French ‘Three Strikes’ Law Slashes Piracy, But Fails to Boost Sales

[darknessangel]

Meh... cutting piracy should be at the marketing level. After all, what gets pirated are mainly entertainment goods. If someone can't get a movie/book/magazine for free... well, a pity but is not a direct reason to buy it.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by spellbanisher

Europes economy is receding back into recession. It should be no surprise that a recession followed by stagnation followed by another recession is eventually leading to a decline in media sales.

They could have used the money wasted on trying to stop piracy.

Originally Posted by spellbanisher

If piracy was the predominant reason for music sales, then any reduction in casual piracy should reduce the decline in sales.

No, it's the oposite way. If piracy leads to sales, reducing piracy reduces sales. Which is what happened.

Originally Posted by HansTWN

I can't agree with you here. The guy who is selling bootleg DVD's off the back of his truck for a buck a piece is a "true pirate", but a big website like The Pirate Bay which probably collects 100,000s of dollars in monthly ad revenue by providing an exchange for the warez is not?

You can also blame the companies that advertize on pirate sites, and the companies that manufacture the hardware that stores the pirated content.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

You can also blame the companies that advertize on pirate sites.

If they do it on purpose, of course you should. Though quite often they don't even know about it, since much of the online ads are placed automatically. Still someone is responsible that the ads are there. And they should make sure that such people receive no support and that every advertiser will stay away.

[MrsJoseph]

Originally Posted by HappyMartin

Has anyone considered that the music got so awful people stopped buying it and couldn't even be bothered to pirate it.

Just a theory

Originally Posted by spindlegirl

My music buying went way down after about the mid 90s for pretty much that reason. The industry would much rather blame piracy, than their own overall decline in quality.

Pretty much the same reason I borrow most books rather than buying. A person can only tell the same story so many ways, and I am highly picky about where I put my money.

Originally Posted by xg4bx

i've hit the point where i have a stereotypical 'old person's' music collection i.e. not keeping up with any new bands and my taste hasn't evolved since a certain year lol. i think the most recent band i enjoy has been around for 20 years.

when they started taking the iron maiden and judas priest t-shirts off the walls in hot topic, i knew current music wasn't for me anymore . i don't know who these bands are these days....and i'm only 34.


there's really no way to track it but i'd bet my arm the secondary market is seeing increased sales. maybe instead of buying it new or pirating people are just buying their entertainments used. i've had decent success selling my own goods through amazon lately, i'm sure i'm not alone. i buy all my books from the publisher Pyr used. i don't have the $10-$15 to take a chance on first time authors and their books are only available in ebook and trade. if i can get a book for $1 in 'like new' condition as opposed to $15, i'm going for it.

Originally Posted by spindlegirl

I think getting older and being kind of "set" in my ways does have a lot to do with it. I'm 44, and while I have an appreciation for many musical styles, my own personal music collection that means a lot to me has pretty much been established.

Also, music has been one of those things for which I've never needed to dedicate lots of money. The radio, youtube, and buskers and so many various places to hear music. Also my own time for the instruments I play. I enjoy listening to myself and practicing.

My husband and I have recently enjoyed discovering new (to us) musicians via the NPR tinydesk concerts we view too.

I think where I have spent the most money is for my oldest daughter who loves J-pop, and various flavours of Asian music. So over the years, YesAsia has gotten a lot of money from me to build her collection. The other children like to listen to mostly things they hear on the radio or borrow from the library.

Just for you guys:

7 Scientific Reasons You'll Turn Out Just Like Your Parents

(Reason) #7. Your Brain Will Stop Getting Pleasure from New Music

[SeaKing]

I love the French as individuals.
It was my honor to once transport members of the Legion.
The French women can only be described as "incredibly breathtakingly awesome."

That said, they have some of the strangest laws imaginable all to protect the privacy of the individual, and now they are doing this?

One man that I knew, liked to shout out on matters like this, and I can't do it justice or even spell it like it was spoken or show the incredulous look on his face when he got stupid orders.

"Imposs sii beeel"

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

They could have used the money wasted on trying to stop piracy.

This point seems a bit more relevant to discussions the war on drugs. I'm not saying that money is, or is not, wasted, just that we can agree a lot of money is spent there. At least in comparison, it seems to me that the money spent trying to stop piracy is minute.

Does anyone have statistics on how many people in the world are currently guests of the state -- any state -- because of pirating purely digital goods? I'm going to make a wild guess and say it's less than triple digits. Maybe a lot less. As it should be.

And how big is the squad who took down Dotcom?

[spindlegirl]

Originally Posted by MrsJoseph

Just for you guys:

7 Scientific Reasons You'll Turn Out Just Like Your Parents

(Reason) #7. Your Brain Will Stop Getting Pleasure from New Music

Hehe, good one.

To tell the truth, when one has 5 children, it gets hard to buy every musician I like, but I do enjoy quite a bit of new music, but not enough to have it jamming on my Clip 24/7

[Ninjalawyer]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

This point seems a bit more relevant to discussions the war on drugs. I'm not saying that money is, or is not, wasted, just that we can agree a lot of money is spent there. At least in comparison, it seems to me that the money spent trying to stop piracy is minute.

Does anyone have statistics on how many people in the world are currently guests of the state -- any state -- because of pirating purely digital goods? I'm going to make a wild guess and say it's less than triple digits. Maybe a lot less. As it should be.

And how big is the squad who took down Dotcom?

