p2p sharing no threat to music ind

[Alegis]

f you share files over p2p networks which are copyrighted, you are doing something illegal and wrong. However, the argument that it is damaging artists or record associations is growing ever thinner. A new study two from respected economists further highlights this fact further. Read on :

 

"Internet music piracy has no negative effect on legitimate music sales, according to a study released today by two university researchers that contradicts the music industry's assertion that the illegal downloading of music online is taking a big bite out of its bottom line.

 

Songs that were heavily downloaded showed no measurable drop in sales, the researchers found after tracking sales of 680 albums over the course of 17 weeks in the second half of 2002. Matching that data with activity on the OpenNap file-sharing network, they concluded that file sharing actually increases CD sales for hot albums that sell more than 600,000 copies. For every 150 downloads of a song from those albums, sales increase by a copy, the researchers found. "Consumption of music increases dramatically with the introduction of file sharing, but not everybody who likes to listen to music was a music customer before, so it's very important to separate the two," said Felix Oberholzer-Gee, an associate professor at Harvard Business School and one of the authors of the study.

 

Oberholzer-Gee and his colleague, University of North Carolina's Koleman Strumpf, also said that their "most pessimistic" statistical model showed that illegal file sharing would have accounted for only 2 million fewer compact discs sales in 2002, whereas CD sales declined by 139 million units between 2000 and 2002.

 

"From a statistical point of view, what this means is that there is no effect between downloading and sales," said Oberholzer-Gee. For albums that fail to sell well, the Internet may contribute to declining sales. Oberholzer-Gee and Strumpf found that albums that sell to niche audiences suffer a "small negative effect" from Internet piracy.

 

read more

 

 

other fine news is that if you own an ipod you'd better stay inside if you want to listen to it muggers recognise the headphones and you become target #1

"West Midlands police have issued a stark warning to iPod users: ditch the white headphones or pay the price." Apparently, muggers recognize the headphones and target passersby for muggage.

[Kain]

I KNEW IT!! BASTARD LARS!! HAHAHAHAHA!! People only download songs on their computer in mp3 form if they intend on buying the CD or if they already have the CD and wanna listen to their fave songs while playing a computer game or if they don't feel like carrying around bulky CD players.

 

HAHAHA!! WE WIN AGAIN!!

[Alegis]

well yes indeed, its somethign "strange" i noticed. With p2p you can listen to any song of a group you l ike and many ppl buy the album then after having listened to it and like it. Unless you listen to the radio 24/7 you can't 'try before you buy' in most music stores

[Astrotoy7]

Originally posted by Kain

I KNEW IT!! BASTARD LARS!! HAHAHAHAHA!! People only download songs on their computer in mp3 form if they intend on buying the CD or if they already have the CD and wanna listen to their fave songs while playing a computer game or if they don't feel like carrying around bulky CD players.

 

HAHAHA!! WE WIN AGAIN!!

 

I'm with Kain.....I hope Lars burns in a cauldron of his own faeces.....

 

perfect example of how I use p2p.... I downloaded 3 songs from the new album of this band I really love. After listening to these 3 songs alone I loved them so much that I had to go out and get the whole album...... It was never even a consideration to downoad the entire album. I want to support the bands I like, so I buy their cds and go see them if they ever make it out here

 

...not to say p2p isnt used for evil and that no-one is shortchanged as a result, but those articles Alegis posted are interesting.....

 

mtfbwya

[BCanr2d2]

Album sales may not have dropped, or have grown..

 

Does this study even mention CD Singles sales? I didn't read it. This is the part of the market that is suffering with illegal p2p sharing......

[txa1265]

As 'statistician' is about half of my job, I think that study is likely a self-serving load of crap.

 

When you have sets of data that are so inherently correlated and autocorrelated, subjective, huge error bars around any given subset, and then try to make relational statements about those correlated parameters ... it is generally guesswork, and in cases like this, pre-determined.

 

I don't believe that the impact of falling record sales falls solely on piracy, as their are many market and economic realities at play, but nor do I pretend that it isn't an impact on sales.

 

How can it not?

 

Let's see:

- Music sales have slumped while other forms of entertainment have climbed.

- As broadband internet access has climbed in use, so have game downloads. Not surprisingly, despite all the great games last year, PC games (the most easily downloaded) slumped in comparison to console games.

