User User name Password  
   
Saturday 4.7.2009 / 05:59 PM
Search:        In English   Suomeksi   På svenska
afterdawn.com > news > canadian isps to pay royalties?
Show topics
News
News

Canadian ISPs to pay royalties?

30 November 2003 12:24 by Jari Ketola | 11 comments

A group representing Canadian songwriters has asked the Supreme Court to rule that Internet Service Providers have to pay them royalties for music files. The ISPs would have to pay an annual royalty regardles of the nature of the music files transferred through their systems.

Should the demands of Society of Composers, Authors, and Music Publishers of Canada (SOCAN) be agreed to by the court, it could result in increase in Internet service fees paid by Canadian consumers. It would also open the door for other copyright holders, like movie studios and software manufacturers, to demand similar royalty payments to compensate on piracy.

The fees proposed by SOCAN are 25 cents per subscriber per year plus 10 per cent of any gross profit made by ISPs through the sale of advertising.

"This is the big case for the Internet. This will set the position on how we are going to treat Internet service providers, whether they are going to be seen as people who are responsible in some way for content that goes through their services," said Mark Perry, a professor of law and a professor of computer science at the University of Western Ontario.

Source:
CTV


Permalink to this article

Get AfterDawn's news to your favourite feed reader! Share this story with your friends!
 

 
Related articles:

  • ISP's battle against encrypted BitTorrent downloading (2 September 2006)
  • Canada: ISPs don't have to pay royalties (30 June 2004)
  • P2P war expands to Canada (13 February 2004)
  • P2P downloads legal in Canada (12 December 2003)
  •  

    « Previous news article
    eMule v0.30d released
    Next news article »
    DVD Jon goes to trial again
     Post your comment
    Discuss this article! 
    Buik (Member) 30 November 2003 13:28 Send private message to this user   
    This is pure bovine defecation. Are they now going to sue public utilities? Simply because they provide one of the "building blocks" of piracy???? How about water companies while we are at it. Without water, we cannot live. If we are not alive, we cannot pirate songs, software, movies.... etc. Guess we would not be around to legally purchase their product either.

    Scotty, Beam me up!! There's no intelligent life down here.


    Stretch the cash. Bargain hunting. System is not static.
    FlthyChry (Inactive) 30 November 2003 16:21 Send private message to this user   
    It's retarded. And because it's retarded I'm sure they are going to get away with it. In fact the ISP will charge the customer 25% more to cover the fee and admin costs. Bang!
    ZX6R (Junior Member) 30 November 2003 20:39 Send private message to this user   
    A pile of greedy, socialist pigs. But living in Canada we ought to get used to it. Our communist, socialist government will surely agree to this.
    Ghostdog (Senior Member) 30 November 2003 20:49 Send private message to this user   
    I doubt this will get through. It´s too far off. It´s like suing the tobacco companies because your husband died of cancer. Pure greed.
    Ausgum (Junior Member) 1 December 2003 0:22 Send private message to this user   
    If royalties are paid then dosen`t it make it legal to download their music?

    Ghostdog (Senior Member) 1 December 2003 3:58 Send private message to this user   
    No, I don´t think so. Artist´s rights organizations already receive an amount of money for every blank CD, DVD and MD bought. That doesn´t make it legal for us to copy music.

    This is actually something I´ve been thinking about now that copy-protectection on CDs is being force-feed to us. The "tax" on the blanks is supposed to cover up for the illegal use of music. If we no longer can copy CDs we shouldn´t have to pay the tax and blank CDs would get cheaper.
    The EFF should look in to this. It would natuarlly be a struggle since that would mean less money in the record labels´ treasure chest.
    Nephilim (Moderator) 1 December 2003 9:09 Send private message to this user   
    Where the hell does 10% of gross profits from the sale of adverts have anything to do with compensation for piracy? Someone please enlighten me.

    I don't see the glass as half empty or half full. I just want to know if anyone spit in it.
    #afonic (Member) 1 December 2003 11:13 Send private message to this user   
    I don't think they get money from blank CD-Rs, are you sure?
    It doesn't make sense, I can right MY songs in a blank CD why should I pay THEM?

    More than 20 guides about DVD!
    Ripping, copying, shrinking, burning and authoring:
    http://www.afonic.tk
    ----------------------------------------------------
    Polarhome - Gateway to freedom:
    http://www.polarhome.com
    rah (Newbie) 1 December 2003 23:36 Send private message to this user   
    it depends on what CD-R /DVD+-R you buy, the ones with Audio Printed on the Cover are no different to the normal ones Accept you pay a Tax that goes to RIAA or some such organization, that's why they are more expensive it has nothing to do with quality or anything like that, they regard this as fair practice to make those of us who take CD's we have bought, and make our own compilations onto blanks pay for the privilege
    Ghostdog (Senior Member) 2 December 2003 4:05 Send private message to this user   
    At least in Finland we pay a tax-like fee called "kasettimaksu" on blanks. dRD knows more about this than I do.
    chthomson (Member) 8 December 2003 5:01 Send private message to this user   
    In 1998 the Copyright Act in Canada was changed to allowed consumers to make copies of music works legally. The following is a quote from the Copyright Act
    80. (1) Subject to subsection (2), the act of reproducing all or any substantial part of
    (a) a musical work embodied in a sound recording,
    (b) a performer's performance of a musical work embodied in a sound recording, or
    (c) a sound recording in which a musical work, or a performer's performance of a musical work, is embodied
    onto an audio recording medium for the private use of the person who makes the copy does not constitute an infringement of the copyright in the musical work, the performer's performance or the sound recording.
    With this change came a levy (tax?) on recordable medium in 2000. The current levy on CD-Rs is 21¢ each. There is a proposal to increase the levy and to expand the mediums the levy applies to including MP3 storage. For further details see http://neil.eton.ca/copylevy.shtml.
    To me the long and short of this issue in Canada I can make copies of any musical work for my personal use legally without fear of penalty.
     Post your comment
     

    Subscribe to our newsfeed

    Get the latest headlines delivered directly to your favourite RSS reader or content aggregation service by using the links below.

    AfterDawn.com: News - RSS feed
    Add to Google
    Add to My Yahoo!
    Add to MyMSN

    Search for headlines

    Search through our news archive.

    Last week's most popular software downloads

    Digital video: AfterDawn.com | AfterDawn Forums
    Music: MP3Lizard.com
    Gaming: Blasteroids.com | Blasteroids Forums | Compare game prices
    Software: Software downloads
    Blogs: User profile pages
    RSS feeds: AfterDawn.com News | Software updates | AfterDawn Forums
    International: AfterDawn in Finnish | AfterDawn in Swedish | download.fi
    Navigate: Search | Site map
    About us: About AfterDawn Ltd | Advertise on our sites | Rules, Restrictions, Legal disclaimer & Privacy policy
    Contact us: Send feedback | Contact our media sales team
     
      © 1999-2009 by AfterDawn Ltd.