From Advanced-Television.Com ...

http://www.advanced-television.com/2008/jun23_jun27.htm#t3

------------------------------------------------------------------------

TV set-top makers to challenge EC ruling

STB makers and pay-TV platforms are considering legal action against the 
European Commission after a tax ruling left many of them facing millions 
of pounds in unexpected costs. Basic set-top boxes, which are classified 
as communications devices, are exempt from tax when imported into the 
European Union. But a change to the rules last month means any box with 
a hard disc drive or Ethernet connection will be treated as a recording 
device, which is liable for tax at 13.9 per cent.

A reclassification of digital video recorders such as the Sky+ box, 
could cost BSkyB alone £15 million (E18m) a year from next month. 
Charges covering the past three years could force the company to pay 
another £25 million-£30 million.

Pay-TV operators including BSkyB, UPC and Sky Italia have joined 
manufacturers including Thomson and Pace to mount a challenge.

The companies are considering an appeal to the European Court of 
Justice, or through the World Trade Organisation. The new rules have 
already triggered a dispute with the US trade department, which has 
started a formal consultation

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Terry

Terry Casey wrote:
>  From Advanced-Television.Com ...
> 
> http://www.advanced-television.com/2008/jun23_jun27.htm#t3
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> TV set-top makers to challenge EC ruling

Here we go again. I've lost count of the times the industry has moaned 
about one thing or another to do with the EU.

Excuse me if I have no sympathy for large wealthy organisation that rape 
the Earth's natural resources, indirectly fund wars over these same 
resources and use third world child labour so we can buy a Freeview box 
for 15 quid.

Ah diddums.

On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 22:15:56 +0100, Terry Casey
<k.type@example.invalid> wrote:

> From Advanced-Television.Com ...
>
>http://www.advanced-television.com/2008/jun23_jun27.htm#t3
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>TV set-top makers to challenge EC ruling
>
>STB makers and pay-TV platforms are considering legal action against the 
>European Commission after a tax ruling left many of them facing millions 
>of pounds in unexpected costs. Basic set-top boxes, which are classified 
>as communications devices, are exempt from tax when imported into the 
>European Union. But a change to the rules last month means any box with 
>a hard disc drive or Ethernet connection will be treated as a recording 
>device, which is liable for tax at 13.9 per cent.
>
>A reclassification of digital video recorders such as the Sky+ box, 
>could cost BSkyB alone £15 million (E18m) a year from next month. 
>Charges covering the past three years could force the company to pay 
>another £25 million-£30 million.
>
>Pay-TV operators including BSkyB, UPC and Sky Italia have joined 
>manufacturers including Thomson and Pace to mount a challenge.
>
>The companies are considering an appeal to the European Court of 
>Justice, or through the World Trade Organisation. The new rules have 
>already triggered a dispute with the US trade department, which has 
>started a formal consultation
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Terry

Is supporting European industry in the face of what some may see as
unfair competition all bad?

"Silk"  wrote in message 
news:g3q8lu$8nq$1@registered.motzarella.org...
> Terry Casey wrote:
>>  From Advanced-Television.Com ...
>>
>> http://www.advanced-television.com/2008/jun23_jun27.htm#t3
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> TV set-top makers to challenge EC ruling
>
> Here we go again. I've lost count of the times the industry has moaned 
> about one thing or another to do with the EU.
>
> Excuse me if I have no sympathy for large wealthy organisation that rape 
> the Earth's natural resources, indirectly fund wars over these same 
> resources and use third world child labour so we can buy a Freeview box 
> for 15 quid.
>
> Ah diddums.

Curiously, the result of imposing import tariffs would be to deprive the 
underpaid workers of the far east of work and income. I can't see how you 
can square that with your communist leanings.

