Harvard Business School: File Sharing is NO THREAT to Music Sales

[gsaldivar]

"Internet music piracy has no negative effect on legitimate music sales, according to a study released today by two university researchers that contradicts the music industry's assertion that the illegal downloading of music online is taking a big bite out of its bottom line.

Songs that were heavily downloaded showed no measurable drop in sales, the researchers found after tracking sales of 680 albums over the course of 17 weeks in the second half of 2002. Matching that data with activity on the OpenNap file-sharing network, they concluded that file-sharing actually increases CD sales for hot albums that sell more than 600,000 copies. For every 150 downloads of a song from those albums, sales increase by a copy, the researchers found."

LINK

 

[sMiLeYz]

psssshhh its the dirty secret the industry doesnt want you to hear.

 

[b0mbrman]

That's cool.

I just hope that the results don't imply that sharing some artist's music morally correct

But that they're "no threat." That really is interesting.

 

[CrazyHelloDeli]

All I can say is I have bought more Music during the fileshareing age than I ever did before.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: HelloDeli
All I can say is I have bought more Music during the fileshareing age than I ever did before.

Let see here...

41 Albums x lets say $15? = $615? Okay.... Now lets look at my friends collection of 2,700 mp3s.....

They are losing money.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Tabb

Originally posted by: HelloDeli
All I can say is I have bought more Music during the fileshareing age than I ever did before.

Let see here...

41 Albums x lets say $15? = $615? Okay.... Now lets look at my friends collection of 2,700 mp3s.....

They are losing money.

Your friend hasn't bought any CD's?

Studies also show that he would not have bought any then even if MP3's weren't downloadable.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Tabb

Originally posted by: HelloDeli
All I can say is I have bought more Music during the fileshareing age than I ever did before.

Let see here...

41 Albums x lets say $15? = $615? Okay.... Now lets look at my friends collection of 2,700 mp3s.....

They are losing money.

2700 x 15?

You think he is going to pay that? You cannot lose money on things that would not have sold in the first place. When I buy music, I usually have heard it first from mp3s, and if I like it, I will often buy it. If I hadnt heard it, I would not have bought anything at all.

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

Those evil men! I guess the RIAA will now have to buy some congressmen to ban universities too!

 

[Mean MrMustard]

Originally posted by: Tabb

Originally posted by: HelloDeli
All I can say is I have bought more Music during the fileshareing age than I ever did before.

Let see here...

41 Albums x lets say $15? = $615? Okay.... Now lets look at my friends collection of 2,700 mp3s.....

They are losing money.

That also assumes he would have bought all the music he has.

I, for one, would not even think of buying some of the music I've dl'ed. Most of it is for shits and giggles.

I know what you are going to say, "that still doesn't make it right"? True. But to say they are LOSING money is bit of a stretch.

 

[ReiAyanami]

41 albums = 41 songs, maybe even 42 if one of them had a little less filler. so u paid $15 per song?

now u can just goto sprawl*mart
[shudder]

 

[chess9]

That's counter-intuitive but probably true.

But, the study begs the question. Is stealing someone's artistic work wrong? Yes, and that IS the question.

-Robert

 

[biostud]

If the Music Industry had just started iTunes and similar much earlier they would have earned lots of money. Too bad they will rather fight and try to control the market than benefit from it.

I very seldom DL's full albums from artist only a song or 2. Bands that make music that is good enough for a full album, I buy.

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: biostud666
If the Music Industry had just started iTunes and similar much earlier they would have earned lots of money. Too bad they will rather fight and try to control the market than benefit from it.

I very seldom DL's full albums from artist only a song or 2. Bands that make music that is good enough for a full album, I buy.

Instead of adapting to the market like any good company would, they are trying to force the market to work for them. And it isn't working, boo hoo.

Maybe they should try increasing CD prices some more to boost sales.

 

[LadyJessica]

It's interesting to note that the Australia and UK version of the RIAA are having the best year ever this year.

 

[Chadder007]

Anyone want to guess which two Universitys will be raided next by the RIAA???

 

[LadyJessica]

Originally posted by: chess9
That's counter-intuitive but probably true.

But, the study begs the question. Is stealing someone's artistic work wrong? Yes, and that IS the question.

-Robert

First, it doesn't "beg the question." It "raises the question."
Second, it's copyright infringement.

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: chess9
That's counter-intuitive but probably true.

But, the study begs the question. Is stealing someone's artistic work wrong? Yes, and that IS the question.

