Please be careful when you try to make it seem like people who download files illegally via Piracy are more likely purchase something. This is not a debate, the music industry isn't two steps away from going instinct because people download illegally and then go out and buy music and support artists.

It's not a debate any more.  File swapping, file sharing, piracy, none of these things help the overall image of the industry. None of this increases revanue.

And I beg anyone who's about to reply to my statement to think for a second... Are labels surviving or dying? Are bands breaking up or making millions of dollars?

Indie's barely exist any more and it takes big money to make it as a musician now, even if your music is phenomenal.

Piracy rarely is the reason for success.  And after spending three years analyzing it I've come to the conclusion, at least in the Metal world, that making an album more difficult or impossible to download illegally DOES INDEED translate into sales... Just saying.

"making an album more difficult or impossible to download illegally DOES INDEED translate into sales"

Incredible we actually have to explain this, huh?

I mean, we rarely hear people say:

"making food/TV's/candy/whisky more difficult or impossible to steal DOES INDEED translate into sales"

Keep in mind, this isn't about kids in BEDROOMS it's about CORPORATIONS and BOARDROOMS...

Piracy is a mass scale, enterprise level, organized crime supported and funded by advertising from MAJOR consumer brands...

http://thetrichordist.wordpress.com/2012/08/31/hey-tom-waits-whos-that-bandido-ripping-you-off-now-bmw-adobe-lgcommercial-target/

Indie's barely exist any more and it takes big money to make it as a musician now, even if your music is phenomenal.

Indie's barely exist anymore?  In my entire collection of music from the past 10 years, the majority is "indie" (defined as either DIY artists or an independent label).

It has always taken big money to "make it" as a musician.  Unless by "making it" you mean earning significantly more than between $25,000-$35,000 a year, which is eminently doable. 

Yes agreed, the analysis in this article is half-baked at best.

You could easily take the statement that people who pirate are more likely to steal by turning it around and saying the following:

"People who are more likely to purchase music are also more likely to divert some of the purchases they would have made into activity on pirate websites."

Terrible, terrible, shoddy analysis on this one. Shame on you, DMN. You can do better.

ALL evidence shows that piracy on the whole dramatically reduces sales. There is not one shred of meaningful empirical evidence to the contrary.

A substantial majority of Americans are going to have a lot of problems very soon:

http://torrentfreak.com/att-starts-six-strikes-anti-piracy-plan-next-month-will-block-websites-121012/

The free ride is over, get used to it.

Dream on. Just look at what has happened in France with the Three Strikes Out. France is in the top 10 list: 

Top 10 Fastest Growing BitTorrent Market Share

Brazil

Estonia

Russia

Argentina

France*

Chile

Mexico

Ukraine

Pakistan

Columbia

Graduated response is a success in France and elsewhere, and it will be a success in the US.

Hear the pirates whine in the torrent freak link above.

They know the free ride is over.

A success in France? Better read this first:

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/09/french-anti-piracy-agency-hadopi-only-sued-14-people-in-20-months/

And the replies in the Torrentfreak thread? Looks like most of them are laughing. And you know who is laughing even louder? VPN-providers.

The free ride will never be over.

Yes, HADOPI is a success in France -- which is why the US copied most of the idea.

If you haven't heard about the initiative yet, you can read this:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1989240

http://infojustice.org/archives/8891

As for the torrentfreaks -- you think they're enjoying this?

Really? :)

All I hear is whining. And it hasn't even begun yet. Wait till they learn that vpn is completely useless (unless you're a vpn provider :).

Yeah Hadopi is such a success the new French government wants to stop the program.

Good luck with the program.

Has nothing to do with HADOPI. Socialists have never been fond of personal property, intellectual or otherwise. 75% income tax, anyone?

But let's see how it turns out. The piracy industry isn't particularly popular among them either.

Come on, now you are blaming socialism? Really? Read again. Hadopi was inefficient it costs millions and BitTorrent traffic in France is still rising.

I'll continue in a new comment to prevent disappearing in the margin ;)

As for music piracy the real solution is nearing: Windows 8 bundled with the Xbox Music. Free music at your fingertips. Goodbye Spotify!

That will be way more efficient than a six strikes anti piracy plan.

Piracy is absolutely an issue and you should really pay for music you enjoy.

Having said that, there are just too many artists nowadays and too much music to consume, so the value of your music is no longer just the value of your music. It's the value of your music compared to everything else.

If people want to play the music game, you unfortunately have to accept your stuff will be pirated. If you're good enough. My favorite is when shitty, low-level artists blame lack of sales on piracy...like people even care enough to steal their shit.

"And what's wrong with these attitudes?  The answer might be nothing at all.  The reason is that pirates are frequently purchasers, often more so than their non-infringing peers."

