What Have We Learned: Greater IP Enforcement Doesn't Work... Yet That's What Governments Want To Give

from the hammers-and-nails dept

Mon, Mar 28th 2011 11:28am — Mike Masnick

It's been an interesting few weeks on the research side of things, and it seemed like a recap was in order. Kicking it off, we had two separate research reports from two highly regarded organizations, both of which came to the same basic conclusions concerning strategies for dealing with copyright infringement online. First was the, rather epic, research report from the Social Science Research Council, which concluded that greater enforcement wouldn't work and wouldn't stop infringement in various countries around the world. Instead, it argued that the solution was better business models by the entertainment industry. Just a few days later, some research from the London School of Economics concluded basically the same thing, specifically in looking at the Digital Economy Act in the UK. It came up with three basic conclusions: the decrease in sales is due to many factors; providing legal, innovative and consumer friendly services is a much better strategy than enforcement; and focusing on enforcement that suppresses new technologies will not do much good. And, then, finally, late last week, we came across a study that also highlighted that the supposed "damage" done by file sharing appears to be exaggerated.

So... what does this tell us? It seems to support what many people have been saying for over a decade. Fighting what technology allows and what consumers want is not an effective strategy. File sharing, if combined with smarter business models, can allow music to flourish just fine, and (most importantly) focusing on greater enforcement strategies won't solve any of the industry's problems, but could actually harm new businesses and new opportunities.

So, given all of that... shouldn't we be rather alarmed that the key strategic effort by the entertainment industry these days, which is now the official policy of the White House is to focus almost entirely on "greater enforcement"? Of course, part of the problem is that the last time we ramped up our IP laws, with the ProIP Act (driven by the entertainment industry, of course), part of the law was to create an "IP Enforcement Coordinator." Note how short-sighted this is. It wasn't about creating an "IP Effective Coordinator." It wasn't about creating a role to determine the best or most appropriate levels of IP. It wasn't even to help content creators understand the economics of the markets they dealt with or to suggest new and innovative business models.

The role was to focus solely on enforcement.

Yet now, as we learn that focusing on enforcement is a mistake, rather than backing off, it seems like those who created the role are simply doubling down. It's as if they don't realize how much harm they're doing to their own markets. It's really quite unfortunate. These are industries that should be thriving right now. After all, the expenses involved in almost everything they do has gone down. It's become cheaper to create professional content. It's become cheaper to package professional content. It's become cheaper to distribute professional content. It's become cheaper to promote professional content. It's even become cheaper to sell the content and ancillary products around the content. Every aspect of the business has become cheaper, and a much more massive audience has been opened up to these content creators. And rather than embrace it, they've whined and complained... and the US government's response is to support them in this? What a shame.

If the current content industries have been unable to take advantage of an amazing new world of content creation, promotion and distribution, it's their own fault. Having governments get in the game of cracking down on new and innovative technologies, just to protect a few legacy companies too slow and too confused to adapt is not a solution. It's the same story all over again. The political system is focused on bailing out the companies who failed to change with the market. We've seen it time and time again in other industries, and it always comes back to haunt us. We shouldn't be bailing out the movie industry and the recording industry right now. Both have had plenty of opportunities to embrace new business models. Plenty of content creators outside of the traditional system have done so, successfully. Governments around the world should stop focusing on protecting these players who are too resistant to change.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: business models, copyright, enforcement, ip, strategy

91 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 11:40am

then, finally, late last week, we came across a study that also highlighted that the supposed "damage" done by file sharing appears to be exaggerated.

Since it has already been shown that the study is sort of meaningless, attempting to devine "quality" (a subjective term) through measuring unrelated points), that pretty much negates that.

Are you attempting to pile crap on top of crap again?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Steven (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 11:56am
  
  Re:
  Hmm. You seem to be focusing on the one part of the study that was somewhat subjective, but at least reasonably explainable as such, and ignoring the several parts of the study that were quantitative.
  
  I'm sure that was simply an oversight.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 12:08pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Well, admittedly, the entire study seemed to be all correlation, no causation. So if you're going to use it to refute harm from piracy, you must also use it to refute harm from copyright or increased enforcement thereof.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 5:37pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Yet now, as we learn that focusing on enforcement is a mistake
      
      2 + 2 = 5.
      
      Masnick honestly thinks people fall for his BS. Too funny.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 10:40pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Care to cite when enforcement against sharing anything resulted in greater sales for the industry?
        
        All I see is them filing for chapter 11 one after the other or is the media making that s. up too?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 11:05pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        http://www.grammy.com/blogs/music-sales-up-for-five-straight-weeks
        
        You boneheads will never learn, will you?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Jay (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 11:14pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        What the hell does the grammies have to do with enforcement?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 11:46pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Please go to any economic 101 class and point them to that link of yours saying that a 1 month 10% increase in sales is a trend or something and you will hear their reaction to that but it will sound something like a LoL.
        
