Illegal Music Downloaders Found to be More Valuable Than Legal Ones
Research into music downloading habits has revealed that illegal users actually spend four and a half times more on paid-for legitimate music downloads than the average user. The reports authors say that the existing P2P networks need to be built on.
The study revealed that the pirates actually spent £5.52 (US$9.61) a month on legal music downloads compared to £1.27 (US$2.21) a month with users who stayed on the right side of the law.
The Leading Question, the digital music research firm who carried out the study, says that rather than prosecuting these valuable customers they should be enticed into using legal alternatives.
It takes the amount of music downloaded by a person where each song is a buck or so and averages it out. If you're downloading music for free then you will download as much as you want w/o having to look at your checkbook, etc. and not just the songs you really want like on a pay per download service.
How am I spending 4.5 times more??? I read the source and they fail to explain this. Last time I checked I was downloading FOR FREE. Albeit illegally, but still I don't recall them ever getting a dime. Emule seems to work without my credit card.
Can someone else better explain how this costs me money????
The results of this study are 'on average', meaning not everyone contributes the same amount.
Basicly what this study is saying is that *on average* people who illegally download music are doing it for a 'try before buy' purpose, if they really like the music they download, they will either buy the track, or buy the CD.
It is pretty simple. Some people don't turn on their radio, they don't care about music period. Those people who download music, are interested in music. Interested people are customers. Its like saying people who watch Hockey, spend money on Hockey stuff. Pretty simple really.
I got music illegaly, when I got a job, I used it as a try b4 you buy system. I would download a few tracks, if there was more than 5 good ones per album i would buy it. Then they started pumping out the crap albums with 1 or 2 good songs on it, and I wont pay $30 for 2 good songs, or ever $20 to buy two singles ($10 each on cd). Then the RIAA started sueing everyone left right and center, so I stopped buying music by any label that and anything to do with the RIAA. I was spending about $150-$200 per month on music (I got a 3 hour commute every day to work, 90 mins in, 90 mins out). Now they get diddly squat.
They want to say pirated music has cost them money? Well in a indirect way it has, becuse its their stance on it that has made me stop buying.
Now I have an iPod, and pool most of what I own on there. And listen to the radio for anything new (unless its not supported buy a RIAA label, then if I like it I will buy it as well), they still get a little money from me listening to the radio, but not near as much as when I buy a CD.
They should cash in on the online system, offer songs for $1 and pump them out, no cd or printing costs, just chuck it online. Also have them in high quality, I bought one song online, and it even had the annoying copy protection 'blips' in it you got when you ripped it yourself. So the paid for MP3 was no better than a limewire download. There are ways to address the online music situation a whole lot better, endorce it, embrace it, use it as a tool. Trying to crush it will only result in them being crushed. No amount of laws will ever stop a populas from doing what they think is fair. And 'protesting' and unjust law.
I read one comparison in the paper yesturday that downloading music is like stealing a cd from a store, no its not, the store paid for that cd, and need to sell it to make money and stay in business. No one paid for that mp3 on P2P. And dont start that the artists lose the money, they hardly get anything from the CD sale anyway, its eaten up by the record label straight away. The con men in the middle are the only ones that lose out, thats why they are sueing.
http://dictionary.reference.com/ "A person having an ardent interest in stereo or high-fidelity sound reproduction." / I've downloaded a lot of material illegally, but this has made me discover music that I would've never found out by tv/radio/advertising/friends etc... So have I purchased more? You bet.
"http://dictionary.reference.com/ "A person having an ardent interest in stereo or high-fidelity sound reproduction." / I've downloaded a lot of material illegally, but this has made me discover music that I would've never found out by tv/radio/advertising/friends etc... So have I purchased more? You bet."
about half of my downloads are from artists that aren't in any music stores i know of in this city, and would need to be bought from a city an hour north of here or bought online. i don't buy online so thats out of the question... i have no vehicle so can't really make the commute reasonibly, not that 2 hours of driving for a $20-30 cd or several of them would be reasonible...
hell the big music stores here will only order cd if their parent company has them in the stock book... most of my music will probably never make it into those books.. theatre of tragedy for example.
"That isnt the point... The point is that if some one downloads alot from P2P for free chances are they are just sampling the songs and then buying them."
oh hell, i have music download now that i have a legit copy of... infact i'd say that accounts for 10% of my downloads alone.
music that isn't found in stores around here make up another 30-45%... another group (for an extension of my example in my last post) in this catagory is Cruxshadows.
I also hate it when they still claim copywrite and sue you over material they are not producing any longer. Try getting some older material, that they wont press on cd anymore. The only way is illegialy online, the CD's arnt sold! Yet still your in the wrong some how.
Doh I should have read that better. I thought that it referred to people paying more for p2p download services.
