Slashdot Mirror
Canadian Record Industry Disputes Own P2P Claims
CRIAWatch writes "The Canadian Recording Industry Association has quietly issued a new
study that contradicts many of its own claims about the impact of P2P
usage on the music industry. Michael Geist summarizes
the 144 page study by noting that the research 'concludes that P2P
downloading constitutes less than one-third of the
music on downloaders' computers, that P2P users frequently try music on
P2P services before they buy, that the largest P2P downloader
demographic is also the largest music buying demographic, and that
reduced purchasing has little to do with the availability of music on
P2P services.'"
Um. In keeping with the invisible nature of P2P (intentional or otherwise). How does anyone know that they have the facts?
No shit.
Glad they finally figured it out...
Today's show is brought to you by the number 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0: 25
About time someone pointed out the obvious. The most mindnumbing about the whole RIAA/MPAA debacle is how they keep blaming their diminishing sales on the consumers as if we are required to buy so many of their products per year. Last time I checked, when a business's sales are dwindling, its time to try something new, or perhaps even innovate. However, their brand of innovation, i.e. suing everyone, seems to be a bit counter-productive.
Of course, it doesn't help when they have the government in their pocket either.
I haven't read the 144 page research report, but I think it is worth noting that the person who summarized this report, states at the end of his summary that he has been claiming for a long time that p2p downloading doesn't affect sales that much. In other words, he has a perspective on the issue. Somehow, I find it hard to believe that the recording industry is going to look at the stat which shows that a 1/3 of music on computers is from (presumably copyright-violation style) downloading (this is for the most-frequently-purchasing demographic (teenie-boppers)), and say "oh yeah, p2p doesn't harm our bottom line. The recording industry has a different perspective ... they'll say they're losing 33% of their sales and have a freak fit.
... naaa.
Anyway, I wonder if people were asked this questions: "of music you have downloaded (as in copyright violation style), how much of that music is good enough to keep for a 1x/decade listen, but not worth buying?" Maybe I should RTF 144pg report
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
1. Never, ever pay for anything that you can download.
2. Make sure your friends and relatives know how to download stuff for free.
3. Make sure your friends and relatives know they cannot be caught or sued if they just download. Sharing or uploading is what all lawsuits have been based on.
4. Remember that if it is free, it is probably crap. But so is what you would pay for.
Who says it has to be free?
Besides, some of us like having physical media, liner notes, etc. Personally, I like playing cds in my car and it's a lot easier to tell the "real" ones apart at a glance than it is with any of the mix cds that I burn.
As for rewarding the RIAA for behavior that I find distasteful, I don't reward them. How? I buy most of my cds used. The only actual new cds I have bought in the last 2-3 years have been from local and regional bands that I went to see live.
I look at music the same way I look at software - if the people who made it want it to be free, great. If they want to charge for it, that's fine too. If they charge what I consider to be a reasonable price and I have some use/desire for it, I'll buy it. If they charge too much for my tastes or I don't really want it that badly, then I won't but it.
It's amazing how that works.
Everything I need to know I learned by killing smart people and eating their brains.
I wonder when the recording industry is going to realize they are fighting a battle that cant be won.
I used to buy CDs constantly. And now with the implimentation of DRM on CDs and not knowing what type of software is installing when you insert a CD in your computer. I dont dare buy a new CD. I want to be able to buy a CD and encode it into any format i want to put it on whatever device i own. And until i really own the music i buy, im not going to spend my money on some music that might be locked inside their encryption. In 20 years my music i bought might be gone because I cant use it in new devices and technology, or with every new advancement in technology Im left converting my entire collection to some new and improved DRM format because of a firmware upgrade because a new bug is found.
Until I get to choose how I use the music I buy, instead of them telling me how, I wont purchase any.
I buy CDs because I can afford them, and because I can tell the difference between an mp3 and a CD. Yes, my ears are spoiled by high quality ogg and who rips in that but me?
Anyway, the crap the music industry is making is targetted at people with no money.
Mommy and daddy's money only goes so far, and for a minimum wage worker a CD is a couple hours of work.
Now for a software developer such as myself... a CD is a fraction of an hour of work.