        More so after you show them the numbers for net income by the big labels don't forget to show them how much they loose each quarter and compare to that significant and very important rise in sales you are showing them LoL
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 12:29pm
    
    Re: Re:
    I am looking at the report as a whole. Mike is claiming "no damage", yet in the same discussion the report shows 10% decrease in sales (or more, their words), and people placing less value on pirated music than purchases music. Clearly, there is at least some damage done by piracy.
    
    So, if music was a 70 billion a year industry and even 10% of that is lost (7 billion) don't you think someone should work on enforcement? After all, 7 billion is a huge amount of money. I mean, heck, Madoff is a massive crook, and only made off with net 18 billion or so over the entire time of his scam. Don't you think that 7 billion in a single year (or perhaps 50 - 100 billion since the days of Napster) is worth some effort?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - chris (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 1:08pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      So, if music was a 70 billion a year industry and even 10% of that is lost (7 billion) don't you think someone should work on enforcement? After all, 7 billion is a huge amount of money. I mean, heck, Madoff is a massive crook, and only made off with net 18 billion or so over the entire time of his scam. Don't you think that 7 billion in a single year (or perhaps 50 - 100 billion since the days of Napster) is worth some effort?
      
      and that right there is why all of the reports are clearly fake.
      
      how can any business, of any kind, remain in business while operating at a loss of billions?
      
      even if the recoding industry lost just 2 billion a year (the smallest number you can have and call it billions) and it's been 10 years since napster, how can there still be a business after losing $20 billion?
      
      and yet the industry still exists. which leads me to believe that there is an exaggeration of some kind somewhere in the equation. either the amount lost (the billions) or its overall impact (the percentage lost) is a complete fabrication.
      
      something just doesn't add up.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 31 Mar 2011 @ 11:15am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        When you lose money, you fire employees. That's how you stay afloat.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 1:09pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      The "some effort" is "better business models," not "greater enforcement." If enforcement isn't working, why the call for greater enforcement? Is this something the government should just be doing "harder"?
      
      I fail to see how continuing a process that doesn't work will result in the turnaround you seem to expect. Throwing taxpayer dollars at an unwinnable war isn't the answer. (See also: The Drug War.)
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 9:59pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      And yet most of the countries that saw growth are considered piracy havens by the RIAA own reports.
      
      If piracy is that bad wouldn't those markets shrink like in the U.S.?
      
      And BTW the music industry is a 15 billion dollar industry not a 70 billion one.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 29 Mar 2011 @ 4:44am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      So, if music was a 70 billion a year industry and even 10% of that is lost (7 billion) don't you think someone should work on enforcement?
      
      Don't you think that if this 10% figure were real and really all due to "piracy" it might be worth a look at breaking it down as to why those people are "pirating" and focus on selling to the ones that will stop it if you provide them what they want rather than spending millions buying new laws that won't work and brand every single one of those people as "Thieves that are killing kittens and clubbing baby Jesus with a seal and should be locked up, flensed and preferably executed with their estates given to us"?
      That would seem to me to provide a more cost-effective alternative that might, well you know, actually get a useful result.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Richard (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 12:20pm
  
  Re:
  
  Since it has already been shown that the study is sort of meaningless, attempting to devine "quality" (a subjective term) through measuring unrelated points), that pretty much negates that.
  
  In your mind only - the rest of us pretty much demolished that argument.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 1:16pm
  
  Response to: Anonymous Coward on Mar 28th, 2011 @ 11:40am
  "Since it has already been shown" well not really shown but I said so. Without reading the methodolgy I know its crap and have backed my opinion by saying "its crap" over and over again.
  
  Mike why won't you understand that every opinion I have becomes fact. So if I say a report is bad please quit talking about or I will have to come back and once again not provide any data or decent points as to why its bad.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
John Doe, 28 Mar 2011 @ 11:43am

IP Enforcement will go the way of Prohibition..
I think one day, hopefully in the not too distant future, we will look back and see IP enforcement in much the same light as Prohibition. It doesn't work and just gives rise to undesirable results. In the case of Prohibition, it gave rise to the mob. Unlike Prohibition though, file sharing is much easier to hide than a still.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Nom du Clavier (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 11:57am
  
  Re: IP Enforcement will go the way of Prohibition..
  And even if things go the wrong way, someone will figure out something legal to share which if left sitting turns into restricted content (cf. bricks of wine).
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 11:51am

What we should have learned: slacktivism feels good but doesn't work...yet that's what the anti-IP crowd wants to give.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 12:05pm
  
  Re:
  What?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Paul (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 12:11pm
  
  Re:
  What are you trying to say?
  
