Canada ends MP3 player taxes after Supreme Court decision
Posted on 31/07/05 00:16 by Seán Byrne                             
Canada ends MP3 player taxes after Supreme Court decision

Back in December 2003, taxes of $2, $15 and $25 were introduced for portable audio devices containing up to 1GB, 10GB and over 10GB of non-removable memory respectively.  But in December 2004, a Canadian Judge ruled that these taxes were illegal after retailers and electronic manufacturers filed a lawsuit against these taxes.  Apparently, no law gave the authority for these taxes and thus the Judge blocked these taxes temporarily until the Parliament could decide on what to do with this issue.

Later on, the Canadian Private Copying Collective (CPCC) which collects royalties on behalf of music artists tried appealing the ruling; however the Supreme Court of Canada has now refused to hear any more arguments on this appeal.  As a result, taxes for MP3 players can be totally done away with.  The CPCC were disappointed with this decision since they claim these products are sold for the purpose of copying music.  As MP3 players and other flash / HDD based devices can hold music just like blank media, the CPCC believes that levies should be applied to these since they can be used to illegally copy music.  If you copy this, please show appreciation by linking back to cdfreaks, thanks.
According to the Digital Access group, they say that the current levies applied to blank media are unfair, since consumers who purchase blank media for other purposes than storing music have no choice but to pay these levies.  An example includes businesses that use CDs for backing up data or distributing presentations, photos and other data on CD.  Consumers who do purchase music downloads are even penalised as they have to pay for the download as well as the blank media levy to take their music with them.  Around $4 million which was collected over the year digital audio device taxes were in effect must be returned to the manufacturers or importers of the affected products, although it is not clear if the consumers who were in-turn penalised will be reimbursed.  Lodai used our news submit to let us know of the following news:

The fight over a levy on IPods and other digital music players ended today when the Supreme Court of Canada refused to hear any further arguments on the matter.

That means there will be no levy applied to digital audio recorders such as Apple's popular IPod and IPod Shuffle as well as other MP3 players like IRiver.

"Obviously we're disappointed. We felt it was self-evident that those products are sold for the purpose of copying music," said David Basskin, of the Canadian Private Copying Collective (CPCC), the non-profit agency which collects tariffs on behalf of musicians and record companies.

The group had wanted the high court to overturn last year's Federal Court of Appeal decision which quashed the levy on the popular gadgets.

This decision will be a great relief for both consumers and retailers since it means that the pricing on MP3 players can no longer be artificially inflated by taxes.  In my opinion, consumers should not have to be penalised for purchasing an MP3 player, especially with the high taxes that were imposed on players over 1GB.  It is like paying a hefty tax to purchase a portable CD player.  Hopefully the unlucky customers who purchased players during the affected period will be reimbursed. 

Lodai added:  A step forward in the right direction. Also the Dept. of Heritage is going to review the levy system in the fall. So hopefully the levy on recordable media will be gone as well.

Source: Toronto Star - TheStar.com

Reactions
Discuss this article with your fellow community members! We appreciate your valuable input, but please keep the reaction policy in mind and make sure your reaction is constructive.
By freonchill, Sunday 31 July 2005 02:03
"Obviously we're disappointed. We felt it was self-evident that those products are sold for the purpose of copying music," said David Basskin, of the Canadian Private Copying Collective (CPCC) wait a second there, isnt the iPod all about iTunes (paying .99 for a song [maybe different price there in canada]) or did i miss out on apple's new financial strategy?
By thyfleshconsumed, Sunday 31 July 2005 02:36
Well, it wasn't apple who said that, but CPCC. However, this is indeed lame, the point of mp3 players is so that you put all your songs on one small (relative to the regular CD players) device and take it with you wherever you want. It's all just another way to rip customers off.
By ChocoCat, Sunday 31 July 2005 06:07
If Bill 60 is passed, it will mean every time you make a backup or music or convert your CD to mp3 to play on you mp3 player ... you will be required to pay royalty/copyright fees. Not to mention it be more easier for music/movie industry to request our private information in regards internet usage. All they had to do is write up a letter stating that he/she is downloading illegal files and I want their internet information (evidence use to sue you) for free. I've a feeling they will starting randoming writing up letters to ISPs requesting private internet usage information of consumer. This is not a step forward. It a step backward in my opinion if the review's report of ammendment of Bill 60 is passed. http://www.michaelgeist.ca/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=825&Itemid=85 Anyways, if there's and canadian readers reading this, please contact your MP and say no to Bill 60. I rather pay a small levy on my purchase of blankmedia / player than pay the full fee backing up my dvds/cds.
[edited by ChocoCat on 31.07.2005 06:17]
By jasaiyajin, Sunday 31 July 2005 20:02
All our information is logged and stored already when online. It is just a difference of secrecy between who is pulling the strings. Let's all stop drinking evian???!!?!?!?
By Zod, Sunday 31 July 2005 23:11
ZodI download mp3's, but i also have quite the collection of cd's and still buy cd's. So its not like i'm stiffing the record companies, I buy what I can afford, and only buy the albums i really like and feel are worth 13-15 canadian dollars. However as of late, I've quite enjoyed making mp3 cd's for my car cd player. I've been ripping my own cd's, of my favorite bands, then putting them all onto an mp3 cd, to listen to in the car. I plan on picking up an mp3 player in the near future. I like the idea of loading it with a few albums before i do my morning bike ride. I'm not always going to be filling with it with stuff I don't own. I tend to download unreleased albums to give them a listen, to see if I feel its worth buying. If not it usually just sits in my mp3 directory doing nothing. I think its lame the CRIAA wants to assume if i bought one, I wouldn't use it for any legitimate purposes. Now they want to try and make it illegal to make backups, and what not, but still get there levy? Why do they assume every illegally download album is a lost sale? Do they really think people could afford to buy that many albums? hopefully somemore crazy assed stuff happens in our parliament, and a new election has to be called. Then the legislation would be tossed out for now.
By heystoopid, Monday 01 August 2005 07:46
So if the CRIAA is crazy enough to commence legal action against down loaders, it would create an interesting legal conundrum of double dipping! And if C60 is passed, with it's new attendant legal user restrictions, then CPCC itself will be invovled in a legal conundrum over it's media tax fees!(for one new law C60, says no you can't do that, yet CPCC says yes you can, because you prepay this royalty charge on a variety of recording media purchased in canada) Oh, life will be interesting indeed for the average Canadian, caught in the middle of the conflicting laws, little wonder the justices bounced this one without a hearing, knowing it will return at a later date! I can imagine what would happen in the local court, if sued by CRIAA for copyright material held, and you produce the CPCC tax stamps, on your media purchased! Onward and upward these conundrums will fly!!
By mrQQ, Monday 01 August 2005 15:04
they are funny.. will they ever learn that * those who download music, and can buy it - buy it anyway * those who download music, and can't afford to buy it - wouldn't buy it anyway so claiming about "losses" due to "downloads" is pure bullshit!
By darshanjog, Tuesday 02 August 2005 19:33
darshanjogAm not siding with CPCC or any such authority. I equally hate their practices but, I don't agree with your following statement: * those who download music, and can buy it - buy it anyway I know many people who can afford to buy it but, don't buy it because they can download it for free.
Name: Email:



Your comment:

Receive notification on new comments?