‘A private copy is a private copy’
p2pnet.net news:- The Copyright Board of Canada has issued its much-anticipated decision involving online music services. The decision sets a tariff for the online music services to be paid for the reproduction of music. I blogged about the hearings in the fall, which pitted the CMRRA against the CRIA and the online music services.
The Copyright Board was asked to choose between two benchmarks in establishing the tariff. CMRRA wanted to use the recent ringtone decision as the starting point, while the CRIA argued that traditional CDs served as the more appropriate starting point.
The Board sided with the CRIA, ultimately arriving at a tariff of 7.9 percent of the retail price per “permanent” download (ie. a download from Apple iTunes) with a minimum payment of 5.3 cents per download. Note that the CRIA also sought to become a sub-licensee of the CMRRA repertiore, but the Board rejected that request.
The decision also includes some important language with respect to private copying and DRM.
On private copying, there was some discussion about authorized vs. unauthorized copying. The Board rejected the distinction, noting that “a private copy is a private copy, whether or not is was authorized.”
This statement is important as provides support for the view that peer-to-peer downloading may in some circumstances be covered by private copying, since the issue of authorization is not relevant.
The Board also rejected an initial attempt to mandate DRM for online music services. As my colleague Jeremy deBeer pointed out, the initial wording of the tariff appeared to require the use of DRM. The Board dropped that requirement – it does not specify any use of DRM – picking up on the recent Puretracks decision to offer DRM-free downloads.
While both sides will find things to criticize in the decision (with the online music services likely the happiest of the bunch), the bigger question is why this tariff exists in the first place.
Not only are many of the same parties preparing for a second tariff for the same services but a different right next month (Tariff 22), but many might well ask why the parties simply could not have negotiated a similar agreement. The need for Board-mandated tariffs may make sense for efficiency sake or where a market-based solution is unlikely. That is not the case here – the parties reached an interim agreement years ago and there was seemingly no need to have an expensive, government-funded system to sort things out.
Michael Geist
[Geist is the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa. He can be reached by email at mgeist[at]uottawa.ca and is on-line at www.michaelgeist.ca.]
If your Net access is blocked by government restrictions, try Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at thIs the end (of the Net) nigh?zze University of Toronto’s Munk Centre for International Studies. Go here for the official download, here for the p2pnet download, and here for details. And if you’re Chinese and you’re looking for a way to access independent Internet news sources, try Freegate, the DIT program written to help Chinese citizens circumvent web site blocking outside of China. Download it here.
rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php | | And use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site
Tired of being treated like a criminal? They depend on you, not the other way around. Don’t buy their ‘product’. Do bug your local politicians. Use emails, snail-mail, phone calls, faxes, IM, stop them in the street, blog. And if you’re into organizing, organize petitions, organize demonstrations and then turn up on your local political rep’s doorstep, making sure you’ve contacted your local tv/radio station/newspaper in advance. Don’t just complain. Do something!
