Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The File Sharing Database

Posted by timothy on from the self-selection-illustrated dept.

Nuclear Elephant writes "The File Sharing Database is an online record of things users wouldn't have bought if they hadn't downloaded it (or part of it) first, and therefore tracks sales as a direct result of file sharing. The RIAA and MPAA claim that file sharing hurts sales, but some recent figures show that file sharing works FOR the industry. This database sets out to prove it once and for all. So if you've ever bought something you downloaded, roll on over and add it to the database."

20 of 296 comments (clear)

  1. Where's the other way round? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Where's the database which shows what customers would have bought if they hadn't downloaded it?

    1. Re:Where's the other way round? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I used to own a bunch of albums on Audio Tape. Those tapes wore out long ago. I'm talking about 100 audio tapes at $8 a pop.

      As far as I am concerned, I still have a license to that music, but I don't have a working copy anymore and deserve a replacement.

      Where's THAT database Mr. RIAA?

    2. Re:Where's the other way round? by Veridium · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Personally, anything I download and continue to listen to I buy. If I had to buy things sound unheard like back in my teen age years, I'd be buying alot less than I do now. In fact, I had dropped down to about 4 CDs a year when I first started downloading MP3s. I had just been so burned so many times by paying 17 bucks for a CD with 1 okay song and 9 crappy ones that I simply stopped buying CDs altogether, unless I got to hear the whole thing from a friend first.

      MP3s changed that. I probably buy about 30 CDs a year now. The last CD I bought sound unheard, was Van Halen III. Any Van Halen fans here will probably understand why that was the final straw. MP3s allow me to avoid wasting my money on crap and only buy the stuff worth owning. And believe me, if I don't buy music after downloading it, it means I think the music sucks and is not worth paying for.

      --
      Think for yourself, destroy your television.
    3. Re:Where's the other way round? by robochan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I would guess that there is a very strong correlation between how many times each song is requested to be played on the radio and how many CDs are sold.

      What in the world makes you think that anyone is requesting this stuff on the radio?
      Other than the oddball local call-in show once in a while, 99.999999999999% of all comercial radio/mtv programming is done via marketers and machines based on who looks good enough to put a $XXX million dollar marketing campaign behind.

      --
      ...Rob
      The American Dream isn't an SUV and a house in the suburbs; it's Don't Tread On Me.
    4. Re:Where's the other way round? by billcopc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You need to find a better record store. Oh you mean a CD store, that's different!

      I find it humorous when they offer between 5 and 12 albums for preview on those little headphone jukebokes. Humorous because they will consistently pick out 11 rap or gaymetal albums, and one stunning non-pop album. There are litterally tens of thousands of albums in-store, but you only get to hear a dozen of the latest, most overhyped teen pukes.

      Cross the street to the _record_ store, and shrinkwrap is nowhere to be seen. There are several SL1200 decks with decent headphones, and you can grab any record and have an earfull, for as long as you like.

      Of course, you'll pay on average 20$ for a vinyl album, 5-10$ for a single, but by the time you've got your wallet out, you know you're going to love this music so it is worth every penny.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    5. Re:Where's the other way round? by Crazy_MYKL · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, it's like claiming you need a new book because reading it gradually deteriorated the ink...

      --


      <jedi> There is something funny here. You laugh. </jedi>
    6. Re:Where's the other way round? by ergo98 · · Score: 4, Funny

      No one force him to abandon tape for CD, just as no one forced him to replace his copy of "Porky's" with the Anniversary DVD edition.

  2. how? by LBArrettAnderson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    how would this database prove it once and for all? it doesn't account for all the things that people have downloaded and NOT purchased even if they liked it.

    I'm not claiming either way, but this database isn't going to prove anything; it's just going to show a large amount of people who have bought stuff.. but guess what. there's also a large amount of people who don't buy stuff.

    1. Re:how? by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A more important question: Why do people think that the RIAA is against filesharing because of diminished sales? Sure, they might say that, but do you think that the RIAA has no strategists? That's just a convenient excuse.

