UK Entertainment Industry Proposes Tax On Broadband Access
- Thread starter Logan Westbrook
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Not disagreeing with you about how this is wrong and bad, but when you buy a packet of gum (or pretty much anything else) from a store part of the cost of that item is to offset theft. It?s just not a tax or really obvious.Bonaggy said:So, Lord Carter feels it is legitimate to tax broadband users who have done nothing wrong to compensate for those who have committed piracy. This is just typical of government in the UK. They know so very little of the realities of the Gaming and Computer industry in general that ridiculous schemes like this even reach consultation in parliament.
I mean, would you accept a tax on your car to recompense car manufacturers who've had cars stolen? Even better, would it be acceptable to tax anyone who buys a legitimate DVD because the makers have suffered piracy?
If a person hasn't committed piracy what makes the UK government believe it is acceptable to force them to stump up cash to reimburse the victim? People in the UK are already seeing their tax money being used to save companies who should have known better than lending to unsafe markets, seeing their pensions being reduced if not axed entirely, and then to have the prospect of paying more money to cover a wrong they didn't commit.
Only in the UK . . .
Yeah, sure, they like the idea now, but once the EFF weighs in with "Great idea! But let's call it a compulsory license, instead!", they'll lose their taste for it.
But ultimately, I think that's where things will wind up, as far as music is concerned. It's far easier than trying to get all the industry players together to manage it on their own, and at least the government has to pretend to pay attention to non-industry players, unlike industry organizations like IFPI or RIAA.
As far as disbursements go, the way it works here in the US is that the digital audiao media levy is remitted to the Copyright Office. The Copyright Office passes on the majority of funds (either as low as 2/3rds, or as much as 90+%, my memory is fairly rusty on the point) to the RIAA, who in turn disburse it to their member companies/artists on the basis of sales, as opposed to any crime based metric, such as counterfeit seizures or torrent seed sizes. The funds retained by the Copyright Office are available for independent artists to apply for compensation directly.
But ultimately, I think that's where things will wind up, as far as music is concerned. It's far easier than trying to get all the industry players together to manage it on their own, and at least the government has to pretend to pay attention to non-industry players, unlike industry organizations like IFPI or RIAA.
As far as disbursements go, the way it works here in the US is that the digital audiao media levy is remitted to the Copyright Office. The Copyright Office passes on the majority of funds (either as low as 2/3rds, or as much as 90+%, my memory is fairly rusty on the point) to the RIAA, who in turn disburse it to their member companies/artists on the basis of sales, as opposed to any crime based metric, such as counterfeit seizures or torrent seed sizes. The funds retained by the Copyright Office are available for independent artists to apply for compensation directly.
Didn't they also propose a tax on CO2 earlier last year? As in the CO2 we are breathing out right now, with every breath.
Basically it's Gordon Brown trying to get as much money as he can in a last ditch effort to save the economy and get another term in office as Prime Minister. Quite simply, the man's an idiot. Bring back Tony Blair (God, as a Tory I never thought I'd hear myself say THOSE words...). Doesn't he know we can't afford all these taxes (fine, I get internet free from university access but that stops in July...), there's a recession on. Thank God I can finally vote at the next election, cause I reckon he's gonna be out on his arse at the next General Election.
I don't know if that's entirely true. The tax wasn't proposed by the government, it was proposed to the government.Trivun said:
The point is, if you approach the Labour Government with anything that involves raising taxes they'll give you a soapbox to stand on. Speed cameras, congestion charges it's all bullshit.
I'm actually tempted to see how far this goes to be honest. Me and a few friends are currently planning to make up a totally preposterous lobbying group, perhaps along the line of "people who cut their grass too short promote flooding and thus should be taxed for damaging the environment." I wonder how far we'll get. Watch this space.
I'm actually tempted to see how far this goes to be honest. Me and a few friends are currently planning to make up a totally preposterous lobbying group, perhaps along the line of "people who cut their grass too short promote flooding and thus should be taxed for damaging the environment." I wonder how far we'll get. Watch this space.
So on top of my £15 pound a month broadband fee.
AND
My £16 a month BT Line rental for broadband.
They want me to pay TAX on top of that because some people like downloading music, so I have to reimburse the music industry out of my own pocket, despite paying for my music legitimately in the first place?
Lucky my broadband just got upgraded then, as Im gonna be using a lot of P2P networks to save money on my music and films, seeing as though this tax will cut the amount of money I have to buy them from HMV.
AND
My £16 a month BT Line rental for broadband.
They want me to pay TAX on top of that because some people like downloading music, so I have to reimburse the music industry out of my own pocket, despite paying for my music legitimately in the first place?
Lucky my broadband just got upgraded then, as Im gonna be using a lot of P2P networks to save money on my music and films, seeing as though this tax will cut the amount of money I have to buy them from HMV.
I was gonna say, at least wait to see if Brown agrees with the tax before you accuse him of stealing our hard earned cashnilcypher said:
Then again, the second he suggests that this is a good idea, hes losing my vote. My broadband access if for gaming, something I already pay an arm and a leg for, I dont need the Government adding on an extra cost to my favourite pasttime.
It does seem to say 'this tax is to pay for those people downloading things without paying for them', which to me says 'so if I'm paying the tax I can download things without paying for them, right?'
Plus whatever the rights or wrongs, admitting to being part of annual multi billion dollar profits, then demanding to take a cut from an industry that isn't yours (music and movies claiming a tax on ISPs), seems pretty poor at best. The way I see it, if you're losing 95% of your potential profits, and still pulling in billions in profit, then relax, you really didn't need that 95% of 'potential' money that MAY exist, and will cost you real money to maybe get part of it.
I'll gladly take the Canada plan tho, charge me an extra £2 a month, and we all get left the hell alone to download what we want. However it won't work as all UK governments like to screw you coming and going.
It does smack of 'we can't do anything about a potential criminal activity, therefore we're going to just accuse the entire country and save all the messing about.'
Why not go ahead and have everyone in the country shot dead, after all, some of them are murderers. (hyperbole, don't ya just love it - woo for taking things to the extreme, and yes, I know we don't have the death penalty)
Plus whatever the rights or wrongs, admitting to being part of annual multi billion dollar profits, then demanding to take a cut from an industry that isn't yours (music and movies claiming a tax on ISPs), seems pretty poor at best. The way I see it, if you're losing 95% of your potential profits, and still pulling in billions in profit, then relax, you really didn't need that 95% of 'potential' money that MAY exist, and will cost you real money to maybe get part of it.
I'll gladly take the Canada plan tho, charge me an extra £2 a month, and we all get left the hell alone to download what we want. However it won't work as all UK governments like to screw you coming and going.
It does smack of 'we can't do anything about a potential criminal activity, therefore we're going to just accuse the entire country and save all the messing about.'
Why not go ahead and have everyone in the country shot dead, after all, some of them are murderers. (hyperbole, don't ya just love it - woo for taking things to the extreme, and yes, I know we don't have the death penalty)
So, the UK is out of places to move to from the US. Well, I might still move to sweden or iceland. I hear they let you say anything and look at anything you want.
They're only upset because of how the loss to the industry relates to the bullshit inflated cost of entertainment on this planet. It's high time that those ridiculously overpaid asshats get their paycuts and have to cheap it out like the rest of us slaves. If entertainment wasn't such a huge deal, piracy wouldn't be either. Time to get a new business model you bastards!
This policy is lassezfaire. You think they are going to re-distribute the taxes they collect??Zac_Dai said:
Nope, not happening. People will be sued by individual companies, government will "re-invest the taxes" to maintain some Internet policing agencies and economy will claim trillions of dollars in losses on files they were not going to sell anyway[GLOBAL RECESSION].
No regulation or social safety net in there whatsoever.
I wish them luck.
Because not every download equals a lost sale. Even when the entertainment industries create their inflated numbers they recognize this, otherwise they would have to post losing such outlandish numbers nobody would buy it.Cousin_IT said:
Last year the US entertainment industry claimed they lost close to $3 billion to piracy. Figures from outside the industry put this figure closer to $2 billion. Wal Mart, one single retailer in the US lost over $2 billion to theft in that same year, and that was in their cost, not the retail value of the items stolen, which would place that closer to $3 billion at least.
Piracy is bad, but I can tell you without hesitation that it isn't so bad that we need to take drastic steps like these.
The reality is that roughly 95% or more of the downloads occur simply because people can. They never would have bought a copy in the first place (buy might be a strong word, these days its seems more like leasing).
Basically the piracy problem is blown way out of proportion, it's no worse (and maybe less so) then legitimate buisness suffer due to thieves. I am against piracy, but at this point I think I am more against the tactics the entertainment industry is using.