Re: Theaving Goths
- From: "vampire division" <info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 22 Sep 2005 02:24:36 -0700
H Duffy wrote:
> > wise who believes that file sharing leads to more sales, is mistaken.
> snip..
> But the evidence shows that this is in fact the case. Given that you've
> provided no evidence, do you think perhaps you need to rethink this one?
There is no evidence, there is research based on inacurate data, to
support the theory/myth that file sharing leads to sales. The BPI web
site, has devoted a large area to piracy and is one of many places that
you can find research that seems to indicate that file sharing is
damaging the music industry. they state for example:
04. Filesharing's Effect on Music Sales
The overwhelming majority of reputable third party research shows that
illegal file-sharing has been a key factor in the recording
industry's 22% worldwide sales declines between 1999 and 2004
(Source: IFPI), and the halving in size of the British singles market
over 1999-2004.
You can read the whole thing here: http://www.bpi.co.uk.
>
> > In Inkubus Sukkubus we have released around a thirty songs into the
> > public domain, this we feel has allowed people to download us free, and
> > also crime free, and it has led to sales, however we are still being
> > ripped off because there are thousands of people, sharing tracks that
> > we have not released, some of these files are on sites that list
> > downloads, so we know what sort of figures we are talking about.
>
> You know how many illegal downloads of your material there have been; you
> don't know how many sales this may have caused or prevented.
Most people will not by something if they can get it for free. If
something is available free most normal balanced people will take it
free and use the money to buy something they cannot get free. I makes
basic economic sense. I feel that if thousands of people are down
loading whole albums illegally from just one site, and also downloading
the cover artwork. then it woulds be fair to asume that some of them
out of thousands would have paid for it if it were not free.
>
> > Back in the 70s and 80s home taping almost ruined the music industry,
> > and it was only the introduction of the CD that saved it.
>
> Excuse me? What evidence do you have that home taping "almost ruined the
> music industry"? I've never seen anything that even remotely suggests that
> the music industry was in any sort of trouble during the 70's and 80's;
> could you please support this claim, or if you can't support it, retract it?
>
This is just one example from a quick search:
By the late 1970s, music sales slide, and the record companies begin an
industry-wide campaign to curb home taping. But cassettes hit the big
time with the decline of 8-track players and the introduction of the
Sony Walkman in 1979. The Walkman revolution coincides with improvement
in cassette sound quality and the cassette tape suddenly became the
only format that you could have in your home, in your car, and in your
pocket. The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), the
record industry's lobbying and trade organization, continues its fight
for taxes on blank tapes into the 1980s and legislators eventually
grant the music labels a portion of every blank tape sale.
from:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/music/inside/cron.html
> Illegal
> > downloads are destroying the music industry once again,
>
> Funny, it looks bloody healthy for something on the edge of destruction.
> Album sales are higher than they have ever been.
How do you know how healthy it is, sales of being down by around 20 -
25% over five years, there has been a slowing of the decline this year,
which would coincide with large numbers of people being charged with
piracy.
>
> companies will
> > sign less bands, there will be no incentive for people to be in bands,
> > there will be no more new bands, actually most of this is already
> > happening.
>
> But there are new bands, and they are getting signed, so clearly this is
> untrue.
There are not as many new bands, and record company advances are much
smaller, these days, they are also reclaimable.
>
> See, I'm not entirely sure where I stand on the morality of file-sharing,
> but those who stand against it tend to come up with arguments which are not
> only unsupported by the evidence, but which actually contradict the
> evidence; they say the music industry is being destroyed when actually it's
> bigger than it's ever been, they say file-sharers buy less music when
> actually the figures say they buy more, they say file-sharing is bad for
> small bands when actually small bands benefit by being able to disseminate
> and therefore advertise their music cheaply, and so on.
>
> So how about we quite the empty rhetoric, and look at the _facts_, yes?
There are many souces that say that piracy is damaging to the music all
of which are based on data available, there are also sources that say
that it does not. If people are file sharing they often try to justify
what they are doing, and they probably have a little bit of fear of
being caught and fined, so they try to make what they are doing seem in
some way OK. That is why these reports that piracy leads to sales are
taken on board with such enthusiasm.
>
> H
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Theaving Goths
- From: David Damerell
- Re: Theaving Goths
- References:
- Theaving Goths
- From: Matthew North
- Re: Theaving Goths
- From: Matthew North
- Re: Theaving Goths
- From: Grave
- Re: Theaving Goths
- From: Matthew North
- Re: Theaving Goths
- From: David Damerell
- Re: Theaving Goths
- From: Matthew North
- Re: Theaving Goths
- From: H Duffy
- Re: Theaving Goths
- From: Matthew North
- Re: Theaving Goths
- From: H Duffy
- Re: Theaving Goths
- From: Matthew North
- Re: Theaving Goths
- From: vampire division
- Re: Theaving Goths
- From: H Duffy
- Theaving Goths
- Prev by Date: Re: Theaving Goths
- Next by Date: Re: Theaving Goths
- Previous by thread: Re: Theaving Goths
- Next by thread: Re: Theaving Goths
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|