@ssxxxssssss: That is very true about how little the artists profit from their being used by the record labels. Here is Courtney Love 'doing the math': http://www.reznor.com/
I returned my ipod for a creative touch...couldn't use it w/Yahoo's service (their fill and go type) so i canceled them. napster said it would be coming soon (w/a firmware update)
so...i traded that in for a creative zen micro. Woudln't work w/yahoo (even after the firmware update) and creative's music manager is NO itunes for sure...my messy music files that took 30 mins to organize w/itunes seemed to take that long w/only 10 albums on that crap.
so...i returned that and went back to sams club and bought my ipod package for only 300 (saved 30 dollars in less tahn 2 weeks)
if legal music was simple...and would have worked for me...and cheap(er) i would be all over it
There are a lot of artist I would never have bought cd's from if I hadn't done the "try then buy". I refuse to spend $20 on an album from an artist I never heard much of. I also refuse to buy if there is only three songs I like on a disc. THe downloading actually encourages to buy more as I find new artist I like or finding out that older releases have more good songs than I thought.
do you people buy stuff? MSRP on a CD is often less then $20. I've already stated before that anyone paying MSRP is an idiot because there are many, many places to buy things 20-50% less them that. Not to mention the plethora of places that you can buy from online.
second, the article seemed to me to be pointing out something obvious. people are more likely to download new, unfamiliar music than they are to go out and buy an album by someone they dont know. if they find something they like they might actually buy the album.
obviously there are some people like Daev who refuse to pay for the music they enjoy. there are also just as many people who download music as 'try before you buy'. id say its likely that the try before you buy people are more activly searching for new music and more activly buying new CDs than those who sit back and let the radio decide whats good and buy a new album every couple of months by the same couple of bands.
I've bought one to many shitty albums in the past, now i'll grab the whole album if i like it, chances are i'll buy it from "www.play.com" or Tesco Jersey (cheap as chips) if they suck i'll delete the songs and never speak of it again.
I like my cd collection, but thanks to the internet i like my cd collection even more because it doesnt contain shitty cd's anymore.
how many ppl who download illegal music aren't hitting the music industries profits, since a lot of what they download is material that they'd never have otherwise bought anyway. And when they do download something that they like, they tend to go and buy it legitimately afterwards anyway.
A survey of 600 people? Hardly sound all inclusive and not necessarily accurate. Bet it would be pretty easy to do a survey to prove that people who steal music are also more likely to lie on a survey. ;)
It is comparing the amount people who download music illegaly spend on downloading music legally to those who only download music legally. It doesn't take CD purchases into account.
i run a good size mp3 room, for the last 8 years, last count i have 130,000 plus mp3s heh, all mint quality due too the great cracked apps i run them through, hell most of them sound even better then store bought cds, outta the 100's of ppl i met in mp3 rooms over the years maybe 3 or 4 ppl i met would actually go buy the odd cd cause it wasnt to be found anywhere, so many times i heard ppl say they go buy the cd if they liked the music they downloaded, yeah,,, right,,, stop lying too us, your full of it, ok, maybe if all u could find were bad copys, then maybe u might buy it, anyways i musta bout 1,000 cds & 5,000 LP's before i discovered my 1st mp3, aint bought a cd since, the cost is part of it, the last lot of cd's i bought were such junk & that was 8 years ago, & i think 99% of music after 1997 is pure crap, bring back the 70's & 80's dammit, real music, worth every dollar, ok i better stop before i get into all my pirated movies, tg canada has no laws on copyright material anymore, ok u can find a few laws on line i'm sure, but no way in hell would a cop waste there time arresting u with the way the mess of copyright laws are right now, there working on fixing the laws on copyright stuff, but i cant see it passing for many years too come, long live mp3s, woohoo!
is that I should go out and randomly buy cd's at the discount places even if I have no idea if I will like them or not? I'm sorry but I consider it a waste at $20 or $10 to buy a CD where I like 0-2 out of 14 songs.
Im in australia, some cd's can be got for $20 but thats only if kmart (like the USA walmat kinda) stocks them, they dont have a great range unless you only like top 20 pop however. $30 is the price for most cd's, and $50 if you want something from the usa that is not 'released' here like most of the rap or harder to find R&B. Amazon is ok, but we get hit with massive duty fees once it hits Australian shores, which make buying most not worth it.
I download tons of music every week. Whenever I find a good CD I eventually buy it, usually within a month time. When I could not download music to give it a test ride, I simply did not buy anything. Hence, my ability to download music (illegally) made me a regular customer. I do the same with Anime.
In theory you could sample music through legal sources like Radio but that is only if you like crap like Britney and the Back Street Boys. I love trip-hop (i.e. Massive Attack, Portishead) and other not so common stuff like Dead Can Dance, The Thievery Corp, etc, I have failed to find any radio station in Canada and South America that plays those artist like those on a regular basis.
