New RIAA Evidence Comes To Light: Napster Killed Kerosene Too!

from the i-can-math-like-the-music-industry dept

Thu, Apr 21st 2011 8:40am — Tim Cushing

The RIAA has stepped up its game in the final stages of its lawsuit against Limewire, where the focus is on determining damages. As part of this, it has cranked out an illuminating chart showing that the decline of the music business rests entirely on file sharing. Nowhere among the multi-colored lines will you find any references to an aging record-buying demographic, the proliferation of thousands of independent labels or even the ultimate game-changer itself, the internet.

As you well know, the internet was invented in 1991 by billionaire tycoon, Al Gore. In its infancy, the internet was nothing more than a forum for conspiracy theorists to exchange anti-government writings and ASCII porn. However, everything changed in 1998 with the simultaneous debut of Napster and the mp3, both invented by Shawn Fanning. With this new "distribution system," the music industry could no longer afford to ignore the looming force of the internet, at least not for more than the next half-decade. Now, with billions at stake, the RIAA has unleashed its ultimate weapon: the line chart. Below is their devastating "Exhibit A:" filed in the lawsuit against Limewire:

Broken down bizarrely into "Albums per Capita," the RIAA's chart takes care to point out two things:

1. Napster.
2. All else being equal, record sales will grow indefinitely.

But that's not all. The number crunchers over at the RIAA have also entered the following charts as eye-catching evidence of the havoc wreaked by file sharing.

Exhibit B: Napster vs. Kerosene Sales

Kerosene usage dropped off considerably before the 1990's, but was still growing slowly for most of the decade. As this previously unpublished RIAA chart clearly shows, 1999 (1 P.N.*) was kerosene's peak, which was then followed by a decade-long slide. Consulting economists from George Mason University have stated that Napster's arrival "didn't have a goddamn thing to do with kerosene's decline." This testimony has been stricken from the record as "irrelevant," as no economist consulted was a former employee of the major labels. Conclusion: the world would be a better (if slightly more odorous) place if Napster had never existed.

*Post-Napster

Exhibit C: The Internet vs. Vehicle Theft

With this chart, obviously the RIAA intends to show a clear correlation between the internet's introduction and the decline of vehicular theft, an unfortunate situation that has put many honest car thieves out of work. It is also hoping to prove the old adage that "illegal downloading is exactly like stealing a car -- which is why car theft declined as file sharing increased."

As the data shows, vehicle theft followed the music industry's decade-long climb from 1986-1996. Or tried to, anyway. Vehicle theft peaked in 1991 at an unsustainable level of .0066 vehicles stolen per capita. Unfortunately, the web turned these hard-working car thieves into lazy music thieves, thwarting a vehicular theft pattern that should have risen to epidemic levels over the next decade. The data points to one damning fact: you can do more financial damage with a single internet connection than has been done in the entirety of human history up to 1998.

Exhibit D: The RIAA and the Honest American Farmer

As everyone knows, Real Americans Don't Share™. And nothing is more American than farming, one of the first victims of the internet's cruel efficiency. The American farm has been on a decline since well before records were kept (ca. 1992, apparently), and the arrival of file sharing decimated both of the U.S.A.'s prime cash crops: compact discs and popcorn.

The fate of these declining industries are apparently forever intertwined, much like the essentially meaningless overlaid chart above. Both lines run downhill in an indictment of, well, everything un-American. In fact, if you look closely enough, you can see the two graph points bravely embracing each other as they weather the onslaught of progress.

And there you have it: incontrovertible proof that copyright infringement is killing American institutions one download at a time.

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: evidence, extrapolation, trend lines
Companies: limewire, riaa

103 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

crade (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 8:05am

Looks more like 94 is their turning point to me. RIP Kurt.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 8:52am
  
  Re:
  Yeah, I remember that day. I just stared at my CD player thinking, "What's the point anymore?"
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Rich, 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:13am
    
    Re: Re:
    Really? Just because that idiot killed himself? It wasn't like he was a member of a great band like Floyd or Zeppelin. Don't get me wrong, Nirvana was OK and Kurt wasn't a bad singer, but really? To ask, "what's the point anymore?"
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - crade (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:16am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Obviously your opinion is in the minority. Just look at the chart :)
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Rich, 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:37am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Obviously your opinion is in the minority.My daughter would agree with that!
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Trails (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:10am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Did anyone else just hear a whoosh?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Rich, 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:25am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        One says "whoosh" when someone take a joke as a serious statement. I don't believe he was joking. So, the answer to your question is "no."
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 11:24am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        There it is again.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Apr 2011 @ 8:48am

