A month after download law, consumers spending less on music: survey

[xeffects]

I will admit I have downloaded many albums illegally but once I realize I like the music, I usually go out and purchase the actual album + others. I downloaded one of the Girls Generation album and listened to the whole thing and I realized I loved it. A month later, I deleted the album and ordered all of their albums from Amazon.com.

The world doesn't seem to understand, that they can never control the NET, the NET represents the world, you can't police the entire world through a cybernetic network, that is like trying to be "eNatzi".

[Kumi3]

There's never been any proven correlation between unauthorized downloads and so-called 'lost' sales.

The majority (but not all) of my mp3 downloads duplicate what I've already forked out for on vinyl and CD.

I also download a shit load of (e)books, but I still purchase what I can.

Realistically, if I couldn't download much of what's available on the internet, I still wouldn't be purchasing it.

And who can really say they could afford to pay for everything they download ? A bare handful on this planet, I would imagine.

A download equals a lost sale - it's a fantasy.


At the end of the day bringing a halt to digital sharing will only disrupt the free advertising it provides, and hence reduce legitimate sales.

* * *

The other side of the coin:

When any commodity of the Information Age, book, song, video, can be manufactured at the push of a button (if even that), and provided to a planet-wide consumer base, asking any price that exceeds a fraction of one dollar (to pick a currency) honestly, is just ripping you off.

[frogleg]

When I was young I bought record albums, then audio tapes, then CDs of all my same favorite recordings. I do not feel too bad about downloading a digital copy now because my money times three went into building the music machine of today. The companys have always ripped off the musicians from day one of music distribution. Greedy companys have drained musicians of their lives and talents for profits. I have no remorse for any music company who has failed to keep up with the times. They had a lot of loot to shell out for futures research. Those companies can die off, I don't care.
Some savvy production companys are trying new techniques. For instance; I just downloaded a (free) mini-series of the upcoming Battlestar Gallactica: Blood & Steel production. The series will not air until Feb.2013, and the same month it will release the DVD for the series. They are using the structure of downloading from the internet to their advantage. By giving a prequel, they invite people to either buy or watch the show when it airs in February. And they give enough time for word of mouth (best advertiser of all) to spread the word of a (hopefully) good product. I know this is a video product, but this type of thinking could work for music as well. Radio did not kill the record industry by making music free to listen or record over the airwaves - it enhanced popularity and sales. Freedom on the internet will not kill the music industry either. My two cents in the matter.

[Summer-Time-Fun]

frogleg,
you took the words right out of my mouth. I was going to make a post last night but decided not to. But you got me fired up today in a good way.
The money I've spent, I could have bought two mansions. I've got twelve crates of CDs in my basement, not to mention all the LPs I've lost track of. That's one point.
I was buying these things at $15.00, $18.00 and sometimes $30+ for double CD sets when it only costs them .5 cents per CD. Who's the thieves.
And you're right, the musicians have gotten F...ked on most of their contracts.

I remember when Metallica and all the record company's were trying to punish everyone a few years back. It's funny because I didn't hear one musician complain on the news. The only reason Metallica was after everyone was because they are a record company. Most these musicians didn't start making money till their 3d CD.
Whenever I was lent a CD, or demo-ed something from the net, I always bought it if I liked it. This idea that you simply buy a CD and hope you'll like the songs is sort of like like buying a car, or set of headphones and never seeing or hearing them (in the case of the phones for example). I had posted a similar example here.
On a side note, as strange as it sounds. I really miss going into Tower Records and cracking open a new CD in my car to smell the fresh plastic.
I always liked having the physical CD as a backup and also digitally on a drive for easy access.

[major9686]

Question...
Is that only for music and videos ?
what about applications and games ?

and as for the music, only japanese music and movies ?! which were released (was licensed) by a japanese company such as sony ?

Also, does that regards only Torrents or Direct Downloads as well ?
And how can they tell ?!
I mean, HQ videos on Youtube, download MODS for games, CLOUD sharing and sync between devices can take quite a lot of bandwidth.

Do they target torrents via specific ports ?
people who get lots of traffic in their UL/DL bandwidth?!

[elgringo14]

I wrote this in the other news thread about that law:

Originally Posted by elgringo14

As far as I remember, the law is focusing on DVD/Bluray/CD rips of live and anime series, movies and music. For some reason other media (JAV, IV, mangas, software) are not really concerned (differences of lobbying?) so they should not be as much affected as the "target" ones. TV streams shall not be concerned as well because they are "free" (at least for the free channels).

About the law targeting more the torrents or direct downloads, I'd say it is hard to monitor direct downloads which are basic http fluxes. Streaming, torrents and other p2p use specific protocols and can really be tracked.

[deny2001id]

Iam gundam fans.
we know very much gundam product from illegal video download. then we buy gunpla from bandai. well yeah if we were in same situation too (HARD to illegally download and will get punishment if we do that), then I'm sure, gunpla sales will be fall.
ya know, we like then we buy because we know / familiar with it. in my language there's wise words: tidak kenal maka tidak sayang

[Ceewan]

Originally Posted by elgringo14

I wrote this in the other news thread about that law:



About the law targeting more the torrents or direct downloads, I'd say it is hard to monitor direct downloads which are basic http fluxes. Streaming, torrents and other p2p use specific protocols and can really be tracked.

Kind of a mixed bag I would think. If you are part of a P2P download then it is doesn't take a genius to track the most of the players involved in that download, which is exactly the method being used in the "six strikes" type of laws in Europe. ISPs' that use throttling merely check bandwidth usage and have no idea exactly what you are downloading via P2P. But you cannot track what P2P users are downloading if you are not part of the swarm. Since bittorrent is a legal way to transfer information just knowing someone is using P2P means next to nothing.

With direct downloads it is another matter. As long as a company keeps logs you can be tracked. There are ways of hiding your real IP but most people don't even bother. Of course there is a lot of work involved in getting at those logs, if they are available, so more attention is put to tacking the sites that store these files rather than the users that up/download them.

That is my take on it anyway.