CRIA Calls SAC P2P Proposal A “Pipe Dream”

CRIA's Graham Henderson has told Reuters that the Songwriters Association of Canada's proposal to fully legalize P2P is a "pipe dream" and that CRIA is reluctant to get involved.


  1. bell has there head up there ass…

    Bell Quote
    “(That) would not go over well with our client base, especially with the large number already signed up for our (legal) mobile and online music services.”

    No but it be ok with bell to charge users extra for geting to sites like Youtube as it is said that bell is in faver in scraping Net neutrality

  2. Read the fine print!
    This proposal is really for a new 5$ monthly levy ($60 per year) on internet connections! It’s a money grab disguised in fair dealing rhetoric. Pay attention to point #7 in the proposal.

    “7. We propose a licence fee of $5.00 per internet subscription, per month. Payment of this fee would remove the stigma of illegality from file sharing. In addition, it would represent excellent value to the consumer, since this fee would grant access to the majority of the world’s repertoire of music. Existing download subscription services generally charge considerably more than $5.00 per month, while offering a mere fraction of the file-sharing repertoire.”

    I would advise that we do not support this. While I do agree that file sharing should be addressed and the song writers do need to be compensated, this far oversteps the bounds of a reasonable solution.

  3. Vincent Clement says:

    Just another form of subsidization. I pay taxes on my internet service and the electricity required to power my computer. I paid tax on the computer and associated hardware I purchased. I pay levies on blank CDs. They want me to pay levies on other storage mediums. Enough is enough.

  4. Bill Chalmers says:

    I actually would consider this if implemented; at least its a realistic solution. I will never “buy” MP3’s from an online retailer in my life, as I fail to see the point as I can can get better DRM free content for free and not have to deal with the restrictions and billing nightmares that would no doubt go hand in hand with another corporate undertaking.

    A $5 blanket surcharge that allows me to continue to get whatever I want from wherever I want seems like a reasonable compromise.

  5. Bell Quote
    “(That) would not go over well with our client base, especially with the large number already signed up for our (legal) mobile and online music services.”

    What they really meant was, why would people pay us if they are already forced to pay someone else.

  6. Those of us who still believe we own our airwaves, and believe the Internet enables us to communicate with others, still believe it is up to those who want to believe computers and the Internet are little more than a new way to expand their personal distribution services to adopt their business models to fit the owners’ wishes, not theirs. P2P is already “fully legal” since it is how computers communicate with each other, and how the Internet works. It’s time we drive the point home to these folks. If SAC wants to help their members, they should begin by educating them about how best to use the Internet as it was designed, i.e., as a 21st century radio that builds their audience.

  7. Of course Graham and his owners don’t support this. It doesn’t hand them back the strangle hold they had on the “industry” (I remember when it was culture).

    I too don’t agree with this proposal. It is a levy on non-participants.

  8. 1) P2P is not yet illegal then it doesn’t need to be legalized.

    2) There is a lot of legal content that travel on P2P via bitTorrent (open source software, free eBooks, free music and the like).

    3) “Illegal” sharing is a world wide issue and one after the other they are and they will shut down all the torrent site (e.g. demonoid, oink, etc…). Soon there won’t be any content to download but we would still pay the internet levy.

  9. Walter Dnes says:

    Argggh… I agree with Graham Henderson. When I agree with him that something is a bad idea, it is a baaaaaaaad idea. There are a gazillion “rights” in the music industry. $5/month for the lyricists; and I’m sure the arrangers will want their $5/month too. Then there’s the artists asking for their $5/month cut. And a “performanance right” of $5/month and a reproduction right of $5/month. Suddenly, my $29.95/month 5-megabit ADSL has $30/month of taxes on it. ***THAT’S JUST THE MUSIC INDUSTRY***. I’m sure the movie studios will come along with hands outstrecthed for their $30/month. The Television industry will follow. As will software publishes and e-book publishers. This will eventually result in $100plus of taxes on a $29.95/month ADSL account. Greed, greed, greed.

  10. Who owns the copyright to the songs? If the writers do, then they should get a cut of the private copying levy. If they don’t, then they are asking to get paid for something they don’t own.

  11. Good deal
    I’d voluntarily pay five bucks a month to for the priviledge to ignore copyright for personal use. Where do I sign up??

    But a manditory levy on an unrelated service, that I’d have to resist.

  12. Walter makes a good point. While the levy is an exciting idea – a cross between the British television subscription system and the US controlled market system – it would have to cover all media for it to work. Games, PC software, movies, television shows, and music. Tricky


    USE tech that works
    Look if bit torrent trackers all ready do a ton of “tracking” why not use that tech, its easy to mandate a simple any tracker setup in canada must give monthly stats,
    this then becomes does a movie get a bigger share , and such.

    It is ironic that the disccusion here is not that the idea is bad its how to do it, well lets get someone to get a site with these techs there so people can play around with them to make these things reality wont be hard btw.
    and if you get all 20 million canucks even 18million
    that is definately over a billion a year, now imagine the USA ten times our size, then UK , hten europe.
    Do NOT ever say 5$ is too much, if the industry wants more cash impliment it world wide, my bet is that would garner 2billion or more a month.
    No more lawsuits, no more whiney crap about DMCA use, no more lack of enjoyment. Thats what i see now they are trying to prevent us from enjoying music and movies and they are making it soo epxensive to do that only the rich can afford it.
    NOTE: no matter what you do, you will not stop pirates, all you do is lessen your base of customes as they who dont pirate would not get your accounts.
    DRM in the USA is dying as it is elsewhere. Why Canada, they see pretnice aka PC gov’t as a last chance at some control and power. WHY DOES THE CRIA EXIST when the top 190 artists left and formed the CMCC? Why did they leave, because they were told that the CRIA is moving to sue people and the artists do not want that.