U.K. Court: PS2 Not a Computer

[StefanS]

Chadwick essentially said 'We know you were trying to circumvent our tariffs, we already ruled that you can't do that, and now you're wasting the appeal court's time because you apparently think the previous Judge is an idiot. He's not, I'm not, and you aren't getting a refund nor can you appeal this any further.'

I bet he said that in the same tone as the French guy from the Monty Python's "The Holy Grail"

 

[Nite_Hawk]

Yeah, sounds pretty harsh to me. I don't disagree with the Judge's decision, but I think Sony had a reasonably legitimate case for claiming the PS2 is a computer in addition to a console. In terms of hardware It's as much a computer as any diskless thin-client is.

What would make me exceedingly happy is if this ruling could be used to label devices which let you browse the web, email, write papers, play games, etc but restrict what applications you run via DRM to be labelled as non-computers. They don't after all, allow you to program them, but only run programs that someone else programmed much like consoles.

Nite_Hawk

 

[Arwin]

I think in this case, Sony should maybe try a different law-firm.

 

[DemoCoder]

Why are there tariffs in the first place on the PS2? Now that sounds stupid to me.

Most people don't buy personal computers to program them, the vast majority of people don't. They buy them to run pre-written software. End-user programmability is not what defines a device to be a computer.

This is nothing more than a case of bureaucracy with one organization trying to avoid fees, and the other one trying to collect, and of course anti-Sony biased people to raise hell. IMHO, tariffs on video game consoles is dumb. I'm read somewhere that the EU finally saw how stupid it is and eliminated the tariff, making this court ruling moot right now.

 

[Acert93]

There is not a technical argument to be had here. Every console is a computer, there are computers all around you embedded in umpteen devices. Too many people seem to read "PC" wherever they see "computer", but computer is an umbrella term that takes in anything that..well..computes.

The issue addressed here was purely a tax classification one, probably based on use cases, intended purpose etc. That has little to do with a technical classification.

Yeah, I think their original law was intended toward use. Computers were exempt due to their use. The term computer can be used in many ways. One could argue many different electronic devices (robust calculators, smart phones, PDAs, some watches, etc) are indeed computers. But I believe how they were define a computer was not as such, and it was in contrast to these and other entertainment devices. I don't know how it is in the EU, but rarely would someone refer to a console, PDA, etc as a computer. Computer is pretty typically slang for a personal PC that is used business and home computer needs as primary use. Although with the advent of email and web browsing, and convergence these distinctions are blurring as PCs become more robust and workload shifts and devices like consoles take on more media tasks.

 

[RancidLunchmeat]

Why are there tariffs in the first place on the PS2? Now that sounds stupid to me.

Actually, I think you should probably be asking the opposite question.

Why weren't there tariffs on computers?

I would imagine the real issue isn't that the PS2 got an 'extra' tax, but rather that computers received a 'tax break'. There was probably a very good reason behind the computer tax break (spur economy, education, etc..) and those reasons don't apply to the PS2.

Maybe I have it backwards, and you've actually gotten it correct, DC. But from what I've read it appears the PS2 was trying to get a tax break they didn't qualify for.. either by the word or the spirit of the law.

This is nothing more than a case of bureaucracy with one organization trying to avoid fees, and the other one trying to collect, and of course anti-Sony biased people to raise hell.

I was with you up until the last part. I don't see what any of this has to do with anti-Sony bias.

IMHO, tariffs on video game consoles is dumb. I'm read somewhere that the EU finally saw how stupid it is and eliminated the tariff, making this court ruling moot right now.

Funny, that's not what the ruling actually says.

In the present context the relevant CN sub-headings in relation to the Sony PlayStation2 are 8471 10 00 (automatic data processing machines) and 9504 10 00 (video games of a kind used with a television receiver). Since 1 January 2004 the tariff classification as between those two sub-headings has been of little or no practical importance because the duty levied on goods classified under each has been zero.

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2006/772.html

What it says is that since Jan 1, 2004, they haven't levied any taxes on those classifications.. not that it has been completely eliminated.. more like, suspended.

 

[Simon F]

Most people don't buy personal computers to program them, the vast majority of people don't. They buy them to run pre-written software. End-user programmability is not what defines a device to be a computer.

It's surely the difference between a tool and a toy.

 

[Rodéric]

Bah...
A toy is meant to be played with, a tool is meant to produce or help produce a product, clearly the PS2 is a toy...

So much noise over such a trivial thing...

 

[DemoCoder]

What it says is that since Jan 1, 2004, they haven't levied any taxes on those classifications.. not that it has been completely eliminated.. more like, suspended.

That's why my message says "moot right now" and not "moot"

I think trade tariffs on toys are silly too. But then again, I think protectionism is dumb. What industry is the EU protecting? A native home grown European "console"? It seems silly to slap a tariff on a product for which there is no direct domestic competitor equivalent. Man, if it weren't for tariffs on XBOXs, PS2s, and GameCubes, those EU-invented consoles would be out of business! Thank god for tariffs.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

competitor equivalent. Man, if it weren't for tariffs on XBOXs, PS2s, and GameCubes, those EU-invented consoles would be out of business! Thank god for tariffs.

