Filed under: Simple. With one goverment study we can debunk the lie created by the music industry about “pirates” and their supposedly spin over losses.
* When assessing the P2P downloading population, there was “a strong positive relationship between P2P file sharing and CD purchasing. That is, among Canadians actually engaged in it, P2P file sharing increases CD purchases.” The study estimates that one additional P2P download per month increases music purchasing by 0.44 CDs per year.
* When viewed in the aggreggate (ie. the entire Canadian population), there is no direct relationship between P2P file sharing and CD purchases in Canada. According to the study authors, “the analysis of the entire Canadian population does not uncover either a positive or negative relationship between the number of files downloaded from P2P networks and CDs purchased. That is, we find no direct evidence to suggest that the net effect of P2P file sharing on CD purchasing is either positive or negative for Canada as a whole.
Thanks to Boing Boing.
Two problems:
1) This looks like dodgy statistics. That’s like saying “more people who exceed the speed limit buy cars than those who do not”.
2) Invalidating an argument against the practice doesn’t make it morally correct
i have been saying this for years.
Nothing immoral about using technology to copy music for yourself. “Intellectual property” is 90% bloated self-serving greedy BS; those who are anal-retentive about it are more immoral than those who aren’t. If Metallica’s sad because people can get their music for free, they can quit and become trash collectors or factory workers, or work some other kind of real job. Oh, right, that’d mean leaving their multimillion dollar lifestyle behind. Nothing wrong with charging for your music, but there is something wrong with turning the country into a police state to ensure you get some $ every time someone listens to one of your songs. It’s sick and bad-natured. I pay for music when I want to support the artist financially. I usually support smaller artists, the ones who you never hear making such a douchey fuss about “piracy.” But recording a song you like to listen back to doesn’t mean you deserve to be put behind bars or bankrupted. Technology is changing the world, adjust and get over it.
Mark:
1) I don’t see the correlation.
2) Morally correct? The prices of CDs doesn’t reflect any sort of competition, nor does the artist typically see any but a small percentage of the $18 that Borders charges for their CDs.
I personally download music as placeholders for when I get the money or time to go out and purchase whatever it is that I want. Most software programs have a trial period before you are forced to buy them.
Trent Reznor was said to have used some torrenting sites. Beastie Boys have said that they don’t mind people downloading their music as long as it’s been out for a while.
Who are you trying to stick up for? The music, or the record companies who keep music away from the world by charging so much.
Or have you already forgotten how successful Radiohead was when, label-less, they released their album for whatever price people wanted to pay.
I only use torrent sites, so it’s free and I never have to buy a subscription to the software. People first have to get the music to upload it and if the music and movie industry was smart they would of joined up with the filesharers instead of went to war against them
What’s funny is being a long time music pirate, I used to believe I didn’t buy CDs or legal copies because I knew I could easily obtain a good copy of some CD online with less time, effort, and money; not to mention it was in a form I more prefered.
Now however I realize I don’t buy the CD’s not because I’m cheap and don’t want to spend the money but because overall the “music” is just absolutely terrible for the most part. Obviously it’s not all terrible, some good songs hit here and there but for the most part it just sucks. I don’t believe I’ve downloaded anything recent for over a year now.
It really tells you something about the music (or maybe just my music taste?) when I won’t go through the effort to download an albumn or song when I know I can get an excellent copy in less than 5 minutes with a very quick search (less than a minute), single click, and a 4-10 minute download.
MARK:
1)How is it dodgy statistics? It’s the real statistic that was achieved in this study. No argument.
2)This isn’t a moral argument either! This is just showing that someone that downloads P2P spends more money on the music industry than you and your whiny ass. Morality wasn’t mentioned in this article at all and I know it’s your only argument against pirating music. really though how can you not like free stuff? Just wondering. Not trying to convert you or something but are you making money through music sales? are you just some wannabe artist? Are you employed by the government? Or is it because the FCC has you shitting your pants everytime you go on youtube?
Just while we’re on the subject of morality why would you support a law that the government made up? Just by how quickly you went to the whole moral issue in the first place I’m sure you have all sorts of problems with the government and I’ fairly certain you think that taxes are horribly immoral. Which then leads me to this. What do you gain from being a “moral” person in the way you believe moral is?
So please keep quiet. This is just a study. Don’t throw your stupid ass logic and opinions in where no one wants to hear them and just keep them where they belong like when the real morality subject actually comes up.
Mark:
The only thing I can think of that -potentially- makes downloading music morally incorrect would be a loss of revenue for the artist. If this is not so, then what is your case for questioning its morality?
dear mark,
they never said it was moral.
@Mark,
Your #1 would be correct if the study found a correlation in the aggregate population, which it did not. What the study found is that among the p2p using crowd, those that download more are more likely to purchase a greater number of CDs.
And as for #2 morality is completely subjective and has no place in the courtroom.
@mark:
your point 1) is a false analogy - one needs to already own a car to break the law with it, whereas one can buy cds and download from p2p independently. And it’s not enough to say something “looks like” dodgy statistics - either you can show where the statistics are wrong or don’t prove to point that they try to prove, or you can’t. And you can’t.
Where exactly is the quote you have posted in this publication (what section?) I cannot find it in the publication.
excactly..
piracy is promoting..
So, in the study, what did they do to get that stat about the “P2P downloading population”? Ask the pirates if they were buying the music they were downloading? Uh.. Yeah, I bought some of those albums I swear! About… 50% of them! How does one go about identifying P2P users and then quantifying their purchases vs. their 5 finger discounts?