Login:
Password:

Canadian appeals court dismisses tariffs on MP3 players

By Scott M. Fulton, III, BetaNews

January 14, 2008, 12:17 PM

A move by that country's Copyright Board to exact a toll from the sale of personal digital audio devices was soundly defeated last week. But now, the cost of CD-Rs there could rise even further.

A three-judge panel of the Canadian Court of Appeal in Ottawa has unanimously dismissed a decision that would have enabled the country's primary collector of royalties for sound recordings to apply a tariff to the sale of MP3 players there, including Apple's iPod.

Federal law already allows the Canadian Private Copying Collective (CPCC) to collect 24¢ from the sale of each audio cassette of 40 minutes running time or longer, and 21¢ from the sale of each recordable optical disc such as a CD-R or DVD-R. A Canadian Copyright Board proposal last February sought to raise both those fees to 29¢ per tape or disc, but would then add new tariffs of 85¢ per CD-R Audio or DVD-R Audio disc or MiniDisc, and between $2 and $10 for each flash memory card sold depending on capacity.

While that part of the order may still go into effect, what the Court of Appeal rejected last Thursday was a tariff on MP3 devices that don't use external media such as memory cards. A device with 1 GB of flash memory built in could be tariffed $5, and an iPod or other brand with a 30 GB hard drive or larger could be tariffed as much as $75.

A complaint brought before the Appeal Court by Apple, Microsoft, Dell, Sony, and SanDisk argued that such a tariff could not be ordered under Canadian law, on the basis of the legal standard of correctness -- specifically, that the device cannot be tariffed as though it were media. The three-judge panel agreed.

Citing prior case law, Judge J. A. Sharlow saw good reason for the applicants to argue that, "the Copyright Board has no legal authority to certify a tariff on digital audio recorders or on the memory permanently embedded in digital audio recorders. It follows that the Copyright Board erred in law when it concluded that it has the legal authority to certify the tariff that CPCC has proposed for 2008 and 2009 on digital audio recorders, and in dismissing the applicants' motions."

At the dawn of the video cassette era, the first studios to swallow the notion that home recordings would be a fact of everyday life, proposed the imposition of tariffs on recording media. That notion was eventually rejected in America, though it was accepted in Canada.

In order for "private copying" to be ruled legal there, the media tariff was deemed a respectable compromise, in order to compensate rights holders for each commercial copy of their product that they then did not sell to consumers by virtue of the private copy.

"A 'private copy' is a copy of a track, or a substantial part of a track, of recorded music that is made by an individual for his or her own personal use," reads an explanation on the CPCC Web site. "A compilation of favorite tracks is a good example of how people typically use private copies. In contrast, a copy made for someone else or for any purpose other than the copier's own use is not a private copy. Nor is a copy of anything other than recorded music...In Canada, private copying is legal and does not infringe copyright. It is because, in exchange, copyright holders in recorded music have a right to receive compensation in the form of royalties for private copying."

As the law happens to be written, this compensation is exacted from the sale of the recording medium. (Canada grants an unusual exemption from tariff for individuals with hearing impairments who may be unable to hear the copies they make; those people can actually purchase CD-Rs and other media through a special service.) The Copyright Board had assumed that the recording medium, in the case of embedded devices, could still be tariffed as such; the Appeal Court ruled otherwise.

The fate of possible new tariffs for external memory cards, for now, remains unchanged -- those fees may go into effect in Canada this year.

Add a Comment (19 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By Phule

edited Jan 15, 2008 - 3:47 PM

"While a victory for those that oppose such levies, the decision is disappointing on at least one level. As we reported in September, the Canadian Recording Industry Association (CRIA) withdrew its support for the iPod Tax once it realized that a legal argument could be made that such levies would give Canadians broad non-commercial rights to copyrighted materials. In short, some believed that the levy would essentially legalize P2P, and the CRIA didn't like the chances of that becoming common opinion."

http://arstechnica.com/n...ked-down-in-canada.html

Score: 0

By cupsdell

posted Jan 14, 2008 - 2:33 PM

Bad news. This will give the RIAA an excuse to argue for the same draconian laws that they have in the US.

Score: 0

By roj

posted Jan 14, 2008 - 4:04 PM

The RIAA has no clout in Canada. Their local chapter, the CRIA lost Every Canadian Member a year ago. They left and formed their own due to extreme differences between how the organization runs things and how they 9the artists) think it should be run.

In short, the CRIA has No Canadian Members. (huge snicker)

Score: 0

By cupsdell

posted Jan 14, 2008 - 5:10 PM

Wrong. A law to impose an RIAA-blessed copyright was just recently narrowly blocked.

See http://www.michaelgeist....comments_comments_start

Score: 0

By yleclerc

posted Jan 14, 2008 - 1:40 PM

This was defeated but there is a new one coming up. There is talk to add $5 (CDN) to every Internet access monthly charges. This will be to compensate for the "illegal" music downloads. Everyone who pays for Internet access will have to pay, even though not everyone download music.

Score: 0

By roj

posted Jan 14, 2008 - 4:06 PM

It'll go the same way as the last one for the same reasons. These jerks just don't get it - there's nothing for them here. Not even Canadian artists.

Score: 0

By roj

edited Jan 14, 2008 - 12:46 PM

The Supreme Court of Canada based the decision on one very simple fact:

The 'tax' would have assumed that everybody who used a mp3 player was a criminal... something not acceptable to the Court.

