View Single Post
Old 06-05-2008, 06:05 AM   #14
zelda_pinwheel
zeldinha zippy zeldissima
zelda_pinwheel ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zelda_pinwheel ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zelda_pinwheel ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zelda_pinwheel ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zelda_pinwheel ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zelda_pinwheel ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zelda_pinwheel ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zelda_pinwheel ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zelda_pinwheel ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zelda_pinwheel ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zelda_pinwheel ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
zelda_pinwheel's Avatar
 
Posts: 27,827
Karma: 921169
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Paris, France
Device: eb1150 & is that a nook in her pocket, or she just happy to see you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by tirsales View Post
Oh well ... I like this tax. Once upon a time it was legal to copy a CD, DVD or something for private use. License holders wanted to get money for this - so there was charges added on every burner, copying machine, etc
But nowadays it is illegal to make private copys - so why still pay this charge?
the arguments i have heard against this tax is that it is indiscriminate and therefore unfair ; it assumes that you are buying blank media in order to copy someone else's (copyright protected) work, and therefore charges compensation ; but what if you are only using it for *your* *own* work ? why should you be taxed to archive your own files ? i think it was the assumption of guilt rather than the tax itself which caused controversy.
zelda_pinwheel is offline   Reply With Quote