backtop


Print 46 comment(s) - last by TheEinstein.. on Mar 29 at 9:07 AM


The loss of LimeWire has P2P pirates on the run.  (Source: Walt Disney)
But are pirates turning to YouTube and elsewhere

The NPD Group, a top market analytics research firm has released a new study [press release] that might surprise some.  It claims that in 2010 the rate of users who pirate content on peer-to-peer (P2P) networks dropped to 9 percent, down drastically from 16 percent reported in 2007.  This marks a dramatic reversal of the trend of increasing piracy rates in recent years.

The report argues that piracy is not a "fundamental" problem for the media industry, given the relatively low levels.  This stands in stark contrast to statements in the Digital Media Report 2010 [PDF] by the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI), the parent organization of America's RIAA.  The IFPI stated in the report, "[The industry will] struggle to survive unless we address the fundamental problem of piracy."

Warner Music, a RIAA member takes a bit more conservative approach.  In a recent presentation to the U.S. Federal Communications Commission, Warner suggested that only 13 percent of Americans pirate.  The Warner report also offers some disclaimers about the harmful impact of pirates, stating that most pirates do spend money on content and that they "tend to drive high discovery for others".

The numbers from the NPD Group are admittedly slanted, though, due to a significant event in the industry.  They were taken from the final quarter of 2010, when the RIAA scored a major lawsuit win that forced the U.S.'s most popular P2P client, LimeWire, to cease distribution.  Thus the dip in P2P filesharing may be only temporary, due to the loss of one of the highest profile clients.

States Russ Crupnick, entertainment industry analyst for NPD, "Limewire was so popular for music file trading, and for so long, that its closure has had a powerful and immediate effect on the number of people downloading music files from peer-to-peer services and curtailed the amount being swapped. In the past, we've noted that hard-core peer-to-peer users would quickly move to other Web sites that offered illegal music file sharing. It will be interesting to see if services like Frostwire and Bittorrent take up the slack left by Limewire, or if peer-to-peer music downloaders instead move on to other modes of acquiring or listening to music."

Today, many of the most used clients are unofficial community releases of past P2P clients that were banned by lawsuits.  Examples include Kazaa Lite and WireShare (formerly LimeWire Pirate Edition), etc.  According to the NPD Group's data, FrostWire (traditional P2P) and uTorrent (Torrent P2P) increased in use, as well, in the wake of the Limewire shutdown.

While the study did consider BitTorrent traffic (a specialized P2P protocol), it did not consider new forms of illegal content distribution, such as one-click downloads, illegally streamed content, such as unauthorized posts to video sharing sites like YouTube.  The latter seems particularly prevalent, as you can go to YouTube and find virtually any song you can imagine -- mostly from unofficial user-submitted uploads (though the major label industry does maintain an official presence on the site via channels like Vevo).

Media organizations have tried unsuccessfully to sue YouTube's owner Google over such posts.  The television industry championed the biggest such case, when Viacom sued Google, demanding $1B USD in damages for pirated content hosted on YouTube.  The media giant's case fell apart, though, after it came out that Viacom employees uploaded content under fake screennames to make it look like infringed content.

The study also only surveyed those 13 and up.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Forget being a "fundamental" problem...
By wordsworm on 3/24/2011 10:24:48 AM , Rating: -1
I'm sure that a stolen car doesn't translate into a lost sale either.

I think if you check your imaginary research, you will also find that while people are willing to pay hundreds of dollars for a stereo would rather not have anything to listen to than pay for it. People who buy thousand dollar computers don't have $50 for the game they bought it for, either.

In other news, stereos in record numbers have been stolen. The thieves declare that no one was going to pay for them anyways.


RE: Forget being a "fundamental" problem...
By Sivar on 3/24/2011 10:49:14 AM , Rating: 5
The standard response to a car/piracy analogy is that the owner of the hypothetical stereo loses his stereo. No one loses a song because it is copied any more than you lose your voice when someone repeats something you've said.


RE: Forget being a "fundamental" problem...
By Motoman on 3/24/2011 11:04:40 AM , Rating: 5
Exactly. That guy up there is a classic example of the stupidity spewed by people who buy into this BS.

Getting an illicit download of a song, for example, is a copy/paste function. Nothing was "taken" from anywhere, or anyone. Which is to say, the original person who owned it still owns it...it's no more a material transaction than me standing on a park bench and reciting the Gettysburg Address. The original address is still in a museum somewhere...neither the writer nor the owner of the address has suffered anything at all.

To compare it to the theft of a physical object is utter idiocy, and is truly indicative of the wild disconnect from reality suffered by all those who put the slightest bit of trust in the $ figures claimed by the industry/government for piracy "losses."


RE: Forget being a "fundamental" problem...
By Dorkyman on 3/24/2011 11:16:48 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed. The car analogy is baloney, because one object is tangible and the other intangible.

You steal a car, and the car's rightful owner loses the use of that car. You clone a song and the owner still has use of the song. The only "loss" is the revenue the owner would have gained had the thief purchased the song.

My own personal impression is that some songs would have been purchased, but not very many. My guestimate would put the number at 5% of the thief's personal collection. More than zero, agreed, but not by much.


By Hieyeck on 3/24/2011 11:47:54 AM , Rating: 5
Let them use their stolen car analogy.

If the car is stolen, the prior owner needs a new car. Prior owner buys a new car.

So to turn the analogy back, every time a song is stolen, a sale is generated! STEAL MORE SONGS, IT'LL HELP THE APPARENTLY FALTERING MUSIC INDUSTRY.


By StevoLincolnite on 3/24/2011 10:54:42 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
I'm sure that a stolen car doesn't translate into a lost sale either.


If you wish to use a car analogy, so be it.

The difference between a pirated movie and a stolen car is simple... Nothing was stolen, just copied.
It would be more attune to me stealing a copy of the cars design plans, and building the exact same vehicle for myself.

Whoever owns the car does NOT physically loose anything.


RE: Forget being a "fundamental" problem...
By marvdmartian on 3/24/11, Rating: -1
RE: Forget being a "fundamental" problem...
By Iaiken on 3/24/2011 12:05:50 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
But that's not what's happening here. The theft is from the dealer (or manufacturer) of the car, which means that car is then not available for sale to someone willing to spend the money.


But that is not what's happening here. Nothing is being taken, a stream of 1's and 0's is being exactly duplicated so that it is now in the hands of two people instead of just one.

It is also highly unlikely that this would be a quantifiable loss that can be "felt" since it is highly unlikely that the second person would have purchased the song in the first place, they would have simply gone without.

The other thing that I find interesting is that it is illegal for you to sell digital content that you have purchased. Selling a used CD is perfectly legal. Copying a CD for your own personal use is perfectly legal too. But if you destroy the original CD and sell the copy, you're suddenly a criminal. That's the magic of the RIAA.


RE: Forget being a "fundamental" problem...
By mcnabney on 3/24/2011 12:51:51 PM , Rating: 2
It isn't just music.

Take games purchased from Steam online. You cannot sell/transfer a game from user to user (resale) and you cannot transfer your entire account. You never actually 'buy' games on Steam. You buy a license to play that game through an account that may or may function tomorrow.


By Taft12 on 3/24/2011 1:52:04 PM , Rating: 2
This is true, but the deeply discounted prices reflect the resale value that is taken away from you.


"Vista runs on Atom ... It's just no one uses it". -- Intel CEO Paul Otellini














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki