The 15% "TAX" headline is COMPLETE LIE. A misrepresentation - READ THE ARTICLE. It is NOT a TAX but a requirement that streamers spend 15% of Canadian revenue to PURCHASE or CREATE CANADIAN CONTENT. This is a Canadian content law. NOT A TAX.

all 28 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 33 points 5 months ago

Canada is good about supporting local artists. I love that local artists must be played on the radio.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    But, I stream the red green show every day.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago

    I never watched it growing up but everything I've heard about it since I was an adult is great. Never watched much skit comedy outside of kids on the hall and that's just when not much else was on.

    Nowadays I'd say the kids in the hall stuff was much better than other stuff I watched, cause I'm not sure I even remember....some syndicated sitcom I assume, waiting for dinner.

    Still recall some of the taglines as little as I saw it, since you were waiting for the next show (possibly Simpsons at one point on cbc).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 22 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    Rest of the world needs to do this too.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 5 months ago

    One thing I like is that the revenue from these taxes go explicitly to the threatened industries. So the more that Canadians stream US works, the more money there is for Canadian tv, movies and radio to compete. Too often, income like this is directed into a general revenue stream, leaving the threatened industries with the same or even less resources to compete with.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -2 points 5 months ago

    Yes, but no. Maybe we shouldn't have streaming cartels at all. Just focusing on enabling content creators wherever they may be, for the sake of the content. You'd be hard pressed to find less deserving less capable stewards of content, than the ones currently stewarding it.

    Honestly I wouldn't care if content I make was shown for free to everyone in the world. As long as I had housing/health/food security and self determination. As would most creative people.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    We need more shows like Orphan Black. Especially since streaming just kills off any show with an interesting premise after one season.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    Can we also add a surcharge so I never have to see an ad again?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    Send me 50¢ per day and I'll share a link to ublock origin?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (2 children)

    I use an adblocker, but would like to financially support the creators that create the content I consume. Blank CDs back in the day supposedly had a surcharge built in to cover piracy and I like the idea of something like that. Not sure how it would work, maybe some sort of "toll" system where instead of an ad I pay the amount the advertisers did to not see it.

    There's no way that advertisers are paying as much as it would cost me to subscribe to everything, so why can't I pay that amount to serve myself "blank" (nonexistent) ads? Or just an extra surcharge that goes to creators and I'll just keep using the adblocker guilt free.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago*

    In my country they actually implemented that recently, any storage drive or phone or computer with storage built in that you buy comes with a surcharge which goes to the artists union so the successful ones can have a bit of money and I'm imagining the less successful ones get a cent or two lol

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago

    Elephant in the room is who has recently bought up a bunch of streaming services ;)

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    Would that include Stargate SG-1? It was all filmed in Canada.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago*

    The Canadian tuxedo would have gone extinct if it wasn't for this law.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago

    Arrrrg. 15% of 0 be 0

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago

    Oi you have a streamy license?

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago

    Kind of like heritage minutes? Pretty sure Canadians were always in favor of that.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    So the streamers will pass on the cost to the end user or insert more ads to pay for it.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 5 months ago

    Only if Canada could step up their game produce better content.

    cant fix boring writing with pathetic dialog and lack of talent+big ego and complete lack of standards with a law.

    Too many Canadians fall into “but my aunt liked my stuff” excuse and expect no notes.

  • source
  • 10 comments in c/canada@lemmy.ca view that post
    [–] 26 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    That's great that they're busy talking about that while at the same time making mass internet surveillance mandatory with Bill C-22. I wonder if one is meant to distract people from the other and dilute the conversation.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago

    I remember Carney "parising" Trump on some show, not directly but just to the host, about how Trump's strategy of "flooding the zone" and calling that a good tactic or something. And then some months later, we gpt Bill C-2.

    So I don't think it's impossible to say that they aren't learning from that.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 4 points 5 months ago* (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

    They state repeatedly that they want to bring us up to the level of our five eyes partners. But that includes the United States.

    I suppose Canada has more to gain from such an alliance, since America could likely mop the floor with us in cybersecurity. If we left or they left they'd just look anyway.

    I just don't believe we can trust them as far as we can throw them.

    But how do the other partners handle their responsibilities with these signals intelligence capabilities? Is it (c-22) truly equal to what they have there? If signalnand Proton etc are all freaking out about it is it worse than what they have in America and new Zealand, UK etc? They operate there still and they are all Five Eyes partners. America is losing all sorts of digital privacy rights etc along with virtually everything else right now. Why do they still operate there?

    And we really want to still be sat at yet another table where what passes for American bulldog politicians bark and yap at us? We should be decoupling where ever possible and something this sensitive is definitely a candidate. They don't even respect their own citizens why would they waste time respecting us. Literally its a toss up who I would trust less with this sort of partnership, Russia usa Israel or China. Might as well just hand it over to various billionaires directly

    The streamer thing is whatever. Not a tax. Sounds fine to me. Bill c-22 is a whole big issue that more people need to talk about tho.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    Doesn't Canadian FM radio have a similar rule?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago

    Doesn't Canadian FM radio have a similar rule?

    All Canadian broadcasters have always been required to contribute towards the creation of Canadian content.

    All this is doing is making the American streamers who broadcast in Canada do the same thing.

    Thier complaints are that Canada won't let them take all the profits out of the country.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago* (1 child)

    They have a percentage of the content that needs to qualify as Canadian, in order to qualify as CanCon (Canadian Content), it needs to pass at least 2 of the 4 MAPL tests.

    Music: Are a majority of the songwriters Canadian?
    Artist: Is the performer Canadian?
    Performance: Was it performed/recorded in Canada?
    Lyrics: Were the lyrics written by a Canadian?

    Because things like Radio only broadcast, and don't let you choose your own programming, by making them broadcast a certain percentage of Canadian Content, Canadians are already getting a certain percentage of their royalties; No additional fee needed.

    When a Canadian act gets big enough, they often stop counting as CanCon. There was a time when Justin Bieber was popular but didn't count because he records songs written by non-Canadians while in the USA.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago

    Canadian broadcasters are also required (as a condition of their license) to contribute to the creation of Canadian content. Each time, during the licence renewal, they have to provide detailed information about how they will achieve that.

    They can contribute money to a production fund, they can make their own content, they can directly assist and promote Canadian artists, or some combination of those.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago*

    Not good enough, they should be held to our existing content laws instead of this cheap offramp.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago

    So if you want to stream in Canada you are forced to pay 15% of your Canadian revenue to Bell/Rogers to make up for the bite you took from their pie.

  • source