Slashdot Mirror
iPod Owners Not Thieves
An anonymous reader writes "Remember last year when Microsoft head Steve Ballmer said iPod owners were music thieves and their iPods were full of stolen music? It turns out they're actually less likely to download music using filesharing software than owners of other MP3 players. A lot less likely." From the article: "A survey of US and UK music buyers reveals that although 25 per cent of people admit to downloading music from file-sharing services, only seven per cent of iPod owners do so. Proving that iPod users are either scrupulously honest or more paranoid they'll get sued by RIAA than owners of lesser music players."
In my opinion, I think there is some competition to consider before making that bold statement.
My work here is dung.
So Steve Ballmer is an idiot. This is news?
--R.J.
Electric-Escape.net
...disposable income to spend on legal downloads than owner of lesser^H^H expensive mp3 players.
-- SIGFPE
People who have iPods have demonstrated a willingness to pay for ease of use and simplicity. That they would spend money at the iTunes Music Store to easily download music rather than go through the hassle of downloading it from a p2p network should not be surprising.
also, this might be a first post...
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
For the record, I own an iPod, so you can put me on the "Do Not Sue" list.
Sincerely,
Me
"I'm just here to regulate funkiness."
> Proving that iPod users are either scrupulously honest or more paranoid they'll get sued by RIAA than owners of lesser music players."
Not really. It's just that it's so much easier to buy from the iTunes store than it is to run some lame P2P app.
I suspect a lot of iPod owners just assume that the only place they get music for it is by ripping from their CDs or buying from itunes.
The stat doesn't indicate that Ipod owners steal music less frequently than non-ipod owners. It's possible from those numbers that all owners of MP3 players steal music at the lower 7% rate. The rest of the illegal music downloading could be coming from those of use who don't own any MP3 players. The article doesn't mention any other MP3 players or their stats.
Not saying that it's wrong, I'm just saying that you haven't backed it up with anything.
--
RumorsDaily
Third option - iPod owners are liars
*ducks*
"Proving that iPod users are either scrupulously honest or more paranoid they'll get sued by RIAA than owners of lesser music players."
Or, that since they have a legal, inexpensive way to obtain the specific music that they want to play, they are more inclined to actually spend $5.00 to get five songs from five different bands instead of $16 for twelve songs from one band, with only one song that they actually want.
Or still, that the people who bought iPods coincidentally are also the same people who already have large CD collections, so they were inclined to rip and encode their music specifically so that they could play it on the iPod, rather than having to resort to scavenging the Internet for music because they were too cheap to pay for it...
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
The iTunes music store eliminates what used to be a HUGE money hole for myself... hunting down import singles for B-sides. Moreso than other music services, iTunes has the obscure releases by the artists that I want, without having to pay an extra $15 a pop... none of which the artist will ever see. And the audio quality is far better than what I may have the off chance of finding off in the armpit of p2p.
Couple that with being able to download it, throw is on my iPod and go? It's easier than pirating. Other devices do it, but I like how iPod/iTunes works.
Bury me in mashed potatoes.
Stever Job once correctly stated that the iTunes store has to compete with P2P services / pirating. They succeded - and it is bloody convinient too.
...
The iTunes store offers so far the best online music store and player combination (software and portable). So far none of the other companies have succeded in offering a better combo. The winner takes it all
After using iTunes, who wants to sift through a bunch of songs of questionable quality, infectiousness, and organization. Really, what a waste of time.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I'm no Apple fanboy, but I give them major kudos to pull off what the RIAA and the major labels are too stupid to understand. This was a technological and economical war from the beginning. Damn them for perverting it into a legal one as well.
Entrepreneur : (noun), French for "unemployed"
"A survey of US and UK music buyers reveals that although 25 per cent of people admit to downloading music from file-sharing services, only seven per cent of iPod owners do so. Proving that iPod users are either scrupulously honest or more paranoid they'll get sued by RIAA than owners of lesser music players."
Another option is that Ipod owners are scrupulously DIShonest, making their numbers a lot lower. Come on, this is like a survey of inner city people who regularly J-walk. You have three categories, the ones that do and admit it, the ones that don't and are proud of it, and the ones that do but say they don't because they are too self conscious.
The iPod is closely associated with iTunes, which makes getting music legally more convenient than downloading. Also, iPod owners are likely to have more money to spend on music than owners of less expensive mp3 players.
Once you bring the price down to a certain point, the average person will pay for a legal copy.
If you have an iPod, it's safer to get songs legally. If you play songs on a PC, it's safer to download questionable content from known criminals than it is to insert a legal Sony CD.
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
Parent is right.
Ipods can't even do vorbis or FM radio.
There are much better alternatives.
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
I'm an ipod/itms user and don't have any illegal music.
... fake files, wrong tags, crappy quality - even sometimes system sounds heard during playback).
when I was younger I had lots of stuff I'd downloaded just because I could, but didn't even listen to most of it. so I got rid of all but my favourite downloaded songs. there weren't that many and from then on it just seemed easier to go to itms than the hassle of p2p (minimum share 5GB! banned for 1 hour! minimum 3 share slots! banned for 1 hour!
then the situation was either have illegal content for the sake of a handful of songs, or just replace them with legitimate versions for the sake of a couple of pints.
itunes just makes being "honest" easier than not. appealing to laziness is far more successful than appealing to respect for disgusting organisations (RIAA) or appalling laws (DMCA).
iPod Owners Not Thieves
Well then, maybe someone would like to explain to me why my iPod is engraved with the following:
To my dearest Helen, I'm sorry I gave you the clap, Gerald
Not to mention that ipod has no wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.
