Most File Sharers Would Pay For Legal Downloads 370
An anonymous reader writes "Two separate studies from Australia and Holland give the lie to corporate entertainment industry claims that file sharers are unprincipled thieves out to rob the honest but harshly treated movie and music studios. Over in Oz, news.com.au reports, 'Most people who illegally download movies, music and TV shows would pay for them if there was a cheap and legal service as convenient as file-sharing tools like BitTorrent.' And from the EU, 'Turnover in the recorded music industry is in decline, but only part of this decline can be attributed to file sharing,' says Legal, Economic and Cultural Aspects of File Sharing, an academic study, which also states, 'Conversely, only a small fraction of the content exchanged through file sharing networks comes at the expense of industry turnover. This renders the overall welfare effects of file sharing robustly positive.'"
Oh, so true (Score:5, Insightful)
But what really ticks me off is when people actually prevent me from willingly parting with my own money due to geography. There was a show on the SciFi channel recently, Defying Gravity [wikipedia.org]. It wasn't exactly the greatest bit of science fiction out there, but I like Ron Livingston, the acting was generally decent, the story was compelling, and on the whole, the show was entertaining. About halfway through the season, ABC cancelled the show. But Canadian and Australian networks continued to show it. You could buy the episodes online via Amazon's video page, but after the ABC cancellation, you could only buy the first half of the show. WTF? I fired up BitTorrent for the first time.
While I'm at it, let me say: region coding for DVDs is a gigantic anti-competitive crock of shit. Fortunately, I have me a region 2 DVD-R, a Linux machine, and Handbrake, so that I can actually pay for and watch good television from another English-speaking country.
Re:How Cheap? (Score:2, Insightful)
It's beyond convenience (Score:5, Insightful)
I periodically try to buy media from some service that is trying to sell it to me. Invariably, their DRM doesn't run on my platform, and I give up.
Didn't Apple demonstrate this already? (Score:4, Insightful)
So they say... (Score:5, Insightful)
Should be titled:
Most File Sharers Hypothetically Say They Would Pay For Legal Downloads
What people say in surveys and what they do when there is actual money in play are two different things. What is "cheap"? And what pay service could possibly be as convenient as BitTorrent? If you have to log in and provide payment information, it's already not as convenient.
Anyway, I wouldn't extrapolate too much from that survey.
Uh-huh. I believe them. (Score:2, Insightful)
That's why people illegally download things that they CAN legally download.
Seriously, how many people are going to say "No, I wouldn't do it legally even if it was cheap enough!"
Two anecdotes (Score:3, Insightful)
I remember back in the 90s before filesharing became popular, I read an article by an expert predicting the demise of the recording industry within the next decade. It was so full of corruption (ie everyone trying to get their 'share', even at the abuse of the artists or the company, much like, say, Bear Sterns) that it was going to implode within a few years. Remember at that time they were still flying high off their boost from the switch to CD format and were spending profligately.
Second anecdote, I had a friend who was working for a major recording studio at the time iTunes first came out. He said iTunes completely saved the industry. People were all terrified because they could see the collapse going on, and were thinking of changing careers (have to when there's nothing else). They didn't know what they were going to do. Then iTunes music store came out and everyone started coming back.
In other words, it is true file sharers are leeches on society who take without giving back, but they aren't the ones who caused the problems in the recording industry. The industry brought it on themselves.
LOL - Your a perfect example (Score:2, Insightful)
why?
Because there is no fixed target. For many your numbers may be too expensive, values set by greedy corporate types who eat babies.
That is why I think this survey is bunk. First off, they can feel good answering in the positive. It does not obligate them to give the feel good reply. Second, not only do you set a small dollar value on an episode you ladle it with conditions. Really, your numbers are ridiculous. I can imagine the grief you would feel if someone valued your output at such low numbers. By your logic why should software cost more than a few dollars?
Setting unrealistic requirements then complaining when they are not met does not make the other guy wrong.
Re:Uh-huh. I believe them. (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:How Cheap? (Score:5, Insightful)
Paying $2/epsiode is not cheap. I would pay $1 for an hour long show (42 minutes in reality) as long as it is commercial free..
Universal Iron rule of the Internet: Everyone would be happy to pay for X, but they're only willing to pay half of what's being asked. Songs are a buck? 50c please. Netflix is $10 a month? I'll only pay $5 a month, and only if there's a bigger selection. An iPad will be $999? Well I'd happily pay $500, and only if it isn't crippled with Apple's retard-o-platform!
