Thread: STUDY: Pirates Buy 10 Times More Music Than They Steal

So much for the record industry’s insistence to the contrary.

Once again we have a study by flesh and bone researchers who have discovered that music piracy
actually increases music consumption.



“Consumer Culture in Times of Crisis” was conductEd by the BI Norwegian School of Management, the largest business school in Norway and the second largest in all of Europe. The study looked at almost 2,000 online music users over the age of 15, and asked file-sharers to prove their legal music purchases rather then simply rely on their honesty.

It concludes that those who download music illegally also purchase the most number of legal digital downloads. In fact, the study reports that file-sharers actually buy 10 times as much music as they download for free.

“The most surprising thing is that the proportion of paid downloads is so high,” said BI researcher Audun Molde. “The results suggest that they are buying twice as much music as they get for free, and also those who state that they download for free actually are the greatest consumers of paid music online.”

As usual, record labels say the results are bogus. After all, one illegal download equals one last sale right? That’s what they teach in music industry school.

“There is one thing you cant explain, and it is that the consumption of music increases, while revenue declines,” says EMI record label rep Bjørn Rogstad. “It can not be explained in any way other than that the illegal downloading is over the legal sale of music. “Based on the results from the survey you might think that the free download stimulates a paid download, but here it’s tough keep the tongue straight in your mouth. Whether those who download music for free would buy the same music, it is, and is a purely hypothetical question.”

He may have trouble believing it, but I don’t. Why? Think about it. The record industry has been hammered by a number of factors, but perhaps by none more so that the bane of all decent, hard working musicians - the digital single.

A $20, grossly overpriced, physical album used to be what everyone bought and then came the digital music revolution. To make matters worse, people no longer wanted 2 good tracks and 15 of fluff. They wanted a single song, which they could suddenly get for 99 cents, less than a single dollar.

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out where your profit margins headed with this new paradigm shift.

Molde also takes the music industry to task for not focusing all of its efforts on creating music delivery platforms consumers actually want.



“There should be no record industry task to prosecute those who download illegally,” he added. “They must work aggressively to create good music and make it available in legal forms. It is the legislators job to enforce copyright law.”

Without skipping a beat, Rogstad counters that the music industry isn’t wasting too much time suing file-sharers, and insists that they are working overtime to create music services people want.

“No, we are using much, much more time to develop good services, he says. “In my opinion, is not the key to fight file-sharers whatsoever, it lies with providers, the so-called ISPs.”

Moreover, the study echoes the previous conclusions of none other than the Canadian govt, which found that “P2P file-sharing tends to increase rather than decrease music purchasing.”

That report, The Impact of Music Downloads and P2P File-Sharing on the Purchase of Music: A Study For Industry Canada, was commissioned by Industry Canada, a ministry of the Canadian federal government, and includes extensive surveying on the music purchasing habits of the Canadian population.

“Our review of existing econometric studies suggests that P2P file-sharing tends to decrease music purchasing,” says the study. “However, we find the opposite, namely that P2P file-sharing tends to increase rather than decrease music purchasing.

The record industry claims to use facts and figures to support its conclusion that file-sharing is to blame for decreasing profits, but once again we see that the people it’s blaming for its woes are actually among its best customers.

If file-sharers buy 10 times as much music as their law abiding counterparts, then couldn’t you argue that suing them is actually accelerating the record industry’s decline?

Oh the irony.

Source: The Study

Suck that Sony and company...

If you study anything long enough, you can get any answer you want lol... crazy

That's complete bullshit for me and my friends. I haven't payed a single cent for anything since I got into torrenting music last year. Since then I have downloaded about 3000 songs and bought maybe 10?

the only way this would be true is if you counted all the iTunes gift cards people have given to me. i just laugh and say "thank you," and then give it to someone else or use it to buy an app. lol

What idiot would buy 10 times more when they are getting everything for free?
However why should we be against data like this, it does put the file sharing in better eyes with MPAA and the music industry. If it cn be proven to the industry that the folks who dl movies, songs for free buy more then who knows MPAA will stop the witch hunt and hell maybe give out free seedboxes yeah right!
TJ
Peace
TJ

There are people who buy WAV's (Lossless) after hearing some VBR/Vinyl or even WEB releases provided by the music scene.

These r probably the same people claiming global warming isn't occurring, or wont have negative effects on our planet.

I download tons of lossless music but I'm also a vinyl collector and I spend a lot on it. I think hardcore pirates getting countless gigabytes without spending a cent are in minority. The rest simply follows the 'try then buy' philosophy more or less (including buying digital formats from iTunes, Napster, lossless music online distribution mentioned before, etc.) and this research reveals that. No bullshit in here.