 

There is too much inferential data pointing to 'casual piracy' as being a detriment to music, video and game sales to ignore.

 

The other problem with reposts like this is that it will embolden pirates - look, we're doing the industry a favor!

 

Oh well ... I just know it is illegal and wrong, regardless of impact. I teach my kids that it is wrong, and that is about what I can do in my little corner of the world.

 

Mike

[WadeV1589]

I must admit I've used P2P for a long time (yes I admit it) but man has it made me spend money! It's like I downloaded Love Spit Love - How soon is Now (theme to Charmed)...next thing I know I'm buying Smiths albums and Love Spit Love albums!

 

Wonder when they realise the bigger a deal they make of it the worse it will get?

[CapNColostomy]

Fact: The year that Napster was at its peak (and to my knowledge, no p2p mp3 sharing program has ever gotten as big or popular as Napster was), the music industry "suffered" a forty percent INCREASE in cd sales. Yeah. I'm just taking food right out of the mouths of some fat ceo's kid. Heartbreaking.

You seldom hear any mention of the fact that it costs just over a dollar to manufacture a cd, packaging and all, yet it costs you and I, the consumers nearly twenty dollars in most cases to buy one. The way I see it, they still owe me some music. Or some money. And yes, I'm aware of that measly thirteen dollar bone they threw people recently. It's not enough.

[Alegis]

i think the real danger in music industry is that because of the recent crap wave rnb, everyone hears the same song 100 times a day on every channel, and then gets fed up with it. see the thread "good but overplayed songs"

[•-BLaCKouT-•]

Originally posted by BCanr2d2

Does this study even mention CD Singles sales? I didn't read it. This is the part of the market that is suffering with illegal p2p sharing......

I'd say the drop in CD singles sales is down to:

• The majority of single releases being crap. I know this because I hear them on the radio. I'm sure there are good singles being released that aren't on the Radio 1 playlist, but I don't get to hear them... therefore... (and the commercial stations in the UK play even less new music, plus I don't get a choice of station at work)

• They're just too expensive. £4 (about US$7.50) for a 3-4 track CD? Hmm, I'm convinced I only buy singles these days if I actually want to push the single in the charts (Darkness' Xmas single being one).

 

Another point of note, in the UK, chart albums are £10-17 ($18-$31). So is it any wonder?

I do still buy albums, but no longer 'on a whim'.

 

My heart bleeds for them

 

B.

[txa1265]

Originally posted by CapNColostomy

Fact: The year that Napster was at its peak (and to my knowledge, no p2p mp3 sharing program has ever gotten as big or popular as Napster was), the music industry "suffered" a forty percent INCREASE in cd sales.

 

Actually, I dispute you to prove that fact. Most places, including the NYT, showed that sales were down in 1996 for the first time ever, then there were a few flat years, then 2001 - 2003 were all down slightly. The exception was the US, which in 1999 saw a 31% decline in sales

 

You seldom hear any mention of the fact that it costs just over a dollar to manufacture a cd, packaging and all, yet it costs you and I, the consumers nearly twenty dollars in most cases to buy one.

 

Actually, you hear it all the time. But is it true? Sure, the actual material costs of a CD including raw materials, press and package is ~$1. But any business 101 person can tell you that in any mature industry that the fixed costs are a small part of the total cost. Overhead, sales and admin, and the massive marketing and 'talent development' (finding the next Johnny Bravo) costs.

 

I'm not saying that they don't make a huge profit - they do. Heck, at the $10 Apple charges on iTunes music store would be a huge profit for a 'real' CD.

 

And yes, I'm aware of that measly thirteen dollar bone they threw people recently. It's not enough.

? I'm not ... do enlighten us.

 

 

The way I see it, they still owe me some music. Or some money.

Actually, they don't *owe* you sh*t. You want the music, buy the CD. Don't want to pay the price? Don't buy the CD. Simple. Want to steal it? Go for it - just be clear that you are 'stealing' and not 'receiving an entitlement'.

 

Yeah. I'm just taking food right out of the mouths of some fat ceo's kid. Heartbreaking.

We live in a capitalist world. Free market. What the internet generation has taught me is that the prevailing attitude is one of selfishness - making money is for *me* ... if *you* make money, then you're some fat, greedy oppressor who *deserves* to have things stolen.

