Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick Fisher
Pur-lease............................get it right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
every illegal download" might indicate a POTENTIAL lost sale.
I wasn't going to get involved in this but I find I have to stand up for common sense in the face of such abject PR for those with a vested interest in upholding the case for mass surveillance for any reason.
|
Mick,
The "every" analogy does, under the constraints of the existing model, apply.
I know that it's difficult to quantify however the fact is that prior to filesharing the only way to access a true copy of any quality was to buy the product.
Radio, national TV etc were used to whet the appetite of the consumer but there was no "try before you buy". In essence - if someone heard a track and bought an album only to find that it was pants the labels didn't care because they'd actually made their money as the now disappointed consumer had already bought it.
They no longer have that revenue stream as consumers can now readily access the material for free. Ergo every illegal download is a lost sale.
The downloaders counter argument in regard to "Singles" does not wash either as these get sufficient mainstream exposure not only from the mediums referenced above but also from streams from artists sites.
If it were the case that downloading were purely for research or to establish "as a taster" whether one might reasonably purchase a track then how would one reasonably explain the plethora of people sharing single lady gaga tracks (by way of an example) on many of the torrent sites?
One would have to wonder if none of them have access to a TV or radio or any other medium of exposure to music.
By the way, I'm not an advocate of mass surveillance - but I'm not in denial over what has helped propogate it.