The predicted sales growth curve should be concave upwards.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
aldestrawk (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 8:48am

ASCII porn
Since you bring back fond memories of ASCII porn, figure 1 looks like an erection.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- :Lobo Santo (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 8:54am
  
  Re: ASCII porn
  Hate to tell you this, but you were apparently visiting some low-quality ASCII porn sites.
  
  ;-P
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - aldestrawk (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:32am
    
    Re: Re: ASCII porn
    What do you expect with a 300 BAUD modem?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Brian Schroth (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 8:52am

Also, consider this: In 1986 there was one fledgling Internet, and there was one global class 7 nuclear disaster in Chernobyl.

Now in 2011, we have Internet2 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet2 ), and we have had a second class 7 nuclear disaster at Fukushima.

We must destroy all internets if we want to prevent a nuclear holocaust.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:20am
  
  Re:
  Then we are royally boned...
  http://gainesville.craigslist.org/sys/2333204207.html
  
  That guy has THREE INTERNETS for sale.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- aldestrawk (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:25am
  
  Re:
  Wow! What supports this is that in 1959 there was a meltdown in a Sodium cooled reactor (Sodium Reactor Experiment, SRE) at the Santa Susana Field Laboratories near Los Angeles. Around the same time in the late 50's the DoD was starting to look into a command and control network that could survive a nuclear war. In 1960, the RAND Corporation got a DARPA contract and one employee in particular, Paul Baran (who died just recently), was instrumental in coming up with the idea of a distributed digital packet switching network. The Pentagon liked the idea and asked AT&T to build a prototype. AT&T said, no way, it couldn't be done.
  It makes sense that since the Internet was designed and built to survive a nuclear holocaust that, in effect, its existence is encouraging one.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Berenerd (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:49am
    
    Re: Re:
    then there was that whole skynet thing...
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Apr 2011 @ 8:53am

Wait a moment. Auto theft correlates with CD sales? so CD sales encourage auto theft. Thank God CD sales went down and my car is safer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Apr 2011 @ 8:54am

Now you're just being silly.
Why not just take it from the mouths of pirates themselves? They will voluntarily tell you how much their piracy takes from the industry. All you have to do is ask.

http://www.copyhype.com/2011/03/how-much-more-evidence/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:08am
  
  Re: Now you're just being silly.
  Canadian pirates aren't really the most feared pirates...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Berenerd (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:51am
    
    Re: Re: Now you're just being silly.
    ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRReh?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- crade (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:10am
  
  Re: Now you're just being silly.
  Yeah they will tell you that pigs fly and Elvis lives too if you ask whoever they asked for that study.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Jay (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:39am
  
  Re: Now you're just being silly.
  And the comments on that tell a far different story with the very biased data Terry is using.
  
  *sigh*
  
  The scary thing is you're serious that the article actually debunks anything. All it does is propogate the same tired stories trying to link filesharing with untold amounts of damage that's "hurting" no one.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- MrWilson, 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:47am
  
  Re: Now you're just being silly.
  You keep posting this like it proves anything.
  
  Flawed original methodology and flawed re-examination based on interpretation bias does not conclusive evidence make.
  
  The only thing a survey can truly show is that respondents answered a certain way to a certain question, but not whether or not they were honest or were even real people.
  
  Not to mention the fact that the way the questions are asked are essential.
  
  For example: "three out of every four respondents said that if P2P were not available they would have purchased some or all of the music"
  
  Lets say that roughly all songs cost $1 on iTunes, if they're available. Some people have downloaded more than 40,000 songs. Did they necessarily have $40,000 to spend on those songs? Probably not. The difference between "some and all" as far as downloading music can be $5 and $40,000 or more. If the question doesn't allow for respondents to qualify their answers, which they never do, the results cannot be conclusive of anything except that the respondent chose Answer A instead of Answer B.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 21 Apr 2011 @ 11:09am
    
    Re: Re: Now you're just being silly.
    Dude, as someone who's illegally downloaded a trillion dollars worth of music, I can conclusively say that I totally would have purchased a trillion dollars worth of music if I couldn't have illegally downloaded it.
    
