Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Canada Music Piracy Your Rights Online

Canada No Pirate Nation: Global Leader In Music Download Sales 179

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the secret-is-also-being-leader-in-eh dept.
An anonymous reader writes "The IFPI, the global recording industry association, recently released its Recording Industry in Numbers 2012, which provides detailed sales data from countries around the world. While CRIA talks about 'rebuilding the marketplace,' the industry's own data indicates that Canada already stands among the global leaders in digital music sales. Michael Geist digs into the data and finds that Canadians purchased more single track downloads than Germany or Japan, and more than double the sales in France, despite the fact that each of those countries has far larger populations. In fact, Canadian sales were larger than all the sales from Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Finland, France, Greece, Ireland, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden combined. Not only is the Canadian digital market far larger than virtually every European market, it continues to grow faster than the U.S. digital music market as well. In fact, the Canadian digital music market has grown faster than the U.S. market for the past six consecutive years."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Canada No Pirate Nation: Global Leader In Music Download Sales

Comments Filter:
  • by tiffany352 (2485630) on Wednesday June 06, 2012 @10:55AM (#40232443)
    And the recording industry is still hungry for money.
  • by mrclisdue (1321513) on Wednesday June 06, 2012 @10:58AM (#40232485)

    As a Canadian, I think I can speak for the country when I say that the reason we're a global leader in music download sales is that we feel so damn guilty for pirating all that stuff that we make amends by buying it.

    Plus, how else can we push Justin Bieber to the top? Don't tell me non-canucks actually purchase his stuff, too?

    We're just so damn polite. Sorry for the cuss words.

    cheers,

    cheers,

    • by Mashiki (184564)

      Hey...
      FUCK YOU!

      Nah I'm sorry man...it just slipped out. I just got back from Toronto. Oh man...Toronto !@*(!.

  • Where in TFA is it suggested that this has anything to do with a lack of piracy?
    • by CCarrot (1562079)

      Where in TFA is it suggested that this has anything to do with a lack of piracy?

      Good point. Maybe we just need lots of indoor entertainment for, like, 8 months of the year or something like that...more than we could handily pirate :)

      Arrr...eh!

    • Re:Title? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by JMJimmy (2036122) on Wednesday June 06, 2012 @11:12AM (#40232693)

      Piracy = increased sales? Canadians are one of the few who are protected under the law and can download as much pirated product as they like. The studies suggest that piracy leads to more purchases of the same type of material (music, movies, etc) so it can be true that we both pirate and purchase at the same time.

      • Re:Title? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by tnk1 (899206) on Wednesday June 06, 2012 @11:17AM (#40232777)

        I know people who pirated movies or video games the first time that were there on opening day to buy the sequels. People will support what they know is awesome because they want it to continue and they know that it will not continue if the makers can't feed their families and pay mortgages.

        They have rather less interest in keeping rich executives rich. Or for that matter, even in keeping rich artists rich.

      • Re:Title? (Score:4, Informative)

        by anyGould (1295481) on Wednesday June 06, 2012 @11:29AM (#40232973)

        Piracy = increased sales? Canadians are one of the few who are protected under the law and can download as much pirated product as they like. The studies suggest that piracy leads to more purchases of the same type of material (music, movies, etc) so it can be true that we both pirate and purchase at the same time.

        Bear in mind we're "protected" because we pay a levy on blank media - effectively it's impossible for a Canadian to "illegally download" material because we've already paid for it when we bought the hard drive.

        IP enforcement in Canada chases after the seeders, because that part is still illegal.

        I'd account a fair bit of the sales increase to people ditching cable - between iTunes and Netflix, I can watch every show I want for substantially less than what cable would be. (I still get my internet and phone through the cable company because I loathe Telus with a fiery passion, so the cable company is content.)

        • Re:Title? (Score:5, Informative)

          by dubbreak (623656) on Wednesday June 06, 2012 @12:35PM (#40234007)

          IP enforcement in Canada chases after the seeders, because that part is still illegal.

          Citation needed. Have you heard about any uploading cases in the last 5-8 years?