 

Mike

[txa1265]

Originally posted by Alegis Gensan

i think the real danger in music industry is that because of the recent crap wave rnb, everyone hears the same song 100 times a day on every channel, and then gets fed up with it. see the thread "good but overplayed songs"

That may have to do as much with the consolidation of radio markets. I was amazed at how many pop songs my kids knew from a 'Now That's What I Call Music Vol 15' CD (my wife picked it up for our frequent 4+ hour trips to her parents ... her Dad is dying a slow leukemia & heart & failure of the everything death). I knew ... well, I had seen/heard the Britney Spears Toxic when we were watching TV that morning waiting for everyone to be ready. So that was 1 of 21.

 

I don't listen to commercial radio, I don't support 'product music' (most music that sells well these days is more product than music).

 

And I sure as heck don't steal from the meager earnings my jazz, classical and avante-garde music makers already get.

 

Mike

[txa1265]

Originally posted by •-BLaCKouT-•

I'd say the drop in CD singles sales is down to:

• The majority of single releases being crap.

B.

I'd just modify that to say that all popular music sales are down because most of it is crap.

 

Mike

[Datheus]

Originally posted by txa1265

Actually, they don't *owe* you sh*t. You want the music, buy the CD. Don't want to pay the price? Don't buy the CD. Simple. Want to steal it? Go for it - just be clear that you are 'stealing' and not 'receiving an entitlement'.

 

We live in a capitalist world. Free market. What the internet generation has taught me is that the prevailing attitude is one of selfishness - making money is for *me* ... if *you* make money, then you're some fat, greedy oppressor who *deserves* to have things stolen.

 

Mike

 

I love you. That post is just peaches and cream. I whole-heartedly agree.

[CapNColostomy]

Originally posted by txa1265

Actually, I dispute you to prove that fact. Most places, including the NYT, showed that sales were down in 1996 for the first time ever, then there were a few flat years, then 2001 - 2003 were all down slightly. The exception was the US, which in 1999 saw a 31% decline in salesMike

 

Actually, in 1999 sales were down by 36%. Not 31%. BUT what you neglected to mention, is in the fine print. They were down by 36% in CD singles. And CD singles account for how much of the RIAA's profits? Not quite one percent. Yes, that's right: they lost 36% of 1% of their profits. That year their "CD sales" were up , even from the previous year's stunning performance. The RIAA increased the average price of a full-length CD from $13.65 to $14.02, and still managed to sell 3,600,000 more of them.

 

Total profit increase on this, the core of their business, was 3.1%, or just shy of an extra $400,000,000.

 

But full-length CDs only account for 92% of the RIAA's revenue. They did have weak performance in the other 8%. CD singles, as already noted, dropped revenue by 36%. But the real casualty percentage-wise was cassingles, which lost over 90% of its revenue from last year.

 

Gee, why could that be? Maybe because nobody wants them?

 

In fact, the RIAA's only real money-losing format of any significance was cassettes, which, along with music videos, were the only format actually cut in price. Cassette revenue dropped $436 million.

 

Wait a minute, what am I saying? "Money-losing"? They aren't losing money on cassettes -- they were just not raking it in as fast as the previous year. And gee, why might that be? Again, because nobody wants them?

 

And it's not like the RIAA is struggling to get by on slim profits. The big picture is that, in the last nine years, they have tripled their annual income.

 

But they are desperate to spin this as a loss. The actual fact is that their total revenue is down 1.8% from 1999. Last year, they made $14,584,500,000. This year, they made $14,323,000,000.

Poke that in your pipe and smoke it, Mr. "Business 101 person".

 

Originally posted by txa1265

Actually, you hear it all the time. But is it true? Sure, the actual material costs of a CD including raw materials, press and package is ~$1. But any business 101 person can tell you that in any mature industry that the fixed costs are a small part of the total cost. Overhead, sales and admin, and the massive marketing and 'talent development' (finding the next Johnny Bravo) costs.I'm not saying that they don't make a huge profit - they do. Heck, at the $10 Apple charges on iTunes music store would be a huge profit for a 'real' CD.? I'm not ... do enlighten us.Actually, they don't *owe* you sh*t. You want the music, buy the CD. Don't want to pay the price? Don't buy the CD. Simple. Want to steal it? Go for it - just be clear that you are 'stealing' and not 'receiving an entitlement'.

 

We live in a capitalist world. Free market. What the internet generation has taught me is that the prevailing attitude is one of selfishness - making money is for *me* ... if *you* make money, then you're some fat, greedy oppressor who *deserves* to have things stolen.

 

Mike

 

That's all very noble of you, but if they don't owe me sh!t as you so eloquently put it, why are they coughing up $67.4 million dollars in a settlement to end a lawsuit where they were accused of artificially inflating CD prices at retail? Just feeling generous I suppose? I mean, it can't be that they were overcharging...At any rate, I hope you're "enlightened".

[Kain]

Them greedy bastards wanted $36 for Linkin Park's Meteora, to which I laughed as loud as I could in the middle of a VERY crowded mall (and I got stares, trust me). Its really sad given that I was going to buy it so I didn't feel bad about dl'ing 3 songs off of it (Faint, Numb, and Somewhere I Belong). Why'd I laugh then? Because at $36 for the CD, clearing my conscience would have cost me $3 a song that I dl'd. I don't care enough. I did buy KoRn's latest CD to clear my conscience of that, but only because KoRn isn't as hyped up as LP, so their CD (which also included a bonus DVD) only cost me about 50 cents a song to clear that off my slate.

 

I still don't own a legit version of Meteora...

[StormHammer]

How many times has this same old argument reared it's ugly head on these boards?

 

*sigh*

 

The bottom line is...sharing any copyrighted work over the internet is illegal, and that includes music. And these forums categorically do not condone, support or indeed tolerate such activity.

 

As for the age-old argument that a CD costs ~$1 yadda yadda yadda, then you should be aware that Mike (aka txa1265) is completely correct in his arguments. You are forgetting that it is a 'music industry' and all that entails. There are considerable overheads in any business. You have to pay business taxes, office rental, utilities and services, and that's before you can even sneeze. Then you have to hire and pay people to do the work. You have to pay depreciation costs on all your capital equipment. Insurances. Liabilities. I know because I've been a Director in a couple of businesses over the years, and you have to offset all your costs against projected sales, while introducing an appropriate profit margin (after costs you deem to be necessary for reinvestment in the enterprise) to satisfy investors/shareholders, and this then fixes your end price to the consumer. At the end of the day, people who work have to be paid, and the government has to get it's cut of the proceeds in taxation.

 

Just as a matter of interest, I agree that some albums, etc., are overpriced these days - particularly in the longer term. It is understandable to have a higher price for an album on release because you are unsure of the initial market forces - the album may not sell well, and so you have to hedge your bets. However, if an album starts selling like hot cakes, then I think the price should be reduced as a result because sales are more 'secure'.

 

'Sharing' music may or may not result in lost CD sales - but at the moment, it's an illegal activity, so please don't come onto these boards bragging about it.

[CapNColostomy]

Well, I wasn't trying to start an argument. I was simply stating facts, as I've read them. He did ask, afterall. Nor was I "bragging" about p2p sharing of copyrighted material. And I'm sorry, but just because you're a moderator here, does not convince me that "Mike (aka txa1265)" is correct. I stand by my post. And I don't ask that you, or anyone else chimes in and says I'm correct. You're right in saying p2p sharing of copyrighted material is illegal. And I won't say anymore about it, so that any future comments cannot be construed as "bragging". I just can't stand to hear about their "losses", that's all.

[WadeV1589]

One thing about forums like this, you can't risk condoning any kind of illegal activity however AFAIK discussion of it without linking or hinting as to how to get them (saying P2P and so on doesn't count, it's in the news) is fine.

 

Yes it is illegal, you're sharing stuff they expect you to buy in stores but when it comes down to numbers I'm going to believe the sales figures mentioned above and the fact that overall their 'loss' is minor and they're still quite happy in the money. The RIAA can get purely evil and try and fine people excessively but until the courts rule in their favour fully I will continue to download music and if I like it I'll go buy an album.

 

To bring up an old comparison, we've had this before when video cassettes were created or when you could first record from the radio. The industry hated the idea because it allowed you to record films and music and then keep them without having to pay for them directly. Now they realise it's helpful to them and don't argue. In the end, as warped as it seems this is the same thing going on just in a more modern way.