    Why would I lie? A trillion dollars worth!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 12:03pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Now you're just being silly.
      I take it there's now a giant crate burred in your back yard somewhere with a trillion dollars in it? Since we all know that once a record sale is lost, that money is gone from the economy for good.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 12:52pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Now you're just being silly.
        Every time you illegally download an album, God sets $9-15 on fire. And kills a kitten.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Squirrel Brains (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 8:55am

The RIAA should take their act on the road. I am sure as a comedy tour, they would rake in some serious cash.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- ethorad (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:13am
  
  Re:
  Well, they would do but all those damn pirates would probably spread the word about the comedy tour, including sending out free clips to drum up interest. After several sell out tours the RIAA would be forced to stop as it's just not worth playing to stadiums packed with pirates.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Nastybutler77 (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:58am
  
  Re:
  The RIAA should take their act on the road. I am sure as a comedy tour, they would rake in some serious cash.
  
  They wouldn't (couldn't?) do any worse than Charlie Sheen.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Berenerd (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:53am
  
  Re:
  they could tour with Charlie Sheen!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Atkray (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 1:31pm
    
    Re: Re:
    I'd actually pay to see that.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Griff (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 8:56am

Kerosene ?
Do people use kerosene to transport themselves to the record shop or what ?

Or maybe there is illegal kerosene sharing ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- aldestrawk (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:16am
  
  Re: Kerosene ?
  I thought it was a reference to the Swedish band "Him Kerosene" which kind of petered out in the late 1990's due to poor record sales.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 1:12pm
    
    Re: Re: Kerosene ?
    My theory has something to do with a bunch of Crackers wearing Kerosene Hats back in 1993-1994, which were then discarded as college rock vanished and alternative rock became the nameplate for such lousy artists as Linkin Park and Staind.
    
    Sandra Bernhard may have been involved, but so far no one has been able to graph it.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
StrongStyle81, 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:02am

If this chart proves anything its how badly the music industry adapted and utilized new technology. The major growth started in 88/89 and really kicked off in the 90's. The reason is because CDs were a better format and were about fifteen dollars an album. In 1999 mp3 was the new technological edge and instead of using it, the music industry tried to sue it out of existence. If they had embraced that technology and Napster early on, the sales figures would have kept up and maybe continued to climb.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Steven (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:02am

Wow, they must be using the XKCD version of extrapolation.

http://xkcd.com/605/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
yogi2200, 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:03am

It's Autotune's fault
According to figure 1, the music decline happened about the same time that autotune was first released therefore singers were putting in less effort and consumers responded by buying less until of course Rebecca Black came along and now they are starting to ease up (lol)

How come no one compares music and video entertainment to games? 30 years ago you could write the entire Invaders sfx in a few minutes and now it takes years for a game to be developed and yet the lifetime of games is only a few months IF it's extremely good, a few years and yet movies and music expect to put in the same amount of effort as they always have and expect the returns spanning decades in a ever evolving technological society that we live in today even though musicians ADMIT that they muck around to make lyrics/riffs and accidentally make a number 1 hit... you'd think the groupies would be enough but I guess the producers don't see any of that action
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
a-dub (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:06am

Its interesting that they are blaming Napster, what about the rise in popularity of the mp3 file format and broadband internet access ubiquity.

IMO, That leveling off displayed in the first graph from 1994-1996 was due to .mp3's rise in popularity and then the dip in 1997 was when mp3's really took off.

I've always view the drop in record sales revenue as a long overdue market correction.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 12:58pm
  
  Re:
  It becomes even more interesting when you realize that their battling Limewire in court. Why the hell would you point out Napster?
  
  I suppose their theory is that without Napster there would be no Limewire, but my theory is that they still don't feel like they've kicked Napster around enough.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Nom du Clavier (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 2:05pm
  
  Re:
  If you take the line of their projected growth in graph 1 and project back, then it clearly shows that before 1973 the music industry paid people to listen to albums.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
ethorad (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:14am

Don't pirates also help lower global warming? At least according to the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster#Pirates_and_global_warming
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Steven (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:16am

Albums per person
That first graph doesn't even pass the basic laugh test (not that any of them do).