          Seems like the prolific US propaganda and lobbying on the subject has skewed your view (as with many Canadians). A precedent was set saying it was not illegal (BMG Canada Inc. v. JohnDoe [wikipedia.org]). The appeal (which passed) stated that the legality still needs to be decided in court. To my knowledge it hasn't been tested yet (most likely due to the current legislation giving it a chance to go through as legal).

          The Royal Canadian Mounted police's policy is: "Piracy for personal use is no longer targeted".

          We covered this quickly in a law class (back in 2007) and the current state then was "not illegal". In order to make it illegal would require a risky court case (which I haven't heard of to date) or legislation (which the RIAA keeps trying to push in Canada and the Conservatives address periodically).

          In conclusion: you have no excuse to be a leecher. Start seeding like the rest of us ;).

          • by anyGould (1295481)

            IP enforcement in Canada chases after the seeders, because that part is still illegal.

            Citation needed. Have you heard about any uploading cases in the last 5-8 years?

            Only anecdotal - my parent's got a nastygram from their ISP listing the various movies that a houseguest was torrenting. Nothing came of it (other than the houseguest losing internet privileges), but it tells me that someone is still paying attention.

            Now, I don't personally worry too much (if only because I tend to torrent obscure things that no-one cares about, and as you mention, seeding is polite and leeching sucks), but it's worth taking note of.

            • Was the nasty gram from RIAA? I got one of those while working as a sys-admin in Germany. A quick "we are not in the US so suck it" usually is sufficient to deal with those.

              • by anyGould (1295481)

                As I understood it, it was from the ISP directly. It listed the files it had detected being shared, along with a bunch of scary text about how she could be liable for this, that, and the other. I never saw the full letter (I did most of the explaining over the phone).

            • by dubbreak (623656)
              Those are meaningless threats. They are never followed through on the the better ISPs won't even bother forwarding them to the customer. Basically it's more propaganda.
              • by anyGould (1295481)

                Those are meaningless threats. They are never followed through on the the better ISPs won't even bother forwarding them to the customer. Basically it's more propaganda.

                Perhaps, but it will still do a good job of scaring people who don't know better. Remember, there's a reason so many people settle out of court on these things.

            • That would be because the levy on media is for music only. Movies, games, software, books etc.. do not fall under the blank media levy, and are still very much illegal.

            • by Xeno man (1614779)
              I've gotten a few of those. They are pretty meaningless. What happens is MGM or some studio tracks a popular torrent of some movie they own the rights to. All you can get from a torrent though is the IP address of other people sharing it. You can trace an IP address to the ISP but that is about it, so MGM sends a letter off you all the ISPs saying their users are hosting their content illegally. Now being in Canada and not the US, we play by a different rule book and frankly, ISP don't answer to movie studi
          • by JMJimmy (2036122)

            The original decision made it clear that downloading and seeding does not constitute authorization of infringement. That's not to say it protects those who engage in infringement and then distribute. ie: If I place a song I own in a shared folder that's not infringement, but if I do the same thing with something I do not own then the law doesn't protect me. The kicker here (and why it's not often pursued) is that the burden of proof is on the plaintiff to show how the material was obtained. If I downlo

            • by dubbreak (623656)
              Good point. And as the law currently stands we are still allowed to rip our own CDs (something the RIAA and Conservatives were trying to stop), so showing up to court with CDs that contain the tracks in question should be enough of a defence. Actually, since borrowing and copying a work is still OK under fair dealing (to the best of my knowledge.. it's basically the same as taping a friend's LP which was protected), showing up with a burned CD (claiming it was the source) should suffice as well. But don't q
              • by JMJimmy (2036122)

                You are correct you do not have to provide proof of ownership or even have ownership, it's all about the intent to distribute / authorization of infringement.

                The ads/restrictions on what operations I can perform/etc are the reason I pirate. I still have a legally purchased DVD collection of over 1200 titles but in each case is a burned copy with that crap stripped out and I previewed just about everyone (either via rental or pirating) prior to purchase.

        • No. Do not promulgate this.

          Downloading is 'legal' because there is no law against it. That levy protects you from nothing, as the bills the current Government have shown. If that law gets passed, your levy defense won't hold water.