Even if piracy leads to increased sales - a very debatable point as we have not done any controlled study - that does not make it right.

If I steal product X from your store, and like it so much that I come back and buy more, did that make the original theft right? And what does it say about your character that you stole from me in the first place?

Regards,

V

Agree.

The only reason we're asked to accept that organized criminals steal our property and make billions from it is the fact that they can do it without any risk.

If they could steal cars without any risk, they would. 

Cars want to be free.

In addition to the public's apathy towards piracy and the public's ease of access to a vast quantity of music, IMO the ability to preview works has added to the diminishing sales of music.

In the old days, someone who bought a CD or vinyl record may have heard only two or three songs from that disc on the radio before purchase.  The remaining songs on the record may have been complete crap. This unintentional purchase of bad music helped support the recording industry. (Also, helped create the used record/CD business model.)

Today a music consumer can hear an artists entire creative output before purchase. I don't want to get into an argument about the quality of music today versus previous decades. IMO there has always been a large amount of bad music, an even larger amount of mediocre music and only a small amount of music worth listeneing to more than once.

The difference today is that music consumers are no longer supporting the industry through the unintentional purchase of bad music.  They simply purchase (or stream) only that small amount of music that is worth owning.

Hear! Hear!

"Adapt or Die" 

I'm stealing this tag from a PR/marketing company because I am 100% sure they are damn right. The so-called "free culture" is there, and it's deeply rooted in the average consumer's mind, there is nothing you can do about it, nothing. Why do you think VPN (Internet anonymity services) are litteraly exploding everywhere (http://torrentfreak.com/which-vpn-providers-really-take-anonymity-seriously-111007/)? Because of anti-piracy laws. Do you really think that you can educate the new generation of kids to pay for every single track they download? Maybe the only thing they'll pay for is convenience (think : spotify, deezer etc.)

I am 100% convinced that fighting piracy is a waste of time and resources : "obscurity is the enemy, not piracy" (Tim O'Reilly). Believe me, most of the emerging artists I am working for would be more than happy to be widely pirated.

The best way to tackle piracy? Giving away your music yourself! And ask an email address in exchange : build your fanbase, interact with them, create fidelity, and you will be able to sell your fans what they still are definitely ready to pay for : exclusivity, direct access to you and your creativity. I can cite countless example of bands which are able to sell directly "special", "backer" editions of their releases, despite the fact they are widely availble for free or on a "pay-what-you-want" basis.

J. Leveque, strategy consultant for indie/DIY artists

It's sad that a few pirates still have these wet vpn dreams.

Repeat after me:

There is no privacy on the internet!

You have *one* option only if you want to steal anonymously: Use somebody else's computer/network.

Piracy IS the problem.

The majority of piracy occurs with file lockers not P2P. These studies NEVER include the file lockers. therefore understimate the numbers of illegal downloads.

File Lockers are used by all the "music bloggers"

They are non-traceable, the pay for uploaded content, the blogger, the file hoster and the ad-networks make money. The user can search for these files using Google and download with one click.

The way tackle to Piracy is to cut-off the money supply.

http://stopfilelockers.com/

http://torrentfreak.com/90-days-of-killing-cyberlockers-50-dead-more-than-500-injured-121006/

Gosh, I wonder who funded this study?

the exact reason why all musicians should tell their brother/sister/friend/son/daughter/cousin other family member that stealing music hurts the musican.

if you tell them directly that your own family member is being stolen from, they will have a personal sense of the crime, rather than a "stick it to the man" "nothing removed just digital" usual tired arguments.

i've seen this directly: had a conversation with a younger cousin, asking them why they d'loaded illegally, and asking them what they felt the reprucussions were. as i non-confrontationally explained how it hurts musicians (indie to big), i could see a light go on.  talked to her later, and she and all her friends rarely d'load & buy their music from itunes. (tho they do stream youtube, unfortunately, a lot) 

Did we need to waste time and money conducting this study? What's next, the study to see if a majority of Americans have a problem with TV or Microwaves? Come on, let's get real here. Anyone below 35 who knows people who use computers could've told you this.

Why is this even a story?  "File-sharing amongst friends and family" has existed ever since the cassette tape went on the market - when the CD-R came out that was going to be the death of the music industry...

Only difference, now it's easier.  I think the industry as a whole recognized that the DRM removal was a good thing, right?

Piracy is an issue, but it's not THE issue.  The true injury to the music industry from the internet came from market segmentation, I don't have exact statistical data but it's indicated in how hard it is to get someone to download a file from the ARTIST for free - people only share OR buy what they want, and the fact is it's less and less.  One thing I do know, windowing your release and putting up walls around your music to make it harder to hear does not help sales for the majority of artists.  It may help on a particular release but it's not a long-term solution for all artists at all levels.  People don't buy what they can't hear and don't want to work to find what they want.  The only long-term solution will be a paradigm shift in the way we view the value of recorded music and the fan/recording interaction and value proposition.

