to and that there is little scientific evidence pointing to a need for a tax on empty storage media.
In fact in many cases there is no need to compensate for private copying since it is something that can be factored into the sales price instead. The market would do a much better job at determining the right value of the private copying exemptions than political committees.
Re: 'You Are All Pirates' Tax
tl;dr Why not call these people out as conmen and charlatans, rather than bitching about the tax name?
Re: Re: 'You Are All Pirates' Tax
“Why not call these people out as conmen and charlatans, rather than bitching about the tax name?”
My “bitching” about buying into how these “conmens and charlatans” want to describe the world was meant to make it easier to call them out…
You could compare it to how comparisons of copyright and property are often used to mislead people.
Re: Re: Re: 'You Are All Pirates' Tax
Sorry, I was actually agreeing with your point. Hence the “tl;dr” part.
Re: 'You Are All Pirates' Tax
i.e. a way of “compensating” copyright holders for copyright exemptions that allow certain private copyin
NO rightsholder on earth is entitled to ANY compensation when I rip my bought CD to MP3 on my USB stick. So yes, it’s a piracy tax.
Re: Re: 'You Are All Pirates' Tax
It’s not even that: it’s an entitlement tax.
…Actually, this should be implemented. Then a full record of all sales of music in Germany should be recorded and the funds raised by this should be disbursed based on a simple calculation based on the percentage of the market share. Ands none of it should reach GEMA. OR the government.
Re: Re: Re: 'You Are All Pirates' Tax
…Actually, this should be implemented.
Your plan is better than what’s actually happening, but still worse than nothing.
Re: Re: 'You Are All Pirates' Tax
“NO rightsholder on earth is entitled to ANY compensation when I rip my bought CD to MP3 on my USB stick. So yes, it’s a piracy tax.”
And yet the laws in many countries give them that right.
My point is that if we say “hey, the official justification for this system is not true, so let’s pretend the system is meant to compensate for illegal copying”, then we’re playing into the hands of those who’d love such a system. It’s better to say, “let’s assume just for a moment that the official justification for this system is true, then it still doesn’t work at all and is poorly designed, so (if not for other reasons already) let’s get rid of it”. If people are compensated for illegal copying, then that is not an indication that the system works – it’s an indication of the opposite.
Re: 'You Are All Pirates' Tax
That comes from a faulty assumption.
Your argument begins on the belief that the creator gets the entire universe of possible uses for himself, and if we set aside anything (i. e. private use, fair use) it’s a cost to them, worthy of some recompense.
The more correct model is that anything we offer the creators is a gift at everyone else’s expense, so there’s no obligation to make up for some revenue stream they’re being denied.
Your justification is like saying “I didn’t get you that Maybach for your birthday, Sally Super Sweet Sixteen, but here’s a Porsche, and I’ll buy you something else to make up for the letdown.”
Re: Re: 'You Are All Pirates' Tax
It’s not “my assumption”. I’m just describing the official motivation for this kind of system. That some political measures don’t make any sense is hardly news. I’m simply describing how we make that message come across more clearly.
I agree with you that non-rivalry of works is the basic state.
I’ll be honest. I downloaded a ton of music when I was younger (I’ve become a bit of a musical fossil and fixed in my tastes, or I probably still would be downloading more)
What started me on the sordid road to piracy, when I used to buy 5-10 CDs a month?
When the Canadian equivalent of ZPU started shit like this and adding “You are a dirty thief” taxes on top of any form of blank media. After I dropped an extra 30 bucks on a first gen iPod (this was a while ago obviously) because of it, I figured I might as well pirate music, since I was being treated like a thief and paying for it anyways.
And it didn’t hurt that Napster/Limewire were in the news then (thanks Lars!) to point me in the right direction.
So basically they took a good customer (5-10 CDs a month was a decent chunk of my disposable income in university), treated him like a thief and charged him extra because of it, and then pointed him in the direction of where to download the free stuff they just assumed he was downloading in the first place.
Mine is hardly a unique story. And it is the better part of two decades old.
You’d think the music industry would learn by now, after all but pushing my generation into downloading
Re: blank media in canada
I always wondered if a Canadian could buy cheap blanks in the US and get them across the border. OfficeMax always had one or another brand on sale for 25 USD per hundred dvds and even less if you turned in your old print cartridges. Would customs seize the blanks?
