Originally posted by David Basskin
1. The private copying levy applies to cassettes, recordable CD and MiniDisc. It does not apply, and has never applied, to DVD.
My bad, oops not DVD's.
2. You're very kind to name me, but I didn't create the private copying levy. It was created by Parliament in 1997.
It was my understanding that you personally lobbied this tax/levy from your own people, correct me/them if that is incorrect. It is funny (odd) how
your name shows up on both CPCC and CMRRA directors lists, the two companies involved with the mandated levy.
When someone lobbies the government to write legislation that skims money by way of a mandated levy on consumers, it's called something... is it
graft of some kind or is it simply lining their pockets at the expense of everyone else? Ahhh, moral and ethical conundrums, but I suppose lawyers are
used to playing those games, it's why the law is written the way it is and full of so much "pork."
I've been in a few countries where I have actually witnessed "lobbyists" paying off government ministers, I wonder if that happens in Canada? I
really don't need to ask that question because I know of cover-ups personally. BTW, don't take offense, these are just questions which are not
really directed at anyone in particular and I infer nothing. I simply reason based on what I have seen and have been involved in, in the past.
I have noticed that it appears you did an excellent job on the CRIA problem so far, $300 million wasn't it in unpaid license fees plus $5.7 billion
in penalties? Who gets the $5.7 billion if the case wins? Does the whole $300 million get divided between the license holders? How much are the
lawyers, CPCC and CMRRA getting out of this? Was it done on spec, pro-bono or the normal ridiculous fees?
3. CMRRA does not collect or administer the levy. That job is done by the Canadian Private Copying Collective (CPCC). For more information, see
From Corporations Canada the CPCC Director list (more information
"Current: 6 Last Update Date: 2009/03/31
Min: 6 Last Amendment: 1999/03/01
The following are the directors at the time of incorporation or as indicated on the last annual summary as of March 31 of the year of filing.
From Corporations Canada the CMRRA Director list (more information
Current: 4 Last Update Date: 2004/05/18
Min: 1 Last Amendment: 2002/01/10
4. GST and applicable PST have always been collected on the sale of recordable audio media to which the levy applies. The introduction of the
HST will not represent any change in the total taxes paid or collected om the sale of such media.
Any mandated levy causes a proportionally equal increase in the amount of tax, meaning HST, PST or GST.
5. The levy is not a tax. Taxes are collected and retained by government. The levy is collected by CPCC, a non-governmental, private
organization, and distributed through CPCC's members to songwriters, music publishers, performers and makers of sound recordings.
6. Since 2000, CPCC has distributed more than $180 million to the payees noted above. Full financial information can be found on CPCC's website.
Given the public availability if the above information, it's a shame that you didn't bother to do any research before criticizing me or my company.
We encourage anyone with questions about the levy to contact us directly for the facts.
[edit on 21-12-2009 by David Basskin]
Yes yes David, I well know the CMRRA and CPCC and I have read most of the documents. It was my understanding, from your own people, that you lobbied
the government to implement the blank CD/recordable media surcharge, which is in effect a "tax." It just goes to a different "highwayman." And I
think I can refer to it as a tax, as it is a mandatory cash added amount that has implied or real threats and does not have any representation. Oh
wait, does that mean it's an extortion, is that correct?
I am all for artists being paid "reasonable" amounts of money for their artistic works, what I am against is parasitic "middle-men." I think a
good quote might be from Ayn Rand;
“When you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing; When you see that money is flowing to those
who deal, not in goods, but in favors; When you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don’t protect you against
them, but protect them against you; When you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice; You may know that your society is
You realize of course David, that anything I type here is opinions and that and a buck fifty will buy you a coffee at Timmies. Personally, I think
lobbyists should be outlawed and politics totally transparent, but we both know that's not going to happen with the present corrupt system of
government (and I know a lot of people in government as well, funny how most if not all start out as lawyers, nudge nudge wink wink). I don't know if
lawyers are inherently corrupt and thereby produce corrupt government or if lawyers are just weak and need that greed void filled, something to ponder
I still have to wonder as well how a lawyer can serve two masters, eg. a client and at the same time be an officer of the court. It would be like
Harper or Obama receiving payment or honoraries from two or more different governments. Oh wait, it's illegal but it's been happening right? I guess
one rule fits some!
Maybe we'll talk again some day and I can explain the realities of corruption within governments with solid examples and evidence, if you don't
already know how corrupt governments really are.
So, you were saying?
Cheers - Dave
[edit on 1/4.2010 by bobs_uruncle]