What I've Been Saying All Along

Online file sharers 'buy more music'
Owen Gibson, media correspondent
Wednesday July 27, 2005


Computer-literate music fans who illegally share tracks over the internet also spend four and a half times as much on digital music as those who do not, according to research published today.

The survey confirms what many music fans have informally insisted for some time: that downloading tracks illegally has also led them to become more enthusiastic buyers of singles and albums online.

Unlikely to be music to the ears of record companies, who have previously argued the opposite, the results will raise a question mark over the companies' recent drive to pursue individual file sharers through the courts.

The trade body, the British Phonographic Industry, has so far secured settlements of several thousand pounds from 90 people who have been caught sharing pirated tracks over the internet, several on behalf of their children.

One case involved a London jazz singer who was fined £2,500 after her 19-year-old son shared 1,330 songs using the family computer.

Since illegal downloading became a mainstream pursuit in 1999, the music industry has insisted that those who swap pirated tracks over the web are chiefly to blame for the downturn in music sales, which have fallen by 25% in the six years since. Eric Nicoli, chairman of EMI, whose artists include Robbie Williams, Coldplay and Joss Stone, recently told the Guardian that the argument that those who illegally download music would buy more legal tracks if they were cheaper was "bollocks".

But the survey of 600 music fans who also own computers and mobile phones, conducted by the music research firm The Leading Question, shows that those who regularly download or share unlicensed music also spend an average of £5.52 a month on legal downloads through sites such as Apple's iTunes Music Store or Napster. Those who were not illegally filesharing spent just £1.27 a month on digital tracks.

"The 2005 Speakerbox research shows that music fans who break piracy laws are highly valuable customers," said Paul Brindley, director of The Leading Question.

"There's a myth that all illegal downloaders are mercenaries hell-bent on breaking the law in pursuit of free music. In reality they are often hardcore fans who are extremely enthusiastic about adopting paid-for services as long as they are suitably compelling," he added.

But the BPI said that it would continue its hard line against those who infringe copyrights by trading songs illegally. Viewed another way, said BPI communications manager Matt Phillips, the figures were a vindication of the BPI's approach in cajoling illegal downloaders to try legitimate services by promoting legal alternatives while threatening court action. Neither did it take into account the overall effect on CD sales, he added.

"It's encouraging that many illegal file sharers are starting to use legal services. But our concern is that file sharers' expenditure on music overall is down, a fact borne out by study after study," said Mr Phillips. "While a third of illegal file sharers may buy more music, around two-thirds buy less, and that two-thirds tends to include people who were the heaviest buyers. That's why we need to continue our carrot and stick approach to the problem of illegal filesharing."

The BPI has said in the past that illegal filesharing was indistinguishable from shoplifting and would still be wrong even if not a single record sale was lost.

Whether illegal filesharing has a negative effect on record sales or acts as more of a marketing tool has long been a subject for debate.

Advocates of filesharing have pointed to disputed research from two US economists who last year studied downloading behaviour. Felix Oberholzer, a Harvard Business School professor, and Carolina academic Koleman Strumpf concluded that "downloads have an effect on sales which is statistically indistinguishable from zero".

Meanwhile, record companies say they are starting to turn the tide in favour of legal, paid-for downloads, and while online sales continue to represent a small proportion of music sold, they could account for a quarter of all sales by the end of the decade. The fastest selling download to date is an exclusive online-only version of Sgt Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band performed by Paul McCartney and U2 at Live 8.

A recent ruling in the US supreme court found that the filesharing service Grokster was responsible for encouraging users to share pirated material over its peer-to-peer network, paving the way for further court cases against software companies.

Recent figures from the International Federation of Phonographic Industries showed that the number of legal tracks downloaded internationally tripled to 180m in the first half of the year, while the volume of tracks being traded illegally rose only 3% to 900m, despite the increased penetration of high-speed broadband lines.

In the UK more than 5.5m online tracks were sold in the second quarter of 2005, a rise of 744% on the previous year.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Pssssh. Why clutter up your hard drive when there are so many music services that stream directly to your computer AND allow you to put songs onto your player for a nominal fee?

$9.95 a month for Rhapsody...and if you have a supported player, unlimited transfer to it. HUGE catalogue plus access to a surprising amount of midrange indie stuff.

I still buy albums, but now I actually get to listen the full album and not 30 second clips.

Rhapsody saved me from buying that Modest Mouse disc. It can save you too!

CONVERT HEATHEN!
Anonymous said…
Hey.. I like that Modest Mouse disc.
Scott said…
I do, too.

Popular Posts