Think people won't buy something they can listen to for free?  Google "Foo Fighters Wasting Light" then go check their soundscans.

Yes, piracy is THE issue!

It affects all professional artists more than any other single factor.

Fortunately, we see a lot of new anti-piracy laws and initiatives across the globe right now.

But how is piracy the issue?

Most artists and labels give at least a portion, sometimes all of their music away for free (in exchange for an e-mail address or other interaction).  Have you ever seen the free download numbers from an artist?  They're often shockingly low.  Yes, you have your marquis acts that do huge numbers, but there are fewer and fewer of those.

Between YouTube and Spotify, nearly every piece of music in the world is at your fingertips for free and legally.  Still over 90% of the listening on those services go to the songs of the moment like Psy, Carly Rea Jepson and Gotye.  Everything else is marginal hence the DMN weekly updates about how indie artists don't get paid by these services.

There are further indications of market segmentation affecting the industry by looking at live music - concerts aren't doing as well because people aren't gathering around one central artist as often anymore (in addition to outrageous prices, etc.).

So these are examples of how market segmentation has directly affected the industry upon which someone can act intelligently to make plans.  Piracy may be an issue but I'm yet to see a direct statement of "here's how it has affected the industry" beyond the initial launch of the mp3 era which was 10 years ago.

I've yet to see a law or legal case that had a long-term positive effect on piracy or the industry as a whole.  iTunes sells music becuase it's more convenient than piracy.  Litigation just angers people and encourages work-arounds.

The statement, 'People downloading for free is wrong because artists deserve to get paid' is not valid because it ignores reality.  Market segmentation and saturation has driven the value of recorded music to near $0.  We must react within that reality, not litigate against it.

what i see myself is a shift from downloading and not telling about it, to being shocked when someone says he actually buys music.

Free downloading seems so much rooted in today's consuming habits, that you are going to appear as a *liar* or stupid when you say you prefer not to download music and that you actually pay for it....

and this is also nurtured by musicians and bands who say they porefer to give away their music for free and make money in concerts.... of course, these are not "pros" and are often "student who were musicians at some point in the past until they realize they won't make money from it" or simply bands who want to make themselves known and give away tracks. It looks like a kind a vicious circle.

I personnally would have preffered to sell a lot of records and then make a lot of free gigs....  that's much much more interesting in a marketing point of view.... but not really possible  ....

I wonder what the facts would look like when you study disc jockeys? I would imagine that the number of DJs with pirated music is very high.

WOW! No wonder the industry is in the dumps.

Let's do some simplified math.

In 2001, the industry was worth ~$13.75b, with 100% physical sales. In 2011, the industry is worth ~$7b, with 50% physical and 50% digital sales. (According to http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/permalink/2012/120810decline)

So breaking down 2011 figures, we have $3.5b in physical sales, & $3.5b in digital sales. If consumers made 3 times as many digital purchases, digital sales would be $10.5b for a total of $14b, which would roughly match 2011 figures.

We all know that, given the option to purchase a la carte, consumers generally just buy the single (for heaven's sake, you only have to look at Carly Rae Jepsen's album sales to justify this statement). So I would expect the digital half of the pie to be down as much as 80%, but we can see it's only down 66%.

As far as sales numbers, if ten single downloads equals one album purchase, we ought to see sales totals dropping 66% or more on the digital side, which means 33% dip overall based on a la carte purchasing alone, nevermind outside forces like mtv's changes in content or radio's diminishing impact or the increasing fragmentation of the industry brought on by the internet.

ANYONE who doesn't see the digital download platform as one of diminished returns is blind. Blaming pirates is easy, & it makes people who aren't good at their job (musicians & middle men alike) feel better about their situation in life. But pirates quite simply are not the threat they're made out to be. They just aren't, the math doesn't leave very much room for them. All of the efforts made to demonize or thwart piracy ought to be spent trying to develope a healthy U.S. subscription industry, because that's the only way that the pie is going to start growing again.

Tech

10/16/2012 @ 10:36AM |113 views

File Sharers Buy More Music Than Non-File Sharers: Not Quite What The Report Says

[There’s a big report out about file sharing and the dangers (or not!) that it poses to the music and film industries. The basic point that most of the reports about it are picking up is that those who do file share seem to purchase more music than those that don’t. Here’s one such report:]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/10/16/file-sharers-buy-more-music-than-non-file-sharers-not-quite-what-the-report-says/