Something, based on long-term observations of events south of the border, that is eminently acceptable to American courts.

This was the second attempt by the greedy recording industry thugs to maim fair use in Canada (the first was three years ago) and once again it was knocked flat on its ass. Perhaps the bas****s will finally learn the lesson that we're just a wee bit more serious and vigilant up here about the rights of our consumers and special interest lobbies and payola get you much less mileage in Canada.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jan 14, 2008 - 1:02 PM

This is all very amusing. Did you forget about this little bit:

Federal law already allows the Canadian Private Copying Collective (CPCC) to collect 24? from the sale of each audio cassette of 40 minutes running time or longer, and 21? from the sale of each recordable optical disc such as a CD-R or DVD-R.

Yeah. Seems Canada is already punishing innocents to appease the recording industry.

Score: 0

By swlaurier

posted Jan 14, 2008 - 1:31 PM

Very True PC-Tool, But both the Record and Movie Industry has not been able to convict one Canadian on Copyright Infringment. If Canadian Copyright Board increase is too much and with the Stronger Canadian Dollar any Retailer on the Border may want to stock up on blank CD and DVD's.

I'm Surprised that US Comsumer is not purchasing blank CD and DVD from Canada (with proof of purchase). you've already paid the bottomfeeder's there piece instead of what their are asking in court.

Score: 0

By roj

edited Jan 14, 2008 - 1:17 PM

No I didn't forget. We allowed that one in before we became as vigilant as we are now. The new tax would have added as much as $100 to the price of a player - and the mess south of our border has become considerably more high profile since then, alerting us to the consequences of allowing the entertainment industry to buy the government as yours has.

We have "special interest lobbies" here too - they just don't get as far.(unless they're Francophone or Inuit - yes, we have our flaws too) ;) .

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jan 14, 2008 - 1:49 PM

We have "special interest lobbies" here too - they just don't get as far.(unless they're Francophone or Inuit - yes, we have our flaws too) ;) .

Well...lately. ;)

But then, all likely before we became as vigilant as we are now.

Nothing personal. I wasn't attacking you, just the implication that Canada was free of, or not threatened by the special interest groups.

Never understood how special interest groups ever gained a foothold in the US. It basically equates to a blind eye being turned on the Constitution, which was written and designed to keep these exact kinds of things from happening (SIGs, DMCA, Patriot Act, etc..).

Majority Rule tempered by the constitutionally guaranteed limitation of Government power....

Now it's just a game of "my morality is better than yours" and "we MUST think of the children..." Constitution be damned.

Yeah, well, we gave it a good run.

/this is me being cynical. Happens on occasion depending on what foolery the politicos are up to at the moment.

//I'm usually pretty optimistic about the Constitution becoming "vogue" again...someday.

Score: 0

By sjc001

posted Jan 14, 2008 - 5:23 PM

The tool-troll is at it again.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jan 15, 2008 - 10:17 AM

Sorry, the grown-ups are having a discussion here.

Go eat some glue or something.

Score: 0

By roj

edited Jan 14, 2008 - 4:13 PM

I'm not attacking you either. I have however been watching developments south with a VERY jaundiced eye - as have many Canadians - for a while now and the general sentiment up here is to not make the same mistakes we see happening with alarming regularity. I can't believe what you guys let those bozos get away with. It's shameful! They own the courts, the legislature, the works!

C'mon - take back your rights! If you had told me some 40 years ago when I was a kid in Jamaica that the US would end up like this, I'd have called you a liar and smacked you a good one to boot. You've got to do something - anything!

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jan 15, 2008 - 1:41 PM

C'mon - take back your rights! If you had told me some 40 years ago when I was a kid in Jamaica that the US would end up like this, I'd have called you a liar and smacked you a good one to boot. You've got to do something - anything!

I look at it this way:

If Bill Clinton gets re-elected, we'll very likely see a *huge* swing, over the 4 years, back to the right and much more call by the people to focus on the limitations placed on government by the constitution, and the need for the courts to enforce those limits.

If Guli-anna or, god forbid, Ru Paul, this could go on for a while longer because these two "Republicans" have no idea what conservatism is.

/not very fond of my party right now in case you couldn't tell.

Score: 0

By sjc001

posted Jan 14, 2008 - 5:35 PM

How they get away with it is by accusing anyone who has a system like ours as being communists. That is why the quality of life, for the average American, is so low when compared to other Western nations. They leave everything up to the so-called free market and this has more than proven that it doesn't work when it comes to things like health care. They're constantly saying that "socialized" medicine doesn't work, but the facts show that this is the complete opposite and that their predatory capitalistic medical system doesn't work at all for a growing number of their average citizens. Its like a man with no shoes laughing at a man who wears bargain store shoes. He seems to not realize that the other still has shoes to wear while he has to go without.

They actually believe that they're a democracy when in fact they never were. The USA is a Constitutional Republic with a democratic tradition and thus the people have far less of a say. Whereas Canada is a parliamentary democracy and thus the people have more of a real say in how things are run up here.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jan 15, 2008 - 10:16 AM

That is why the quality of life, for the average American, is so low when compared to other Western nations

Same BS, different day, eh, sjc?

Repeating the same tired bull doesn't ever get old for you, does it?

Score: 0

By horsecharles

posted Jan 15, 2008 - 2:37 PM

Weary argument. I wonder, both countries being neighbors plus equal in size... why so few folks live up there... and who does the rest of the world beat a path to?

Are most people in the world wrong?

Could that be?

Score: 0