It's measured in albums per person, and they are asserting that individuals would have continued to purchase more and more albums over time.

We're going to ignore that sales plateaued for for six years after a spike and just draw a line going up forever. That graph should be the most meaningful, but the fact that they push crap like that tells me they have nothing.

If I were a judge I'd laugh that one out of the courtroom.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 11:55am
  
  Re: Albums per person
  We're going to ignore that sales plateaued for for six years after a spike and just draw a line going up forever. That graph should be the most meaningful, but the fact that they push crap like that tells me they have nothing.
  
  Yeah I was hoping some statistician could point out the correlation of their line to the preceding data because to my mere motal eyes it looks like the line is entirely arbitary and unrelated..... not to mention possibly done by someones 7-year old child with a ruler.
  
  It's measured in albums per person, and they are asserting that individuals would have continued to purchase more and more albums over time.
  
  ... and since it's in ALBUMS per person, perhaps some helpful label executive could carefully explain why most people now buying singles rather than albums has absolutely nothing to do with the reality line too.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 12:30pm
  
  Re: Albums per person
  It's measured in albums per person, and they are asserting that individuals would have continued to purchase more and more albums over time
  
  This x1000.
  
  Expecting people to just buy more and more albums is exactly like expecting that home prices would continue to rise indefinitely. Could someone remind me how well that worked out?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Chris, 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:18am

What's the data based on?
Is the data for the graph based only on CD sales? Or is this including downloaded purchases through iTunes and such as well?

Kinda makes a big difference.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:18am
  
  Re: What's the data based on?
  It says "Including dig singles," whatever that means. I'm not sure what kind of multiplication they're using because the RIAA hasn't made the data on this chart available. I'm not even sure if this includes just iTunes or everywhere else.
  
  Are they going with 8 songs per album? 15 per album? 12 per album? Who knows?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 12:35pm
    
    Re: Re: What's the data based on?
    because the RIAA hasn't made the data on this chart available.
    
    There's a surprise. Pretty chart with no actual evidence backing it up sounds like standard operating procedure for them.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
weneedhelp (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:24am

Ozone
They forgot to include Napster killed the ozone layer too, and is responsible for deforestation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
i have gas, 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:26am

It'd be fun to see some of these curves compared with historical gasoline/crude oil prices
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
charliebrown (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:29am

Who is to blame?
POINT ONE:
How about the fact that (in Australia) between 1991 and 1999 a new release CD album was around AU$30 whereas by 1998 a CD single was AU$10 ~ Of course you "can't compete with "free" when you're charging ten bucks a song!

POINT TWO:
Apparently actual units of CD's sold began to decline in 1995 but the fact that they put the prices up offset any monetary decrease in those sales. As soon as I revive the other computer (where the source is bookmarked) I shall provide a source if wanted
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Spaceman Spiff (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:38am

Statistics...
There are lies, damned lies, and then there are statistics... Which explains why politicians, lobbyists, and lawyers (often the same entities, though possibly at different times) cite statistics so often.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Comboman (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:44am

Surprising (but understandable) graph
I'm surprised that the albums-per-person number is still as high as it is. It's basically the same now as it was in 1975 (after which there was a jump as people re-bought albums they already owned on 8-track and cassette) and in 1982 (after which there was a jump as people re-bought albums they already owned on CD). Since people can now rip CDs they already own to whatever digital format they want, there is no more need to re-buy albums (which based on this graph, seems to be what the record business is counting on).

I'd love to see a graph of singles-per-person. I suspect that graph would look very different, with a gradual decline from the 1970's to 1990's (as 45RPM singles fall out of favor and tapes/CDs didn't have a viable single format) then a huge jump when iTunes is released. I bet the RIAA don't want to show that graph in court.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Khstapp, 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:49am

Line charts are funny
This is the first time in my life I laughed out loud at a line chart!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- slander (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:14am
  
  Re: Line charts are funny
  I was laughing at line charts before they were funny. Then they sold out and went mainstream.
  