It repeats itself over and over in just about all of these conversations... for just about anything people have a choice to buy, there are those that pay it, and those that don't and rationalize their decision with the concept that the price is too high and everything would be unicorns if only the price were 0.5x. And since it isn't, this establishes a platform for griping about collateral issues (usually DRM and license terms),
Laughable (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Uh-huh. I believe them. (Score:3, Insightful)
Let's go with the big one: music. You can even download, legally, for a small price, DRM free MP3s from iTunes, Amazon... etc...
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, I would. (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd love to pay for legal downloads. It'll never happen though. It's great that the iTunes store is offering generic MP3s (although lossless would be nice) ... but for $1/track? Forget it. I can buy it used for $6 and get the case, liner notes, and have it in whatever format I want. Downloadable TV? It had better be high def and MPEG4, and no commercials, and cheaper than they would ever dream of offering it. When I can buy a DVD box set for cheaper than buying a download of each individual episode, you're doing it wrong.
The content industry will simply never offer it in formats or at a price I find acceptable.
Re:How Cheap? (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm for even the price of the show on the DVD. If you sell the Seasons's DVD set for $39.95 and it has 20 episodes on it, I'll give you $1.99that for one episode in full pristine resolution and no commercials.
but they want 3X-4X for it, at low res, and full of commercials.
There is no reality in the heads of the executives. They are all a bunch of morons.
Re:LOL - Your a perfect example (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How Cheap? (Score:5, Insightful)
Paying $2/epsiode is not cheap. I would pay $1 for an hour long show (42 minutes in reality) as long as it is commercial free. IF you try to sell me commercials, forget it! 30 minute shows I would pay $.50-$.75, but again, only for a commercial free version.
What about shows that just plain aren't available? I've been following HBO's mini-series The Pacific for the last few weeks. The first episode was a freebie on their webpage. Decent quality stream and no commercials. None of the subsequent episodes were made available though.
I would happily pay for the privilege of watching this show but that isn't an option. The only way I can get it is to sign up for an insane cable package that will cost me $60-$70/mo. Fat chance of that happening. So I've turned to other avenues to see the show....
Re:So they say... (Score:5, Insightful)
over and over again it has been shown that giver a convenient method and a cheap price people will pay for the goods.
Apple has sold billions of songs, all of which could be gotten for free.
There is no correlation between the advent of bit torrent, and a decline in music sales.
If the industry put up a easy to use feed and embed advertising, they would be fine.
AS it stand right now, I'll grab a series online, watch soem episodes. If it's good, I'll get the DVD, if not I dfelete it and move on.
Just like when would listen to a tape of songs before going and purchase an album.
I had tons of 8 tracks I down^H^H^H^H copied front the air waves to listen to.
The same shit has been said since the introduction of the printing press. Seriously the exact same argument. Yet the entertainment industry is still a multi billion dollar industry, and the easiest thing to copy in the world, software, is a multi-billion dollar industry as well.
Re:How Cheap? (Score:3, Insightful)
Yet somehow they can afford to stuff that same show onto DVD's and nice fancy printed packaging for the same price. I can usually find a season of whatever show I want to buy for around $20 for a 22 episode season. Not too far off... seems like they can afford it, especially when the marginal price they're getting for the product now is $0. People always want to take the reverse view of reality. I say you should pay $$ for it so you should. Wrong, learn about the free market, supply and demand applies even if the supply is simply convenience and risk/reward.
Re:How Cheap? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:LOL - Your a perfect example (Score:4, Insightful)
If 5 million viewers were watching each episode of my tv show, I'd be pleased as punch to get $.25 for each person. You've got to have a top notch piece of entertainment to make it worth a dollar or more an hour, and frankly, most television does not meet this standard. The studios need to recognize that only their top billed shows should be $1 (at most, even for HD), and everything else should either be dirt cheap or subscription based.
So a counter-example... (Score:3, Insightful)
So let's go with a counter-example from recent experience...
"Only You" (re-recorded version) by The Flying Pickets, at Amazon UK:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Only-You-Re-recorded-Version/dp/B001LBT6S4/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1273254270&sr=1-2 [amazon.co.uk]
This is geographically right next to where I live.. save for the north sea.
But I can't buy it.
There's no Dutch Amazon, so that's out.
The Dutch 7digital doesn't have it (fwiw, neither does the American Amazon).
