Comments on: Canadian musicians’ file sharing plan

By: TheVoice

TheVoice — Thu, 27 Dec 2007 06:13:34 +0000

All you posters above should give your heads a collective shake. The purpose of the 5 bux/month is to protect the Downloader, not the music industy. It protects you from a lawsuit. Period.

It also helps to some small degree musicians that you haven’t paid for their songs.

To those that say they don’t download songs so why should they pay, I say this…lots of people don’t have cars but they have to pay taxes to pay for roads even though they don’t use them…how is this different?…according to your logic, if you don’t use something you shouldn’t have to pay taxes?

Give me a break. This solves a gigantic issue so for once in your lives consider the collective good over your own tightwadded wads.

By: Photographer

Photographer — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:02:45 +0000

Today, none of us fans get sued for downloading in Canada, due to the fact that we pay the tariffs on recordable CDs.
But we are being soaked to the tune of $30 million a year for this exchange.

This proposal would just add a new tax to the pile. (or shift it - who knows what the new law will be).

I do not download any music.
I am currently able to escape the tax by using recordable DVDs instead of CDs to back up my files and photos.
(Recordable DVDs are cheaper because they have so far escaped the added tariff).

How do I escape THIS proposed tax?
Cancel my internet access? - oh you got me now, eh.

Please go back to the drawing board.

By: Dreddsnik

Dreddsnik — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 23:53:19 +0000

” Why does the music industry get to partake and no one else? ”

You’re absolutely right.
If the RIAA gets this .. the MPAA will be there with THEIR hand out next ..
then the BSA ( software ) .. Photographers … Book publishers .. etc ..

That 25.00 a month internet access will jump to 500.00 before you can spell
‘bullshit’ .

By: Nuihc

Nuihc — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 22:57:47 +0000

Why does the music industry get to partake and no one else? Now maybe if you could download all the movies, ebooks, games, apps, TV shows, etc. that you want for 5.00?

Never happen. Isn’t practical. How the heck would you divide up the proceeds?

By: Monkey D. Luffy

Monkey D. Luffy — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 18:10:30 +0000

DON’T FEED THE DINOSAURS!!!!! This is unfair, for reasons stated above, people who don’t download music should not be forced to pay out $$. The RIAA has made no attempt to adapt to changing technology or compromise in any way, they should not be rewarded by a nice fat influx of cash. Let them die.

By: Peter Green

Peter Green — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 16:57:19 +0000

I don’t think it’s fair that everyone has to pay the fat cats that run the music and film industries when not everyone downloads!
I give away a tutorial DVD I made using BitTorrent, I don’t like to think that in order to get it, people have to pay that $5.
Also I think that file sharing should be legal for personal use and the bands make their money from getting their egotistical, spoilt backsides on the road and work for their money like most working class people do!
After all. it’s not just money they get for doing a ‘job’ that they love doing anyway, they get the fame too.

By: Dreddsnik

Dreddsnik — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 16:47:04 +0000

” Might happen in Sweden too i heard, i dont realy care since i dont download music. ”

That’s a big reason why you SHOULD care.
You don’t download music, and yet you will be forced to pay for it anyway.

Maybe you only donwload non-RIAA music.
Those non-RIAA artists won’t get a dime of this.

” Copyright law that protects the creators from organizations that feed off of their creativity. ”

Copyright law currently protects the organizations that hold those rights from the
annoying creators of those works, that deserve some pay and recognition.

Gotta love monopolies.

By: readers write

readers write — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 16:33:01 +0000

@ readers write above

And change the copyright law so that creators can only ‘rent’ out their rights for X years, not sell them. That way the rights return to the creator after a set period of time.

By: readers write

readers write — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 16:27:21 +0000

“I think its a great idea, but leaves a HUGE problem.. The music industry cannot die once implemented, if a new industry merges that somehow competes with music industry it competes on unfair grounds etc, its a permanent monopoly witch would forever feed Hollywood… ”

Hmm,
Payments go to creators (not rights holders) and the creators pay the rights holder.
This way in the future the rights holders can migrate back to being the rights holders. i.e. they do not have to beg the corporations for their money.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 16:15:39 +0000

About time. That makes complete sense.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 16:09:13 +0000

Might happen in Sweden too i heard, i dont realy care since i dont download music. I rather use Internet radios instead with great shows while gaming

I do download movies though once in awhile, would be great if they made the same thing for movies. I wouldnt mind paying a bit more on my internet to finaly solve all this..
Aslong as it isnt huge amounts, witch it wont be as long as everyone pays a little

I think its a great idea, but leaves a HUGE problem.. The music industry cannot die once implemented, if a new industry merges that somehow competes with music industry it competes on unfair grounds etc, its a permanent monopoly witch would forever feed Hollywood…

But hey i wouldnt realy care aslong as i could download stuff without being called terrorist supporter by anti-pirate organisations.
And they could start hunting real pirates that sell burned CDs on the streets instead of this internet cat/mouse game..

There are better solutions though, but this is the best one so far that could actualy happen..

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 15:19:40 +0000

For the groups of people who do not share music which are % wise larger
, why should they subsidize the down loaders.
This is just like the RIAA methods, force people to buy music. BAD PLAN.