Study Finds P2P Has No Effect on Legal Music Sales 294
MBrichacek writes "The Journal of Political Economy is running the results of a study into P2P file-sharing, reports Ars Technica. The study has found that, contrary to the claims of the recording industry, there is almost no effect on sales from file-sharing. Using data from several months in 2002, the researchers came to the conclusion that P2P 'affected no more than 0.7% of sales in that timeframe.' 803 million CDs were sold in 2002, according to the study, which was a decrease of about 80 million from the previous year. While the RIAA has been blaming that drop (and the drop in subsequent years) on piracy, given the volume of file-sharing that year the impact from file sharing could not have been more than 6 million albums total. Thus, 74 million unsold CDs from that year are 'without an excuse for sitting on shelves.'"
Can't Say I'm Surprised (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The Original Report (Score:5, Informative)
Something interesting to note is that this paper is dated March of 2004 (not too new as Ars Technica reported) and it causes me great wonder why I've never come upon this before (or why it's never been cited in the news). I recall reading tons of reports from one of the Associations where piracy is proven to hurt record sales but several years after this one is published, I finally see it.
For those of you interested in the data, pages 34 on contain some very interesting data whereby downloads are broken down by song, album, country & genre (in case everyone was trying to pin illegal downloads on those damned teeny boppers).
For those of you who wish to question the sample size, see Section B. "File Sharing Data and Album Sample" of the paper. You will also be interested in reading Appendix A in which they call into question their own sample sizes and weigh in on how accurate they might or might not be. To quote the paper for some more detail on the downloads samples, To quote the paper on album sales samples, Don't kid yourself, this is a difficult study to do. Both the downloads and album sales must be sampled and modeled correctly to draw correct conclusions. In the end, it would be hard to verify/discredit any studies done on this topic since A) consumers are human and therefore erradic & B) macro economics still isn't well understood.
Now, for those of you who just want the bottom line at the end of the paper, And, from the very end of the paper, Yeah, that's right, the research concluded that "file sharing probably increases aggregate welfare." I'll bet if we all got drills & augers, we could get that into the brains of the people running the RIAA & MPAA.
Re:The Original Report (Score:5, Interesting)
File sharing enables more acts to be exposed to a larger audience. File sharing is probably hurting radio more than it is artists, as it becomes increasingly difficult to cater to the growing diverse tastes of what used to be their audience. Basically, I pose that file sharing is taking the place of radio to promote artists. Why do I say promote? If you've ever heard an MP3 or other compressed format played at a reasonable or louder volume on quality equipment, you wouldn't be asking.
Control of musical output is being taken away from large conglomerates, and is actually being put back into the hands of the people. Over the course of the last 20 or so years, the FCC has allowed the independent radio station to become extinct as they were gobbled up mainly by one of 2 corporations: Infinity and ClearChannel. These corporations, namely ClearChannel as I have personally seen them destroy the selection of radio stations in my city, have attempted to create a one size fits all set of stations to pump music and [lack of] talent through to the chumps, um, audience. Via this control, and payola, for which I have no direct proof other than the absolute crap on the radio that has driven away large portions of their audience, they thought they were setup to just print money by promoting talentless acts with crappy contracts that would "sell" just because they promoted them.
What happened instead is this internet thing and P2P, wherein people started sharing music, music that wasn't promoted, wasn't on the local airwaves, and thus not in the RIAA members's maximized profit model. It got even worse when sites like MySpace (yes, I have to give it some props) started serving as an alternative promotion source for bands.
So there's much more to P2P and music sales than what these or any statistics show. Falling sales are not related to increased P2P. I'd argue that sales haven't fallen any more than they have explicitly because of P2P. Why? Take a look at the last 6 months of album releases. Can you name more than 2 albums of note? I can't. I haven't seen a single Rock/Alternative/Pop album I wanted in the past 6 months. Is it because there aren't any musicians out there? Naah, it's because tripe has been promoted and is all that's for sale.