Bill

In article <noU7k.95528$1B6.16018@newsfe21.ams2>, Terry Casey wrote:
> STB makers and pay-TV platforms are considering legal action against the 
> European Commission after a tax ruling left many of them facing millions 
> of pounds in unexpected costs. Basic set-top boxes, which are classified 
> as communications devices, are exempt from tax when imported into the 
> European Union. But a change to the rules last month means any box with 
> a hard disc drive or Ethernet connection will be treated as a recording 
> device, which is liable for tax at 13.9 per cent.

I can understand why the inclusion of a recording medium could justify 
calling it a recording device - but an ethernet connection? Near me as I 
type this are a broadband router and a printer which both have ethernet 
connections, but neither is capable of recording anything.

Rod.

On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 10:48:38 +0100, Roderick Stewart
 wrote:

>In article <noU7k.95528$1B6.16018@newsfe21.ams2>, Terry Casey wrote:
>> STB makers and pay-TV platforms are considering legal action against the 
>> European Commission after a tax ruling left many of them facing millions 
>> of pounds in unexpected costs. Basic set-top boxes, which are classified 
>> as communications devices, are exempt from tax when imported into the 
>> European Union. But a change to the rules last month means any box with 
>> a hard disc drive or Ethernet connection will be treated as a recording 
>> device, which is liable for tax at 13.9 per cent.
>
>I can understand why the inclusion of a recording medium could justify 
>calling it a recording device - but an ethernet connection? Near me as I 
>type this are a broadband router and a printer which both have ethernet 
>connections, but neither is capable of recording anything.
>

Really? What is a printer for if not for recording data?

Bill Wright wrote:

> Curiously, the result of imposing import tariffs would be to deprive the 
> underpaid workers of the far east of work and income. I can't see how you 
> can square that with your communist leanings.

Communist? Moi? I don't think so. I'm about as right-wing as it gets 
this side of civilised.

"Silk"  wrote in message 
news:g3rd71$u3b$1@registered.motzarella.org...
> Bill Wright wrote:
>
>> Curiously, the result of imposing import tariffs would be to deprive the 
>> underpaid workers of the far east of work and income. I can't see how you 
>> can square that with your communist leanings.
>
> Communist? Moi? I don't think so. I'm about as right-wing as it gets this 
> side of civilised.

Well I'm glad to hear it.

Bill

In article ,  wrote:
> >> STB makers and pay-TV platforms are considering legal action against the 
> >> European Commission after a tax ruling left many of them facing millions 
> >> of pounds in unexpected costs. Basic set-top boxes, which are classified 
> >> as communications devices, are exempt from tax when imported into the 
> >> European Union. But a change to the rules last month means any box with 
> >> a hard disc drive or Ethernet connection will be treated as a recording 
> >> device, which is liable for tax at 13.9 per cent.
> >
> >I can understand why the inclusion of a recording medium could justify 
> >calling it a recording device - but an ethernet connection? Near me as I 
> >type this are a broadband router and a printer which both have ethernet 
> >connections, but neither is capable of recording anything.
> >
> 
> Really? What is a printer for if not for recording data?

Mine doesn't record television programmes terribly well.

Rod.

>>
>> Really? What is a printer for if not for recording data?
>
> Mine doesn't record television programmes terribly well.
>
> Rod.
>


Couldn't you just print a hex dump of the transport stream?
You could archive it in several hundred boxes in your attic per minute of 
recording.
Fot the greenies, print double-sided.

To play it back, you'd simply type them back into a file, and off you go.

Probably got a longer archive life than optical media, magnetic media or 
film!

-- 
Ron

wrote in message 
news:5rc2649r6aa3pm1obs86pj3c5akpfo0vl7@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 10:48:38 +0100, Roderick Stewart
>  wrote:
>
>>In article <noU7k.95528$1B6.16018@newsfe21.ams2>, Terry Casey wrote:
>>> STB makers and pay-TV platforms are considering legal action against the
>>> European Commission after a tax ruling left many of them facing millions
>>> of pounds in unexpected costs. Basic set-top boxes, which are classified
>>> as communications devices, are exempt from tax when imported into the
>>> European Union. But a change to the rules last month means any box with
>>> a hard disc drive or Ethernet connection will be treated as a recording
>>> device, which is liable for tax at 13.9 per cent.
>>
>>I can understand why the inclusion of a recording medium could justify
>>calling it a recording device - but an ethernet connection? Near me as I
>>type this are a broadband router and a printer which both have ethernet
>>connections, but neither is capable of recording anything.
>>
>
> Really? What is a printer for if not for recording data?

