 | Taxation Start‑class (inactive) | ||||||
| |||||||
Just posting to say I thought it felt a bit strange that Private copying (which is linked to from some articles) redirects to this one, about the taxation. While the matters are clearly related, I feel there should be one "Private copying" article dissecting the practice and perhaps various legislation under different jurisdictions, in a broader sense than levies in particular. Questions that could be attempted to be answered could be:
... and so on, i.e. not merely the case of levies as here and now. One section could be about the levies, with this article listed as the main article. External links could include articles like this one, and there is also a lot of material in that article itself that could give ideas on subjects to cover. I personally feel there seem to clearly be enough material to base a separate article around this.
I understand this might be a matter of "so if you'd like to see that happen, write the missing article!", and I'll perhaps consider that if no one else does and this would be agreed on. If I'd miss out to follow up on this and there's agreement, hopefully I gave some out there some inspiration for content with this comment. :-) -- Northgrove 00:31, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want to be a dick to the author, but the quality of this article is pretty poor. It reads more like a high school essay than an enxyclopaedic entry. There is way to much rhetoric and personal tone in the article, and the lack of references only exacerbates the problem.
I might go over the article and formalise the text, but I've added a "citations needed" tag. This article could really use particularly the first half of the article could really use some footnotes. Nicholas90 (talk) 08:52, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm wondering if anybody has a reference/citation for the following statement: "Non-commercial includes such things as resale not in the course of business, perhaps of normal use working copies which are no longer wanted." I'm not so much a "MUST HAVE CITATIONS" kind of person, I'm just really curious about any 'official' statements made about the possibility of non-commercial resale (such as at a garage sale, or when donated to a charity thrift store or something) or giving away of legally made home recordings, say when you grow tired of them or no longer need them. Any hints welcome. Thanks. Centerone (talk) 07:44, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ars Technica reported today on an EU court decision regarding Spain's private copying levy. The decision concluded, among other things, that "indiscriminate application of the private copying levy, in particular with respect to digital reproduction equipment, devices and media not made available to private users and clearly reserved for uses other than private copying, is incompatible with Directive 2001/29". If I understand correctly, it's saying that EU member states, if they have a private copying levy, must apply it only to private consumers, not to anyone else. This seems noteworthy for the article. However, the article requires a bit more work just to prepare it for the inclusion of this news, and I just don't have the time to deal with it right now. If someone else would like to take on the task, please be bold. —mjb (talk) 04:22, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Canadian section needs to be updated based on the following links: http://www.cpcc.ca/en/the-cpcc/private-copying-tariff http://www.cpcc.ca/en/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Tariff-2011.pdf A lot is out of date, most notably, the "current tariffs" sentence. Might there be some consideration of noting the valid years for the tariff amounts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.141.219.11 (talk) 03:07, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In finland you may not make copies if you would need to break digital handcuffs to do so. Is this similar in other countries? Palosirkka (talk) 19:54, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Australia's 1989 cassette levy is no longer in effect. It was struck down in Australian Tape Manufacturers Association Ltd And Others v. The Commonwealth Of Australia (1993) 176 CLR 480 FC 93/004 by the High Court as, essentially, badly located and unfair tax law and not a royalty. 203.62.184.110 (talk) 23:53, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The article says most "MP3 players" are classed as computer peripherals. I presume because they "need a computer" to be used (I haven't read the original case though). But what about an iPhone (or whatever) which can download music from a service (or off the Internet) themselves? Jimw338 (talk) 04:52, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
