> We're way off topic now (i'll be on topic by the end of this mail so
> bear with me). The losses the companies attribute to 
> piracy/p2p internet downloads are way off target anyway, this 
> (19billion) is probably a RIAA figure.

It is as far as I'm aware - I think it's based on an estimate for the 
number of tracks downloaded through p2p networks over the last year, 
alongside the assumption that *every track downloaded would have 
actually been a CD album sale if p2p networks didn't exist*, which 
I think is where the figure really falls down. For example, you could 
apply a similar logic to show how radio stations have "lost" trillions 
of dollars for the RIAA in the last few decades, on the assumption 
that each time a listener heard a track on the radio the RIAA basically 
lost one album sale. 

It completely discounts the fact that a lot of people download tracks 
they wouldn't have bought anyway; it discounts the fact that a lot of 
people buy CDs they wouldn't have bought if they *hadn't* heard one or 
more of the tracks over p2p first; so, all in all, it's a "sexed-up" 
figure alright!

FWIW, a person I know works for a major label and is quite heavily 
involved with that label's anti-p2p efforts. He tells me that while the 
majors are confident that the next few years will see legitimate mp3 
services eclipse the illegal ones in terms of visibility and prominence, 
they have effectively "given up" on a certain generation of listeners, 
who they don't think they'll ever really wean away from the illegal 
services (which they know they'll never completely vanquish). That 
generation is the one that's university-age now, which has never really 
known a world where you *have* to pay for music. Younger generations 
will, in theory, grow up accustomed to using paid mp3 services; older 
generations, like the late-20s/early-30s demographic that makes up the 
bulk of this list, will always have a sense of "guilt" about free music 
which will make them go back to buying music on physical media or use 
paid services instead. That's what I'm told anyway...

Brendan

Reply via email to