It's only those tariffs that kept the Gizmondo (RIP) alive as long as it was...

 

[Andy]

I'd say the one of the keywords in the dictionary definition is programmable - under normal circumastances, to the end user, its not a programmable device; a PS2 dev kit is a programmable device (but thats also a different product).

You can buy Linux kit for PS2, therefor it is a programmable device.

 

[Rodéric]

That's why my message says "moot right now" and not "moot"

I think trade tariffs on toys are silly too. But then again, I think protectionism is dumb. What industry is the EU protecting? A native home grown European "console"? It seems silly to slap a tariff on a product for which there is no direct domestic competitor equivalent. Man, if it weren't for tariffs on XBOXs, PS2s, and GameCubes, those EU-invented consoles would be out of business! Thank god for tariffs.

Not sure but I think the EU is considering that tools are more important than toys. Basically toys are luxury, but tools are a necessity, hence the difference in tax.

 

[Arwin]

You can buy Linux kit for PS2, therefor it is a programmable device.

Not only that, but at least in Europe you got Yabasic on its demo disc. All PS2s sold had this, don't know if it's still there though. I even made a site with programming references and a basic programming tutorial. You could use most USB keyboards with it too.

I think that the tax break basically was to stimulate people to have a PC, as this was perceived to increase the value of the European workforce. Or probably it was something like that. The playstation, at any rate, didn't qualify, though it easily could have had they made half an effort to include a few more business like applications for it.

The PS3 under current circumstances would have classified with its browser and Linux, but as said it's a moot point now.

 

[Dave Baumann]

I would imagine the basis for "importance" would stem from the notion of protecting business - "computers" are a necessary tool for business, hence they wouldn't want to overly tax those, thus increasing the cost for businesses.

 

[compres]

I can't believe any of you would defend sony in this case. Everyone and their grandpa knows the Play Station 2 is a game console, and everyone knows sony is after the cash.

I have to agree with the european authorities here.

 

[RancidLunchmeat]

I would imagine the basis for "importance" would stem from the notion of protecting business - "computers" are a necessary tool for business, hence they wouldn't want to overly tax those, thus increasing the cost for businesses.

Agreed.

I don't think it was a case of Sony getting hit with an unfair or extra tax. Rather, it was a case of computers getting a tax exemption because of their perceived importance to business/the economy.

Then again, I agree with DC's idea of protectionist tariffs. But I really have a feeling that most of these 'tariffs' are simply revenue generating taxes that have very little to do with actual protectionism.

 

[DemoCoder]

Exactly Rancid. It's like the Spanish War tax in the US. Once the government finds a source of revenue, they don't want to easily give it up, lest they have to raise taxes elsewhere which would be bad for them in an election year!

 

[RancidLunchmeat]

Sure enough. Which is why these tariffs have been 'suspended' rather than removed. It's also the reason why it's interesting as to why they were suspended at all.

I spent quite some time searching around yesterday looking for the ruling (I found the # but the language), to see why they decided to remove the tariffs on 9504100000 (Video game consoles connecting to a tv monitor), but couldn't find the explanation.

It's regulation number 1789/03, which was a "Modification", effective "01/01/2004" Published in Journal "L 281" on Oct 30, 2003 in page 0001.

But I can't figure out where to find the journal to see their reasoning for suspending the tariff.

 

[Andy]

I can't believe any of you would defend sony in this case. Everyone and their grandpa knows the Play Station 2 is a game console, and everyone knows sony is after the cash.

I have to agree with the european authorities here.

It's not about defending Sony, If Microsoft, Nintendo or whoever else were in court for the same reason, I would say fair enough. They were trying to get the title of PS2 changed to a "digital processing unit" which it certainly is, so is a Gamecube, XBox and even a pocket calculator, so I fail to see why you can't believe some people would find this unjust.

 

[TrungGap]

Distressing ... hmm. If Linux is on this machine, great! It will be a better machine than I currently have. Right now, I have a 256mb XP 1800+ with a 9600 Pro 128mb card, a 40Gb harddrive, and 2 USB 1.1 ports as my best machine. The PS3 would be a step up, and I would be able to use it for a lot of the things I typically do with my PC.

Off Topic: Hmm, time to upgrade? I just brought Dell PC - Intel dual core 3.2Ghz, 1GB Ram, 250GB HDD, dual layer burner, WinXP MCE w/ remote, ATI X300 (pretty much a throw away) for $605. I'm sure this setup will be a lot more useful for you than a PS3...Linux on 256MB is pretty crappy if you ask me, unless you planning to use it as simple server (256MB is barely usable with MySQL).

On Topic: In California, we have luxury taxes on expensive cars...The that tax was designed to tax car, but a classification of car in which they deemed excessive. In the caes of taxing on gaming console vs computer, it's pretty clear they want to tax products that people are willing to buy without impacting business and creating hardship. While, it's understandable for Sony trying contest this, but that's pretty lame that they wasting tax payers' money by bring this to court over and over again.