How does the ethernet connection enhance that capability?

A printer does the same job however it is connected to its host computer.

tim

Ron Lowe wrote:
> Couldn't you just print a hex dump of the transport stream?
> You could archive it in several hundred boxes in your attic per
> minute of recording. Fot the greenies, print double-sided.
>
> To play it back, you'd simply type them back into a file, and off
> you go. Probably got a longer archive life than optical media, 
> magnetic media or film!

"If it ain't on stripy green paper, it ain't backed up."

(That dates me ;-) )

André Coutanche

Terry Casey wrote:
>  From Advanced-Television.Com ...
> 
> http://www.advanced-television.com/2008/jun23_jun27.htm#t3
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> TV set-top makers to challenge EC ruling
> 
> STB makers and pay-TV platforms are considering legal action against the 
> European Commission after a tax ruling left many of them facing millions 
> of pounds in unexpected costs. Basic set-top boxes, which are classified 
> as communications devices, are exempt from tax when imported into the 
> European Union. But a change to the rules last month means any box with 
> a hard disc drive or Ethernet connection will be treated as a recording 
> device, which is liable for tax at 13.9 per cent.
> 
> A reclassification of digital video recorders such as the Sky+ box, 
> could cost BSkyB alone £15 million (E18m) a year from next month. 
> Charges covering the past three years could force the company to pay 
> another £25 million-£30 million.
> 
> Pay-TV operators including BSkyB, UPC and Sky Italia have joined 
> manufacturers including Thomson and Pace to mount a challenge.
> 
> The companies are considering an appeal to the European Court of 
> Justice, or through the World Trade Organisation. The new rules have 
> already triggered a dispute with the US trade department, which has 
> started a formal consultation
> 


This is just rubbish from Sky and the report is very misleading and 
incorrect.  The rules havn't changed, its just Sky have been abusing 
them and have been caught.

There are 2 main chapters in the EU tarif definition for consumer TV 
type goods.  Simplified;

1. Recording + receiver devices for TV
2. Receivers for TV

They both have various detailed sub-tarifs and Sky have been using a 
receiver tarif for a recorder when the recorder one is more relevent and 
accurate.

Sky or someone originally proposed a duty suspended sub-tarif for 
'digital TV receivers with modems' on the grounds that they couldn't 
source a STB with a Modem in the EU in sufficient volume. Well they 
proposed it and noone successfully objected, althought the system is a 
bit of a farce and you have to very expert in its use to even know to 
object to duty suspensions.  Sadly most companies have moved mfr to 
China leaving the UK with just banking, which as it turns out, we are 
not particularily good at,  but I digress.

They have been using this tarif 'STB with a modem' for a PVR and 
completely incorrectly, because it is cheaper and not because it is more 
accurate.  The system relies on diligence and accuracy but companies 
often try to use economics as the way to decide which tarif to use for a 
particular item.  The customs always win and their decision is final, 
and Sky will be very lucky to get away without having to back pay the 
missing duty.

--
Tony

Tony  wrote:

> There are 2 main chapters in the EU tarif definition for consumer TV 
> type goods.  Simplified;
> 
> 1. Recording + receiver devices for TV
> 2. Receivers for TV

3. Recorders that act as receivers until the user pays more money.

-- 
Alan Pemberton
Sheffield, South Yorkshire, England
To e-mail me directly, please visit
<http://www.pembers.freeserve.co.uk/index.html#Mail-me>