  Bar graphs are where it's at now...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Chris in Utah (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 2:35pm
    
    Re: Re: Line charts are funny
    See Cheesburger ;)
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:51am

If you use there graph and start the "Predicted sales" two years earlier (1997) wouldn't it show a decline in sales? Or at least a leveling off?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:08am
  
  Re:
  They're extrapolating from an Excel linear line-fit curve. You see these kinds of whacked out graphs when people do stupid stuff like that.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Chosen Reject (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:42am
    
    Re: Re:
    I don't think they are. It sure looks like they just extended the line from 1998 to 1999.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:55am

I blame iTunes
The 2000 decline may have just been a normal cylic occurance, or maybe by then all us fools had finished re-purchasing our already-purchased music in that new CD format yielding less sales, but iTunes came out in 2001 at which point it was no longer necessary to purchase entire albums to get the one or two tracks you actually wanted. Of course album sales per person went down. Morons.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Matthew (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 9:58am

Ridiculous!
Are you trying to tell me that correlation does not equal causation? Ridiculous! Who ever heard of such poppycock!?!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Old Fool (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:01am

Al Gore?
I expect your statement that Al Gore invented the internet was sarcasm.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Berners-Lee
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- slander (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:09am
  
  Re: Al Gore?
  During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country's economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system.
  
  Al Gore, 9 March 1999
  
  Straight from the horse's mouth, I'd say. Or, are you somehow implying that he'd lie about something like that? Next thing you know, you'll be saying that since he lied about that, he probably lies about many other things, and not merely the those from which he profits.
  
  Sheesh, the nerve...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:21am
  
  Re: Al Gore?
  I expect it is, too. ;)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:02am

Why do people keep this stupid "invented" lie going?
Shaun Fanning did not "invent" Napster. He took the initiative in the creation of Napster. Even Vint Cerf says so!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:24am
  
  Re: Why do people keep this stupid "invented" lie going?
  Your information (while informative) is not relevant. I don't think it matters who invented Napster (or the mp3 format) because this suit is the RIAA vs. Limewire. But for some reason, they slap Napster's name on the graph.
  
  Perhaps they're hoping to get a chunk of Napster all over again.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - crade (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 11:42am
    
    Re: Re: Why do people keep this stupid "invented" lie going?
    It only counts if they buy the whole album as individual singles. 5 songs from 1 album, 4 from another and 6 from a third counts as 0 albums :)
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - crade (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 11:45am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Why do people keep this stupid "invented" lie going?
      sorry.. ermm this somehow ended up in the wrong place..
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
slander (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:03am

And now, the rest of the story...
January 12, 1999 - Britney Spears releases her debut album. Soon afterward, music sales started taking a steep downhill slide. On the other hand, sales of 2.73-minute montages of semi-melodic noise and insipid, repetitive lyrics started increasing in record amounts.

For generations, Pakistan had what is still considered by some a very traditional form of dowry-dispute resolution called "Bride Burning," where the newly-wed young lady mysteriously burns to death while using a kerosene stove. In 1999, the number of reported cases rose to 1600+, bringing international attention to the problem. As a result, kerosene sales worldwide plummeted as young, hip, tech-savvy Pakistanis started shunning the practice. Caustic acid sales, however, have risen dramatically since then.

Regarding the statistics on vehicle theft, 1991 saw the emergence of what are called "RiceBoys." As most of the aficionados of this new (lack-of)culture were, simply put, too poor to afford the objects of their (twisted) desires, many simply stole them. (Apparently, they couldn't afford big hard drives, either, or they would have simply downloaded them.) Note the increase in 1991. That was the year that Honda started selling Type-R stickers directly, instead of requiring a full car purchase (or theft, as the case might be).

As far as the farm operations data is concerned - I got nothin'...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:03am

I think the chart is wrong. I didn't buy 2 albums last year :P
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:04am

I think I just saw a statistician burst into flames.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:07am

Is this a joke post? I'm still waiting for the punchline...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 1:04pm
  
  Re:
  The punchline is that the RIAA actually believes their terribly composed chart is the key element that will finally allow them to extract billions of dollars from Limewire.
  
  "Albums per capita?" Who measures sales that way?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:10am

I don't get this article. Is the entire thing facetious? Or just the part about kerosene? or what? Was the first chart actually presented in court?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:22am
  
  Re:
  The first chart is indeed part of the argument that is going to prove the RIAAs case. (Or that is their intent I am sure.) As such, it is 'real'.
  