-Robert

I Agree. Oh, and

Is stealing someone's artistic work wrong?

is the dirty secret us downloaders don't want you to hear

BTW, I bought about 2 cd's a month up to 1998 until Scour came around. Haven't bought any since

 

[BugsBunny1078]

I own most of the songs I have listened to.
Thousands upon thousands of songs all completely memorized in my head.
I can play them at will faster than you can click the play button on your mp3 player.
Perfect copies stored in organic digital format.
By creating music and releasing it to the public yea even selling it you are giving it to the public. You no longer own it but it becomes part of other people. Don't release it if you don't want people making copies.
I think the problem with cd sales is the music they are putting out is sucky.
All the stuff I am forced to endure at work on the rock and roll stations is worthless drivel.None of the songs have any meaning to the lyrics. All the guitars are distorted. That was ok to have an alternative of that type when all rock was long beautiful guitar ballads. There can only be so much metal though but now all rock is metal.No one likes it enough to pay for it you have diluted it .sorry try something else.
CD audio also is too old a technology. Try DVD audio the difference is night and day. Even bad music is much better to listen to on dvd audio than good music on cd audio. WHen they changed from cassette tapes to cds I eventually had to rebuy all my albums on cd. They didn;t sound any better even but I still rebought them.Change to DVD audio and the music will actually sound better and people have even more reason to buy them. Or they can go whine about filesharing waaah waaah!

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

You people just don't get it. Obviously record sales aren't affected NOW, record companies are looking into the future when we have increased bandwith and can download entire albums in seconds, and then transfer them to a CD with the whole process taking only minutes to complete. It's only a matter of time before we have the technology and process simple enough so that anyone can do it. Fact is it takes at least some computer skills to download the mp3's and burn them onto a CD.

 

[BugsBunny1078]

Yes but for that to happen sudheer anne the record companies would first have to put out entire albums of good music that people will want to download.Not one or two good songs and 12 fluff spacers.
People want one song because they only like the one song because that is the only good one on the record. The record companies put one good song on a record full of crap then charge 20 bucks for it.No wonder mp3s are popular. You can get the one song you like without all the fluff and it doesn't even cost a thing.

 

[chess9]

LadyJessica:

Regarding your first point, see:

Text

You are behind the culture.

Regarding your second point, what is the distinction you think is relevant? Digital downloads can be, and frequently are, criminal in the U.S. Simply because the U.S. Attorney's Office doesn't want to prosecute them doesn't make them only copyright infringements. I don't see any large difference between stealing my car and stealing my songs, and neither did the U.S. Congress.

See:

Text

-Robert

 

[FrodoB]

The biggest problem in this industry today is that the music sucks. With the exception of a few bands, music has sucked since the grunge era ended. Good music sells, bad music does not.

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: FrodoB
The biggest problem in this industry today is that the music sucks. With the exception of a few bands, music has sucked since the grunge era ended. Good music sells, bad music does not.

Amen to that. If they want to keep suing everyone who has the latest britney spears album, go right ahead. I wouldn't download that trash if it was free AND legal. The problem is their old system is failing. They can't just manufactor the latest hottie, give her a couple generic songs, hype the sh|t out of her, rake in the dough and discard her anymore. It still works, but not as well. That, coupled with the fact that the economy hasn't been doing so well lately (ah...did you expect sales to skyrocket along with unemployment RIAA?) are contributing factors.

Blaming the lag in CD sales exclusively on file sharing is scapegoating at its worst.

And again...change your business model you frickin' dinosaurs! There's money to be made here, and its not just for the lawyers.

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: BugsBunny1078
I own most of the songs I have listened to.
Thousands upon thousands of songs all completely memorized in my head.
I can play them at will faster than you can click the play button on your mp3 player.
Perfect copies stored in organic digital format.
By creating music and releasing it to the public yea even selling it you are giving it to the public. You no longer own it but it becomes part of other people. Don't release it if you don't want people making copies.
I think the problem with cd sales is the music they are putting out is sucky.
All the stuff I am forced to endure at work on the rock and roll stations is worthless drivel.None of the songs have any meaning to the lyrics. All the guitars are distorted. That was ok to have an alternative of that type when all rock was long beautiful guitar ballads. There can only be so much metal though but now all rock is metal.No one likes it enough to pay for it you have diluted it .sorry try something else.
CD audio also is too old a technology. Try DVD audio the difference is night and day. Even bad music is much better to listen to on dvd audio than good music on cd audio. WHen they changed from cassette tapes to cds I eventually had to rebuy all my albums on cd. They didn;t sound any better even but I still rebought them.Change to DVD audio and the music will actually sound better and people have even more reason to buy them. Or they can go whine about filesharing waaah waaah!

Then don't buy it? Someone, somewhere is buying up all the Britney/boy band/bling bling rap crap otherwise it wouldn't be everywhere.

Deep down, are you sure it's the music industry you're mad about. Maybe it's the American consumer

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: chess9
LadyJessica:

Regarding your first point, see:

Text

You are behind the culture.

Regarding your second point, what is the distinction you think is relevant? Digital downloads can be, and frequently are, criminal in the U.S. Simply because the U.S. Attorney's Office doesn't want to prosecute them doesn't make them only copyright infringements. I don't see any large difference between stealing my car and stealing my songs, and neither did the U.S. Congress.

See:

Text

-Robert

technically you're not stealing, you're violating copyright. you have to deprive the owner of the use of the item to steal.