          I've said this in response to every comment like yours for years for exactly this reason. Do not complacently think that you get anything out of the levy other than an empty pocket. Most of that money you pay doesn't even go to the artists that distribute it. In fact, last I heard

          • by anyGould (1295481)

            Well, more strictly it's legal because the government and courts can't quite get on the same page.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_sharing_in_Canada

            has the bloody history, and while the '04-05 ruling isn't valid, it's still a pretty good indicator that Canadian courts don't (currently) consider torrenting illegal in and of itself. (As always, I'm not a lawyer, you probably aren't either, etc, etc, etc.)

            I'll agree the levy didn't do much for musicians, but I never expected it to. (My understanding was that

      • by willy_me (212994)

        Canadians face similar limitations when it comes to sharing music that other nations do. For example, it is illegal to share music covered by copywrite. While I believe the receiver is not considered to be at fault, the sender is. Those using bittorrent are just as guilty in Canada as they are in the US.

        Also, the recent reports of Canada being a haven for pirated media are BS. It's a political game where the recording industries are trying to make it look like Canada needs tougher laws. Last I heard

        • by JMJimmy (2036122)

          Canadians face similar limitations when it comes to sharing music that other nations do. For example, it is illegal to share music covered by copywrite. While I believe the receiver is not considered to be at fault, the sender is. Those using bittorrent are just as guilty in Canada as they are in the US.

          First, it's copyright. Second no they don't. In the above linked court decision the judge equated placing copyrighted music in a publicly shared folder (specifically citing P2P) is the equivalent of a library placing a photocopier in a room full of copyrighted books. The library is not authorizing you to copy a book, if you do that's on you. However, if you do copy something digital from a P2P network (or any other source) you have no way of knowing if the source is a legal one or not so you cannot be h

        • by CCarrot (1562079)

          It's almost like the question of legalizing marijuana. If left illegal it becomes a gateway drug and connects people with those who distribute drugs that are actually harmful. If legal, most people would never connect with the dealers of harmful drugs. Same with piracy - provide easy access to legit media and most will never visit the pirate bay.

          While there are several errors in your post, this one hits the mark. This makes sense, from personal observation.

          I am neither here nor there regarding legalizing pot: I'll let others debate that point to death. The fact that media companies are cutting their own throats by driving customers to the pirate sites in droves due to the severe dearth of legal, flexible, timely, cost effective and user-friendly alternatives is something I see quite regularly. Non-techie family, friends and colleagues are often

      • by mcgrew (92797) *

        Piracy = increased sales?

        A couple of years ago (I wish I could find the link) a book publisher wanted to know how much piracy was costing him, so he commissioned a study to find out. Since books don't hit the internet for a few weeks after it goes on sale, the researchers watched sales figures from the time of release to a point after the book hit the net. The researchers and publisher were astounded that rather than a drop in sales, there was actually a sales spike! Having it on the net, they hypothesized,

    • According to the report the United States and the U.K. are number 1 and 2 on the list. Canada is number 3. Considering the shared culture between the UK, USA, and Canada it is not surprising that customers in these countries behave the same.
  • I still by CDs and DVD-Audio discs because I want to rip the files into a lossless format. Plus I still listen to entire albums from start to finish. I guess I'm just old school at the ripe old age of 33.

    • by rrohbeck (944847)

      Ha, at 33 I still bought CDs too. Now I'm past that

      • by cpu6502 (1960974)

        I buy CDs too (not the individual albums, but the Greatest Hits collection). I rarely listen to them. Buying the disc is simply my method of (1) supporting the artist, engineer, musician, etc and (2) backingup my songs in a non-erasing format.

    • by CCarrot (1562079)

      I still by CDs and DVD-Audio discs...

      Oh, are you'se the b'y? :)

    • I listen to entire albums from start to finish, too, and I haven't burned a music CD in at least a year (and that wasn't even for me, but for a friend to listen to in his car)...I'm still 1/4 of the way through the 50 CD spindle I bought back in like 2007. It's been even longer for DVD-R's.

      I don't think I'm even going to bother putting an optical drive in my next PC build. Seems like there's no point anymore.

    • by mcgrew (92797) *

      You're only in the minority because most people don't have good enough speakers to tell the difference between am MP3 and a WAV. Especially when many of the CDs are mastered so badly.

