tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post7496586017400822097..comments2024-03-28T13:45:42.289+00:00Comments on The IPKat: BREAKING: CJEU says that fair compensation for private copying cannot be funded through general state budget Verónica RodrÃguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-62108368845198963772016-06-12T05:31:35.077+01:002016-06-12T05:31:35.077+01:00Matt:
It's probably a "tax on knowledge&...Matt:<br /><br />It's probably a "tax on knowledge" issue thing. Europe has had a long history of censorship based on copyright since the 19th Century. The court probably wanted to evade a scheme that reintroduce that sort of notorious arrangement into European practice again. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-64436003911533395602016-06-10T09:43:00.188+01:002016-06-10T09:43:00.188+01:00RE: But apparently it's not okay to put a levy...RE: <i>But apparently it's not okay to put a levy on all citizens (ie use general taxation) -- even if this would be much more efficient, and less distortive.</i><br /><br />A State would be an intermediary between two market players: copyright owners and users of those protected works. The use of intermediary increases the distance between the actual market players, which means the increase of the distance between the work and its value/reasonable remuneration. It brings more regulation into the market, whether it would also bring efficiency for any/all/some parties is not so obvious. Therefore, a tax does not seem to be a first-choice solution.<br /><br />The situation is, of course, different with "orphan works", where one of two market participants is not known/uncontactable and a State acts as representative, not as intermediary. The Cat that Walks by Himselfnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-84704444080234954982016-06-10T09:05:17.425+01:002016-06-10T09:05:17.425+01:00"[S]uch a scheme for financing the fair compe..."[S]uch a scheme for financing the fair compensation from the General State Budget of the Member State concerned is not such as to guarantee that the cost of that compensation is ultimately borne solely by the users of private copies."<br /><br />Can not the same be said about blank media levies, which have substantial non-infringing uses?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-61273980249787581712016-06-10T06:50:51.711+01:002016-06-10T06:50:51.711+01:00One is left with the conclusion that CJEU must be ...One is left with the conclusion that CJEU must be trying to push the whole interpretation of this clause to the point where all sane implementations are precluded, so the whole concept has to be rewritten or abandoned.<br /><br />(in common with various other recent CJEU decisions?)<br /><br />Most blank media is not used for private copying. But apparently it's okay to put a levy on all blank media purchases.<br /><br />Most citizens may not be private copying. But apparently it's <i>not</i> okay to put a levy on all citizens (ie use general taxation) -- even if this would be much more efficient, and less distortive.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-19099748248938889872016-06-10T01:41:14.344+01:002016-06-10T01:41:14.344+01:00The UK's "orphan works" scheme relat...The UK's "orphan works" scheme relates to payment for use of copyright works that the UK government does not own, but participation is not compulsory. I am not clear what is to happen to the funds that the orphan works scheme holds if (as seems likely) the owners of the orphan works never claim them, but I wold be surprised if the government didn't find some way of appropriating them.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-17549704316805546042016-06-09T17:12:12.993+01:002016-06-09T17:12:12.993+01:00Great post Eleonora! Great post Eleonora! Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-40908274127391170612016-06-09T14:13:35.507+01:002016-06-09T14:13:35.507+01:00Maybe not entirely in the context of this particul...Maybe not entirely in the context of this particular ruling,<br /><br />recently we start to hear suggestions on introducing a State tax for certain types of Internet activities and possible State subsidies/compensations to owners of copyright protected works.<br /><br />With that, I start wondering about two things. First, why would a State impose a tax for something it does not own or otherwise participate in, such as private copyright. And second, why those who could make money on their own, from their works, should seek compensations or subsidies from a State. The Cat that Walks by Himselfnoreply@blogger.com