View Single Post
Old 06-05-2008, 07:12 AM   #15
tirsales
MIA ... but returning som
tirsales ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tirsales ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tirsales ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tirsales ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tirsales ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tirsales ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tirsales ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tirsales ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tirsales ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tirsales ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tirsales ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
tirsales's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,600
Karma: 511342
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Germany
Device: PRS-505 and *Really* not owning a PRS-700
Quote:
i think it was the assumption of guilt rather than the tax itself which caused controversy.
Yes, you are right. But this got even stranger with the new law prohibiting copying media for private use - I still have to pay that tax, so the government is essentially assuming that I am breaking the law (and to believe that they actually certified that I am trustworthy (and law-abiding) enough to handle explosives ...)

Perhaps one should start a case of defamation

--edit:
I mean - if you would apply the "presumption of innocence" and a tax differing between "media used for copying" and "other media" - you would actually have to pay that tax for nearly none medias (and that's why it is indiscriminating...)
Oh well, who ever heared of a tax or cession abolished after the original meaning has been lost? (For Germans: Sparkling wine tax ... established to pay for WW1 )

Last edited by tirsales; 06-05-2008 at 07:17 AM.
tirsales is offline   Reply With Quote