Granted - I haven't checked iTunes yet.. too bad I have to go through a specific piece of software to even find out.
But clearly it's not as simple as "music. You can even download, legally, for a small price, DRM free MP3s from iTunes, Amazon", as that only applies to those items actually for sale.
It -is- that simple with illegal downloads, on the other hand. No geographic restrictions, no having to set up any account, nothing.
I purchase my music, movies, etc wherever I can or typically just do without. But every once in a while, if a company decides to be boneheaded to the core, I have no qualms with downloading (heck, downloading (music/movies) is legal in NL anyway, so I shouldn't have any qualms regardless).
Re:Uh-huh. I believe them. (Score:1, Insightful)
A trip through history: (Score:5, Insightful)
What: Printing press
When: 1653..about
Who: Stationaries guild
I read an article by an expert predicting the demise of the book industry within the next decade. -
What: Player pianos
When: 1906
Who: Composers
I read an article by an expert predicting the demise of the music industry within the next decade. -
What: VCRs
When: 1970s
Who: TV industry
I read an article by an expert predicting the demise of the TV industry within the next decade. -
What: Software
When: Mid 70s, 80's, 90's, and the Naughties.
Who: Software industry
I read an article by an expert predicting the demise of the SOftware industry within the next decade. -
What: Cassettes
When: Late 70s
Who: Music Industry
I read an article by an expert predicting the demise of the Music industry within the next decade. -
They would be wise to learn from history and adopt instead of wasting money irritating consumers.
Re:Laughable (Score:4, Insightful)
> I think I would be happy buying a Lamborghini for not a penny more than $1400
Except under the conditions that you are trying to ignore in your analogy, we already get Lamborghini's for less than that price.
Big Media can't erase decades of gratis radio and TV.
Two words: DVD regions (Score:3, Insightful)
Part of the fault of this whole "downloading" mess rests on the "industry" shoulders, be it the music, movie or TV. Specifically the whole "region" concept.
Why, in this day and age, with globalization, internets and the like, do I have to wait MONTHS to catchup a TV series on my country (Portugal), after it broadcasts on the US? Why don't they just make it available straight away on iTunes, for me to *buy it*? Oh right. Because as of right now, I can't buy series or movies on iTunes Portugal, only music... Can someone explain me why?
Or why do I have to wait 6 (sometimes even more) months to get a movie on DVD, after it came out on the US? Granted, I can understand some delay related to localization costs (in the Portuguese case, only covers and subtitles, as we almost never dub movies, as the Spanish do). But even so, if I want to buy the whole English version of a movie, why can't I do it? Well, I can do it, I can order it from Amazon.com.... if I have a region 1 DVD player, of course.
In both these situations, I have two options: sit and wait months for the "region aproved" versions of the series or movies (if they ever get picked up by the local distributors, of course), or just fire up utorrent and have a Lost episode hours after it aired in the US.
My point is that I would gladly pay for DRM-free, "fresh", 0-day, English only media content. I don't mind waiting for a region 2 edition of a good movie, and buying it, and I have some original, payed-for box sets of my favorite TV shows. The problem is not exactly price. The problem is convenience. And artificial barriers. I still can't figure out why can't I buy my favorite shows on iTunes Portugal. Or why all of the sudden I can't watch The Daily Show on their website. Oh, the problem is add revenue, you say? It can't be free anymore? No problem, I would *pay* for episodes of the The Daily Show... If I had a place on the web to buy them!
The industry is still clinging to outdated business models, that don't make any sense in our age. Come on! In a few days, the Mac crowd will be able to enjoy Steam, and Valve's games! Talk about globalization and interoperability! But why can't I watch South Park or Lost or House, legally, in Portugal, after it broadcasts on the US?!
You see, the issue is not always price. My treasure can be the next man's garbage. The issue is convenience. Ever wondered why malls and big store conglomerates are so popular? Heck, ever wondered why Amazon is so popular? Convenience. When I want something, I want it in the fastest, most convenient way possible. Amazon delivers me books to my doorstep, in a matter of days. I've tried to do something similar with some "brick and mortar" stores here. Just forget about it. They told me I would have to wait for 2/3 weeks for a specific book that I wanted to order. I said to them "never mind then". I went to Amazon, and 3 days latter, I had the book. And it probably cost me a bit more than doing it locally. But I had the book *fast*, because I needed it.
So there you have it. Media industries, start to think about "costumer convenience" (this includes DRM-free stuff as well), even before the prices. If the convenience is there, even if the price is not the cheapest, the people that want it will pick it up.
