Mobile/PDA About Us Advertise here


		User name	Password

		Not registered yet? Register here. Lost your password? Click here.

Browse by topic

News

New report points fingers at file sharers and music industry

30 September 2007 13:00 by Rich "vurbal" Fiscus | 5 comments

A paper from economist Stan Liebowitz argues that both the music industry and file sharing defenders are cherry picking facts to prove their points.

The primary purpose of the paper was debunking earlier research out of Harvard University which concluded that P2P file sharing has no impact on CD sales. The argument in that study was that P2P activity falls drastically during the summer because most college students don't use file sharing services when they're not at school.

Liebowitz points out two key problems with the study. First, he says the publicly available data on file sharing doesn't back the Harvard study with regard to file sharing patterns. According to his analysis file sharing activity actually increased slightly over the summer in the years covered by the original study. He also notes that the Harvard researchers didn't release their entire dataset, making it impossible for it to be subjected to any kind of peer review.

His report isn't one sided though. He also points out that the music industry's problems are primarily of their own making. He says that music labels' attempts to Block the availability of new technology and sue customers hasn't done anything to stop profits from dropping.

File sharing may or may not impact CD sales, but there are two realities that are inescapable. CD sales are dropping partly because of music downloading - whether legal or illegal, and you can't stop technology from being developed. That combination spells the end of the CD as the linchpin of the music industry, and record labels will either have to act accordingly or be prepared to lose money to those who do.

You can download the entire report from Social Science Research Network.

Permalink to this article

Study says P2P hasn't harmed British music sales (22 October 2007)

« Previous news article
Revenue sharing helps Blu-ray gain better rental presence

Next news article »
Copyright lawyer advises universities to fight RIAA

Post your comment

Discuss this article!
bomber991 (Newbie) 30 September 2007 13:20
Now I didn't RTFA, but I just wanted to say this. The music/movie industry has to say they lose billions of dollars to piracy because they know that most people who download their stuff probably would never pay to see it anyway. The P2P defenders has to say that the industry loses no money because they know that they download movies and music to save money. In all honesty, how many of us use P2P to share files that are not copyrighted? I know when there's a movie that comes out that I want to see, I'll wait a week or two for a good version to be posted online because I sure as shit don't want to spend $8.50 on a movie ticket. That's almost the price of a pizza! [ + quote]
corn (Senior Member) 30 September 2007 16:07
*Originally posted by bomber991:* Now I didn't RTFA, but I just wanted to say this. The music/movie industry has to say they lose billions of dollars to piracy because they know that most people who download their stuff probably would never pay to see it anyway. The P2P defenders has to say that the industry loses no money because they know that they download movies and music to save money. In all honesty, how many of us use P2P to share files that are not copyrighted? I know when there's a movie that comes out that I want to see, I'll wait a week or two for a good version to be posted online because I sure as shit don't want to spend $8.50 on a movie ticket. That's almost the price of a pizza! Lol, I know what you mean. But I don't like downloading movies that just came out, the thought of getting caught makes upset lol. But, honestly, who uses P2P to download files that are not copyrighted? Sure, Ive downloaded an ISO of a Live Linux OS, but thats not the only thing Ive downloaded :). [ + quote]
chaos_zzz (Junior Member) 30 September 2007 16:12
bomber991 i agree man , media is so overpriced going to the movies mean at least 20 each so it's better to just buy the dvd wich is gonna cost like 25 so you can watch as many times as you want, ooor just take it off from your internet bill since you are already paying it wich will cost you $0 :). cd's are 20 bugs movies 25 30 comen on people they should lower the prices so thath actually the world buys original stuff. I live in peru nobody buys legal dvd's they are pirated ones at the street at 1.5 $ (i went to the mall the other day the guy who was running for president was buying the simpson movie so that pretty much says it all) but if they sold ddvd's for less i'll go for it cuz it's better ,if dvd's would be like 10 or 13 ppl would definitly go for original since it's better sharper image and all , same for cd's cuz original have that layer wich makes them scrath safe so i really whink media should lower prices so the world starts buying not only the US or europe or japan or another high developed country [ + quote]
borhan9 (AfterDawn Addict) 1 October 2007 5:18
Tell us something we dont know :) [ + quote]
Outboard (Newbie) 10 October 2007 15:25
The Music Industry are causing their own problems by allowing people to download music 4 a set $ per song. I just pay a couple of $ for the good songs Instead of what they want for a full CD of stuff I don't lick but a few! NOW we have a DROP in sales! So they are Killing themselves when it comes to Profit Now. [ + quote]