      As to listening to albums from start to finish, that is old school. Note that a lot of the older (from the analog age) music is meant to be listened to an LP side at a time, rather than the whole CD at once. Someone here once complained that "Money" didn't fit the "Dark Side of the Moon" CD, well, it isn't suposed to. There's s

    • by CCarrot (1562079)

      I still by CDs and DVD-Audio discs because I want to rip the files into a lossless format. Plus I still listen to entire albums from start to finish. I guess I'm just old school at the ripe old age of 33.

      I buy CDs when I go to live performances (I pretty much get one of each they have for sale, if I don't have it already...and sometimes even if I do :). That's all to support artists I love, otherwise why would I be at their shows? Also, I *believe* that a larger cut of live show sales goes to the artist, less (or hopefully none?) to those damned RIAA leeches. (Can anybody verify this for me? I've never been able to find a definitive answer to this question...)

      Other than that, I only buy CDs from used mu

    • Many independant artists will sell you wav or flac versions of their songs directly off their website. If you want to "preserve" them, BURN them. Or for cheaper, just copy it to 3 different hard drives. CD's are about $0.50/GB ($1 in Canada due to the damn levy), HDD's are about $0.15/GB
  • Not that the RIAA and their siblings ever would let facts get in their way. Most of the piracy discussion resolved around protecting existing (but somewhat outdated) business models and increasing the power over the consumer.
  • by Das Auge (597142) on Wednesday June 06, 2012 @11:03AM (#40232569)
    So you mean that if you respect the privacy of your citizens (Canada has the best privacy laws in the world) and don't treat them like criminals...that they won't generally act like criminals?

    I'm freakin' shocked.
    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      If Vic Toews has his way all of this will change very soon.

  • "The Canadian music market is being destroyed by downloads!" (And oh by they way we're the global leader in sales.)

  • Pay to download the music and they pay a surcharge on the media to burn it to.

    BTW Maybe people in the rest of the world would pirate less if there were legal ways to download and pay, I don't think Amazon's mp3 store is accessible in other countries.

  • by vlm (69642) on Wednesday June 06, 2012 @11:17AM (#40232779)

    I predict a epic fail. Lots of discussion about morality and ethics of downloading / sharing by country, no discussion about availability in the marketplace.

    A lot more chopsticks are sold in .jp and .cn than in .se or .fr. That doesn't mean the people in .jp rarely pirate chopsticks and everyone in .fr prints stolen 3-d printer copies of chopsticks or relies on gray market imported chopsticks. I'm guessing that most of the online available music appeals to .us and by extension (since their govt is just a lapdog of the us, etc etc) the music appeals to .ca. On the other hand Garth Brooks and the Dixie Chix don't sell so well in Paris.

  • by CCarrot (1562079) on Wednesday June 06, 2012 @11:18AM (#40232787)

    Well now, perhaps studies like this will help motivate the other large US music sellers (Amazon, Google) to get off their collective asses and start porting their services to Canada. Have been (not so) patiently waiting for this for, what, five years now?

    I am no fan of Apple, but right now that's the only large-scale digital music purchase option available to Canada...at least they provide iTunes cards so I don't have to, you know, enter any real personal information for an iTunes account. The interface and bloatiness still sucks, though, and I'd hop on Amazon or Google in a heartbeat (well, once my current credits are used up).

    • What about DirecTV?

      • by CCarrot (1562079)

        What about DirecTV?

        ?
        a) DirecTV is a satellite TV provider, not anything you can actually purchase content from, just rent it. And,
        b) it's apparently not available in Canada, according to their own website [directv.com].

        • I hear the Canadians have hacked it whilst smoking something called BC Bub or Club or something.

          • by CCarrot (1562079)

            I hear the Canadians have hacked it whilst smoking something called BC Bub or Club or something.

            Oh, well, possibly, I wouldn't know.

            I'm too busy griping about the lack of legal alternatives to iTunes, ones with widely varied selections and the great ease-of-use factor, like Amazon or Google Music.

            Puretracks is okay, with a pretty decent selection, but the convenience factor just isn't there yet, like it is (for 'mericans at least) with Amazon or Google. If Puretracks had an app that let me browse and buy on my phone...