Re: (Score:2)
And what's more, they don't even try. For the most part, they simply play what the recording industry pays them to play. This is to further the industry's continuing goal of promoting the hell out of a few artists to create a few bajillion-selling albums instead of getting a wider variety of music out there and making less from each a
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It is the same here (Portugal). I don't listen to radio anymore because i hate listening to the same half a dozen hits the whole day. But it's not because of protectionism, nobody respects the quotas for national music, 90% of what plays in our radios is anglo-saxon pop/rock.
If the quotas were enforced it would actually be an opportunity for many national artists that can't pierce through the anglo-saxon corporate machine and the puppet radio stations.
Not that I don't like anglo-saxon music, but I wo
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No kidding!
Q: What's the only advantage radio still has compared to my iPod?
A: Traffic reports.
Re:The Original Report--1 Problem Here (Score:2)
One problem here. To hear an artist on P2P, you need to search for them, either by name, or song title. While this is great to find other artist's covers of a favorite song, a new artist with a new song title doesn't have an easy road to being discovered, downloaded, and listened to.
Radio, OTOH, will play stuff you never knew existed until you heard it there.
Amnesiacs (Score:2)
The argum
Re: (Score:2)
Notably, the music industry "hit back" with a paper called "Piracy on the High 'C's", who's central contention was that students did spend less on music. A barely mentioned acedemic paper that I discovered when researching the issue mayself had a response to that: older people who pirate buy more, and younger people buy less.
In unrelated news, the Beer Brewers' Association of America (BBAA) announced that there was a correlation between filesharing and a steep drop-off in sales of premium beers. "We are aligning ourselves with the RIAA and the MPAA because it is clear that filesharing has far reaching effects in our economy and must be stopped," announced BBAA chairperson Miranda Stone.
In other news, the makers of Bud, Miller, Coors, Pabst Blue Ribbon and Mickey's Big Mouth withdrew from the BBAA today, citing record prof
Well, if they haven't lost any money. (Score:2, Insightful)
As if the world were fair.
Exactly (Score:4, Insightful)
It's easy for the large publishers to complain and act as though their sales are declining due to the increasing amount of P2P networking, but you might as well say that global warming is the cause. Afterall, neither have ever been proven to have a huge effect on record sales...
Re:Exactly (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Exactly (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget you can also rent movies either from a store or via Netflix. If you rent a movie that sucks, you are only out the amount of the rental, so it is not a big deal. If it is a movie you want to keep, then you can go down to the store and pick it up for around $20. The music industry in their infinite wisdom, got the laws changed to make renting CDs illegal, so that eliminates one way of previewing music. In addition, radio is so lame that it is almost useless for finding new tunes.
The RIAA keep
Why listen to crap? (Score:2)
Yeah? Do people really listen to music that's not great? I can't imagine any reason to do that with the amount of great music that can be had.
After ripping my CD collection and throwing out all the tracks that are just bad, I'm still left with *days* of music. I'd no sooner download a crappy song on p2p than listen to some low-grade track from Tunnel of Love when I can listen to Born to Run again.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, for high bitrate lossy, I don't think it's possible to beat MPC. I personally use Monkey's Audio for lossless, though, even if there's not much difference between the lossless formats. That said, CD audio might be lossless, but it's usually downsampled from 24-bit to 16-bit, requiring dithering and noise shaping to keep artifacts to
Blah blah blah. (Score:5, Interesting)
Frankly, it's obviously somewhere in the middle. I doubt that p2p does much damage to music sales, but it has to have SOME impact...I mean, when I get some stupid pop song stuck in my head and I download it instead of buying it, that's a few bucks that won't go to the damn RIAA, and I have enough disposable cash that I might have bought it, if I had no other option.
On the flip side, I tend to download songs off CDs I already own, so I don't have to get out the sharpie to scribble over the stupid data track, so I can rip it. That's the definition of a no damage situation.
