Posted on 06/22/2005 5:19:22 AM PDT by N3WBI3
LONDON (Hollywood Reporter) - Around 35% of music consumers now download tracks legally via the Internet and the percentage will soon pass the 40% who have pirated music, according to a new survey released Monday by Entertainment Media Research.
The online research company used data collected from 4000 music consumers to compile the 2006 Digital Music Survey in association with media law firm Olswang.
Fear of prosecution, Internet viruses, and inferior quality were cited as the main deterrents against illegal downloading, the report said. Nearly two-thirds of music consumers said immediate availability was the key reason for buying tracks online.
"The findings indicate that the music industry is approaching a strategic milestone with the population of legal downloaders close to exceeding that of pirates," Entertainment Media Research chief executive Russell Hart said.
John Enser, senior partner at Olswang, added in a statement: "Clear deterrents to illegal downloading are emerging, with fear of prosecution running high, and close behind is the sense that unauthorized downloading is 'not fair on the artists,' suggesting that the industry's messages, led by the British Phonographic Industry, are being communicated effectively."
While the article gives fear of breaking the law most of the credit I wonder how much goes to the fact that the music industry has finally started to adjust its business model. The availability of iTunes and other services with a wide variety of songs from which to pick and choose has had to have had a serious impact..
A fair percentage of those who download "free" music would not otherwise have it. They are not potential customers so no money is really lost to the artist, production company, etc. Music piracy became chic for awhile among the young folks but that is dying down. Unless there is money to be made there will be no music to buy.
You are correct.
I have downloaded hundreds of songs that I would have never purchased.
Do I enjoy the music? Yes.
Do I engoy it enough to pay $12 for a CD of fifteen tunes to get the two songs I want? No.
Cant find much fault with that statement, the kids in school who used to download music (this was when Napster in its original form was legal) would not have purchased it...
They are not potential customers so no money is really lost to the artist, production company, etc.
In the same manner that downloading software you would not otherwise buy is not theft, that is to say technically you're right. Downloading music you have no right to download is in fact wrong, and as close to stealing as one can come without actually meeting the dictionary definition.
Music piracy became chic for awhile among the young folks but that is dying down.
I always hated the use of the word piracy for what is basically copyright infringement. We don't call photocopying pages out of a book in the library piracy..
Bingo. At $0.79-$0.99 a track, people are far more willing to buy just the tracks they like. And services like iTunes, which streams 30-second samples of tracks on request, allows a little "try before you buy" without removing the incentive to pay for it altogether.
But is that your choice? all legalities aside is it right to do something that the owner of that material would not want you to do? I dont really do music but my impression is that with current online services you can pick and choose your songs and not have to buy the whole CD..
Apparently we have choice. People are choosing to buy what gives them the most value for their dollar.
I used the wrong word, I should have said 'is that your right'. TO do something illegal because you dont feel like spending 12$
I have tried itunes.
And I find it very cumbersome (not to mention expensive)compared to the way I was doing it long before they came along.
Often I will download the most popular songs of an artist without having heard them. This is something I can do with other free services.
That way I have songs the group's fans enjoy the most, not the preselected songs used to fill up the CD.
Which was?
I have a subscription to the Coast to Coast radio program so I can download the programs because I can rarely listen from midnight to 5AM, which is when it is live. For the MP3 streams of the broadcast, they have to cut all of the 'bumper' music, which seriously impacts the show adversely. Apparently if they included the bumpers, the costs would be astronomical. For the streamed broadcast they have no such issues, because a 'stream' is considered more ephemeral than the MP3 download.
I'd like to know why the music industry is worried enough about an audio file that is cut at a 48kbps bitrate???? This is fairly insane IMO. If they were sending a 192kbps I could see how they might have a point. I really hope that the unreasonableness of the music industry will eventually kill the beast.
BearShare.
Have you ever photocopied a page from a book without buying it?
Another approach to marketing music is the "creative commons". Check out Magnatune.
You have hit the bulls eye of the argument about all this. If someone who purchased the music offers it to me for free am I wrong in accepting. That is the moral question and I say the answer is no, unless there is a contract on CD's, etc., as there is on software agreements, that prohibit the person from offering it to me. If there is that is like buying stolen goods and is aiding and abetting a crime.
I always hated the use of the word piracy for what is basically copyright infringement. We don't call photocopying pages out of a book in the library piracy..
Seems your likes and dislikes of words are your own peccadilloes. Stealing is acceptable but piracy is offensive, to you. The whole enchilada comes down to the aspect of limited use and reselling. Software is protected by license agreements and the terms are spelled out. Music may be that way now, I don't know, but it wasn't when this whole thing started.
From a practical point of view, regardless of how the moral issue settles out, is that unless money can be made no one will produce and distribute the music. Artist, songwriters, etc., may still play for the love of it but widespread popularity and vast wealth will be much more difficult.
I can pay for and download books and music cheap and can get it virtually 24/7 and in a matter of minutes.
I hope movies become leglly available as well.
Copyright law in regards to books is as follows..
Basically, the law has been interpreted to allow the following:
• ONE copy of ONE article per issue of a periodical or newspaper.
• ONE copy of ONE chapter per book if the book is divided into chapters, or ONE copy of 10% of the book if it is not divided into chapters.
• ONE copy of 10% of a piece of music.
• ONE copy of ONE poem per book, up to 250 lines.
• ONE copy of no more than two pages from a children's book (this includes pictures, paintings, and drawings).
• ONE copy of ONE photograph, chart, or graph per book, UNLESS these are within the context of an article or chapter AND the entire text of the article or chapter is being copied as well; then we may make ONE copy of each photograph, chart, or graph within that article or chapter.
• NOTHING from a workbook with perforated pages (unless otherwise stated on the manuscript). The specific purpose of such workbooks is to have the pages torn out and written on. This is how the publishers make money on them, so patrons who make copies of these pages are defeating the purpose of the workbook and are, in effect, denying the publishers their income.
And I will not that I used to download music, and it was wrong. Me doing something wrong does not give the thumbs up for you? If I was a murderer would that make it ok for you to do the same?
Actually I said its not stealing but very close, I also said its copyright infringement. piracy offends me because its only put in there to make it sound like a more serious crime than it is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.