  I do a podcast for a Church. We limit it to the message (no music) because such a small church publishing a podcast with such small circulation cannot afford license fees for music. The exception is original music performed by the artist who gives us permission.
  
  I also run an open source project to make a bit of technology available to others. This is a bit of tech that supports several multi-million dollar projects, so it is far from insignificant.
  
  Many of us of the so-called-anti-IP-crowd contribute heavily to the public commons. And many of us are quite critical of extreme IP rights. And we are hardly slackers.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 12:19pm
    
    Re: Re:
    How is your work convincing governments to stop focusing on enforcement? Perhaps more importantly, how is your work convincing government better than the groups that are clamoring for greater enforcement?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 9:36pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      How is the campaign to "educate" people about copyright is doing?
      
      LoL
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 12:24pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Paul, that is the way things are suppose to be. You want music, you either pay the people who make it, or get the stuff donated to you. What is the big deal, people have been doing this sort of thing for ages (like, what before podcasts...).
    
    Honestly, I think that if you approached rights holders to use their music, many would give you permission in a blink. Have you ever tried?
    
    You may also want to contact some of the "royalty free" music sources, as they may be also willing to donate to your cause.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 9:56pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Not true ASCAP and other collection agencies would be knocking you down if you tried.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike Masnick (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 12:22pm
  
  Re:
  What we should have learned: slacktivism feels good but doesn't work...yet that's what the anti-IP crowd wants to give.
  
  Please, oh please, keep believing everything you say here. It only makes things easier.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 12:37pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Well, things may certainly change someday and that will be all well and good. If the anti-IP crowd actually begins to organize in earnest it may happen sooner rather than much later.
    
    And then all the living-room bloggers will trip over each other racing to the front of the line to claim the credit. In all the celebration, it may be that nobody will even notice.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 1:08pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      I think what you will find is that when they "organize", there won't be much there. The usual collection of children from 4 chan, a few from anonymous, and a group of students who will drop the cause pretty much as soon as they graduate and start making money.
      
      It's not clear that there is really widespread support beyond the apparent desire of most to get something for nothing. They don't appear to be very "activist" otherwise.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 1:12pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        It's a lot of fun to underestimate your opponents. Your opponents enjoy it as well.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 2:10pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Correct me if I am wrong. So far everything that has come out shows that piracy is the domain of the young, the anti-social, and a few geeks. Everyone else is just hanging on looking for a free lunch.
        
        Please, correct me. Bring some examples.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 2:16pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        You are making the blind unsupported assertion. It is your responsibility to back it up.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        pringerX (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 2:24pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Yes and no, AC. Sensationalist hacktivism may be the work of a small group, but that is the tip of the iceberg. The entertainment industry pushing for more enforcement is like the captain of the Titanic saying "Oh, it's only a small chunk of ice- we'll just push over it." Attempting to force wider, heavier laws will run the ship aground on the bulk of people who download illegally because it now does affect them. A handful of bored college kids DDoSing sites is easy to write off, but millions of (p)irate citizens not so much.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 7:22pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "Correct me if I am wrong. So far everything that has come out shows that piracy is the domain of the young, the anti-social, and a few geeks. Everyone else is just hanging on looking for a free lunch.
        
        Please, correct me. Bring some examples."
        
        I'm curious to see this "everything" you refer to. Are you drawing this from some sort of media portrayal of the bedroom pirate/hacker?
        
        If so, may I point you in the direction of "Hackers" and, to a lesser extent, "Hackers 2." The first starred Angelina Jolie who, given her track record of adopting entire third world countries and making time with Brad Pitt, is hardly the "geeky" or "anti-social" type.
        
        Not only that, but hacking a system is a lot like turning a seizure stimulator to 11, often accompanied by the sound of dated-as-soon-as-it-hit-the-screen crossover techno.
        
        CLT 1, AC 0.
        
        Your serve.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 9:47pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Correct if I'm wrong cpt. Ahab, but have any attempt to curb supposed piracy at the public level succeed?
        
        Copyrights can only be enforced on business effectively because they depend on the state to exist, individuals exist wether there are governments or not, so explain how will you enforce something that can't be enforced without extreme intrusive measures that failed even in dictatorial regimes around the world.
        
        If people choose not to respect copyrights there is little you or any government in the world can do about it besides complain.
        
        Sure you can get the people trying to profit from it, but people simply sharing things, now that will prove to be very difficult to stop, even more with the actual culture that favors sharing since tender ages, when religion teaches sharing as a good thing, would you call Jesus a thief and freetard for having multiplied the fish for all to eat not taking into consideration the fisherman around him? or the fact that without sharing we may not have been able to evolve at all since cooperation is something very important in society and is what this society and all others are based on.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 9:51pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Care to explain why most of the people around the world accused of "pirating" something are above the age of 30?
        