So, hey, why don't they make music that appeals to intelligent music conniseurs with money, rather than target the teenie bopper demographic? They should either put out good stuff that reaches people with money, or lower the price on the shitty stuff. Welcome to economics 101 - one price for all demographics doesn't maximize profits.
Buckle your ROFL belt, we're in for some LOLs.
More likely instead of addressing the study they'll try to sue the RI of Canada, somehow making a nebulous claim about the RIoC cutting into their profits.
One of the worst things about Slashdot is dealing with the subset of people who have no sense of humor
It's not always the fault of the recipient for a 'joke' not being got, before you get carried away with the insults. Play nicely. (Condescending's not nice either, huh)
--
Digital media players (UK)
The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
Because in most cases people have ripped their existing CD collections to disk. Better question to ask is what percentage of their current playlist is P2P? And I agree with some of the other comments here, in that if I thought that a third of the people out there were ripping me off, I'd freak too.
that the largest P2P downloader demographic is also the largest music buying demographic
In other words, the people with the most interest in music do both. Surprise, surprise.
reduced purchasing has little to do with the availability of music on P2P services
Agree here. Though while decent content is an issue, I also think that other entertainment options (games, dvds) have an impact, as well as reduced salaries, rising gas and oil prices, and other economic factors leading to less disposible income.
Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
Record companies need to offer a better product. And they ought to consider just giving away a couple of songs per artists right off the bat via P2P. It's happening anyway. I'm an idie musician and I've seen jumps in sales every time I give music away. I can only WISH that thousands of people were trading a few of my songs via P2P because it would send some of them to check out my music, and generate some sales. The music industry should take advantage of P2P instead of trying to fight it. The indie movement is already doing this - most indie artists do give away a song or two. Well, the smart ones do, at least...
Music - www.richardmac.com
Please, understand what you are fighting for.
Please, understand that some people aren't fighting.
Sorry for biting...
But I do feel that the artists (...) have a right to be compensated.
Oh absolutely. I'm all for compensating the artists. However, very little of the retail price for a CD is spent on compensating the artist, and a lot of it is spent rewarding the RIAA for tyranizing the population. That, I think, is wrong. I'd gladly donate a dollar here and there for the songs I love, if I'm confident that the payment system is reasonably secure, and that three nines or more of the money goes to the donatee.
Don't try to justify your theft (and yes, it is theft) by saying that I'm an idiot for paying for my music.
Don't worry, it's not theft, so there's nothing to justify, and you're not an idiot for paying for your music, you're an idiot for paying money to be oppressed by the RIAA.
Anyways, let me explain: If I copied your rhetoric, you would not lose your ability to use it. If I copied all your CDs, you would not lose the raw materials, or the ability to listen to them. If I copied your car (don't ask), you wouldn't lose your car.
It is NOT theft (and I'm sick and tired of people calling it that), it's copying. We as a society (I'll only speak for "my"self, and that's Denmark), had at a time come to the conclusion that giving up our right to copy information (since we were unable to, by virtue of not owning printing presses and CD toaster) would be a good trade, since more works would be produced. Now, the assumptions are wrong: we are able to copy information, almost effortlessly.
I'm just saying that this whole notion that music should be free simply because it can easily be pirated anyway is stupid.
So, if we could copy food limitlessly, we shouldn't let the hungry people have it, because the food-producers need to be compensated?
Yes, it is a valid analogy: copyright creates an artificial limit on the copying on music, the above example is an artificial limitation on the copying of food.
Maybe an economical argument can convince you: once a piece of music is on the internet, supply is infinite. In a free market, that would imply that the prices ought to be zero(*). However, copyright law and the RIAA artificially (try to) limit the supply, thereby artificially keeping the price up.
(*) Note, though, that even if the price is zero, that doesn't prevent people from donating money; surprise: some people do that.
5. you can get everything you want at the library. You can legally borrow it and rip it to MP3 or copy the disc for your personal collection (in Canada, anyway). You can even get new/popular stuff if you simply put a hold on it. In my town, you can place a hold online, and they'll check all the libraries in the area and bring it to the library of your choice when it's available. The wait is usually somewhere between 3 days and 2 weeks. They call you when it's ready for pickup.
I've not had a need to download when all the material I want is available for free right there.
You can accomplish anything you set your mind to. The impossible just takes a little longer.