Re: Re: blank media in canada
Probably.All law enforcement thinks you’re a dirty stinkin pirate if you have any type of portable storage on you.
Plus it gives them a reason to “toss” your car. One experience you don’t want to have.
but there will be no reduction in the accusations of piracy, no reductions in piracy, no reduction in the cost of buying any legitimate media and no increase in the amounts paid to artists. the other thing is, the companies that produce all of the needed things to reproduce media, ie the burner, the blank disc, the software etc, are often manufactured by the same companies that produce the movies or music, eg, Sony. they expect people to continue to support the company by buying these things but then put them in a drawer somewhere, unopened and unused?
no sweat...
just buy & use portable harddrive, use the same USB port, comes pretty small and have way bigger capacity
Re: no sweat...
And come with hefty levies (likely to be increased soon) as well.
German collection society decides everyone else owes them a living.
We don’t want to compete so we will just make everything else more expensive to support us.
I’d call it corporate welfare, but lets be honest… of the fees that will be collected, what tiny sliver of a cent will make it to an artist? Most of this will just line GEMA’s and the other member’s pockets.
We treat everyone like criminals, why is there this sudden increase in criminal behavior?!
They so want us to “respect” copyright and yet somehow can’t show the people respect. Did they miss the lesson you reap what you sow?
Well one things for sure… If someone was not a pirate this is a pretty good incentive to become one.
I guarantee if I was forced to pay 2000% tax hikes for something I was not doing I would start doing it. I’m not going to pay for something I’m not doing. The only logical choice is to become a pirate since you’re all going to be paying for it anyways.
I’m from the USA and I salute you GEMA for your awesome plans to turn everyone in Germany into pirates.
You morons just gave every pirate in Germany JUSTIFICATION for their online habits! Way to go!!
Yikes, if ext HDDs were included, I’d dread to think how much my 1TB would incur…
Unless the 1.95 is a flat rate?
Re: Re:
There are special rates for harddisks which are intended for multimedia, or they’re planning to introduce these.
There is a tax on printers, too. It’s all to compensate the quite limited legal copying of stuff.
Re: Re: Re:
Because, you know, they have to ‘compensate’ for the ‘limited’ right to copy that is meant to partially compensate for the granting of a monopoly to them in the first place.
It’s like the copyright holders are ‘renting’ a house from ‘the public’, and because the ‘homeowner’ has a legally mandated but limited right of entry for maintenance trying to get the government to force the ‘homeowner’ to pay a penalty for that right.
Heh heh heh...
…Oh who am I kidding, I clearly don’t get German humour.
It is interesting, one way of fighting the MAFIAA is simply avoid buying its affiliates products, which I do with pleasure. But how do you avoid paying an unfair and potentially unconstitutional (at least in some countries) fee? You can’t.
So, if I were German I’d just pirate with my mind at ease because after all, every1 is paying the artists. Now I just wonder if it’s fair to give money to that lazy ass ‘artist’ that just produces a pile of turd and feels entitled to receive money for it.
So, with my purchase of a USB stick I now have a license to copy anything I want (as long as the file spends some time on the stick). Seems a fair deal.
Let’s all remember that anytime this happens, it’s because the US is making them do it. Germany can’t be held accountable for its own actions, since that would break the narrative.
Re: Re:
We didn’t know.
Re: Re:
No, there’s plenty of stupid to go around. Quite a bit of it involves middlemen who are gatekeepers, oddly enough.
Thus creating copyrighted material, thus making it legal for GEMA to demand money for the storage of it. If the general public wants to get a cut of that money, they’ll have to sign up with GEMA (for a fee) and they’ll be counted to the big heap of other ‘no-name’ artists.
Why not tax the use of electrons too
Memory cards and sticks can be used for any number of reasons, not just for piracy. So, with this line of reasoning, why not also tax the use of electrons since without electrons piracy would not be possible on the alleged scale that it is now – it would reduce to whatever people could hand-copy themselves.
Re: Why not tax the use of electrons too
In fact, you should pay a daily amount no matter what you have or own or do. You might just have my song in your head. Pirate!
Pencils and Memories
Are they taxed too?
You can copy things with a pencil.
If I memorized a song could I be charged for carrying that around in my head?(you know…the one you can’t get out of your head)
Re: Pencils and Memories
Sooner or later somebody will introduce taxes on thinking anyway (because, obviously, people who are concerned about their ability to enjoy music and movies must be thinking too much…). Naturally, this will include songs that are stuck in your head.