        Those silly kids never grow up.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 10:07pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        You keep saying that but look at how open source makes money they don't lock away the product they let people use it and find new ways to use it and created a market for them, one that relies on local talent to be continued and an international pool of talent that contribute to make something better and useful.
        
        People in africa sign ask help from people in Europe and they pay them for that help so they can localy help the African business to whom they sell services, is a symbiotic relationship unlike the parasitic nature of the copyright industry, that acts more like a cancer.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 1:48pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      nah. It will never happen.
      
      Immense time and effort being expounded so a product can be consumed for free could never be the norm in the US.
      
      It isn't the way our society works.
      
      But people can keep dreaming if they wish.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 9:55pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        You mean TV and radio don't exist?
        Google doesn't exist?
        Bing, Yahoo, Facebook don't exist?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 12:04pm

"After all, the expenses involved in almost everything they do has gone down. It's become cheaper to create professional content. It's become cheaper to package professional content. It's become cheaper to distribute professional content. It's become cheaper to promote professional content. It's even become cheaper to sell the content and ancillary products around the content. Every aspect of the business has become cheaper"

There is your problem they are seeing costs drop so their profit should be directly inverse to that(in the industry's eyes). Sure they COULD drop prices but then they wouldn't make as much money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 12:46pm
  
  Re:
  Actually, the quote is key because it is wrong. The "professional content" should be replaced by "professional appearing content" in each case. It's sort of cargo cult stuff, people learn the form but not the function. They can ape the album cover, they can manipulate the bits in the editing programs, but they cannot truly generate the content.
  
  It's all appearance, not actual content.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - The eejit (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 2:52pm
    
    Re: Re:
    And? The very appearance is content.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Gordon (profile), 29 Mar 2011 @ 7:57pm
    
    Re: Re:
    -They can ape the album cover, they can manipulate the bits in the editing programs, but they cannot truly generate the content.
    
    It's all appearance, not actual content.-
    
    Wait, isn't this exactly what the music industry and the software industry does exactly?
    
    To put it another way,
    Once the song is recorded and digitized or the software code is written and saved....aren't they then just making copies and selling them?
    
    If I made a copy of one of their copies haven't I just duplicated EXACTLY what they've done, made a copy?
    So yeah, it's professional content. Exact duplicate of the original.
    
    I wasn't actually posting on the story, I was just trying to enlighten you on your flawed thinking on that one comment.
    
    2 pennies for you.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 12:04pm

Oh, they know
It's as if they don't realize how much harm they're doing to their own markets.

It's as if middle managers are grabbing at an excuse to increase the size of their department, despite knowing that it ultimately makes them less nimble and therefore less competitive. The short term rewards are too tempting. The consequences are too long term.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Shawn (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 12:36pm

Just Say No
I stopped listening to music from the record labels years ago. The DRM-free music is available for free and it's just as good if not better. So why is this a problem for anyone? Just say no.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 12:59pm

Let's add to this discussion:

Greater IP Enforcement Doesn't Work

Yet:

http://mashable.com/2011/03/25/internet-music-piracy-study/?hpt=Sbin

I would say that the jury is still out on enforcement not working. It would depend what you consider working. If you think working is some sort of magic "and suddenly they are all buying again", then you are going to claim that it isn't working. But we didn't get where we are today with piracy in 10 minutes, and 10 minutes in the other direction isn't going to change much. You have to watch the trends over time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
  
  Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 1:16pm
  
  Re:
  I would say that the jury is still out on enforcement not working.
  
  Nope. All studies that say piracy is great are gospel, and any study that speaks poorly of piracy is ipso facto debunked. All victories (though, of course, doubtful they could even exist) are by definition Pyrrhic. Thus sayeth Techdirt.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Mike Masnick (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 2:48pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Nope. All studies that say piracy is great are gospel, and any study that speaks poorly of piracy is ipso facto debunked. All victories (though, of course, doubtful they could even exist) are by definition Pyrrhic. Thus sayeth Techdirt
    
    It's so funny when people like you start stomping their feet. With each of these studies, we go to great lengths to go into detail on the methodology, what works, and what doesn't.
    
    And your great "debunking" is to write a single (false) sentence that pretends we don't.
    
    Try harder.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- chris (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 1:22pm
  
  Re:
  Yet:
  
  http://mashable.com/2011/03/25/internet-music-piracy-study/?hpt=Sbin
  
  from your article:
  
  Online piracy is a popular scapegoat of the music industry, which has suffered a 30% decline in global sales between 2004 to 2009, according to IFPI�s annual digital music report [PDF].
  