  The rest of the charts use the same method of projection against other elements that are measured and tracked. Basically, it assumes the first chart is right, and the method used to display the data is right, therefor, these also have to be right for the same reason.
  
  In all cases it is showing a correlation, that is, they are happening. However, in no case should one assume a causation, because, frankly as the other charts show, it is utterly foolish to believe that Napster caused kerosene sales to fall, yet, that is what they (the RIAA) wants you to believe about Napster and album sales by showing its chart.
  
  Hopefully I got my terms in order...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Chosen Reject (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:47am
    
    Re: Re:
    The greatest part is that they are suing Limewire. What the heck does Napster have to do with anything? I swear, they've gone with the Chewbacca defense.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - The eejit (profile), 22 Apr 2011 @ 1:33am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Not even that - it's liek the Chewbacca defense with Artoo in place.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:17am

I think car manufacturers are to blame for why I can't dunk because when I started driving I stopped getting any taller.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jimr (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:22am

RIAA Using only two data points?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:29am
  
  Re: RIAA Using only two data points?
  Wonder what the chart would look like with a third point showing 'piracy' numbers. Since they didn't even try... I am guessing it would make the chart tell a worse story. After all, if you believe their arguments that Piracy is the only cause, piracy numbers should be shrinking from 1986 hitting an all time low in 1999, and then skyrocketing without any dips in the last 11 years.
  
  They probably don't include that number since it would make the graph tell a slightly different story.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
DannyB (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:25am

Seriously, you should not publish charts like this
I know you mean well. However the RIAA will get one look at your Kerosene graph and they might actually use it as further evidence of the evils of file sharing.

Ask yourself this question: if the RIAA actually did this, just how shocked would you be?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 1:06pm
  
  Re: Seriously, you should not publish charts like this
  Well, I'd be a little shocked. But I'd get over it quickly. I'm sure their lawyers looked over it briefly before deciding that the fake economists were probably right.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:38am

Let's show the moment when retailers stopped allowing you to return CDs that were absolute crap. Do you think their policies to combat "piracy" might have something to do with the consumer's unwillingness to bend over time and time again?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jay (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 10:46am

Somehow...
Somewhere, there is a Hitler parody waiting to happen for the RIAA against Limewire here...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
John, 21 Apr 2011 @ 11:14am

CD vs Car theft
I would think there would be a direct correlation here since people would keep their albums in the car. When the car was stolen so would their albums so they'd have to go buy them again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 1:08pm
  
  Re: CD vs Car theft
  I like your thinking. Street teams deployed by the major labels to jack cars & cds in order to facilitate this fabled "neverending increase in sales." All this car theft could have been avoided if they had just come up with yet another format for album repurchase.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Michael Barclay (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 12:23pm

XKCD on correlation vs. causation
Don't forget this important explanation by XKCD on correlation vs. causation:
http://xkcd.com/552/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Brian, 21 Apr 2011 @ 12:52pm

Napster made me old and fat
In 1998 I was young, had black hair and weighed about 160. Now I have a lot of gray in my hair and weigh about 190. Who can I sue?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 1:10pm
  
  Re: Napster made me old and fat
  That depends. Can you whip up a misleading chart showing how it's all somebody else's fault? Preferably a "somebody else" with deep pockets?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Peg Leg Jack, 21 Apr 2011 @ 12:52pm

Piracy at Peg Leg Jack's
Hello,

I've been downloading free music via mp3's since before you guys had any clue as to what to call people like me. Since I'm basically the OG pirate now, I would like to extend an offer to my fellow pirates out there...

I will be creating an internetical sensation of Buc's Den that isn't 4chan. It will be called "Peg Leg Jack's". At Peg Leg Jack's you can compare drinking ability with other pirates, trade booty, swoon wenches, and mp3 it up to your hearts content. There will be only 2 firewall rules at Jack's;

The first rule of Peg Leg Jack's: If it aint at least CD quality, it aint at Peg Leg's.

The second rule of Peg Leg Jack's: DRM will get you a coach trip to the goat locker.

I'll be seein you swash bucklin sea rats at Jack's!

-Peg Leg Jack
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile), 21 Apr 2011 @ 1:14pm
  
  Re: Piracy at Peg Leg Jack's
  I likes the cut o' yer jib, Peg Leg Jack.
  
