Private Copying + separate Tariff?

[Russell McOrmond]

On Wed, 10 Apr 2002, Jason Young wrote:

> The private copying exemption applies only where the copying is done 
> for personal use and does not apply where the copying was done for 
> the purposes of communicating the work to the public. That's pretty 
> clearly laid out in s. 80(1) and 80(2) of the Act.


  The disagreement on the concept of what "communicating the work to the
public" is in the context of the Internet of course a large part of the
Tariff 22 debate.  My concept is totally different than that of the 
recording industry.


> Private copying of music in Canada is not an infringement, it's an 
> exemption.

  We seem to be going around in circles on this.


  If not paying for it would not be an infringement, what is the basis of
the Tariff?  The Tariff system appears to be a simplified way to pay
royalties for copying where not paying for that copying would be an
infringement.


  If Private Copying of music is not an infringement, then why is there a 
Tariff?


> It's when it becomes "not private" that it has an economic impact on
> rights holders and that's what the corresponding "right to remuneration"
> and blank media levy are all about.


  What "not private" copying are we discussing?  It seems to me that much
of the blank media levy is to pay for what would normally be considered
private copying, not "communication to the public" by private citizens.


> The tariff is not a licence that makes the use legal, the use is
> exempted from infringement separately.


  I believe you can understand why there is confusion.

  If it's a legal form of copying, what is the basis of the tariff?  
Tariffs are to pay for what, if not paid for, would be an infringement.



  If the tariff is for something other than private copying, then what is
it for?  Like a radio station who has already paid to play 20 songs from a
given repertoire, purchasers of blank media should know exactly what they
have already paid for so that they can utilize what they have paid for!


  This whole system is completely unfair.  To make it fair then there 
should be documentation saying:

  "For every 10 blank CD's you purchase, you have the legal rights to one
song out of the following repertoire" (Or whatever the basis of the rate
was - I simply don't know at this point), with a searchable website
(Hosted by the Copyright Board and not the record companies) that offers
an appropriate listing to that repertoire.

  This searchable website will still be needed with Tariff 22 given that
someone publishing music should be able to check if their music is part of
a given repertoire when a 'claim' of infringement in a "notice-and-tariff"  
request comes forward.  I assume traditional customers (like radio
stations) that make use of the Tariff systems have easy access to music
catalogs.


  Without adequately documenting and offering citizens the
products/services which they have paid for through the Tariff, it appears
that the "Private Copying" Tariff is simply theft.

---
 Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/>
 See http://weblog.flora.org/ for announcements, activities, and opinions
 Get Legal - become Free! http://weblog.flora.ca/article.php3?story_id=126
 Anti-Copyright Crusader  http://weblog.flora.ca/article.php3?story_id=133

--
For (un)subscription information, posting guidelines and
links to other related sites please see http://www.flora.org/dmca/