  But given that only 9% of U.S. Internet users use P2P networks to download music illegally (that percentage does include those who obtain music through unauthorized online streaming services and download sites), one wonders whether that blame is merited.
  
  does it mean that enforcement worked, or that enforcement was never the problem to begin with?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 1:33pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Chris, 9% of internet users isn't 9% of music buyers. I don't have the numbers handy, but it has been discussed before here and on other sites. Not everyone in the population is a music buyer, and fewer still are active buyers, collectors, or "hardcore musicphiles". Clearly, anyone who goes to the effort of installing and using P2P software would be a music fan, as they wouldn't do it just for the act of doing it.
    
    So that 9% of internet users could be what use to be a more signficant part of the music buying population.
    
    http://paidcontent.org/article/419-the-music-industrys-demographics-problem/
    
    The demographics of buyers is shifting, and that is part of the problem.
    
    The article stating that they wonder if blame is merited shoots holes in Mike's bold statement, clearly it is soemthing that has not be established, except perhaps in his wishful thinking.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Gwiz (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 2:22pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Clearly, anyone who goes to the effort of installing and using P2P software would be a music fan, as they wouldn't do it just for the act of doing it.
      
      Not sure what you mean by P2P software, but torrent clients are part of the default install for most all Linux distributions and I believe (not an Apple fanboy) also on Macs. And for Windows, a 3 minute Google search, 1 click and there you go, not really much effort these days.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - RD, 28 Mar 2011 @ 3:16pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "And for Windows, a 3 minute Google search, 1 click and there you go, not really much effort these days."
        
        Sure, this works if your goal is to be instantly riddled with numerous viruses and have your computer compromised...
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Gwiz (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 3:42pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Sure, this works if your goal is to be instantly riddled with numerous viruses and have your computer compromised...
        
        Yeah, true.
        
        Let me rephrase that a bit.....After a 15 minute investigation on which open source torrent client for Windows is the best for you, 1 click and there you go, not really much effort these days.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        The eejit (profile), 29 Mar 2011 @ 6:52am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        http://www.bittorrent.com
        
        You can thank me later.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 2:42pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      "The article stating that they wonder if blame is merited shoots holes in Mike's bold statement, clearly it is soemthing that has not be established, except perhaps in his wishful thinking."
      
      So because that study says "one wonders whether that blame is merited." Mike saying "the blame is not merited" becomes false? Seems like they would like to agree with him not that they are refuting him by any means.
      
      Also I love that you keep bringing out the report that says p2p traffic went down during the month limewire went down. Despite the fact that limewire was back up (pirate version) a short while later. So yes limewire was shut down, and since its mainly used by nubs it took them some time to A) figure out it was down and not coming back, b) switch to a new service. Whether that new service is the new limewire or whatever the neighbor kid said he used when they asked doesnt really matter. Its gonna be funny when they address what they bring up in the article �In the past, we�ve noted that hard-core peer-to-peer users would quickly move to other websites 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,� So yes during the month quarter that limewire went down p2p traffic slowed did it go right back up the next quarter? probably.
      Also from your report
      "Limewire was used by 56 percent of those using P2P services to download music in Q3 2010, but fell to just 32 percent in Q4 2010, since the P2P service was only available through October in Q4; however, other P2P site usage rose. Frostwire was used by just 10 percent of those sharing music files via P2P in Q3 2010, increasing to 21 percent in Q4 2010; Bittorrent client u-Torrent increased from 8 percent to 12 percent in the same time period."
      
      Also for someone who cries about study methodology so much maybe you should stop linking to NPD studies where the data is from self reporting by users. "Hello random person, do you engage in illegal p2p file sharing?"
      "Uh.....no"
      "Good another no, piracy is really on the decline."
      
      Real solid report and solid data we are dealing with here. Its good to know piracy has been declining steadily since 07, I think we all new it was just a fad. Glad to know its over so I can begin creating again. Fear of having my work stolen was keeping me from expressing myself.
      
      I love your logic, its starting to grow on me. I have started using it on my girlfriend, she is too baffled by the logic void zones that she just agrees with me.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 2:59pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        So because that study says "one wonders whether that blame is merited." Mike saying "the blame is not merited" becomes false? Seems like they would like to agree with him not that they are refuting him by any means.
        
        The point is they are saying "maybe", but Mike is saying "for sure". The jury is still out, which suggests Mike's statement just isn't supported by reality.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 3:10pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Again, Lovely logic.
        
        Mike believes that the damages attributed to piracy are not real.
        
        The NPD says the damages attributed to piracy may not be real.
        
        Therefore Mike is wrong.
        
        I have a car and I think the paint is blue.
        My friend thinks the paint could be blue or purple.
        My believe is not supported in reality!
        
        They are saying he may be right but the point of the study was about the amount of p2p traffic not its "damages" to the industry. Its rare for a study to be about one thing and then make conclusive statements about something else. However they did say the data in front of us make us wonder about the validity of the statements. Seems more supportive of Mike than not.
        