Neither side is ever going to compromise on this; the **AA's are as convinced we're screwing them as we are that they're screwing us. Eventually they'll just wither away and die due to changing distribution models, and that will be the end of that.
Re: (Score:2)
When you get some stupid pop song stuck in your head, are you really thinking about purchasing the entire CD knowing that the remaining tracks are probably garbage? I doubt it. You downloaded it because you never intended to buy it. And you probably only downloaded the single track, not the entire album. Besides, there's no difference between downloading the song and
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
downloaders don't believe that piracy hurts legitimate artists
Of course it hurts legitimate artists. The people it doesn't hurt are the people's work you're pirating.
If piracy became impossible tomorrow and ever more then people aren't going to suddenly go to music stores and buy lots of music. Instead they'll find someone who offers them a price they're willing to pay, which will be an indie artist (who may use ads on their website to make money). If they have a choice between the pirated works of the latest RIAA shill or an indie artist whose offering their work fo
Re: (Score:2)
You have to face the facts: Digital copies made by people who never would have bought the music in the first place have no relevance whatsoever, and do not hurt anyone, be it the RIAA or "indie" musicians. You might as well assume for the sake of this discussion that for all practical purposes, neither the copies, nor the copiers even exist, because the effect they are having is the same as
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I personally have never bought anywhere near as much music as when I was downloading like crazy (Napster period), and I've seen the same pattern in others for downloading other things: The people I know that download tons of films also buy a bunch - the guy I know that download most films also has about 2000 legitimately purchased movies.
Eivind
Re: (Score:2)
Is it even worth publiching these things. (Score:4, Interesting)
Most people prefer supposition and believing what's "obvious" and they will continue to ignore the facts anyway.
Hey record companies. (Score:5, Funny)
My pleasure.
Where is the study on how much CDs suck? (Score:5, Interesting)
The music consumer has wised up, and many of us sample music we are interested in on MP3, WMA, whatever, and find out what is good and what sucks BEFORE spending our money. When I find good music, I generally purchase the CD, but I'll be dammed if I am going to part with money for a disk full of B-sides.
Record companies got greedy, when they could have made a fortune selling CDs for 7-10 dollars.
Right fucking NOW, some stupid record exec is reading the report, and in his mind, sees it as another opportunity to RAISE prices.
Fuck um.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
But if the RIAA would get their heads out of their ass and realize that the majority of the population doesn't want to hear the crap they put out they might turn things around. First off they're marketing to the wrong bunch. They're marketing to the decling population of teens to twenties. This worked in the 6
I am the FLAC-Daddy! (Score:2)
Study is Wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
Because:
A. File sharing has caused RIAA lawsuits
B. RIAA lawsuits have pissed off customers
C. Pissed off customers look for other things to buy instead of CD's.
A->B->C so A->C
On a more serious note.... This reminds me of the global warming debate.. First you have those that say it's happening and those that say it isn't. Then enough studies come out that Global warming happening becomes the prevailing idea. So the next debate is Well, humans are causing it/it's natural. and so forth.
So we've seen the Cd sales are diminishing debate, CD sales ARE going down, now we're looking at why, the debate is File shareing / not file shareing / impact of file shareing.
I will be quite happy when the debate turns to "Your artists are CRAP, CD sales is dropping because the consumer is moving to buy independent artists' work, where they can find decent music."
Re:Study is Wrong (Score:4, Interesting)
A. File sharing has caused DRM (e.g. rootkits).
B. DRM pisses off customers.
C. Pissed off customers look for other things to buy instead of CD's.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
* The Internet is created from ARPA, CERN, and espresso.
* Universities pick up the Internet.
* Shawn Fanning gets bored, writes Napster.
* RIAA shuts down Napster.
* Nullsoft designs and releases Gnutella.
* Neo-Modus designs and releases DC.
* Kazaa is released.
* Gnutella-style networks evolve into semi-anonymous brightnets.
