Month: October 2018

When CD copying was all the rage in the late 1990s, many countries started to levy a tax on blank media.

This meant that consumers had to pay an extra fee on every recordable disc, because these can be used to duplicate copyrighted content.

In some countries, this model has expanded to other media, such as hard disks, MP3 players and phones. In Canada, however, this didn’t happen. Despite several attempts in the past, there is no private copying levy on smartphones, tablets or hard disks.

During recent copyright reform discussions, the matter was brought to the forefront once again. But there’s also another copyright compensation issue, one that’s potentially even more controversial.

A proposal from the Screen Composers Guild of Canada (SCGC), put forward during last week’s Government hearings, suggests to simply add a levy on Internet use above 15 gigabytes per month.

The music composers argue that this is warranted because composers miss out on public performance royalties. One of the reasons for this is that online streaming services are not paying as much as terrestrial broadcasters.

The composers SCGC represents are not the big music stars. They are the people who write music for TV-shows and other broadcasts. Increasingly these are also shown on streaming services where the compensation is, apparently, much lower.

“With regard to YouTube, which is owned by the advertising company Alphabet-Google, minuscule revenue distribution is being reported by our members. Royalties from the large streaming services, like Amazon and Netflix, are 50 to 95% lower when compared to those from terrestrial broadcasters,” SCGC writes (pdf).

“Statistics like this indicate that our veteran members will soon have to seek employment elsewhere and young screen-composers will have little hope of sustaining a livelihood,” the guild adds, sounding the alarm bell.

SCGC’s solution to this problem is to make every Canadian pay an extra fee when they use over 15 gigabytes of data per month. This money would then be used to compensate composers and fix the so-called ‘value gap’.

As a result, all Internet users who go over the cap will have to pay more. Even those who don’t watch any of the programs where the music is used.

However, SCGC doesn’t see the problem and believes that 15 gigabytes are enough. People who want to avoid paying can still use email and share photos, they argue. Those who go over the cap are likely streaming not properly compensated videos.

“An ISP subscription levy that would provide a minimum or provide a basic 15 gigabytes of data per Canadian household a month that would be unlevied. Lots of room for households to be able to do Internet transactions, business, share photos, download a few things, emails, no problem,” SCGC notes.

“[W]hen you’re downloading and consuming over 15 gigabytes of data a month, you’re likely streaming Spotify. You’re likely streaming YouTube. You’re likely streaming Netflix. So we think because the FANG companies will not give us access to the numbers that they have, we have to apply a broad-based levy. They’re forcing us to.”

The last comment is telling. The composers guild believes that a levy is the only option because Netflix, YouTube, and others are not paying their fair share.

That sounds like a licensing or rights issue between these services and the authors. Dragging millions of Canadians into this dispute seems questionable, especially when many people have absolutely nothing to do with it.

According to Canadian law professor Michael Geist, who highlighted the issue, it would also result in an unfair double-payment.

“[T]he SCGC proposal would represent double-payment by consumers, who would pay to access the content on services such as Spotify and Netflix and pay for the transmission of the same content with the ill-advised copyright tax on broadband data,” Geist writes.

It’s doubtful that there will be broad support for the proposal among the public. However, proposing to add a levy or tax on Internet use certainly gets people’s attention, which might have been part of the plan.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.

Read 4 remaining paragraphs | Comments

Read 19 remaining paragraphs | Comments

A few days after starting to roll out the Windows 10 October 2018 Update to users, Microsoft has temporarily stopped distributing the latest feature update for its desktop operating system. The company says it’s “paused the rollout … for all users as we investigate isolated reports of users missing some files after updating.” Shortly after […]

The post Microsoft puts Windows 10 October 2018 Update on hold appeared first on Liliputing.