Re: Pencils and Memories
Pencils will definitely be taxed: not only can they be used for copying, but you can also CREATE SOMETHING NEW and CHOOSE NOT TO HAND THE RIGHTS TO ANY PUBLISHER. They don’t like indie creators, y’know.
Re: Pencils and Memories
I don’t think the means of copying is taxed yet (but hey, just wait!), so a better analogy would probably be a tax on blank paper.
Re: Re: Pencils and Memories
People will just start to write on walls, then. But if there’s a tax on walls, houses will become too expensive. People will live in the streets and die. No more copying, problem solved.
Re: Pencils and Memories
Nope.
Who uses pencils these days?
Pens, on the other hand, they’re evil and must be stopped!
This is a tax on people for daring to create their own content. If you create your own content, and don’t buy the legacy industries content, they still expect you to pay. After all, you did get content!
GEMA
I live in Germany. I will never buy another piece of music in this country. I will never attend a live performance. Its too expensive now to hear a piano player at a resturant so I don’t go. I will drive to Prague if I want to enjoy myself at a concert or a club and buy my CDs and memory sticks there.
The president of sony said that the company looses millions of dollars in Germany because of this rogue organization who does nothing to help musicians.
As in America, the Government works for the corporations and not the people.
Cassette Tape Tax
I remember a long time ago (I think around mid 80’s) in the US there was a push for a “piracy” tax on blank cassette tapes. I remember signing petitions protesting this. As far as I know they never successful in enacting this tax. Anyone else remember this?
Re:
Movie Theaters?! You think this is about movie theaters? Hell no. It’s about dancing at weddings! Weddings already cause musicians to feel hunger pangs simply by playing music. When dancing occurs at those weddings musicians begin to starve. But If you were to record that dancing…OH GOD you’re a cruel beast!!! YOU SAVAGE BRUTAL PIRATE DEVIL HITLER!!!
Wow.
The word of the moment is rogue. It’s ROGUE data. They need the monies to ‘harmonize’ the data.
WTH
Or the square root of a piece of pie.
Re: WTH
Everyone knows that pie is round. It has a circle root.
Lawyers
“We’ll get ALL the lawyers in the world working on this while we sneak this taxation over to the US.. they’ll love it.
If the fee is for compensation for, in most cases imaginary, economic loss du to piracy, isn’t that pretty damn close to fraud? And while their at it, why not throw in a fee for bags, boxes etc. Because, you know, it is possible to carry all sorts of stolen things in them
Everyone here is a Pirate!
All of you who commented here are PIRATES! Why? because in order to comment here you need a computer which has the ability to record and transmit data, and an internet connection which could be used to transfer that data! Ergo, you are all pirates!
The usage of the "tax"
While I agree with you, that this increase should at least be justified somewhat, I think it might be cool to explain while this money is collected: The money is shared proportionale among musicians, writers and other creative people at the end of each year according to their success.
Though it’s debatable how success is defined, the overall system is a good idea, in my opinion and in fact, it’s an option that is widely discussed in the current German copyright debate. There are several concepts on the table that each person with an internet connection should pay a monthly or annual fee while file sharing and other stuff gets legalized.
Re: The usage of the "tax"
How do we know that any of this money is actually going to the artists? The recording industry has a long history of ripping off musicians. There have been many of the great pioneers of rock that made millions for the record companies who died in poverty. Here is a great video by an entertainment attorney explaining how an artist could sell a million albums and still be in the hole after all the fees are deducted. It is nothing short of racketeering.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcwgdB0NltY
Re: The usage of the "tax"
There are several concepts on the table that each person with an internet connection should pay a monthly or annual fee while file sharing and other stuff gets legalized.
That’s another bad idea. This isn’t like health care, where the government incurs costs providing a service, and taxes are to pay for the costs. That plan would be government taking money from citizens and giving it to private businesses in exchange for something the government could do for free: update its copyright laws. Not to mention that there are people with an internet connection who have no interest in file sharing, but would pay the tax anyway.
Increasing tax is quite good because it can add more revenue to the country but it should be done in a fair way.
The public must be given proper and exact information before implementing any rules. Their words must be heard first.
Hi
Substantially, the article is really the best on this laudable topic. I concur in your conclusions and will eagerly look forward to your future updates. Just saying thank you will not just be enough, for the wonderful lucidity in your writing.