            • I dunno too much about iPhones, but can't you jailbreak one of those and/or root an Android and get what you want? If not I think there are some bittorent clients for Android at least. I'm pretty sure there is also a proxy for rooted Androids as well since there isn't legal alternatives. I normally buy the CD and go from there anyhow. It just seems like a better deal.

              If you fight piracy that hard then all you will have are pirates.

  • Canada, Canada... I don't think that we properly understand each other.

    It's not about the money anymore, it's too late for your damn sales figures. It's about respect.

    You always were one of our top earners, kid; but that wasn't good enough for you. You had to go mouthing off against the MAFIAA, against the family...
  • Must be because of our strong Canadian laws against piracy and strict enforcement against - oh wait...
  • by rrossman2 (844318) on Wednesday June 06, 2012 @11:23AM (#40232865)

    Since apparently the legit digital market is growing leaps and bounds, would it be a good time to suggest repealing any CD-R and SD type card taxes the CRIA managed to get passed into law? It only seems fair and makes sense to me.

  • Lol - Noobs.

    That's all.

  • I don't understand the headline.

    How does the fact that Canada is a global leader in music sales imply that they are not a "pirate nation"? Has any credible study shown that one would expect that to be the case? The studies and surveys that come to mind all indicate that those who pirate the most media also spend the most...
  • Well..of course they are! After all...someone has to buy it to be able to put it on the net for everyone else to download!!

  • by brit74 (831798) on Wednesday June 06, 2012 @01:10PM (#40234465)
    When I first read the summary, a red flag went off for me - and it was the fact that we're *only* talking about digital sales - and even worse, the summary talks about one subcategory of digital sales: "single track downloads". The summary seems to have ignored physical sales of music and whole album digital sales. My first thought was to question how the Canadian balance of physical to digital sales differed from other nations.

    Also, talking about how the Candian digital sales is growing faster (percentage-wise) than the US could also be a red herring if the Canadian market for digital sales was very low five years ago. (Example: if you start with 10,000 digital sales per year five years ago, you can get 100% growth each year and still have lower overall digital sales than a country that was selling 1,000,000 sales five years ago and had 10% growth each year.) In fact, the MichaelGeist information confirms that this is what happened - i.e. that the Canadians digital sales numbers started much lower - when he says "Canada seems likely to pass the U.S. on per capita single track downloads in about 18 months". So, the chart Michael Geist produces showing six years of faster-than-US sales growth in "single track downloads" is really a chart showing that Canada is still playing catch-up. Also, I wonder how "single track downloads" differs from "digital sales" in general.

    According to the Norway sample data (http://www.ifpi.org/content/library/RIN-samplepage-2012.pdf), digital sales account for 45% of total revenue and "single track downloads" accounts for 18% of digital sales. This means in Norway that "single track downloads" accounts for only 8.1% of revenue. This also raises a red-flag for me because it makes me think that "single track downloads" was a subcategory that Geist could seize on to paint a rosy picture, even if the total picture was different.

    I've also noticed that a lot of comments on the Slashdot thread seem to think we're talking about "total sales" when were talking only about one component of music sales: "digital music sales" or "single track downloads".

    As much as I hate when the music industry spins numbers (for example, assuming that one act of piracy equals one lost sale to calculate the amount of money lost to piracy), we should also acknowledge that the pro-piracy crowd spins their numbers as well. I'd look at the actual numbers, but the entire report is only available if you pay.
  • I'd like to know who. I literally do not no a single person that has bought a signal song electronically. At the moment I have ~20k songs in my iTunes collection and I'm a relatively light user compared to my friends. Rot in hell CRIA.

  • It has to do with all that stuff they smoke up there.

  • I was quite surprised when I learned last month that Amazon doesn't have an MP3 store for Canada.

  • Canada does not have the same copyright laws as the US. We have a right to preview media. We use downloads to do that instead of going to stores.

    And surprise, surprise: The more media you preview, the more you're likely to buy.

    But the RIAA and MPAA will keep screaming about "lost sales" until they finally die an ignoble death rather than face up to the fact that they should encourage previewing/piracy to boost sales, not scream and cry about it like spoiled children.

  • They make the Wi-fi connections easier.

"Atomic batteries to power, turbines to speed." -- Robin, The Boy Wonder

Working...