  Might we also be able to trade wenches, along with the mp3s and swoon-y looks?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bob, 21 Apr 2011 @ 3:24pm

This article reminds me that I haven't gone cherry picking in a while.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
JustPointEmOut, 22 Apr 2011 @ 1:15am

So let's burn Napster at the stake so the world can right itself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The eejit (profile), 22 Apr 2011 @ 1:35am
  
  Re:
  Too late, they got eaten by the Great Elder God RIAA.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
hmm (profile), 22 Apr 2011 @ 9:37am

sharing is evil
These thieves, and now they're sharing LANGUAGE and OXYGEN...they must be stopped!

Think of the poor french-spanish dictionary makers and the oxygen-tank companies!!!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Apr 2011 @ 9:56am

advent of napster = decline of cd sales
decline of cd sales = decline of kerosene sales
decline of kerosene sales = decline in incidence of self immolation

if a=b & b=c & c=d then a=d

napster saved lives
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Apr 2011 @ 9:57am

advent of napster = decline of cd sales
decline of cd sales = decline of kerosene sales
decline of kerosene sales = decline in incidence of self immolation

if a=b & b=c & c=d then a=d

napster saved lives
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
herbert, 22 Apr 2011 @ 10:39am

are you trying to tell me that they (anyone) actually believes this crock of shit? do they (anyone) actually think a judge (unless HANDSOMELY REWARDED!! and it would then stand out like a poodles plums!!) is going to believe any of this shit either? if so, then GOD HELP US ALL!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
JustPointEmOut, 22 Apr 2011 @ 2:12pm

@herbert
What I believe is that individuals in power at the institutions and associations have been selling this scenario so long, to the exclusion of everything else, because doing so points the finger away from leadership that has been inept and uninventive.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Spuffler, 22 Apr 2011 @ 5:51pm

Nothing about how the projected growth of vinyl was permanently kaiboshed by those maggot CD manufacturers? Was that fair to Empire and Audio Technica and Grado? All those industries destroyed!

And my wax collection... oh those sneaky upstart lacquer disc makers! Everyone knows that hand cranked wax cylinders are the 1337357!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bob D (profile), 25 Apr 2011 @ 12:32am

Couldn't possibly be because the music industry hasn't found a band worth a damn since the 90's. Couldn't possibly be because everything played today is vetted by Clear Channel lacking any soul, depth or correlation to "music". The music industry died when rap went mainstream and actually started calling that shit a musical album and the crap they arranged (or should I say rearranged) songs. The industry would do well to focus on finding "musicians" and "songwriters" as opposed to suing people who refuse to pay for their crap. I've never once downloaded music from any band that i didn't buy the album first if I considered them to be musicians. Most of the bullshit out today doesn't even qualify as commercial-worthy (read ad). Much less good enough to warrant spending money on. If the band is worth it though most of us support them by buying. Assholes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Peter, 26 Apr 2011 @ 7:59am
  
  Re:
  I'm not an expert, but I'm pretty sure bands make hardly anything from record sales, but mostly from live shows. So I'd say if you want to support them, pirate music but see them live too.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Robert Driggers (profile), 26 Apr 2011 @ 7:40pm

I'm not an expert either but if you want to see a band achieve commercial success and garner some air-play record sales are an important component. Clear Channel won't play what record companies don't have sales of. Believe me I don't support records sales because of companies; most companies suck. They could care less about the artistic value of a group's creation only asking does it sell? Just look at the fact that in order to please the conservatives in this country (and to be available at Walmart) they have "radio" versions of songs and edited albums.

The good bands get money from their sales; although they derive their primary earnings from tours and t-shirt sales from what I understand. Unfortunately (although the paradigm is shifting) the labels are needed to get the exposure. You got to make the playlist if you want to be heard.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jose_X, 31 May 2011 @ 10:32am

a few items that may not have been mentioned earlier
Overheated 90s economies?

Year 2000 predictions and uncertainties?

Presidential elections?

Recessions?

Twin tower attack?

That fact that turning points don't necessarily correlate with peaks but also with trends and averages?

The fact a great many other things did not coincide at those points in time (of all things to look at, you can find data points for anything just about, especially if you have loads of money)?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]