{"id":57894,"date":"2021-07-05T09:00:50","date_gmt":"2021-07-05T09:00:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/?p=57894"},"modified":"2021-07-05T09:00:50","modified_gmt":"2021-07-05T09:00:50","slug":"should-internet-users-pay-a-piracy-levy-to-ensure-creators-get-paid","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/?p=57894","title":{"rendered":"Should Internet Users Pay a Piracy Levy To Ensure Creators Get Paid?"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"The<\/a>More than two decades after going mainstream, the problem of illegal downloading is not going to go away overnight. Indeed, it may not go away at all.<\/p>\n

Over the years there have been dozens of initiatives to try and reduce the flow but by far the most effective has been to make content available to consumers at a fair price. The success of services like Spotify and Netflix are a testament to that but there are other ideas too, ones that approach things from a different direction.<\/p>\n

The Smart Fund<\/h2>\n

This week \u201c100 leading cultural figures\u201d including Academy Award winner Olivia Colman published an open letter in The Times (paywall<\/a>) calling for the creation of a so-called \u201cSmart Fund\u201d to help generate up to \u00a3300m per year to support the UK creative sectors. <\/p>\n

\u201cThe Smart Fund is proposed as a collaboration between creators and performers, technology companies and the Government. It provides a direct way for tech manufacturers to invest in, grow, empower, and enrich the cultural DNA of our society, by supporting the creativity for which the UK is globally renowned,\u201d The Smart Fund\u2019s proposal reads.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt would work by placing a small one-off levy on the sale of mobiles, laptops, PCs and devices that are built to allow people to store and download creative content, solving the problem that creators are not recompensed for the use of their work.\u201d<\/p>\n

TorrentFreak contacted The Smart Fund who told us that this \u201cis an entirely separate issue to piracy\u201d but then went on to explain a mechanism that sounds tailor-made to compensate for losses that the creative industries attribute to piracy.<\/p>\n

\u201cAt the moment the works of thousands of artists, writers, musicians, performers and film-makers, are copied and stored on devices like smartphones, which breaches their copyright. These rights are often not enforced and the creators aren\u2019t remunerated. The Smart Fund provides a mechanism to fix this across the creative sector,\u201d the group explained. <\/p>\n

Benefits of the Proposal<\/h2>\n

If we leave potential problems and criticisms out of the equation for a moment, The Smart Fund does appear to have some admirable goals. <\/p>\n

Those who could benefit from the cash injection include performers at festivals and art galleries, for example<\/a>, with The Smart Fund noting that it would be able to support young people while helping to \u201clevel up<\/a>\u201d those in disadvantaged areas.<\/p>\n

This sounds all very well in theory but in practice, things are unlikely to be so straightforward.<\/p>\n

Levy or Just Another Tax?<\/h2>\n

Given that The Smart Fund is proposing a 1% to 3% levy on sales of all devices that are download-capable, we put it to The Smart Fund that they may have failed to mention the most important people in the equation \u2013 the people who will buy those devices, i.e the general public. <\/p>\n

Isn\u2019t this just a tax by another name that will eventually have to be paid by consumers?<\/p>\n

\u201cThe Smart Fund is not a tax, as a tax would be paid to government. Instead, The Smart Fund will pay creators and performers directly through transparent and fair means. It is a way for tech to invest in and enable creativity for everyone,\u201d The Smart Fund says.<\/p>\n

\u201cThere is no reason why the cost of a smartphone, tablet or any other device should increase with the Smart Fund. As set out in the report \u2018Private Copying Global Study 2020\u2019 by CISAC<\/a>, the International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers, schemes like the Smart Fund exist in 44 countries and there is no evidence to show that consumers in these countries pay more for their devices.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Smart Fund\u2019s approach is that manufacturers of download-capable Internet devices will pay the 1% to 3% levy and the cost of the levy won\u2019t be passed on to consumers. Unfortunately, that\u2019s not how businesses tend to work. Everything is passed on to consumers where possible since they are the ones actually buying the devices.<\/p>\n

