Debating Europe: What would save the music industry from digital piracy?

On June 26, 2015, the Internet platform “Debating Europe” of the Friends of Europe and the NGO Europe’s World, which is supported by the European Council and other European institutions the question “What would save the music industry from digital piracy?” was posed. I had the honor of starting the discussion on Skype. Find more here: http://www.debatingeurope.eu/2015/06/26/illegal-downloading/#.VY0gH0ZyfAF

Advertisement

The Music Industry’s Fight Against Napster – Part 4: Napster’s Slow Death

On December 6, 1999, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) sued the first file sharing platform Napster for copyright infringment. This was the start of a still ongoing campaign against file-sharing and related practises. On the occasion of the 15th anniversary of RIAA’s lawsuit against Napster, I would like to retell the story of Napster relying on Joseph Menn’s book “all that rave. The Rise and Fall of Shawn Fanning’s Napster” (2003) as well as on court documents and press articles.

In the fourth and last part the slow death of Napster is highlighted when Bertelsmann AG bought the sued file sharing service and failed to turn it into a sustainable business model.

The Music Industry’s Fight Against Napster – Part 3: The Trial

On December 6, 1999, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) sued the first file sharing platform Napster for copyright infringment. This was the start of a still ongoing campaign against file-sharing and related practises. On the occasion of the 15th anniversary of RIAA’s lawsuit against Napster, I would like to retell the story of Napster relying on Joseph Menn’s book “all that rave. The Rise and Fall of Shawn Fanning’s Napster” (2003) as well as on court documents and press articles.

In part 3 the trial on the preliminary injunction against Napster is highlighted that eventually let to the shut down of the file sharing service in summer 2001.

The Music Industry’s Fight Against Napster – Part 2: The “War of Expertise”

On December 6, 1999, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) sued the first file sharing platform Napster for copyright infringment. This was the start of a still ongoing campaign against file-sharing and related practises. On the occasion of the 15th anniversary of RIAA’s lawsuit against Napster, I would like to retell the story of Napster relying on Joseph Menn’s book “all that rave. The Rise and Fall of Shawn Fanning’s Napster” (2003) as well as on court documents and press articles.

In the second part the studies and survey commissioned by the music industry as well as by Napster are highlighted that eventually were decisive in the Napster case. The studies also mark the starting point of a still ongoing scientific research on the impact of file-sharing on recorded music sales (see also part 1-25 of the blog series “How Bad is File-Sharing?”

The Music Industry’s Fight Against Napster – Part 1: Napster’s Rise to Fame

On December 6, 1999, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) sued the first file sharing platform Napster for copyright infringment. This was the start of a still ongoing campaign against file-sharing and related practises. On the occasion of the 15th anniversary of RIAA’s lawsuit against Napster, I would like to retell the story of Napster relying on Joseph Menn’s book “all that rave. The Rise and Fall of Shawn Fanning’s Napster” (2003) as well as on court documents and press articles.

In part 1 Napster’s rise to fame until RIAA’s filing its lawsuit against Napster is highlighted.

How Bad Is Music Streaming?

In the past few days two studies on the impact of music streaming on recorded music sales surfaced. The Country Music Association (CMA) presented study results that streaming services are more successful in fostering music sales than radio. It was reported that more than a quarter of the respondents purchased music after streaming it compared to eight percent of radio listeners. Since the CMA study is not available, the results cannot be seriously assessed. Therefore, we rely on a study of Stephen McBride, a researcher of the Science Team at Pandora Media. He testified before the U.S. Copyright Royalty Judges and presented evidence that show a positive impact on music sales. In a nutshell, he highlights that listening to a song on Pandora increases music sales be more than 2 percent – a moderate “Pandora effect”, as he called it. In following, I will analyse McBride’s findings in the so-called Music Sales Experiments that were conducted by Pandora’s science team. Learn more about it here:

The Impact of HADOPI on music file-sharing

HADOPI is an acronym of the French government agency “Haute Autorité pour la Diffusion des Œuvres et la Protection des Droits sur Internet”, which was created by the so-called ‘HADOPI law’ in 2009. Its main aim is to screen internet connections in France to prevent the exchange of copyrighted material without prior agreement from the copyright holders. If a copyright holder complains a copyright infringement, HADOPI may initiate a so-called ‘three-strike’ procedure: (1) an email message is sent to the alleged offender. The Internet Service Provider (ISP) is then required to monitor his/her internet connection. In addition, the alleged offender is invited to install a filter on his internet connection. (2) If, in the six months following the first step, a repeat offense is suspected the second step of the procedure is invoked: A certified letter is sent to the alleged offender with the same content as of the initial email. (3) If the offender fails to comply during the year following the reception of the certified letter, and upon accusation of repeated offenses, the third step of the procedure is invoked. (3) The ISP is required to suspend internet access for the offender for a period of from two months to one year.

HADOPI started its operations on October 1^st 2010 and a report entitled “Hadopi, 1¹/₂ Year After The Launch” on the effects of the graduated response measures since the first warning email was sent out, was published at the end of March 2012 (click here for the French version of the report). In the following I would like to sum up the results of the report from the music usage’s perspective.

How Bad Is Music File Sharing? – Part 24

In a recent working paper by Robert G. Hammond of North Carolina State University the impact of album pre-releases in file-sharing networks on physical and digital album sales is analyzes. The paper comes to the conclusion that album sales benefit from album leaks. “[A]n album that became available in file-sharing networks one month earlier would sell 60 additional units”. In addition the results also suggest that popular artists benefit more from file-sharing than newcomers and less establised artists. In the following the analytical and methodolocigal background and the results of this paper are highlighted.

How Bad Is Music File Sharing? – Part 23

The economist Jordi McKenzie of the University of Sydney published the first study on the impact of music file sharing on music sales (physical and digital) in Australia. His article in the Australian Economic Papers entitled “Illegal Music Downloading and Its Impact on Legitimate Sales: Australian Empirical Evidence” is based on a working paper from August 2009 and was published in December 2009.

With a similar methodological approach to Oberholzer-Gee and Strumpf (2007) he came to the conclusion that “(…) the evidence suggests no discernible impact of dowloading activity on legitimate sales“. More details on his approach and his findings are given here:

How Bad Is Music File Sharing? – Part 22

The objective of Brigitte Andersen and Marion Frenz’s study entitled “The Impact of Music Downloads and the P2P File-Sharing on the Purchase of Music”,(2007/08), which was later published in the Journal of Evolutionary Economics under the title “Don’t blame the P2P file-sharers: The Impact of Free Music Downloads on the Purchase of Music CDs in Canada” (2010) was to determine how the downloading of music files through P2P networks influences music purchases in Canada. They used data from a representative survey of the Canadian population aged 15 and older collected by Decima Research for Industry Canada, in which 2,100 repondents were also asked how many CDs and non-physical music tracks they purchased in the last two months and how much they paid for it on average. They show in their paper “(…) that P2P file-sharing is not to blame for the decline in CD markets. Music markets are not simply undermined by free music downloading and P2P file-sharing, due to the sampling effect” (2010: 735).