Piracy costing tens of billions of pounds

antijoke

antijoke

antijoke

Caporegime
Joined
28 Jan 2003
Posts
39,973
Location
England
Story

Interested to hear everyones views on this. What about all the other revenue that is generated by people listening to artists they wouldn't have before, and then gone ahead and bought their work.

EDIT: Maybe some could edit the title to include to UK economy.
 
I'll await the usual "support for piracy by many" replies - usually complete with self justification etc.
But in answer to your small question.

If somebody pirates an artist they haven't heard before and likes it.
What makes you think they will then go out and buy the album?
If they pirated the first track they will go back and pirate the rest.

That argument holds as much water as the "I wasn't going to buy it anyway so it's OK to steal it" one.
 
Well piracy isnt that big of a deal they still have loads of profit regardless of piracy.

Also what about radio, its free u listen to the songs on there but its legal. So whats the difference really from that to downloading music?
 
The Strategic Advisory Board for Intellectual Property (SABIP) warned it may be hard to change attitudes.
Click to expand...

They're wrong, more like its too late to change attitudes. Mass public file sharing has been going on since Napster back in 1999, ten years ago. How on earth do they expect to be able to change the attitude of people that have been doing it for 10 years?

Its simple, they're too late to do anything about it, they'll just have to change the way the media companies distribute their material now, in order to present an even easier, more attractive alternative to piracy.
 
stoofa said:
If somebody pirates an artist they haven't heard before and likes it.
What makes you think they will then go out and buy the album?
If they pirated the first track they will go back and pirate the rest.
Click to expand...

<sarcasm>I have no idea what would lead him to think that. There is certainly nobody who pirates and then supports the artists/developers who's work they like. Nobody.</sarcasm>

Oh wait.
 
And it just goes to show how much money record companies make if they're losing tens of billions and still posting huge profits. The artists don't suffer badly, they still get their contracted wage/royalties from air time, it's the record companies that lose out more.
 
stoofa said:
That argument holds as much water as the "I wasn't going to buy it anyway so it's OK to steal it" one.
Click to expand...

Not really, as theft permenantly deprives the owner of an item, which is why it is a criminal offence. Copyright infringement does not, and therefore it is a civil offence.

A major contribution to piracy is the pricing structures adopted by film and record labels. Most people will watch a movie what, once a year? No point watching the same one over and over again when you know what happens. Yet a Bluray will cost £20? Thats very poor value entertainment. No wonder people are tempted to just download it instead. It's the same with music - £10 for 10 tracks.. bargain. That means it would cost what, £10,000 to fill an average ipod with music. Bargain!

If you could go onto Itunes and pay, say, 10p a track, I doubt anyone would waste their time pirating anything ever again. There simply wouldn't be any point.
 
Last edited:
stoofa said:
I'll await the usual "support for piracy by many" replies - usually complete with self justification etc.
Click to expand...

That doesn't necessarily mean it's not true or justified. ;)

stoofa said:
If somebody pirates an artist they haven't heard before and likes it.
What makes you think they will then go out and buy the album?
If they pirated the first track they will go back and pirate the rest.
Click to expand...

In your opinion perhaps? I'll admit I've pirated songs before, and anything which I've liked I've bought the legit version (and usually anything else of theirs I can get my hands on)

Why? A) Because the CD is usually better quality B) A good artist should be supported so they can continue to provide their art.

I've got CDs from several bands that I would never have heard of had I not downloaded them first. So again, while maybe you wouldn't go out and buy the album after pirating songs, doesn't mean everyone is the same.
 
When I was in my teenage years, downloaded an album by one group. Since then bought their whole discography... If you like something, support it.
 
Complementary comments to that article.

Clearly a lot of people actually do think they're justified in pirating. Changing these people's attitude is going to prove fairly tough indeed. Although I do agree with them on the fact that new releases are priced fairly poorly - £12 for a CD and £15 or more for a DVD is slightly ridiculous, especially when you consider most of these filesharers are teens (older users tend to favour encryption / usenet, so they won't be included in the statistics).
 
[TW]Fox;14169645 said:
A major contribution to piracy is the pricing structures adopted by film and record labels. Most people will watch a movie what, once a year? No point watching the same one over and over again when you know what happens. Yet a Bluray will cost £20? Thats very poor value entertainment.
Click to expand...

In this case If you only intend to watch a movie once I would suggest popping down to your nearest Blockbuster.

Trying to say it's because of the price of goods is just the same as the other garbage others are saying by how they will download something "new" and go buy it if they like it. Last time I checked, new music is streamed via the radio. For free!
 
stoofa said:
What makes you think they will then go out and buy the album?
If they pirated the first track they will go back and pirate the rest.

That argument holds as much water as the "I wasn't going to buy it anyway so it's OK to steal it" one.
Click to expand...

It was based on another study that was on the BBC website that I cannot find.
 
Always amuses me in the PC Gaming forum when people ask for help with an issue they have, and that issue only pertains to the pirated copy of the game - eg: Crysis' chicken guns.

Buy the damn games, noobcakes!
 
I wasn't asking you to defend pricing structures or provide alternative solutions, I am TELLING you what a major contribution to piracy is. It doesn't justify it, it merely goes some way towards explaining its prevelance.
 
Damonic said:
In this case If you only intend to watch a movie once I would suggest popping down to your nearest Blockbuster.

Trying to say it's because of the price of goods is just the same as the other garbage others are saying by how they will download something "new" and go buy it if they like it. Last time I checked, new music is streamed via the radio. For free!
Click to expand...

That's not to the user's convenience though. If they could access a film at a reasonable price online I am sure fewer would turn to piracy.

After all, why would you rather drive to Blockbuster and back and be told to watch it within a certain timeframe than download it and watch it when you feel like it?

P.S. You can only laugh at the radio comment.
 
Last edited:
I would say their is a possible loss of sale, people will download rather than going to the shop, more needs to be done from the media companies to implement a valid source for downloading films cheaply and legally. Every online site or application just charges you £3+ for a rental.

But they make plenty of money from ticket sales via cinemas, £6+ to watch a film now and £50+ to see a top band or singer and also paying a movie star $20 million dollars to star in a film is not exactly the best business logic when they go on about how they are losing money, these days nobody cares who is in the film as long as its good and worth the price payed to watch it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom