An MP3 Tax for Us Canadians?

Like we don't already pay enough tax in Canada...now we have to consider another one.  An MP3 tax eh?  Hmmm?  Because we're all thieving Canadians ripping off music.  You, me, my grandmother.  The whole lot of us.  Sigh. 

I hate this idea of a music tax.  I didn't like it when the Zune launched and they were giving a portion of the sale to the recording industry to compensate them for people stealing music.  And I don't like it now when this kind of nonsense is being looked at here in Canada.

Canadian music industry representatives are re-opening an old debate about MP3 players that could see the average price of the devices climb by as much as $75.

The Canadian Private Copying Collective, an association of composers, recording artists, publishers, and record labels is asking the Copyright Board of Canada to re-introduce a controversial extra fee into the sale price of MP3 players in Canada.

David Basskin, a member of the CCPC's board of directors, said it's time artists be compensated for the copying of their files onto the digital devices.

What does this mean really?  If I pay this tax on my next iPod...well, then the recording industry has been compensated on music I might steal.  I don't steal music!!!!!  I buy my music.  Mostly in iTunes, but still in CD format as well occasionally.   So why penalize me by charging me more for my next iPod?  Does that mean that if I pay more for my iPod and the tax is paid to the Canadian Private Copying Collective, that now I can go unpaid music?  I mean, if they are being compensated for that, then why should I buy music?  This kind of taxing will lead to music theft, not prevent it.  The recording industry cannot, I repeat, CANNOT, have their cake and eat it.  I don't steal music, so don't ask me to compensate you by charging me more for my MP3 player.  If you force me to pay the tax then I've compensated you for something that I don't have...so I should go get it right?

Now some will say..."mip, mip...it isn't about stealing...it is about not copying music, even if you own it, to your digital devices."  Well that is just plain stupid if you ask me.  If you want me to pay for a CD copy of music and pay for a digital mp3 copy of that album...so be it. Say so.  Make both available.  And I'll only buy the digital mp3 version.  If you want to charge me for having multiple formats, that is fine. Consumers like me will just elect to go for the digital version since we listen to the music on our MP3 players.  By why tax the device?  That makes no sense.  That means that if I buy and album and move that to my iPod, the device tax has paid the compensation to the CPAA.  What about in a years time when I by another MP3 player - I pay the tax again!!!!  Thus, I keep repaying to compensate the CPAA for the same album.  Why do they get compensated over and over again?   

I really hope this thing gets shot down.  To get all the details, read about it here.

Comments

Hey who know maybe mip's scan will receive some of those dues since no one is paying for the podcasts!

In most forms of taxation, the user-payer scheme makes so much more sense, including this one. If they want to discourage music... I mean stealing, having a tax on the songs makes more sense, although it would be next-to-impossible for our government to collect, and once again they would be stuck taxing the most legitimate users/purchasers while most likely tax-dodgers would easily buy the music from outside the jurisdiction.

The first comment I made can be looked at like a tax on pollution... you could add a 10% tax on heavy polluting cars, or you could simply add a tax on gasoline, which would work as a disincentive on using the gas, but would not be a problem for those who just like to park their hummer on the lawn to show off.

[minik leydi]

Very nice blog, good work.