Sensible Erection | ZeroPaid - No evidence that file sharing damaged music sales...

Tuesday, 22 May 2012

ZeroPaid - No evidence that file sharing damaged music sales...

quote [ We’ve just finished out lengthy series on what file-sharing studies really have to say about file-sharing. The series has drawn quite a lot of attention, so, we felt the need to cap off this series with some final thoughts and a list of links to all the studies and more. ]

Ran across this on Google+, thought it was interesting.

[music] [by eric4x4@2:58amGMT] [+10 Interesting]

Comments

bbqkink said @ 3:10am GMT on 22nd May [Score:1 Underrated]
Yea, but......RIAA don't care. They are not going to lower prices, they have a monopoly. They don't have to. It is cheaper and more profitable to pay off congressman.

willrogers said @ 8:52am GMT on 22nd May
It seems like all these lawsuits and such are basically the RIAA's way of staying relevant. They convince everyone that piracy is a problem and then wrangle up these tenuous and frivolous legal cases to act like they're doing something important to distract people from the evidence that the old system of music production and distribution is no longer necessary.

Technology has made music production equipment and overall music recording far cheaper. The internet has revolutionized music distribution, making traditional physical formats obsolete, and is beginning to change the financial aspects with things like Kickstarter. The corporations that traditional handled these responsibilities are fighting against progress like buggy whip manufacturers fighting against the automobile. They are trying to stay relevant by whatever means necessary and trying to distract the public from realizing that they are unnecessary middlemen artificially inflating costs.

chold_numa said @ 11:35am GMT on 22nd May
Just as technology has changed the industry, it's only to be expected that those who benefitted from the old models will try to preserve it. The quick adoption of digital distribution has caught them flat footed, and the opportunity to contain widespread piracy has long past. Possibly back in 1998 or so, they had a chance.

Free music is here to stay. There's 25 year olds out there who've never paid for music in their entire lives, and that mindset is here to stay, for better or for worse. Ultimately, I see it going the way of Asia, where musicians are largely manufactured and money is made out of touring, merchandising and endorsements. Talented musicians will still be there, and they may be able to make a living outside of the mainstream, but making a career out of it will be harder. Then again, very few make a career out of it now, so it won't be a huge change.

cb361 said @ 4:46pm GMT on 22nd May
Interesting. But where will the executives get their cocaine and prostitutes?

spite48 said @ 12:02am GMT on 24th May
Yeah. There is still money to be made. Catchy songs will still be commercialized for advertising purposes, and other revenue streams exist from touring and limited sales and royalties.

But mostly the recording industry, the film industry and associated retailers are in trouble because they have failed to adapt.

NickelJoe said @ 6:21am GMT on 22nd May
It doesn't matter. The key point in all file sharing cases is imagined losses and other big made up numbers. Even the FBI admits that their recent statements on piracy losses where not based on any actual investigations or research. Facts are what ever the richest attorneys say they are.

willrogers said @ 8:55am GMT on 22nd May
Good point. There is a very obvious power disparity in the legal system, where corporations, wealthy individuals, and everyone else with significant amounts of money possess a distinct advantage that makes them frequently immune to legal consequences (both civil and criminal) and allows them to throw their weight around against the average consumer/citizen.

The only help the average person receives is the occasional support for government, but in this case the corporatists have gotten the government into intimidating and prosecuting consumers who would even think of threatening their revenue streams.

lsdbeta said @ 7:14am GMT on 22nd May
An upmod for this making excellent reference material. But to read this on a whim, it really is a bit tl;dr.

hackiavelli said @ 7:42am GMT on 22nd May
These sorts of justifications for piracy have always struck me as hypocritical. If piracy really had no effect at all iTunes, Steam, Amazon, Hulu, Netflix, and the like would have completely displaced it. Instead we have The Pirate Bay as one of the most visited websites on the internet.

mrklipp said @ 8:00am GMT on 22nd May [Score:4 Insightful]
You seem to be operating under the idea that every person who illegally downloads a file would have otherwise been a paying customer.

It's understandable, that's what's been pushed heavily by the industry, and is the basis for the legal judgments sought.

The truth is, that's simply bullshit. First off, much of what people download is stuff that they would not have otherwise purchased. People download lots of music or games and then toss the 90% of the stuff they don't like. If you had to pay retail for each one, most people simply never would taken the gamble at all. More to the point, If you have 50$ a month to spend on movies or music, the data shows that you will spend that 50$ a month on something.

This is why piracy doesn't affect sales whenever it's checked in studies. People still spend the same amount of money, they just also download some extra stuff as well. If you could remove the ability to download it, it's not making you any more money as an industry, as people are already spending the budget they have.

CapnSilver said @ 8:31am GMT on 22nd May
I wouldn't know a thing about arrested development, community, archer or the venture bros were it not for torrents and I'm a better person for it.

Urzazero said @ 5:49pm GMT on 23rd May
+1 Archer

theolypse said @ 12:20pm GMT on 22nd May [Score:2 Funny]
We've hit peak money!

b said @ 4:09pm GMT on 24th May
This. I've said this so many times in so many other places. An illegally downloaded piece of media is not equal to a lost sale. Not at all. And anyone who says that it is is a flat out liar.

JewyPEZ said @ 2:54am GMT on 23rd May [Score:1 Underrated]
What's Google+?

Supreme_Coconut said @ 6:30am GMT on 23rd May
Not really all that interested in the article. I just decided to check the comments because I didn't think anyone still used google+

the circus said @ 3:38pm GMT on 23rd May
Isn't refering to sharing, copying, and what might be the crime of counterfeiting music and movies, as piracy ridiculous hyperbole anyways? Wouldn't it be like a town council member with bug up his but about jaywalking changing the name of it to murderape?

Misanthrope said @ 5:20pm GMT on 23rd May [Score:1 Funny]
Roadpillaging or maybe roadrape.