With that usually being the case, there\u2019s the pressing question of whether a levy should be imposed on consumers whether they like it or not and, crucially, whether a levy should be paid by people regardless of their consumption habits.<\/p>\n

The fundamental issue is that illegal downloading relates only to a relatively small proportion of device buyers. Unfortunately, there is no practical way to only extract a levy from people who are pirating content, so everyone must foot the bill. That raises more issues.<\/p>\n

Per Device Tax is Fundamentally Unfair<\/h2>\n

The stated aim of the scheme is to place a levy on every mobile phone, tablet and PC sale but it won\u2019t necessarily stop there. Indeed, The Smart Fund wants a surcharge placed on all devices that are able to download and store content from the Internet, which in some households could stretch to a large number of devices.<\/p>\n

Then there\u2019s the not-insignificant issue of the majority of homes that already pay for legal services and do not download anything illegally. Not only will they have to pay for Spotify, Netflix, Prime, and Apple Music \u2013 all of which necessarily have to pay money to creators \u2013 they will be forced to pick up the bill for people who are paying nothing too.<\/p>\n

Again, for balance, The Smart Fund says that tech companies won\u2019t have to pass on the cost of the levy to consumers. Make of that what you will but \u00a3300m isn\u2019t going to come out of thin air.<\/p>\n

Private Copying Freedoms Are Restricted in the UK<\/h2>\n

The Smart Fund quite rightly points out that there are schemes in dozens of countries that generate funds via blank media, MP3 playing devices, and computers, for example. The funds raised from those levies are pumped back into the creative industries but there is often something for the consumer too \u2013 a private copying exception, i.e the freedom to format-shift owned copyrighted works without breaking the law.<\/p>\n

In the UK, such an exception was introduced in 2014 but following legal action<\/a> by several music industry groups, which challenged the government\u2019s decision to bring in an exception without a levy, in 2015 the High Court quashed<\/a> the regulations and the exception. <\/p>\n

While illegal downloading was never part of the equation (users must permanently own the content they wish to copy), the end result today is that UK citizens cannot even make MP3 tracks from CDs they actually own without breaking the law. Fast forward six years, and there are now calls for a levy (ostensibly to recoup piracy losses for good causes) but without an accompanying private copying exception being part of the package.<\/p>\n

Presuming That a Levy is a Good Idea, Where Does The Money Go?<\/h2>\n

If we take The Smart Fund at face value, it does seem to want to put its proposed \u00a3300 million to good use. Providing funding to disadvantaged areas and those less well off are certainly admirable goals and there\u2019s no doubt that society as a whole could benefit from a well-managed, well-considered scheme. But with \u00a3300 million in the pot, how long before big business starts circling?<\/p>\n

There\u2019s no question that when it comes to illegal downloading, the music and movies sectors are those most affected in terms of volume and value. The big question then is whether the most affected companies will swoop in to claim what is \u2018theirs\u2019? In music, just a handful of major labels control more than 90% of the market \u2013 will they allow millions of pounds to be distributed to other industries or will they want their \u2018fair share\u2019?<\/p>\n

We put this to The Smart Fund who told us that project is not mainly for music content at all.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe Smart Fund will be available for all creators and performers, from artists to actors, to musicians and dancers and more. The people set to benefit from this most are the many creators who struggle to secure fair payment for their work,\u201d the group explains.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe levy schemes in 44 other countries provide a template that the UK can build on to ensure the best outcome for the Smart Fund. Organizations like DACS, PRS for Music, ALCS, BECS and Directors UK already distribute royalties to hundreds of thousands of creators efficiently and transparently. This would be made even easier if technology companies partner with us and utilize their data.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Smart Fund project can be found here<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

From: TF<\/a>, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.<\/p>\n

Powered by WPeMatico<\/a><\/small><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

More than two decades after going mainstream, the problem of illegal downloading is not going to go away overnight. Indeed, it may not go away at all. Over the years there have been dozens of initiatives to try and reduce the flow but by far the most effective has been to make content available to […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":57895,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[308],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-57894","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-torrent"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/57894","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=57894"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/57894\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/57895"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=57894"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=57894"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=57894"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}