Re:How Cheap? (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't be ridiculous. I agree completely that $2/episode is too much, and it has nothing to do with whining about current pricing.
It has everything to do with comparing prices with comparable purchases.
If I subscribe to cable TV I might follow 5-10 shows, along with my family members following their own favorite shows. Most shows have 20-26 episodes per season.
If I instead drop cable TV and purchase my episodes, at $2/episode x 10 shows x 4 family members x 26 episodes x 3 seasons I would be paying $6,240 per year or $520/month for the privilege on the high end, or $1,800 per year or $150/month on the low end.
That is ridiculous pricing! Clearly they are NOT pricing individual episodes at a competitive price to cable TV.
I have already canceled cable TV in my house and I watch the few shows I follow on Hulu. I would be happy to pay $1 per episode to watch without commercials and to avoid any hassle downloading or getting Hulu onto my TV screen instead of a computer monitor. I will never pay $2 per episode.
Re:Is Australia half a decade behind? (Score:2, Insightful)
Indeed. Some of us even pay for legal CDs. I do so because I'm picky about the noises that I want from a sound system which I've spent a reasonable amount of money and consideration in building, and I prefer to encode my own MP3s for my iPod.
Yes, I am guilty of making the occasional (admittedly illegal) copy of CDs I have bought, and friends of mine are equally so. But in both cases, these copies have led to further sales from those artists, so everybody (including the recording companies) has something to gain from this cross-pollination of musical ideas.
I could spend forever trawling through torrents to find feeds that are in concordance with my particular musical interests, usually spending much of my time rejecting poisoned, poorly encoded or or mislabelled files, but in practice, what is available through these channels tends to be useless to anyone whose musical tastes extend much beyond the works of Abba or the Bay City Rollers.
As far as I'm concerned, my time is better spent finding a good deal on legitimate media without the headaches.
Re:LOL - Your a perfect example (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How Cheap? (Score:5, Insightful)
I've discovered that for DVDs, I'll readily pay about $1/hour for TV that I really want to collect and save, or about $8 for a good movie that I'll watch more than once, without thinking too much about it. (Somewhat less for ephemeral stuff, but I seldom buy that at all anyway.)
But if I have to spend my time to download it, muck about with burning it to DVD if I want to save it, etc, then I expect to pay a small fraction as much, because I've done a good part of the distribution work for them, and ALL of the unit manufacturing work.
Or do they expect me to work for free?? See, that goes both ways...
pirates provide a better product (Score:3, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:LOL - Your a perfect example (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:How Cheap? (Score:3, Insightful)
Universal Iron rule of the Internet: Everyone would be happy to pay for X, but they're only willing to pay half of what's being asked. Songs are a buck? 50c please. Netflix is $10 a month? I'll only pay $5 a month, and only if there's a bigger selection.
You're not wrong. I think these surveys are worthless, because what people say they will do, and what they actually do, are very different things. There will always be an excuse.
Re:How Cheap? (Score:1, Insightful)
I already pay for a rapidshare account to grab episoded of series I like, in practice looking at how much I download I pay about 0.70-1.0 per episode since I'm not a heavy user.
I don't care who I pay, I just want one service with all the content I want for a reasonable price.
On the note of online commercial breaks- I have no problem with them on any free service except that so many sites seem to have just one add that they play at me over and over and over and over and over.
pretty soon I find myself filled with digust for whatever product is being advertized.
Please! I don't mind ads. I do mind ad - singular.
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:How Cheap? (Score:3, Insightful)
Without a Monopoly someone will always step in and offer a less expensive product to satisfy that segment of the market. The existence of a higher priced choice does not in any way negate the parent's point.
Re:People will even pay for first post (Score:4, Insightful)
And if we mod it down, the comment will have insightfully predicted this!
Epimenides is watching us and snickering somewhere.
Re:LOL - Your a perfect example (Score:3, Insightful)
Would any of those talentless hacks have demanded $1 million *pinkies* if the show only earned 25c. per showing? They're preening egomaniacs, just as much overpaid (for what they actually do) as professional sportists.
By what metric are they overpaid?
The producers were happy to pay it, the actors were happy to accept it, and the audience was happy to pay for it (by viewing the commercials, buying the DVD, or whatever).
Apparently, everyone involved in the process thought the asking price was worth paying. They were the best at what they did (making money for the network), and deserved well above average prices in the market.