🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <40217922357550500@prep.ai.mit.edu> rms@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Richard Stallman) writes:
>
>                      The Right Way to Tax DAT
>
>                         Richard M. Stallman
[much deleted]

Actually, the whole notion of a tax on DAT decks or blank tape to compensate
musicians (and record companies) for the effects of home copying is bogus.
The record companies base their arguments that "fifty godzillion dollars a day
are stolen by home taping" on the assumption that virtually every DAT deck and
DAT blank tape are used for "unlawful home taping".  This is nonsense.  Although
I don't have a DAT deck, I do have a very fine analog cassette deck and do a lot
of home taping on it (you may recall that a few years ago the record industry
was pushing for a tax on blank cassette tapes for essentially the same reasons
as the DAT tax).  I feel that my home taping is legally and morally correct
and, in the long run, benefits the record companies and recording artists.
Why?  Because I tape MY OWN stuff, typically CD's but maybe LP's (ever tried to
find Tonio K.'s "Life in the Foodchain" on CD?), THAT I PAID MONEY FOR and
play that tape in my car, in my Walkman (should I insert a Sony trademark here
lest they sue me?  And they own Columbia now! the horror, the horror . . .),
for other people, etc.  By having that music available to me in other forms
than the original, I derive more enjoyment from the music and (here's the
important point) I EXPOSE MORE PEOPLE TO THE MUSIC!!!  These people then may
go out and buy the music for themselves!  I have seen this happen many times;
in fact, in the case of the Tonio K. LP (all right, all twenty people out there
who have heard of Tonio K. stand up!) my playing my home-made cassette copy
in my car with other people induced at least four people to buy the album that
otherwise would not have even heard of Tonio K.  At least two of these people
have continued to support this superb but all-but-unknown artist by buying his
subsequent releases.  This is not an uncommon occurrance; I have furthered the
sales of recordings by Richard Thompson, Lou Reed, Toni Childs, T-Bone Burnett,
and many others by this technique.  I know that people are buying stuff that
they hear first from my tapes because I later see them with a "store-bought"
tape or CD of their own!  Maybe the record companies should give me
a rebate . . .

Most illegal copying that actually deprives record companies and musicians of
revenue is done by big operations (usually controlled by the organized crime
syndicates), not by ordinary consumers; a tax on machines or tape will not have
any effect on the big music counterfeiters (I'm sure they can easily find ways
to avoid the tax).  It is my argument, therefore, that (1) the tax will harm
the record companies and artists by discouraging home tapers and thereby
reducing their musical pollination of others; (2) the tax does nothing to
combat the real copying threats, large crime syndicates; and (3) it opens the
door for any special interest group to try and convince the government to
extort more money from the citizens and give that money to the SIG, as a right.
How about a tax on TV's that goes to cable operators to compensate them for
theft of cable service? A tax on blank videotape to assuage commercial networks
for the loss of advertising revenue caused when people fast-forward through
commercials on taped programs, thereby reducing the value of advertising
minutes?  A tax on floppy disks, since we all know that floppies are used to
illegally copy software? Ad infinitum . . .

E-mail any direct replies, since I don't get this newsgroup (follow-ups were
directed here by the original poster).

Newsgroups: alt.activism.d
Subject: Re: The Right Way to Tax DAT
Summary: The only good tax is a dead tax
Expires: 
References: <40217922357550500@prep.ai.mit.edu>
Sender: 
Reply-To: rodgers@engcon.UUCP (Kevin Rodgers)
Followup-To: 
Distribution: 
Organization: LTV MEG, Dallas, TX
Keywords: 

In article <40217922357550500@prep.ai.mit.edu> rms@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Richard Stallman) writes:
>
>                      The Right Way to Tax DAT
>
>                         Richard M. Stallman
[much deleted]

Actually, the whole notion of a tax on DAT decks or blank tape to compensate
musicians (and record companies) for the effects of home copying is bogus.
The record companies base their arguments that "fifty godzillion dollars a day
are stolen by home taping" on the assumption that virtually every DAT deck and
DAT blank tape are used for "unlawful home taping".  This is nonsense.  Although
I don't have a DAT deck, I do have a very fine analog cassette deck and do a lot
of home taping on it (you may recall that a few years ago the record industry
was pushing for a tax on blank cassette tapes for essentially the same reasons
as the DAT tax).  I feel that my home taping is legally and morally correct
and, in the long run, benefits the record companies and recording artists.
Why?  Because I tape MY OWN stuff, typically CD's but maybe LP's (ever tried to
find Tonio K.'s "Life in the Foodchain" on CD?), THAT I PAID MONEY FOR and
play that tape in my car, in my Walkman (should I insert a Sony trademark here
lest they sue me?  And they own Columbia now! the horror, the horror . . .),
for other people, etc.  By having that music available to me in other forms
than the original, I derive more enjoyment from the music and (here's the
important point) I EXPOSE MORE PEOPLE TO THE MUSIC!!!  These people then may
go out and buy the music for themselves!  I have seen this happen many times;
in fact, in the case of the Tonio K. LP (all right, all twenty people out there
who have heard of Tonio K. stand up!) my playing my home-made cassette copy
in my car with other people induced at least four people to buy the album that
otherwise would not have even heard of Tonio K.  At least two of these people
have continued to support this superb but all-but-unknown artist by buying his
subsequent releases.  This is not an uncommon occurrance; I have furthered the
sales of recordings by Richard Thompson, Lou Reed, Toni Childs, T-Bone Burnett,
and many others by this technique.  I know that people are buying stuff that
they hear first from my tapes because I later see them with a "store-bought"
tape or CD of their own!  Maybe the record companies should give me
a rebate . . .

Most illegal copying that actually deprives record companies and musicians of
revenue is done by big operations (usually controlled by the organized crime
syndicates), not by ordinary consumers; a tax on machines or tape will not have
any effect on the big music counterfeiters (I'm sure they can easily find ways
to avoid the tax).  It is my argument, therefore, that (1) the tax will harm
the record companies and artists by discouraging home tapers and thereby
reducing their musical pollination of others; (2) the tax does nothing to
combat the real copying threats, large crime syndicates; and (3) it opens the
door for any special interest group to try and convince the government to
extort more money from the citizens and give that money to the SIG, as a right.
How about a tax on TV's that goes to cable operators to compensate them for
theft of cable service? A tax on blank videotape to assuage commercial networks
for the loss of advertising revenue caused when people fast-forward through
commercials on taped programs, thereby reducing the value of advertising
minutes?  A tax on floppy disks, since we all know that floppies are used to
illegally copy software? Ad infinitum . . .

I'm posting this to gnu.misc.discuss, since the original was posted there and
I don't have access to alt.activism.d (the original Follow-up: group).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin Rodgers  Chance Vought Aircraft (now LTV Aerospace, soon to be ???)
rodgers%engcon@uunet.uu.net
"Convictions cause convicts." --- Malaclypse the Younger, Pricipia Discordia
------------------------------------------------------------------------------