      The reason they are against this, is because they realize that they'd gladly lose a few sales today, to own it all tomorrow. What good is a few filesharing-induced music sales compared to making you all music slaves for eternity, 20 years from now? That's why filesharing is bad, because it lets you start thinking you should have any control over music.

      Duh.

  3. Isn't this illegal? by Sheetrock · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I mean, if somebody registers that they downloaded a whole bunch of copyright protected content and bought it later, aren't they admitting to doing something illegal?

    Something to think about. Maybe this list won't cause any problems, but I wouldn't anything past **AA and their lawyers.

    --

    Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
    -- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.




    1. Re:Isn't this illegal? by RPoet · · Score: 4, Informative

      At least where I live (Norway), downloading music and movies is perfectly legal.

      --
      "Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
  4. Interesting, but pointless. by sultanoslack · · Score: 5, Insightful
    • The RIAA and MPAA won't care at all about this -- they'll just claim it's lies.
    • There's no reference point and no tracking of purchases not made; you can't make a comparison without a baseline.
    • Demographically this is going to be very slanted; most consumers wouldn't fill out something like this.
    When I read the description I thought, "hey, cool" as I really do buy quite a few of the things that I see or hear first via file sharing, but looking at how it's done this really won't accomplish anything or get anyone important's attention.
  5. Wow, $712 gained from file sharing! by phpm0nkey · · Score: 5, Funny

    How much longer can the MPAA and RIAA ignore these staggering figures?

    --
    domain combinatorics
  6. No way i would post to this by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Admitting to copyright violations to some random website doesn't sound like a good idea. How do we know this isn't a honeypot for the ??AA to collect IP addresses?

    Nice idea, but I would recommend not posting to it unless immunity were to be granted somehow.

  7. I for one... by nautical9 · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... have purchased well over 300 blank CD-Rs!

  8. Iv got a better DB by RTPMatt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How about we keep track of all the stuff that we would have never paid for had we been able to see just how crappy it was before ever shelling out the cash?

  9. Re:100,000,000 by foidulus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yeah, but guess what, iTunes proves that most artists no longer need the RIAA. Yeah, the RIAA still owns their old music, but now there is very little overhead to make a new release. You record it, and send it over to iTunes(yeah, it's a bit more complicated, but you get the point). Moby has already released some independent stuff on iTunes.

  10. What about downloading stuff you already bought by foidulus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    CDs and DVDs break, games go missing etc. You shouldn't have to pay for it twice just because the cheapy medium broke.

  11. my buying preferences by v1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I download movies. Quite a lot actually. Most of it I glance at, or if it's a series, watch the first ep or two and chuck it because it's not anything I like. A few though I watch and really enjoy. Those are the ones I go out and buy, so I can see them at full res on my bigscreen. As it is I have four stacks of DVDs about 3ft high each, and a good chunk of that is due to my being able to "preview", or if you prefer, "try before you buy".

    As for software, I don't download as much, and I have to say that the majority of things out there fall squarely into the "crap" category. (the free software often has better odds of being decent) But when I find a good app or game that I want to see more of, I support the authors and buy it. If it's shareware, I register it. If it's freeware, I send a paypal to the author. (have you paypal'd Brahm Cohen yet? I hear he's running low on pizza) I patiently await the day the RIAA/MPAA drop their BS and they (and the govt) acknowledge the right to try before you buy.

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
  12. What about stuff you wouldn't buy . . . period. by bedouin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm sure there's tons of people who would switch to OpenOffice, Gimp, or Linux if there was no way to pirate a copy of Office, Photoshop, or Windows.

    The average person who pirates Photoshop uses it to crop pictures and some minor editing. They wouldn't pay for it if it couldn't be pirated, they'd just use something else.

    How many mp3s have you downloaded just for background noise, but wouldn't waste even a dollar on? Probably lots.

    Liking something is a lot different than liking something so much to spend hard earned money on it -- at least to me.