4 ms·

In my eyes the main issue is political standing, which we had very few. When in France the RIAA equivalent came up with a plan to add a tax to all digital stor

In my eyes the main issue is political standing, which we had very few. When in France the RIAA equivalent came up with a plan to add a tax to all digital storage media, because it could be used for piracy, the tax was applied an we all ponied up. Why ? because they make money, deal with politicians everyday and make sure the wheels are well lubrificated when they need them to turn. For a very long time the computer industry had none that, and/or wanted contents right holders on their side, with not enough negociation power. Now I feel we're on the other side with Apple straight telling legislators to turn a blind eye because they need their semi-monopoly to keep printing money.

tzs 4y ago
> When in France the RIAA equivalent came up with a plan to add a tax to all digital storage media, because it could be used for piracy, the tax was applied an we all ponied up. Why ? because they make money, deal with politicians everyday and make sure the wheels are well lubrificated when they need them to turn. RMS has suggested a similar tax on internet users in exchange for legalizing file sharing [1]. The idea of taxing something associated with the consumption of creative works in order to fund the creators instead of the direct sale of copies model is one of the more popular ideas among those who try to actually figure out how creators should be funded in an age where anyone can make unlimited copies for essentially no cost. [1] https://stallman.org/articles/internet-sharing-license.en.html https://stallman.org/articles/internet-sharing-license.en.ht...
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > The idea of taxing something associated with the consumption of creative works in order to fund the creators ... usually ends up as a barrier to creators, because the funding goes to established creators or industry cartels, reinforcing their existing advantage over upstarts and independents.
  - tzs 4y ago
    Indeed, the big problem with the tax approach is deciding how to distribute the money. The government could do it via grants to creators, but then you've got the government playing a major role in determining what art gets created, which would not doubt in the US end up a partisan thing. Yuck! Another approach would be to track downloads and distribute the money based on popularity. That at least gets away from having the government decide what gets funded.
- makeitdouble 4y ago
  I think it could have been a sensible approach if it stopped at "something associated with the consumption of creative works". Sadly it (is ?)was way broader than that and you'd have a tax on hard drives sales whatever you would do with them. Imagine needing two extra hard-drives for your home NAS to store your family pics and videos and something like 2 to 3% of the price goes to some artists that _might_ be impacted by piracy some way or another. https://www.culture.gouv.fr/Thematiques/Propriete-litteraire-et-artistique/Commission-pour-la-remuneration-de-la-copie-privee/Questions-pratiques/Les-montants-de-la-Remuneration-pour-Copie-Privee https://www.culture.gouv.fr/Thematiques/Propriete-litteraire...

tzs 4y ago

> When in France the RIAA equivalent came up with a plan to add a tax to all digital storage media, because it could be used for piracy, the tax was applied an we all ponied up. Why ? because they make money, deal with politicians everyday and make sure the wheels are well lubrificated when they need them to turn. RMS has suggested a similar tax on internet users in exchange for legalizing file sharing [1]. The idea of taxing something associated with the consumption of creative works in order to fund the creators instead of the direct sale of copies model is one of the more popular ideas among those who try to actually figure out how creators should be funded in an age where anyone can make unlimited copies for essentially no cost. [1] https://stallman.org/articles/internet-sharing-license.en.html https://stallman.org/articles/internet-sharing-license.en.ht...

dragonwriter 4y ago
> The idea of taxing something associated with the consumption of creative works in order to fund the creators ... usually ends up as a barrier to creators, because the funding goes to established creators or industry cartels, reinforcing their existing advantage over upstarts and independents.
- tzs 4y ago
  Indeed, the big problem with the tax approach is deciding how to distribute the money. The government could do it via grants to creators, but then you've got the government playing a major role in determining what art gets created, which would not doubt in the US end up a partisan thing. Yuck! Another approach would be to track downloads and distribute the money based on popularity. That at least gets away from having the government decide what gets funded.
makeitdouble 4y ago
I think it could have been a sensible approach if it stopped at "something associated with the consumption of creative works". Sadly it (is ?)was way broader than that and you'd have a tax on hard drives sales whatever you would do with them. Imagine needing two extra hard-drives for your home NAS to store your family pics and videos and something like 2 to 3% of the price goes to some artists that _might_ be impacted by piracy some way or another. https://www.culture.gouv.fr/Thematiques/Propriete-litteraire-et-artistique/Commission-pour-la-remuneration-de-la-copie-privee/Questions-pratiques/Les-montants-de-la-Remuneration-pour-Copie-Privee https://www.culture.gouv.fr/Thematiques/Propriete-litteraire...