* The first open-source darknet client, DC+
Give us something worth buying... (Score:5, Insightful)
When I listen to music I'm partly looking to be wowed by the performance of at least some part of the piece. Current electronically generated and produced pop has no real performances to speak of, or if there is one can't be sure whether it's a sample of some old record thrown into the mix.
The point to all of this is that people now feel no reason to want to own the tracks they think they like (so that they can be listened to years down the road with fond memories) as music has become as commoditized and disposable as Gillette razors - only meant to be used for a certain period of time before being chucked in the bin.
There's a lot more to the problem of course, but the above does play an important part. The record companies need to produce artists (and they are out there) who produce real music and do it well. Fiddling with MIDI settings all day isn't producing music - it's computer programming.
Cheers
Re: (Score:2)
You are so right. When I was growing up, we used to argue over who was the best guitarist, drummer, whatever. It wasnt just about the music. Today, I guess you could argue over who is the best sample-stealer, who lip-syncs the best, (sure as fuck aint Beyonce) and who can gyrate best on stage without losing their headset mic? There is very little talent out there to WATCH and inspire.
You mention Jeff Beck to some teenager today, and they will ask what did he RAP? They would tell you that B
Re:Give us something worth buying... (Score:5, Insightful)
Come on. The 60s and 70s didn't have fodder music? Please.
When's the last time you listened to your Soft Machine albums? When's the last time you listened to Wendy Carlos? Or how about Iron Butterfly?
Every era of music has trash and time washes it away to expose what of value is left. The Beastie Boys are the Rolling Stones of tomorrow. Bands like Iron Butterfly and Canned Heat are only selling on Ryko comps today. In another 20 years we'll be seeing the commercials for comps that have crap on it like "Whoop! There It Is" and "Who Let The Dogs Out" and people who are the same age as you are today are going to buy them and say the same thing about the music of 2027.
It always bothers me that people claim there is no good music "like the stones" because they can't be bothered to give other music a try. I know if I only listened to my classic rock station the newest good music I would be hearing is The Clash too.
Fiddling with MIDI settings all day isn't producing music - it's computer programming.
Really? How about telling that to Tangerine Dream or Kraftwerk or Ash Ra Tempel? This type of thing has been going on for over 30 years, don't act like it's new. And if "fiddling with midi" is all it takes to sell an album you'd be doing it too. Just because a music is made with electronics doesn't make it easy. Granted that doesn't make it good either but there are tons of guys that "just decided to pick up a guitar" too. Some of them did well (like The Ramones and BTO*) and most ended up playing a few gigs for beers. It's really no different.
* Before anyone bitches, let's at least be honest enough to admit that bands like BTO and Grand Funk were simple "good times" music and not really the height of talent.
Re: (Score:2)
There is skill in writing and playing good music, music that gets you, but there's just as much skill in good production. Similarly, you can take the best actors, scripts and sets in the world, but with a crap production a film will be pretty unengaging. With none of the former but great production, it can be an impressively polished but ultimately unimpacting. They'd both be p
Re: (Score:2)
First of all, your observations about electronic music being "cold" and "sterile" are subjective, to say the least. There are plenty of electronic musicians who produce warm, beautiful and emotional music, and plenty who are just writing club hits with no real purpose or meaning. Consider disco -- there are a few disco "classics" that survived the test of time, and lots of crap that just entertained the cokeheads dancing on an ill
Re: (Score:2)
Die Bitch, Die!
Without an excuse... (Score:4, Insightful)
Thus, 74 million unsold CDs from that year are 'without an excuse for sitting on shelves.
You mean besides the non-music industry perception that they contain music people are not really interested in or are at a price people are not willing to pay?
I know the effect it's had on my music purchasing (Score:5, Interesting)
Not much.
I was never a huge music buyer or listener really, mostly I just relied on friends music collections to carry me through. Though I understand how some folks get completely wrapped up in their music collections, for me it was mainly background noise to what I was really focusing on. As such, a 1/2 decent radio station would suffice when no friends with massive music collections were around.
