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.'"

Comments

Well.... Duh

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone here knows it. I buy more music now, not less. And I'm a huge P2P user. I don't buy or even listen to anything from a major label. I don't care if my boycott has any political significance. It's a personal choice. I'm done supporting them. I'm indifferent to whether they survive or not. So I pretty much stopped in to reiterate the obvious. Since it's early in the thread and all... I also like buying used CDs, electronic trance etc from ebay and places like that. Stuff that didn't have huge production runs and are out of print and can't be purchased new. And my mp3 collection otherwise is stuff I wouldn't buy or couldn't find on CD...

No kidding.

[AWhiteFlame]

Most audiophiles are not going to have a giant music library of all pirated music and have 0 CDs or purchased media.

Personally, the only time I use gnutella or such is when I need a copy of a song without DRM for whatever reason. I already have the song on CD or from iTunes.

This study is pretty much redundant. This has been said again and again. But not that the RIAA [is going/wants] to listen.

Re:Damn right

[ClamIAm]

And with the draconian copyright laws we currently have, most (all?) of the music on OCRemix is considered infringing. I only mention this so we all remember that there's quite a few issues involved in the struggle for better copyright law.

The OBVIOUS

[us7892]

It seems so obvious. It always has been obvious.

Except, I do remember a colleague of mine filling half the available diskspace on my company computers with Napster music downloads back in 2000. He was racing to beat the crackdown. He burned a lot of CD's from that frenzy of music downloads...

Re:The Fault

[MightyMartian]

Quite frankly I think the root of the problem is that the record companies have become so overwhelmingly corporate in nature, so dominated by dull, unimaginative accountants and MBEs that they've forgotten the precise nature of the business. I really can't believe that the early 1990s saw the last gasp of groundbreaking music, but the last decade has basically saw a cookie-cutter approach, with forgettable boy bands and female stars who require odd sounds and digital enhancements to make their "dance" records even work in any sense of the word.

Record companies are blaming a lot of people for their own failings. Right now the next Beatles or Led Zeppelin could be slogging away unnoticed, but record companies don't seem at all interested in encouraging and developing artists, and they're reaping what they sow, and all the anti-consumer DRMs and legislation won't give these incredibly musically inept corporate types what they need.

Besides, these are the same pack of crooks who spent the last fifty years screwing artists every which way, so I figure that a good deal of payback is in order.

Well, someday hopefully 100%

[synonymous]

In fact, I have only bought CD's in the last long many years simply because of P2P. Excruciating story short,,, I simply hadn't heard the likes of what I listen to now. Never knew it existed. Thanks to the non strategy of P2P, it seems to be to those that simply are seeking.

Arctic Monkeys shows what can be done

[Nice2Cats]

Interestingly enough, Wired currently has a longish story about a group called Arctic Monkeys that bypassed all the industry stuff and has been a big success because, not despite them giving songs away:

Their story is remarkable because of one fact: grassroots communication channels like MySpace and P2P file trading networks worked better than the major-label hype machine. The Arctic Monkeys became hugely popular because they wrote good songs, made them available to their fans for free, and encouraged them to share the MP3s with their friends.

Given my two latest, disasterous experiences with major-label hyped artists -- Enya and Kate Bush, whose new albums should both best be avoided -- I'm more than willing to look in other places.

Re:The Fault

[goonerw]

who require odd sounds and digital enhancements to make their "dance" records even work

Ben Fold's said it best in "Rockin' The Suburbs":

I'll take the checks and face the facts, while some producer with computers fixes all my shitty tracks

Then again, we have a flood of "Some unknown vs. Well known artist of old (80's etc.)" with the well known artist's song and just repeating the first line of the chorus to some shitty backing dance crap. At least some poptarts try singing the whole song, albeit without the feeling, intent, or even in the same key, "danced up" and sounding absolutely horrible.

My (limited) experience and connections

[hummassa]

Tell me that p2p and even street-sold pirate records do NOT affect at all record sales.

People (that I know) that download p2p music normally buy "official" records and support (going to shows etc) the musicians they like. They also throw out a lot of the downloaded stuff -- the things that are no good.

There are two kinds of people (that I know) that buy street-sold pirate records: the immense majority are relatively poor people that buy one CD for R$ 3 (US$ 1.50), because they can, and they wouldn't pay R$ 40 (US$ 20) -- which is the price of a hit CD on the stores -- they just would not buy the record at all. Some perspective here: our minimum wage is R$ 300/month (US$ 150) and the price of one record is over 10% this value.

Most medium-class folks I know abstain from buying street-sold pirate records; most of the ones that do, use them as the p2p downloaders: to have a large (as in they'll never hear it all), garbage, music collection, and to select to which musicians they'll support by buying the official records.

Mind you, one of our (reasonably good, 1980's hit) musicians decided to sign off a record company and go indie -- with good results for him. I'm not really a big Lobão fan, but he sells his new CDs on the newspaper stands (because the big record companies tell the music stores "if you buy his CDs I won't sell to you") for R$ 10 -- which is far cheaper than Sony/etc would charge for them.

Re:My (limited) experience and connections

[BewireNomali]

All of my peers download music and don't buy. In fact, I can't remember when we've collectively seen the inside of a music store.

I understand what you're saying. You make two mistakes: asusming first and foremost that your experience is widespread, and second, that everyone who downoads then decides to pay for the EXACT SAME THING - even thoguh they don't have to.

With all due respect, that seems kind of dumb to me. As in not smart.

I've heard all the "moral" arguments. Fact is, that less than 5% of major label artists ever recoup expenses. Which is to say, less than 5% of artists ever sell enough to get into the black. So, buying a record is supporting and bolstering the music cartels that enslave the artists. Even after recouping, most artists rarely see more than $0.15 US per unit sold. The artists get fucked. Record companies are pimp industries and the artists are getting fucked. All of which is to say, the moral argument of buying something after you download makes no fiscal sense, and it doesn't benefit the artists. So, all of you who compalin of the hold the RIAA has on the industry buy into it when you buy music from affiliated labels. Everyone should know that an opinion in the US that you don't put your money behind is not an opinion at all. Good luck with that.

And then on top of it, you're all out of cash from these CDs you keep buying. It makes no sense to me. Honestly. And I work in media. I know mid level music execs who joke and laugh thatthey can't understand why people keep buying music. They LAUGH at you. *shaking head* Execs from Sony and Universal here in New York - it's an inside joke for them that music is worth $0.00 to the audience in the digital age. I've even seen their powerpoint presentations to that effect - I wish I had a link.

This buy music after downloading thing is misguided, and in my opinion, another example of how the system doesn't have to enslave us, they program us to enslave ourselves. And we proceed.

Notice who the CRIA blames

[davebarnes]

I did read (well, skimmed) the Comment and the 2 Appendices.
The CRIA blames "big corporate radio" for the downturn in CD sales.