EU court ruling might make Amazon pay millions in disc levies

vbimport

#1

We’ve just posted the following news: EU court ruling might make Amazon pay millions in disc levies[newsimage]http://static.myce.com//images_posts/2011/08/cds.png[/newsimage]
[quote][/quote]
Read the full article here: http://www.myce.com/news/eu-court-ruling-might-make-amazon-pay-millions-in-disc-levies-67971/

            Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

#2

I’ve bought blank media before, therefore I must be sued for everything I own! Seriously, why do copyright owners/anti-piracy groups insist on making legal media-related tasks so hard to do without having to constantly look over your shoulder? Letthe people do what they will do, and stop getting your panties in a twist adout it!


#3

I would expect this kind of ruling in America, but Europe too? What is this world coming to?


#4

I’ve bought hundreds of DVD’s & hundreds of CD’s, and can honestly say that I’ve used less than 1% for copying music CD’s, or copying DVD’s.

I’ve only copied about five Bluray movies …


#5

[QUOTE=TSJnachos117;2693055]I’ve bought blank media before, therefore I must be sued for everything I own! Seriously, why do copyright owners/anti-piracy groups insist on making legal media-related tasks so hard to do without having to constantly look over your shoulder? Letthe people do what they will do, and stop getting your panties in a twist adout it![/QUOTE]

Except the irony of this is it just happens to be Amazon; a multi-million (if not billion) pound / dollar company. I didn’t need to read on after that, there was no need to.

Why is Amazon being targetted for selling it’s own? Why not target the manufacturers, therefore, like CMC, MBI, etc for making that technology available? Why not target ASDA for selling those DVDs?

A blatant example of harking companies for no other reason than profit and greed. :rolleyes:


#6

Chad, yes, why not levy the ‘tax’ against the manufacturers instead? Probably because Amazon has lists of customer names so those doors can be broken down and these evil citizens eliminated, once and for all. That will REALLY help sales for Sony, RIAA, etc!


#7

[QUOTE=ChristineBCW;2697201]Chad, yes, why not levy the ‘tax’ against the manufacturers instead? Probably because Amazon has lists of customer names so those doors can be broken down and these evil citizens eliminated, once and for all. That will REALLY help sales for Sony, RIAA, etc![/QUOTE]

I’m sorry, maybe you misinterpreted what I wrote - What I wrote was dripping with sarcasm. Unless you countered my sarcasm with more sarcasm, in which fair play! :smiley:

Just saying, it’s like penalising one retailer when so many others are doing it? I thought this argument of copying for illegal purposes died when the VHS and Betamax came out in the 1980s? Soon Sony, RIAA will be banging on the likes of ASDA, Tesco, and demanding them pull them from shelves :rolleyes:

In most cases the MacroVision is enough to deter the unsavvy from copying protected DVD’s. And that’s fair enough.

Fair play, I copy a lot of television recordings (concerts and the likes) to friends, but I don’t see it as being illegal because;

  1. I’m not profiting on them. In fact I’m losing out on postage, DVD cost etc.
  2. It’s really no different then them hooking up a DVD recorder themselves and doing it themselves.

#8

Chad, agreed to all. One other interesting aspect about going after the manufacturers instead of merely a distributor like Amazon - the manufacturers would probably aim back one more step - to the engineers of the standards for their products.

That would be Sony-Philips, leaders in the CD-Audio Disk format and the BluRay Disk Format.

Why not go after THOSE? Then, we could have Sony suing Sony.

That would indeed be the most justifiable action.

Amazon’s been losing a lot of tax-cases in the USA, where they are forced to pay sales tax to those provinces where their warehousing operations work - where they ‘sell from’, so to speak. Maybe the EU courts smell lawsuit-blood in the water and think they can hurt Amazon while others are kicking it around.

But truly, there’s only one difference between Amazon and the people (bigger distributors and the manufacturers themselves) that sell TO Amazon:

Amazon can supply addresses for individuals who receive those products.

Is Dollfuss still alive and kicking in Vienna, by the way?