Since the p2p downloading craze and the direct download craze that led up to it...though my music collection itself has increased quite a bit, my buying patterns are about the same. Essentially, I have my own personal perfect radio station.
Conversely, I do directly attribute P2P with significantly increasing my spending in one area: live concerts.
Though my effort/money put toward accruing music hasn't changed at all, my exposure to music has vastly increased with the ease of "collection" that p2p has brought. I've always loved a live show, so much so that it probably explains my aversion to recorded music. I love the little flaws in a live performance that gives the music a personality that is often stripped away by significant remastering at the recording studio.
Since a show costs anywere from 10-60 dollars and I'm going to more then ever and in genres I never considered before.....I'd say the music industry is profiting form me more then ever.
They're garbage... (Score:3, Insightful)
That's the excuse. Sorry, people are buying less CDs because so many of the new CDs pushed by major labels are cookie-cutter copies of other CD's that sold well. Maybe I'm just getting crotchety in my old age, but all the music *does* sound the same to me.
Maybe it's because... (Score:2)
There is an excuse (Score:5, Insightful)
There is some good indie music out there, but the major companies shun it while pushing out their canned pap. This is what is on the shelves rotting (as it should). No wonder their primary source of funds seems to be lawsuits right now.
No wonder the Police have chosen to reunite. The rockers with walkers are making a killing because the industry today is creatively bankrupt. Bring on Jagger, the Stones and their musical wheelchairs.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I ask you to go look at the charts and see what is selling. While I agree much of it is radio fodder the bottom line is that Justin Timberlake or 50Cent or whomever outsold Pink Floyd last year. Pink Floyd is timeless and will continue to sell long after Timberlake and his ilk are worm food but that still doesn't make it deniable that pop outsells classic rock. The industry had it good when we classic rock fans were busy
Re: (Score:2)
True too, I was broke as a k
Re: (Score:2)
This is true to a point but if it wasn't for us loyalist fans these kids today may never turn on to classic stuff. It's an odd paradox: either they get it for free from you and maybe fill in a few gaps in your collection with a real honest-to-God CD or they never find out about it and it never sells in the first place. I think the situation is pretty go
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I knew that you'd be kinda strapped for cash then, so I went out of my way to see several Rush concerts for your benefit during the mid/late 80's. They kicked ass then, as was to be expected. In particular, the Hampton, VA dates for the Power Windows and Hold Your Fire tours were quite good - Blue Oyster Cult opened the Power Windows concert, and Primus opened for Hold Your Fire.
Re: (Score:2)
And you didn't even get me a t-shirt? Man, I've been hosed.
Double edged... (Score:2)
Remember, that is also contrary to the claims of almost everyone on slashdot too... So many times I've heard that P2P increases sales. Since everyone has an "I found this band and bought the album" story.
Re: (Score:2)
As a french, I'm also faced with a similar issue with TV series: many
Re: (Score:2)
Rots Your Brains (Score:4, Insightful)
The music biz used to be mainly in the business of finding artists coming from the mass of people, trying them out before "focus groups" (live audiences) who selected themselves from the cultural word of mouth, and cultivating them for a decade or more. The artists getting the most continuing investment were those most successful in either a live audience, or record sales even in a regionally highly varied market, feeding back with radio play. A natural coevolution of the artists and the audience, when mediated best by the music biz people engaged into both.
Now the biz thinks it's smarter than the market. Creating fake "artitst" who are really just spokesmodels in videos for a recorded product tied in with cobranded products like so much anime breakfast cereal. The model is to create as many products that can be most controlled as possible, within a narrow range of those styles best "understood" by the marketers, pushing more money than brains through the network of middleman connections, and maximizing the profit from anything that looks like it's "hitting". Meanwhile, these "smarter than the market" marketers are dumber than ever before, especially about music and the mass of people in the market, because the smarter ones have already fled the sinking ship a decade ago.
