Support |
luca wrote: > CDRs (for computers) cost less than Audio CDs. > I have been told this difference ( in Italy it is about 1/2 U.s. $ ) is >a > sort of tax that is payed to majors or whatever because it is clear that > people uses the specific Audio Cd to duplicate music. > Is this correct ? Yes and no. In the EU (or at least all countries that have already passed the recent set of EU bills into local law), there is a copyright fee both on Audio CDRs (i.e. CDRs recordable in consumer audio devices) and Data CDRs. The money is shared among all national copyright boards responsible, and is further shared among their membership by whatever general distribution scheme each one has. In Germany, that would be GEMA (publishers, composers) and GVL (musicians and producers) in the case of Audio CDR, and GEMA, GVL, VG Wort (writers) and VG Bild (graphic artists) for Data CDR. The software industry is still struggling to get into the picture. > If yes, majors do protect their lost sells, and what about artists ? At least the GEMA and GVL use sales and airplay statistics to build their distribution schemes - you get points for each of these events, and get a corresponding share of the total at the end of each billing period. > ...I know that a guy duplicated one of my cds, but nobody gave me any >money > from the Cd for Audio he had used... How should they know what CD he had copied? Money from events that do not generate playlists (or where the value is too small to warrant collecting and evaluating data) is pooled and shared as explained above. The schemes are arguably unfair to artists catering for a special interest market, as their sales and airplay tend to be invisible to the GEMA data collectors, but OTOH, administering the whole thing at a level where it would observe microsales would be so expensive that they would get even less out of their membership. Sevo -- Sevo Stille sevo@ip23.net