[pp.int.general] levies consultation
aiarakoa at yahoo.es
Sat Mar 29 13:45:49 CET 2008
----- Mensaje original ----
De: Reinier Bakels <r.bakels at planet.nl>
Enviado: sábado, 29 de marzo, 2008 12:19:39
> > Also, I see no problem in answering all the questions, even only to say "you trickster" -they are just questioning how
> > to manage levies, so they are assuming levies should exist anyway (without even questioning why); what a tricky
> > questionnaire then-. Obviously without calling them directly trickster, but pointing at how tricky the questions are.
> Look at the actual questions. They are mostly about numbers and other facts. To answer some of them, we would have
> to interview people e.g. from collectin societies. And they will be utterly surprised, if not worse, about our questions.
OK, let's look at the actual questions. Question nº 20: Are you aware of consumer surveys on private copying behaviour which are used as a basis for setting the levy rates? And consumer surveys on the main sources of works or sound recordings that are privately copied? The obvious answer -at least in the Spanish case- is NO, we are not aware of; the -hope it isn't- not so obvious addition to that answer would be and we would love to be aware of, because we are only told to pay, though we are not told why, we are not told which is the basis to determine such amounts for levies.
I think you may not be aware that in Spain, from 1996 -the year the current Spanish IP law (amendments apart) was passed by the Congress- up to now, Spanish RMOs have never been audited; so there's no certainty about if they properly distribute what they collect; add that to the fact that documents, reports, surveys and other media used to determine levies in Spain are not made public, and you'll get very clearly the Spanish scenario ... total opacity.
Believe me, Spanish RMOs -which are the collecting societies in Spain- are utterly surprised and even worse about questions from everyone, and also they use to offence any mass media, any political party, any civic group and any individual who question their practises; they convince every Spanish Minister of Culture -without regarding who is he/she or which is his/her party- to support them in their attack to everyone who dares -dare! as if asking for public transparency was an offence- to question how the things currently works regarding levies. So reaction from RMOs because of us making questions shouldn't be, in my opinion, a concern.
> > Yes, we already had yesterday a PPI meeting and arrived to simmilar conclusions; such explanation would serve as a
> > reference for EC to understand our answers -to understand for the whole document why do we find such
> > questionnaire a tricky one-.
> I did not attend the meeting but was informed. I saw a Wiki that basically turned the questionaire into chapter
> headings. Again, I believe that neither possible not desirable to answer all these questions.
Is there any reason to find not desirable to answer all the questions, apart from RMOs being utterly surprised? If you're willing to, I may send you a report about actions from Spanish RMOs and also about opacity regarding levies in Spain -and also may Valentin (reporting about SACEM) and other PPI folks do the same with their national levies issues- to let you see why we shouldn't care if RMOs become disgusted with our inquiries.
> > Not sure about if there are existing ones already sent to authorities, but the concepts are solid if there were the need
> > for writing a new document.
> I still hope for responses from others. Otherwise, we reinvent the wheel.
Of course reusing is always preferable; however, if no one of us has previous papers, we should create one :) Regards
( Aiarakoa )
Partido Pirata National Board's Chairman
Enviado desde Correo Yahoo!
Disfruta de una bandeja de entrada más inteligente. http://es.docs.yahoo.com/mail/overview/index.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the pp.international.general