It's like the factory farms that breed mad cow. No wonder the music sounds like a soundtrack to the cows' death dance.
Re:Rots Your Brains (Score:4, Insightful)
RIAA company: "We'll distribute your CD and songs on iTunes, but we get 70% of the take."
New band: "Whatever, I can use something like CDBaby [cdbaby.com] and do the same for only a 20% take."
RIAA company: "Buh... uh... won't you think of the children? And by that, I mean our children. How will they ever afford a new Hummer?!"
Songs from (good) indie bands that do a lot of exposure are then picked up by the indie stations, and eventually make their way to the various ClearCrap stations who don't want to lose listeners to the stations that play more than the top 40s.
I agree, but it isn't new (Score:2)
But think about all the boy singing acts in the 50's/60's such as Fabian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabian_%28entertaine r%29) These were modestly talented singers who were pushed by the record companies to be stars and sell records to pubescent girls. Or in the 60's all the girl singing groups that came out. Or closer to the present, Brittany
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Why does the RIAA still dominate, then? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Market economics will quickly provide competition for short-term profit, but I suspect that markets don't innovate so well when the timescales are longer and the risks appear higher. The established market probably has to collapse in some way first, and some new bottom-up models emerge to fill the gap.
Sort of like an ecosystem that has ecological nich
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
albums vs. songs (Score:4, Insightful)
Sales are down (Score:2)
[ ]Because collectors are mostly done converting their Cassettes to CD format
[ ]Because the Industry is putting out less music
[ ]All of the above
Re: (Score:2)
A real collector NEVER buys pre-recorded music on cassette. It was cheaper to buy the LP and a good quality blank cassette and make your own cassette copy while retaining the original quality of wax.
Even when cassettes were half the price of CDs I never bought cassettes because the quality sucked that bad. Making my own cassette was always a much better deal even though the cost was much higher.
Just keep saying it... (Score:2)
The premise of the arugment is all wrong... (Score:2)
still one good reason to "pirate" a song... (Score:4, Interesting)
If I like a song enough to want a local copy of it, my first step is to check iTunes. Usually I find the song (recent example: Yell Fire by Michael Franti) and its associated album. If I like the other songs enough, I buy the whole thing, otherwise just the one. However...
If the song is NOT on iTunes (recent example: Justified & Ancient by Tammy & the KLF), I click the icon I keep right next to iTunes... Poisoned [gottsilla.net]. It's exceedingly rare not to find exactly what I want on P2P. As far as I'm concerned, I made a good faith effort to pay for it, and my conscience is clear.
Local music (Score:2)
Moving On [youtube.com]
Original [youtube.com]
my perspective is... (Score:2)
if the MPAA/RIAA & music/movie industry can not figure this out then they should be going the way of the dinosaur (extinct)...
What they really fear from piracy (Score:3, Interesting)
Back when I was a kid, the way I "found" new bands was to go to the CD store and randomly buy something. Either that, or the radio. Nowadays I'd be ashamed to buy music sight-unseen (that is, unheard) but it used to be normal behavior.
Accessibility of Music (Score:2, Interesting)
I still buy CD's....sort of. (Score:3, Interesting)
I pretty much stopped buying the drivel put out my the major labels in the early 90's, stopped listening to the radio (di.fm FTW!), and most of the concerts I go to are old bands coming back for the umpteenth time - though I did see Coldplay's 2nd tour which was darn good!
To my mind the music *business* has turned into just that - a machine designed to reap the greatest money from the consumer for the least amount of effort/talent/artistry. There are tons of fantastic artists out there, but the vast majority of them record on little tiny labels (twisted.co.uk, ultimae.com are two that I consider noteworthy).
I admit to doing a bit of Nabstering in my day, but honestly all I was looking for were extended mixes of 80's tunes that are not available anywhere. I would not even consider pirating/downloading any of the music I listen to all the time if I can buy it on CD.
