Decisions

Decision Information

AI Summary:

This content was automatically created by Lexum using generative artificial intelligence (AI) technology, without editorial revision, and is not official. Users are responsible for checking its accuracy and completeness.

Overview

The Canadian Private Copying Collective (CPCC) proposed a tariff for levies to be collected in 2008 and 2009 on the sale of blank audio recording media in Canada. These levies were intended to compensate for the private copying of musical works, performers’ performances, and sound recordings. The proposed tariff included digital audio recorders and removable electronic memory cards, in addition to traditional blank media such as audio cassettes, recordable and rewritable CDs, and MiniDiscs.

  • Federal Court of Appeal, January 10, 2008: Ordered the removal of all portions of the proposed tariff dealing with digital audio recorders.

Parties' Submissions

  • Retail Council of Canada and Canadian Storage Media Alliance: Argued against the inclusion of digital audio recorders in the proposed tariff, leading to their removal by the Federal Court of Appeal.
  • Canadian Private Copying Collective (CPCC): Withdrew its proposed tariff as it applied to removable electronic memory cards in a letter to the Board dated June 8, 2007.

Legal Issues

  • Should digital audio recorders be included in the proposed Private Copying Tariff for 2008-2009?
  • Should removable electronic memory cards be included in the proposed Private Copying Tariff for 2008-2009?

Decision

  • The portions of the proposed tariff dealing with digital audio recorders were struck out, including the definition of “digital audio recorder” and related provisions.
  • The proposed tariff as it applied to removable electronic memory cards was withdrawn by CPCC.

Reasons

The Board:

  • Struck out all references to digital audio recorders in the proposed tariff, including the definition of “digital audio recorder” in section 2, subparagraph (a)(v) of the definition of “blank audio recording medium” in section 2, and paragraph 3(1)(e), in compliance with the Federal Court of Appeal’s order.
  • Acknowledged CPCC’s withdrawal of the proposed tariff as it applied to removable electronic memory cards, limiting the scope of the tariff to audio cassettes, recordable and rewritable CDs, and MiniDiscs.

Decision Content

Copyright Board
Canada

Canada Coat of Arms/Armoiries du Canada

Commission du droit d’auteur
Canada

 

Date

2008-03-27

Citation

File: Private Copying 2008-2009

Regime

Copying for Private Use

Copyright Act, subsection 83(8)

Members

Mr. Justice William J. Vancise

Mrs. Francine Bertrand-Venne

Mrs. Sylvie Charron

CPCC’s proposed tariff of levies to be collected in 2008 and 2009 on the sale of blank audio recording media, in Canada, in respect of the reproduction for private use of musical works embodied in sound recordings, of performers’ performances of such works or of sound recordings in which such works and performances are embodied

Reasons for decision

In response to the April 11, 2007 motion of the Retail Council of Canada and the April 20, 2007 motion of the Canadian Storage Media Alliance and pursuant to an order of the Federal Court of Appeal dated January 10, 2008, all portions of the Canadian Private Copying Collective’s (CPCC) proposed Private Copying Tariff, 2008-2009 dealing with digital audio recorders are struck out. These consist of the definition of “digital audio recorder” found in section 2, of subparagraph (a)(v) of the definition of “blank audio recording medium” found in the same section and of paragraph 3(1)(e).

Furthermore, in a letter to the Board dated June 8, 2007, CPCC withdrew its proposed tariff as it applied to removable electronic memory cards. As a result, the examination of the proposed tariff will proceed on the dates already set for the hearing but only with respect to the following blank audio recording media: audio cassettes, recordable and rewritable CDs of all types and MiniDiscs.

Signature

Claude Majeau

Secretary General

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.