#9

Here we’re already paying that levy for quite some years…
But as compensation, it’s permitted by law to create backups for personal use…and that’s the part where the multimedia industry tries to kick in.
They want the backup to be prohibited,but “forget” that they already get quite some money from the storage media to compensate…:Z


#10

Like all taxes the end payer is the consumer.
So it is a tax on those that buy from Amazon because they are going to pass it on either in the open or hidden .
To spread it out so any increase looks like less part of the European tax will be passed to US customers & other countries citizens that get no benefit of the taxes.
That is if any of us citizens paying taxes ever get the benefit .


#11

[QUOTE=ChristineBCW;2697216]Chad, agreed to all. One other interesting aspect about going after the manufacturers instead of merely a distributor like Amazon - the manufacturers would probably aim back one more step - to the engineers of the standards for their products.

That would be Sony-Philips, leaders in the CD-Audio Disk format and the BluRay Disk Format.

Why not go after THOSE? Then, we could have Sony suing Sony.

That would indeed be the most justifiable action.

Amazon’s been losing a lot of tax-cases in the USA, where they are forced to pay sales tax to those provinces where their warehousing operations work - where they ‘sell from’, so to speak. Maybe the EU courts smell lawsuit-blood in the water and think they can hurt Amazon while others are kicking it around.

But truly, there’s only one difference between Amazon and the people (bigger distributors and the manufacturers themselves) that sell TO Amazon:

[B]Amazon can supply addresses for individuals who receive those products.[/B]

Is Dollfuss still alive and kicking in Vienna, by the way?[/QUOTE]

Perhaps, but so to do ASDA home delivery services, or Tesco for that matter? :confused:

The way I see it, the reason why they’re doing this is frighteningly obvious. Although the film and television industry is making eye-watering profits, advances in technology (including catch-up TV, online streaming etc.) means that cinema figures are in decline. In short, their losing money at their biggest expense - delivering to cinemas.

When home cinemas offer a performance close to that of “proper” cinemas, there’s little reason to pay the extortionate, so-expensive-it-would-be-laughable-if-it-wasn’t-true, fees that greedy cinema companies
are asking for.

Convenience of a film to watch whenever I want it without some jerk unfolding sweets loudly behind me? Yes please.

This is greed, plain and simple. I hope Amazon kick Sony’s DRM-smelling arse into next week with this one.


#12

[QUOTE=cholla;2697221]Like all taxes the end payer is the consumer.
So it is a tax on those that buy from Amazon because they are going to pass it on either in the open or hidden .
To spread it out so any increase looks like less part of the European tax will be passed to US customers & other countries citizens that get no benefit of the taxes.
That is if any of us citizens paying taxes ever get the benefit .[/QUOTE]

The problem is, then, that consumers will just go elsewhere if Amazon levy a tax on their optical media.

I was tempted to buy a 100 pack DVD+R for about £17 from Amazon but I picked up a pack of Polaroid for £14.95 since I needed to go into ASDA anyway.


#13

[QUOTE=Chad_Bronson;2697258]The problem is, then, that consumers will just go elsewhere if Amazon levy a tax on their optical media.
[/QUOTE]

It wouldn’t appear as a tax . It would appear to be a price increase.
Amazon would just pass the tax along that way.

Just like the rest of the businesses that will have to pay the same tax.
So all of them will increase their price to cover it.

The only ones that won’t are the businesses already paying this tax.
The reason they won’t is because they already have.


#14

[QUOTE=cholla;2697271]It wouldn’t appear as a tax . It would appear to be a price increase.
Amazon would just pass the tax along that way.

Just like the rest of the businesses that will have to pay the same tax.
So all of them will increase their price to cover it.

The only ones that won’t are the businesses already paying this tax.
The reason they won’t is because they already have.[/QUOTE]

Oh yeah of course; Amazon won’t pass it off as a tax, they’re not dumb enough to do so :slight_smile:

No the point is if they start to increase the prices, people will just go elsewhere to purchase their media. Stores are becoming increasingly competitive, and after delivery charges, I rarely shop online for optical media unless the delivery charges outweigh going to the store.