Study Supports Imposition of Illegal File-Sharing Broadband Tax
By: MarkJ - 11 May, 2009 (1:57 PM) - Views: 1334 - Categories: Illegal Downloads

The Institute of European Media Law (EML) has found that a levy (tax) on broadband Internet usage, which would essentially support the legalisation of illegal file-sharing (P2P) downloads, does conform to European copyright law; though it would require some changes.

The news comes shortly after the European Parliament chose to retain amendment 46 (138) of the new Telecoms Package (original news), which makes it very difficult for an ISP to disconnect users suspected of involvement with illegal downloading. Typically an alternative solution is needed.

The Intellectual Property Watch website states that two models are emerging: a free-market approach based on private blanket licences and voluntary subscriptions, and a legal licence approach based on exceptions in copyright law and mandatory levies (above).

It certainly seems like a simple enough approach but cracks quickly show up when you dig deeper. For example, the majority of broadband Internet users in the UK are law abiding and unlikely to be pleased with having to pay extra for the misdeeds of others.

Then there's the matter of how you gauge fair distribution of the revenue between rights holders. Don't forget, we're not just talking about music here, it's movies and software too. If you think about it, such a solution could risk making the situation worse unless literally every copyright holder in the world is included. That's a mammoth task, to say the least.

Finally you have the matter of how much to charge (tax) broadband users. There are different proposals on this, although one suggestion is that such a levy would be held against all communication services, not just broadband/Internet connections.

We doubt that £1 extra per year would do it, as some have hinted, so you'd probably be talking more in the range of £1 to £2 extra per month, which is a lot if you're on a low income. This is pure speculation of course, but it definitely wouldn't be popular.

Share Links: Slashdot, Stumble, Facebook, Digg!, Blink, Del.icio.us, Reddit, Yahoo, Mixx, Propeller, Diigo
Options: Link | Search News

Comments: 4

asa logot0m5k1
Posted: 11 May, 2009 - 5:35 PM
Link to comment

why dont they accept that file sharing is the new thing & just change the marketing models & stop trying to be bullies!

many bands are now going independant & releasing their content via torrents & p2p as a way to gain more awareness to their music

embrace the 0's & 1's dont turn them into false enemies
asa logoLee
Posted: 11 May, 2009 - 11:29 PM
Link to comment

Then there's the matter that downloading a lot of data is not necessarily downloading anything that should be taxed. Some of us use advanced, modern, internet-centric, but freely given operating systems like debian.
asa logoCarrot63
Posted: 12 May, 2009 - 2:16 AM
Link to comment

There's a world of difference between taxes on all that means that the better off subsidise the healthcare of the poorest, and extra taxes on those who DO pay for copyrighted material being used to support failed business models. Levying taxes for such a purpose is unreasonable, unjust and certain to be unpopular.

The figures bandied about by 'rights holders' for 'losses' incurred from 'piracy' are pure fantasy, not least because most of those 'stealing' would not use the products at all if they were made to pay. If all it takes to get a cheque from the government is to invent a specious figure, I'm game and await the cheque for 5 million for my losses.

We have existing laws against theft, beyond those it is hardly the job of governments to prop up those incapable of making their businesses pay, nor of ISPs to police it.

Less greed from 'rights holders' might just equal better sales.
asa logojagq
Posted: 13 May, 2009 - 5:29 AM
Link to comment

It's up to the owners of intellectual property whether to charge and how much to charge for their work. This is as it should be. This system is in place to encourage innovation and creation, as creators are thereby protected in ownership of their work.

It is not within the consumer's rights to choose to steal.

Leave a comment


baffled cheese confused cool frown glee laugh mad mixedup noexpression sad sadder shifty shocked smile smirk timid tongue whatever wink 



Characters left (comments containing swear words may not be saved)

Please MAKE A COPY OF YOUR COMMENT so you can re-post if an error occurs.

Enter this code in the field below.
Security Image





Generated in 0.40945 seconds.
DB queries: 8

Copyright © 1999 to Present - ISPreview.co.uk - All Rights Reserved (Terms, Privacy Policy, Links (.), Live Chat & Website Rules).