Re: [dvd-discuss] Slashdot article - Canadian Tariffs

[Wendy Seltzer <wendy(at)seltzer.com>]

At 12:16 PM 3/12/02 -0900, Jacob Gemmell wrote:
>I don't think it is a tariff.  Slashdot just mislabeled it.  Rather it is
>a levy.  That being said, how is this justified in light of copy protected
>CDs?  Do recording companies who use copy protection schemes still get
>thier piece of the pie?

That's a neat question, and might be the first wedge at giving lesser 
copyright rights to those who use technical means to limit use beyond what 
copyright does.  Let's make them choose a range of rights in proportion to 
what they give the public -- greater compensation for the publication of 
unencumbered copies, lesser for the vending of DRM-crippled copies.

I hope someone with standing to object will raise this question (although 
apportionment appears to be addressed elsewhere, in the Copyright Act).

--Wendy


>On Tue, 12 Mar 2002, Peter D. Junger wrote:
>
> >
> > If this is really a tariff, then it only applies to storage media
> > imported into Canada from elsewhere.  Sort of like Bush's tariff
> > on steel manufactured outside the United States.
> >
> > If it is a tariff one would expect that it will be attacked by
> > all the free marketers and challenged as a blatant treaty
> > violation.
> >
> > But is it really a tariff?
> >
> > --
> > Peter D. Junger--Case Western Reserve University Law School--Cleveland, OH
> >  EMAIL: junger@samsara.law.cwru.edu    URL:  http://samsara.law.cwru.edu
> >          NOTE: junger@pdj2-ra.f-remote.cwru.edu no longer exists
> >
>
>--

--
Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@seltzer.com
Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html
Chilling Effects: http://www.chillingeffects.org/