Researchers spoke to 1,000 people towards the end of last year. More details available from XTN Data here. XTN on their home page claims all research comes from web buyers. These people must know that their name is inevitably attached at some point to their data. 'Truthieness' is going to be at stake. We are unable to know if they are offered an incentive to give data or their propensity at openly lying as they know what the proper or inproper action might be.
Paranoid? How about "three times more likely to lie to a potential RIAA lawyer that they download music?" Or "three times less stupid?" Perhaps, less inflammatorily, we could say "iPod owners are three times more informed about the rapacious RIAA barrators."
I don't think it counts as paranoia when they're publicly taking down 8-year-old girls and 72-year-old grandmas. It's self preservation.
John
Sounds like flamebait to me. Calling every other music player "lesser." Yeah, no other music player holds up to an iPod.
Instead of jumping all over the place, how about considering iPod users are more likely to have money hanging out of their pockets than other MP3 player users? Having more disposable income is highly likely to influence the choice between buying and finding less spendy ways to accumulate music.
Maybe because I don't have a pile of cash to throw at Sam Goody I'll rip my collection of CDs, I've been accumulating since they first came out, and make my own music (since I'm scrupulously honest) and if I can't get actually buy it I may resort to downloading.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
... the iPod is a fashion accessory to many these days and the type of people who buy gadgets because they are fashionable are the kind who just stick the iTunes CD into their PC and let it do it all for them. The idea that they could install eMule and seek out music for free won't have entered their heads. They'll be too busy deciding what fashionable accessory to get next (probably a PSP).
Or that iPod users are dishonest and will lie about where they got their MP3s.
Or that iPod users are lazy and tend towards the convenience of iTunes.
Or that iPod users are technically incompetent and can't figure out P2P.
Or that the statistical sampling and analysis was flawed.
There are so many possible reasons. Why did the submitter need to state a false dichotomy?
Oh, now I see why.
are more enticed to use the bundled iTunes legal purchasing software that works well with their computer, their iPod, and the fact that they really don't understand computers? Isn't this software Darwinism? Build good software and they will come, right?
My brother got a nano and he got my dad to buy some music from iTMS, even though he had previously gotten them for free off of peer networks. He could have gotten those songs for free, but since his iPod came with iTunes, he used the included software to get some music. Songs at a reasonable price, found using software he can use. It all makes sense to me.
Get Firefox!
I agree 100% with the parent.
It all comes down to pain. How much pain is inflicted by $1? How much pain is inflicted by finding a decent P2P app, avoiding viruses, then getting a quality download. Most of the users I encounter will pay the dollar.
You seem to be forgetting that there's the possibility that iPod owners are going over to their friends and saying "load me up with your MP3 collection"
I have to fight my friends off with pointy sticks because they keep asking me to drag my mid-tower over to their house so they can have at my MP3s.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
BMW owners found less likely to siphon gas than Ford owners.
Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
Anyone that trusts a survey where people disclose any illegal activity is a good candidate for buying swamp land. Surveys are dodgy at best and when they ask about questionable activities I'd say they are most likely worthless.
I think I was invited to take part in it... at least I was invited to take part in a similar survey. I ran into a problem. On the very question of where my music comes from.
I had the choices, if I recall correctly, of "downloading from a file sharing service", "purchasing from an online music service", "ripping my own CDs", or "copying from my friends". There might have been a couple more, but you could see the idea they had. But there wasn't any option for "downloaded from artist's own website" or "purchased directly from artist". And since a good 20-30% of my music falls into those categories, I stopped there and sent mail asking for clarification.
No response. Survey form timed out. End of story.
It's simple economics. If purchasing music is easier than stealing music, then people will purchase music rather than stealing it. That is to say that if the value represented by the combination of time, effort, and money needed to legally aquire music is less than the value represented by the time and effort needed to steal music, then purchasing is the obvious choice. All irrelevant claims of "bestness" aside, the iPod, iTunes, and the iTMS makes aquiring much easier than any other method (easier is of course not better). But the point being that iPod + iTunes + iTMS is, for most people (not /. readers), "cheaper" than file sharing.
Steve Ballmer is also bald. Film at 11.
They surveyed people who bought music online, not a random sample of mp3 player owners. This doesn't take into account people who only copy music illegally.
Vote for Pedro
Well most talk radio is on AM radio, so FM typically doesn't help.
r l/ref=br_ss_hs/002-2596788-4560056?platform=gurupa &url=index%3Dblended&field-keywords=portable+fm+ra dio&Go.x=0&Go.y=0&Go=Go
Anyways. I have two MP3 players, a iRiver thingy and a Nano.
I barely use the iRiver, even though it has FM radio and all those other shinies. Why? Because I never used them anyways.
On the other hand its possible to get a seperate FM/AM radio for pretty cheap:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-u