Re: (Score:2)
Filesharing INCREASED my music purchases (Score:2)
Before that, I never purchased media myself. I was content to listen to the radio, or the infrequent CD my parents would get as a gift.
After Napster tanked, I moved with the masses to Kazaa, continuing to expand my music selection. Somewhere around the end
In other news (Score:3, Funny)
The other study Finds Stealing Has No Effect on Wealth of the Riches.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Actually that's a lie. I know you do it, too.
Re:How bizarre... (Score:5, Insightful)
Really, until you actually RTFA and tell me why they're wrong, I'll stick with the only person who has developed a point so far: TFA.
Re: (Score:2)
but there is a debate about which direction it affects them, some say that P2P causes people to buy less because they can get it for free, some say it causes people to buy more because they are exposed to new music they might not have otherwise heard (or movies seen, etc)
Would it be that much of a stretch to say that both sides are correct and that the net effect is somewhere close to zero? (or as the article claims, 0.7%)
Re:How bizarre... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I dunno about that. One suggestion is that people are getting music, but they still spend money on it. They could use P2P to discover what they want to get, then go get it. Sounds counter intuitive, but you've got to consider that there's always new music coming out. For example, I discovered the Chemical Brothers through 'piracy'. When they released a new album, I just went out and bought it. I was excited about getting it.
Re:How bizarre... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:How bizarre... (Score:5, Insightful)
I download a shitload of music and movies. Yet, I buy the music I want. The availability of filesharing has not affected the amount I spend on culture each month. If I bought everything I download, I would probably have to pay some $2000/month.
When you say Everytime a new study come yet the results differs., take a look at the sources. All independent research has always shown that filesharing has not and does not affect record sales. All information that comes from the record companies says that they do. Who do you trust?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:How bizarre... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
The fact you don't plan to buy something doesn't mean you're entitled to have it for free. Some people just want to justify music piracy and not paying artists for their work. They want something for free, because they're freeloaders.
Re:How bizarre... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
You quite obviously have never seen how little an artist makes on an album sale compared to what the record label makes.
I can assure you that the record label hurts the artist more by essentially taking their creation, owning it, then not paying them dick for it.
I DO support the artist by buying merchandise, concert tickets, and by referring friends to them which in turn increases their fan base. A larger fan base allows
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What I never understood was why the RIAA thinks that people listening to less music is a good thing, regardless of the reason.
Because the RIAA isn't about music. It's about money.
Artists hate dealing with business. Businesspeople know this, so they'll gladly flock to the "aid" of artists, telling them, "You just go and be artistic. We'll handle the business end for you." The trouble is that this lack of business savvy on the part of the artists attracts the bottom of the business barrel, the least scrupulous, most ambitious, laziest get-rich-quick bastards ever to earn an MBA.
They don't give two shits if you listen to music. T
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And you seem to buy into the RIAA fascists' doctrine that the creators have some kind of God-given Right to profit from their so-called "IP." Here's a news flash: they don't. Copyright only exists "to promote the progress of science and the useful arts," yet it has mutated into an abomination that hinders that progress instead. Therefore,
Really? (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not so sure. CD's are lacking any sort of copy protection or DRM, as were LPs before them.
The legislation to support DRM was put in place primarily with the DMCA which predates any sort of file sharing on a large scale. My guess is DRM was put in place primarily because of the *fear* of unauthorized file sharing, not from any losses.
But even if what you're saying is true, what do you propose? If people didn't commit crimes, we wouldn't ne
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That may be, but they certainly have increased the dirty-sex rate.
BBH
Re: (Score:2)
Dirty sex "probably increases aggregate welfare?"
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know what record company you work for, but whatever it is I guess you have access to all the independent research that goes against your claims. If you would actually read some of it, you would see that there are plenty of explanations why filesharing does not affect music sales. No one is saying that there hasn't been a decrease in CD sales.
If you would read your PR agents post before you posted it on slashdot, you would also notice that the studies that showed that smoking doesn't give you lung