        Also did Mike ever state that as his point of view? Or did he just say here are three studies that support this point of view maybe we should consider it instead of always taking the legacy business' point of view?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 10:31pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        ???
        
        What reality in the multiverse? the reality that every attempt of enforcement of copyrights into the public failed miserably to this day or the reality where enforcement made people stop pirating and sales soared up and everybody is happy?
        
        What I saw to this day was:
        
        - There were 6 big labels now there are only 3 with one of them in their last legs, trying to sell itself to some schmuck who wants to buy it, not even the other 2 want to go near it.
        
        - Every legislation to this point failed, every enforcement act produced not only bad publicity but was met with increased public anger which lead to failing sales, you can even see that on the plotting of the revenues generated, every single time the industry increases enforcement they loose sales, is there a turning point in there somewhere? I doubt it.
        
        - Every attempt to change laws in their benefit is met with more people going to the competition that is free and people can continue to do what they have been doing which is share and distribute music for free and use it in their home videos to put on Youtube.
        
        - In every forum on the internet and even in research the industry is seen as a bad actor rivaling the telco industry in complaints generated. They should be proud.
        
        - Piracy was cool until the middle of the 90's, that was the reality of things, sharing is not a new cultural phenomenon, but something that we are born with, that we do instinctively and it is the basis from which we learn to cooperate to achieve better results except apparently for the entertainment industry, also why are we trying to criminalize the sharing of anything that somehow doesn't seem right.
        
        So basically the industry wants to dictate a new set of social rules to everyone, failed at every turn and it is paying the consequences on that and you still think the jury is out?
        
        Are you serious?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 11:37pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Here is your jury, decision.
        
        We the internet people repudiate your copyright laws and will create our own content and make use of it the way we see fit, we are sorry to see you take an unreasonable instance trying to protect the indefensible imaginary lines created by disturbed minds or trying to justify the unjustifiable means used to do it, forever trying to make people conform to your world view through the use of force, and for that reason we will use your own laws against you.
        
        Like on the Transformation video that used Blender to make a study about spherical forms, which uses free music from Jamendo.
        
        Do I have any sympathy for copyright holders under the RIAA banner? or the MPAA or the BSA or the book publishers?
        Nope.
        
        Do I care if they loose everything?
        Nope.
        
        Do I care about their rights?
        H. no!
        
        Will I buy anything from those people?
        Dream on pal!
        
        Until those laws are bring to size and start to make some sense to normal people, you people can believe that there will always be someone doing their best to undermine your position with strong support from the public.
        
        In that case laws don't matter, what you think you deserve doesn't matter and not even what you will do matters, you will fail in the end, these are not kids you are jerking around those are full adults that are on a mission to destroy this cultural idiosyncrasy that was spawn by copyrights going so long without checks and balances.
        
        Now that is a grandstanding statement LoL
        
        Seriously though, what you think you deserve will not make me buy anything from you or your kind, anything you do will not make me want to buy or consume that for which you place so much value because for me it has none, laws won't change that either and that is why I know I won, ultimately I control what I do with my money and you can't force me to give it to you, because if you could you would have to take it from me with a swat team under the raining lead.
        
        I think you are right filesharing caused harm to the music industry it made me open my eyes and see the world under a different angle, it made me realize I could do those things for myself and I'm not letting that go without a fight now.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        techflaws.org (profile), 29 Mar 2011 @ 3:09am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Actually your "The jury is still out" just isn't supported by reality.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 10:15pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      What is he saying there I don't understand.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 10:03pm
  
  Re:
  Not for me, enforcement absolutely drove me to find free legal alternatives, I don't buy music from those other people anymore.
  
  Is that the effect the industry wanted?
  If so that was a big victory for the pro-enforcement people they drove me directly into the arms of their competitors LoL
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 1:05pm

Of course, part of the problem is that the last time we ramped up our IP laws, with the ProIP Act (driven by the entertainment industry, of course), part of the law was to create an "IP Enforcement Coordinator." Note how short-sighted this is. It wasn't about creating an "IP Effective Coordinator." It wasn't about creating a role to determine the best or most appropriate levels of IP. It wasn't even to help content creators understand the economics of the markets they dealt with or to suggest new and innovative business models.

The role was to focus solely on enforcement.

Of course it's enforcement. The IP Czar enforces the copyright laws that Congress creates. It's hilarious that you're complaining about Congress assigning to someone the job of enforcing the laws that they promulgate. And what is your complaint, exactly? That the IP Czar doesn't create policy? That's pretty stupid. Of course the IP Czar doesn't create policy. That's not her job.

Is there anything copyright related that you won't bitch and moan about? Sheesh. You just make up stupid shit to get upset about at times.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 1:10pm
  
  Re:
  You just make up stupid shit to get upset about at times.
  
  Well, I'm finally convinced. IP for everyone! Hang the pirates!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Steven (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 1:22pm
  
  Re:
  In my mind the problem here is the government creating a high level position and spending tons of money on a civil issue that has no evidence of harm.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike Masnick (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 2:55pm
  
  Re:
  Of course it's enforcement. The IP Czar enforces the copyright laws that Congress creates.
  
  So you're fine with the fact that the gov't is wasting taxpayer money on a plan that doesn't help?
  
  And what is your complaint, exactly? That the IP Czar doesn't create policy? That's pretty stupid. Of course the IP Czar doesn't create policy. That's not her job.
  
  Yes. My complaint is that the job is not focused on the most effective use of IP, which is what the Constitution requires. I know you like to ignore that document, but some of us think it's important.
  
  Is there anything copyright related that you won't bitch and moan about? Sheesh. You just make up stupid shit to get upset about at times.
  
  I'm sorry, but I fail to see how pointing out how an expensive gov't policy that is ineffective and could serve society better is "bitching and moaning." And furthermore, I did not make up anything here.
  
  Care to lie any more? Are you so troubled by the fact that I actually understand what I'm talking about -- and it disagrees with the FUD you think you know -- that you have to simply lie about me every day? What a sad life you must lead.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 3:03pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Yes. My complaint is that the job is not focused on the most effective use of IP, which is what the Constitution requires.
    
    Where is the job of IP czar in the constitution? I would love to know!
    
    Seriously, IP czar's job is to enforce the laws, as written by congress and passed, signed by the President of the day, in accordance with the constitution. The IP czar isn't the person you would have a beef with, the beef is with the 700 or so elected officials who, with due consideration and debate, have put in place copyright laws, and modified them from time to time over the last couple of hundred years.
    
    When you get off on a tangent, you sound sort of like the anti-tax people. They stand there dancing on the head of a pin, not accepting that the laws are in fact the will of the people as expressed in the laws passed by their representatives.
    
    If you want to change the copryight laws, then get the people in charge to do it. But you won't do it when you are off to the side as a minority stamping your feet and pirating everything that you can get your collective hands on. It is very hard to have any sympathy for a group of people who seems more interested in satiating their personal needs rather than considering the law.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 10:38pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      If we were the minority you wouldn't be complaining about infringiment since pundits from the industry keep saying that their intention is not to stop piracy but to reduced to manageble levels, so explain again how is the that minority a problem? Why do we need a czar for enforcement when you yourself claims it is just a minority doing it.
      
      Quote:
      It is very hard to have any sympathy for a group of people who seems more interested in satiating their personal needs rather than considering the law.
      
      That is exactly how I view you people, a small group of people trying to subvert the laws and social norms to conform to their views, forcing people to comply will hardly have my sympathies.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 10:53pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Except of course, that you are the minority.
        
        Thinking otherwise helps you rationalize your behavior, but it's really just a pathetic fantasy.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 11:47pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        That is why artists are afraid to go public and call pirates thieves?
        
        The minority scares them?
        
        Wow!
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 29 Mar 2011 @ 12:10am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Also you are the one saying that the internet people are losers right and do nothing in the real world and can't affect change right?
        
        How can we the lame people frighten you so much that you start screaming like a girl and hide.
        
        Remember we can't change anything in the real world, we are a minority and we are powerless against your greatness.
        
        One has to wonder why the persecution then.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 29 Mar 2011 @ 12:16am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Also if we are the minority already its "mission accomplished" it was not the intent advocated by the industry to bring piracy under manageable levels?
        
        If so the minority of cashless people who can't change anything is no threat right?
        
        Unless of course what you are saying is just BS, and you are scared, s.ing in your pants afraid of the people you call pirates and you was dumb enough to give in into emotional responses and letting yourself being cornered into a place where you will get pounded over and over again in public to your eternal shame. good thing you are anonymous otherwise your employer could find out how lame you are and try to find someone else who actually could try and debate the issues and not be made a fool in front of the entire interwebz.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 10:52pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Any law that criminalizes sharing is wrong and I don't care what the law says.
      
      Any law that makes me a criminal for sharing a movie with a friend is a bad law.
      
      Any law that makes me a criminal for sending a song to a friend is a bad law.
      
      Any law that gives anyone a 200 year monopoly is a bad law.
      
      Copyright is a BS law that only benefits a few and diminish the quality of life for all the other members of society.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 10:56pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        The people you rip off want you to come clean the studio they work in. You won't get paid, you'll be sharing your labor.
        