Except money isn't just spent on jailing people. Money is also spent indirectly by ISPs that need to comply with laws that require them to monitor, and in setting up and maintaining government bureaucracy to monitor for and send out letters in relation to infringement. There's also a loss to the citizens who end up having to pay taxes to support this scheme and defend against false accusations of infringement.

If the law imposes a compliance burden and tax burden on citizens and seemingly benefits no one, one has to wonder exactly what the point is.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by Ninjalawyer

Money is also spent indirectly by ISPs that need to comply with laws that require them to monitor, and in setting up and maintaining government bureaucracy to monitor for and send out letters in relation to infringement.

I was thinking this part would more than pay for itself, by reducing internet traffic. The sorts of pirates likely to be caught are those who download masses of large files, perhaps more than they will ever be able to read, view, or listen to -- thus slowing down my own tiny email and news traffic.

There's also a loss to the citizens who end up having to pay taxes to support this scheme and defend against false accusations of infringement.

There is a possibility that I will have to pay a few cents to lock up the likes of Dotcom -- who, if guilty, I hope gets a fine and probation. But if you are talking about the coming cooperation between ISP's and copyright holders, that doesn't come out of taxes.

As for false accusations, the same can happen when someone is mistakenly accused of shoplifting a book that would otherwise be remaindered and pulped. You can never reduce wrongdoing if there is absolute zero tolerance for mistaken accusations. Now, if false accusations seem to be common, I might change my mind, but I want to see some evidence first.

[plib]

Originally Posted by Ninjalawyer

If the law imposes a compliance burden and tax burden on citizens and seemingly benefits no one, one has to wonder exactly what the point is.

Transferring the compliance cost from the owner's budget to the ISP and public budget, leaving funds available to pay the costs of the next copyright extension and/or new DRM brain fart.

[HappyMartin]

Originally Posted by MrsJoseph

Just for you guys:

7 Scientific Reasons You'll Turn Out Just Like Your Parents

(Reason) #7. Your Brain Will Stop Getting Pleasure from New Music

Oh I still buy lots of new music and hardly ever listen to old music. Well apart from the Sex Pistols and Johnny Cash.

It has always been young people that listened to music more than us older folk so if music consumption is down look to the youth, not me.

I meant that the music now must not be appealing to the market segment that in the past was the biggest consumer of music. The youth

[Ninjalawyer]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

I was thinking this part would more than pay for itself, by reducing internet traffic. The sorts of pirates likely to be caught are those who download masses of large files, perhaps more than they will ever be able to read, view, or listen to -- thus slowing down my own tiny email and news traffic

Those pirates make up a small portion of an ISP users so: (i) aren't slowing down your connection one iota; and (ii) the marginal cost of bandwidth is tiny for ISPs, so given the small numbers involved, would likely not "more than pay for itself" or even register as much of a blip on an ISPs radar - legal services like Hulu and Netflix use vastly more of an ISPs bandwidth.

Honestly, maybe you should stick to facts rather than just blue-skying.

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

There is a possibility that I will have to pay a few cents to lock up the likes of Dotcom -- who, if guilty, I hope gets a fine and probation. But if you are talking about the coming cooperation between ISP's and copyright holders, that doesn't come out of taxes.

The costs of taking down Kim Dotcom is irrelevant to this discussion. I don't know what "the coming cooperation between ISP's [sic] and copyrightholders" is coming from and it doesn't seem relevant to a discussion on 3-strike laws, but greater enforcement requires more taxpayer money; laws typically aren't freebies. The ISPs in the U.S. are pursuing agreements with ISPs, but that's not what we're talking about.

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

As for false accusations, the same can happen when someone is mistakenly accused of shoplifting a book that would otherwise be remaindered and pulped. You can never reduce wrongdoing if there is absolute zero tolerance for mistaken accusations. Now, if false accusations seem to be common, I might change my mind, but I want to see some evidence first.

You've grossly missed my point. My point was that false-accusations have a cost, and if people are paying that cost for no benefit (i.e. 3-strikes laws failing to increase sales), then one has to wonder what the point of the system is.

If I periodically took $20 out of my wallet and threw it in the garbage, you'd probably think I was nuts. Effectively, French government is doing exactly that if it's shown that this law is of no benefit.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by HappyMartin

Oh I still buy lots of new music and hardly ever listen to old music. Well apart from the Sex Pistols and Johnny Cash.

It has always been young people that listened to music more than us older folk so if music consumption is down look to the youth, not me.

I meant that the music now must not be appealing to the market segment that in the past was the biggest consumer of music. The youth

I don't know about that, the nostalgia market has always been big too. When you're young you can't really afford to buy much music, it's the people in their late 30s/40s with disposable income to spend.

[Jaden]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

When you're young you can't really afford to buy much music, it's the people in their late 30s/40s with disposable income to spend.

I used to buy much more music when I was younger. Now I'm in my late 30s and I don't care that much for music anymore - in general. So I rarely buy music. But I was always more interested in books anyway.

But I do remember that I quite a bit of my income/allowance when I was a younger. And if I couldn't afford music, I got tapes from the library or listened to and recorded music from the radio, listened to my fathers old vinyl records or tapes or got music as birthday and Christmas presents from my parents.

My parents never bought music for themselves as far as I recall.

[HappyMartin]

The thing about turning out like your parents is pretty good though. My father loved music and never stopped adding new music to his collection until he died. I seem to be going the same way