Read 43 remaining paragraphs | Comments

Nach Beschwerden von Benutzern über gelöschte Dateien hat Microsoft die Auslieferung des Oktober-Updates von Windows 10 gestoppt. Bereits heruntergeladene Updates sollen nicht installiert werden. (Windows 10, Microsoft)

Read 13 remaining paragraphs | Comments

Die deutschen Raumfahrtfirmen OHB und MT Aerospace wollen zusammen mit Jeff Bezos' Raketenfirma Blue Origin auf den Mond. Die Pläne sind aber noch sehr vage. (Blue Origin, Nasa)

Der Elektroautobauer Tesla will ein umfassendes Bild von der Sicherheit seiner Fahrzeuge bekommen. Der erste vorgelegte Sicherheitsbericht ist jedoch wenig aussagekräftig. (Tesla Model X, Technologie)

Four years ago, Singapore became the latest in a long line of countries to use copyright law to block access to ‘pirate’ sites. The amendments were passed during the summer of 2014 and took effect in December the same year.

After a break of almost two years, a request by the MPA(A) rendered Solarmovie.ph inaccessible in 2016. Several major ISPs were ordered by the High Court to block the streaming platform, the first such action in the country.

In April this year the MPA(A) chalked up another victory when its application to have 53 sites operating across 154 domains – including those operated by variants of The Pirate Bay and KickassTorrents – was granted by the High Court. ISPs including Singtel, StarHub, M1, MyRepublic and ViewQwest blocked the sites shortly after.

The blocking process in Singapore appears to be thorough. The High Court must be satisfied that sites targeted are “flagrantly infringing”, i.e with a primary purpose of breaching copyright and generally showing a lack of respect for copyright law. Site operators are also able to defend themselves although thus far, none have done so.

With plenty of experience of sites around the world taking evasive counter-measures to avoid blocking, the injunction in Singapore allowed copyright holders to return to Court to request an amended order to block new domains and/or IP addresses. However, this model has proven cumbersome in the past so it’s no surprise the MPA(A) has now persuaded the Court to adopt a more streamlined approach.

After highlighting that several of the blocked sites changed their domains to avoid blocking, the High Court has now handed down a “dynamic injunction” which will allow the Hollywood studios to block any new methods deployed by the 53 sites covered by the earlier injunction.

“Without a continuing obligation to block additional domain names, URLs and/or IP addresses upon being informed of such sites, it is unlikely that there would be effective disabling of access to the 53 (infringing websites),” said Justice Lee Seiu Kin, as quoted by TodayOnline.

Under the terms of the new order, companies including Disney, Paramount Pictures and Twentieth Century Fox, will be able to liaise with ISPs M1, MyRepublic, Singtel, StarHub and ViewQwest to have additional domains and IP addresses blocked, if they facilitate access to the previously blocked sites.

According to Justice Lee, the new injunction “provides a practical means of ensuring the continued effectiveness of the original injunction since it provides an expedited process for the blocking of additional (piracy websites).”

The Judge added that ISPs will only have to block the new resources if they are satisfied there is enough evidence to do so but according to TodayOnline, this was highlighted as potentially problematic by local lawyers.

“It is questionable if this is a good enough safeguard when the most expeditious way for an Internet service provider to respond, upon receipt of a request to block an additional domain name, would simply be to comply with the request, rather than to incur the time and cost of disputing the matter with the copyright owner,” said representatives from the Bird & Bird law firm.

Nevertheless, the judgment was welcomed by Neil Gane, general manager of the Asia Video Industry Association’s Coalition Against Piracy.

“There is no one silver bullet to deterring online piracy,” Gane said. “What is required is a holistic solution to include enforcement; disabling access to egregious piracy websites through effective site blocking; cooperation with technology platforms and other intermediaries; and consumer outreach.”

According to a report published by the Motion Picture Association Canada earlier this year, at least 42 countries are now obligated to block infringing sites. In Europe alone, 1,800 sites and 5,300 domains have been rendered inaccessible, with Portugal, Italy, the UK, and Denmark leading the way.

In Canada this week, site-blocking efforts suffered a setback when local telecoms regulator CRTC denied FairPlay Canada’s application for a broad pirate site blocking scheme. CRTC cited a lack of jurisdiction under the Telecommunications Act.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.