        Thanks.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Jay (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 11:20pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Thanks for the hatorade but the kool aid here tastes a lot better.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 11:50pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        You want me to clean them out?
        Sure just give me your bank account number and I will make sure it will be "clean" LoL
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 5:47pm
    
    Re: Re:
    BUT THE CONSTITUTION!!!
    
    Can't you see AC, enforcing piracy laws is horrible because it steps on the Constitution. It's so obvious. Clearly you're confused.
    
    LOL
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - techflaws.org (profile), 29 Mar 2011 @ 3:14am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Dumb troll is dumb.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
misterdoug (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 1:18pm

How soon we forget
Hardly anybody remembers back in 2003 when the University of Pennsylvania traced the top 50 movie downloads to their original postings, and found that 77% of them were leaked by movie company insiders.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn4166-insiders-blamed-for-most-online-movie-piracy.html

An d those were all high-quality copies. The remaining 23% is where you'll find all the crappy-ass copies made in theaters with handheld cameras.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Mar 2011 @ 2:12pm
  
  Re: How soon we forget
  Actually, they only proved that they came from copies the studios had. As we saw with Wolverine and others, there is no connection to any official action, it's often hackers or people getting pre-release copies from friends, from DVD factories, etc.
  
  It's not exactly like all the copies of the movies are locked up in a manner that keeps them away from any human contact.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Jay (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 11:19pm
    
    Re: Re: How soon we forget
    Wait, didn't Mike talk about this where there were leaks by third parties making them official leaks for movies?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
rubberpants, 28 Mar 2011 @ 2:58pm

I wish you luck in your efforts to sell something that can be effortless copied and instantly transmitted around the globe.

I hope you succeed in maintaining your profit margins even though producing what you sell has never been easier for anyone with a shred of talent.

I'm sure you expect that your attempts to create arbitrary rules to rein in the laws of physics and economics will work great.

Keep reaching for that rainbow.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
CN, 28 Mar 2011 @ 3:50pm

The industry seems to want me not to pay...
And I can go to Amazon.com and order an MP3, but when I go to pay for it, it says, hey wait a minute, you are a Canadian... we can't sell this to you. So where does that leave me? (I don't want iTunes thank you anyway!)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Persephone (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 5:26pm

Heck yeah we want our IP addresses protected!
ummmm, heck yeah we want our IP addressses protected. They are not being protected, so what Mike, this is cool with you???

http://open.salon.com/blog/virginia888/2010/12/02/is_topix_giving_out_users_personal_data_ to_the_nsa
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Persephone (profile), 28 Mar 2011 @ 5:29pm
  
  Re: Heck yeah we want our IP addresses protected!
  Yeah we want enforcement. However you are right to be suspect of our government which has its own fingers placed way too deeply in the internet pie. So where does enforcement come from? Yikes.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - The eejit (profile), 29 Mar 2011 @ 1:04am
    
    Re: Re: Heck yeah we want our IP addresses protected!
    From the group fo people known collectively as Bush. Dick and Colon.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
abc gum, 28 Mar 2011 @ 5:42pm

Copyright infringement, aka piracy, is simply a tool being used like a lever to pry away more of your rights. It is like a false flag operation, a scape goat to hide the real objective. Do not be fooled.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
masquisieras, 29 Mar 2011 @ 6:03am

A big mistake in your article
At this point there is not a content industry, there is content distribution industry that thru it has get to control the content itself and they like to call themselves content industry.
Until recently the cost for unit distribution were low but the cost of entering were enormous creating a natural oligopoly with huge benefits that where hidden in an artificial cost structure and move most of the revenue to the distribution so to keep most of the money. Now the cost of entry has became minimum and the cost for distribution unit null. The revenue for distribution dry up so they have two choices
to fight and die
or
tell everybody:
"The cost for distribution we were charging was a lie, we cheat you all this year,the revenue split of all this years another cheat. But know the cheat do not work for us anymore so we are gona restate the revenue split from now on, but only from now on because before was in our favor and we don't intent to give you back the money we cheat you out of. Please sign this new and improve contract"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Mar 2011 @ 7:20am

What I learned.
The quickest way to financial ruin is to sue your customers while calling them thieves.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Persephone (profile), 29 Mar 2011 @ 9:22am
  
  Re: What I learned.
  Yep.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Apr 2011 @ 7:16pm

rape laws don't work, murder laws don't work, traffic laws don't work, should we abolish them too??

masnick seems to think so given the logic hes used, those "legacy" laws don't seem to fit in today's environment

""The quickest way to financial ruin is to sue your customers while calling them thieves.""

If they are downloading your content without paying for it, they are not customers, they are thieves, and should be sued/arrested, like any thief
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 3 Apr 2016 @ 12:41am
  
  Re:
  Years later, no more darryl.
  
  I'd like to think he asphyxiated on average_joe's lack of a phallus, trying desperately to find it.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]