http://www.geek.com/news/germany-increases-usb-flash-drive-t...
On the other hand one might not agree to offsetting costs from legal copying and use the tax as an excuse for piracy anyway.
Furthermore, I don't even agree with offsetting costs from illegal copying (since there are no provable costs), hence my moral interpretation of the tax.
The storage device is where the copy of the copyrighted media resides. The CPU, speakers, headphones, video display, RAM, etc. are all transitory in their involvement of piracy; but the hard drive/USB stick is "where" the violation is taking place.
Again, devil's advocate here! This is mostly a thought exercise.
Related: http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/entry/23
Related: http://www.alrc.gov.au/publications/issues-paper/caching-ind... http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:_5znwT8... http://www.alrc.gov.au/publications/issues-paper/caching-ind... http://www.pcworld.com/article/2036961/belgian-isps-sued-for...
Should the electric utility also be involved, they provide electricity which is used for piracy. How about the makers of the CPU, the motherboard maker, the storage vendors?
Should the builders of roads be responsible for people speeding on it, how about car makers making cars that go above the speed limit should they be responsible?
As an individual I do have a moral right to pay for the digital media I consume so that new media will be produced and other people will not have to pay for my consumption.