The company is being charged in Austria millions of dollars for selling blank CDs, cassette tapes, memory cards, and MP3 players to customers that might have used them to record copyrighted music. July 11, 2013 5:37 AM PDT Amazon has found itself in the middle of a battle over whether it should pay fees on the sale of blank CDs, cassette tapes, memory cards, and MP3 players. And unfortunately for the company, the EU's Court of Justice hasn't provided much help in determining what should happen. The European Union's high court on Thursday issued a ruling (PDF) on whether Amazon or other retailers should pay a "private copying levy" on the sale of recording media to customers. An Austrian copyright-collecting agency, Austro-Mechana, has sued Amazon for $2.4 million, claiming that the company owes artists fees for the sale of blank media between 2002 and 2004. Amazon has argued that suit, which presumes that people are using the blank media for the illegal recording of copyrighted works, is not fair. Related stories Amazon adds Miramax flicks to Instant Video lineup Apple and Amazon stand down on 'app store' lawsuit Flash quietly re-emerges on Amazon's Kindle Fire Amazon to fire up new Kindle tablets this year, says report Amazon launches comics with help from George R.R. Martin The Court of Justice on Thursday ruled that in some cases, assessing such a fee in the EU is indeed fair. The court specifically said that a fee could be assessed "where the intended use is not the making of private copies." However, the court muddied the waters a bit by saying that EU law "does not allow for the private copying levy to be collected in cases where the intended use is clearly not the making of private copies." So, what's the difference between the two? That's not for the court to decide. The high court was asked by the Austrian Supreme Court to determine whether it should even hear the case. Despite Amazon's contention that it should not be heard and should be thrown out, the Court of Justice has effectively said that it could be heard, but determining whether a customer had intentions of using blank media for copyright infraction must be determined by Austria's court. Given how difficult it is to determine the motivations of customers who buy blank media, Austro-Mechana might have a difficult road ahead of it. That said, the organization has already won in lower courts and Amazon has been forced to appeal. Now it's up to the Austrian Supreme Court to ultimately decide whether the online giant should pay out fees.
The company is being charged in Austria millions of dollars for selling blank CDs, cassette tapes, memory cards, and MP3 players to customers that might have used them to record copyrighted music.
Amazon has found itself in the middle of a battle over whether it should pay fees on the sale of blank CDs, cassette tapes, memory cards, and MP3 players. And unfortunately for the company, the EU's Court of Justice hasn't provided much help in determining what should happen.
The European Union's high court on Thursday issued a ruling (PDF) on whether Amazon or other retailers should pay a "private copying levy" on the sale of recording media to customers. An Austrian copyright-collecting agency, Austro-Mechana, has sued Amazon for $2.4 million, claiming that the company owes artists fees for the sale of blank media between 2002 and 2004. Amazon has argued that suit, which presumes that people are using the blank media for the illegal recording of copyrighted works, is not fair.
Related stories
- Amazon adds Miramax flicks to Instant Video lineup
- Apple and Amazon stand down on 'app store' lawsuit
- Flash quietly re-emerges on Amazon's Kindle Fire
- Amazon to fire up new Kindle tablets this year, says report
- Amazon launches comics with help from George R.R. Martin
The Court of Justice on Thursday ruled that in some cases, assessing such a fee in the EU is indeed fair. The court specifically said that a fee could be assessed "where the intended use is not the making of private copies." However, the court muddied the waters a bit by saying that EU law "does not allow for the private copying levy to be collected in cases where the intended use is clearly not the making of private copies."
So, what's the difference between the two? That's not for the court to decide. The high court was asked by the Austrian Supreme Court to determine whether it should even hear the case. Despite Amazon's contention that it should not be heard and should be thrown out, the Court of Justice has effectively said that it could be heard, but determining whether a customer had intentions of using blank media for copyright infraction must be determined by Austria's court.
Given how difficult it is to determine the motivations of customers who buy blank media, Austro-Mechana might have a difficult road ahead of it. That said, the organization has already won in lower courts and Amazon has been forced to appeal. Now it's up to the Austrian Supreme Court to ultimately decide whether the online giant should pay out fees.
