Music Piracy





What is Music Piracy?
Music piracy, as defined by the IFPI (International Federation of the Phonographic Industry), is the deliberate break of copyright laws on a commercial scale, but can more simply be stated as the sharing of music files without legal permission. Music piracy can be broken down into four different categories:

1. Physical Music Piracy- This is the making and/or distribution of music without permission from the individual or company who owns the rights to the music. The copies that are created may differ from the original version, but the compilation is illegal as it was manufactured without permission.

2. Counterfeits- These are copies of albums or records that have been made, without permission, to resemble the original versions published by the artist.

3. Bootlegs- These are copies of live performances or broadcasts, which are recorded without authorization, and are sold without the permission from the rights owner.

4. Internet Piracy- This is the illegal downloading and uploading of music on the internet, that can range from small scale individual use to large scale commercial use, but all which are done against copyright laws. This can be done through peer-2-peer (P2P) websites, such as Limewire.

Our research will focus on the fourth type of Music Piracy, Internet Piracy.

Who Can be Held Responsible?
A study performed by the IFPI estimated that the number of illegally shared music files on the internet is approximately 40 billion, which makes a piracy rate of 95% (Digital Music Report, 2008). With such high rates of piracy, this raises the question of who is responsible for it. Is it the responsibility of the artist, the law, P2P programs? Some legal proceedings in the United States of America hold that P2P programs should be held responsible for disastrous effects of file sharing. In 2005, the Supreme Court ruled against Napster, which resulted in the program being shut down. But should these programs be held responsible? The courts ordered Napster to be shut down because of how the program worked. Napster had a central server where all files were stored, and users accessed the server from their own computers, therefore they were found to be the ones responsible for the sharing of music. Yet other programs, such as Limewire, have a different set-up. Limewire works by connecting individuals. Each user's own computer acts as a server, and they are able to download files from other users computers. The USA courts have not found that these programs are responsible for illegally sharing music files as they act as a central program that connects users, but they are not directly involved in storing the files.

Others claim that it is the responsibility of the companies that make computer burners and the associated software as these are often involved in different stages in the music piracy process. Yet, this does not hold a lot of truth, because such hardware is not made with the intention to make illegal copies of CD. They have many other functions, such as making file storage.

When it comes down to it, a lot of the responsibility lies in the hands of the users- people who illegally share music files on the internet. Although programs, like Limewire, are available, the bottom line is that sharing music without copyright permission is illegal. It is no different than walking into a record store and stealing a CD. In the USA, individual users have been sued for sharing music files, resulting in fines against the user. Although lawsuits against individuals have stopped, government agencies are keeping an eye on individuals who download a lot of music.

Legal programs
With a cost:

http://www.apple.com/ca/itunes/whatson/music.html http://www.werkshop.com/store/home.action

http://www.emusic.com/

https://www.smithsonianglobalsound.org/index.aspx

http://www.amazon.com/gp/browse.html?node=163856011

http://www.eclassical.com/

http://www.magnatune.com/

http://audiolunchbox.com/

http://www.last.fm/

http://www.bluetracks.ca/

http://www.muchmusic.com/shop/

http://www.emimusic.ca/home.asp

http://mp3.rhapsody.com/home.html

Free:

https://www.smithsonianglobalsound.org/index.aspx

http://www.garageband.com/

http://www.ubu.com/sound/index.html

http://www.mtv.com/music/downloads/

Illegal programs
http://www.limewire.com/

http://music.cooltoad.com/music/

http://aries.com/

http://www.youtube.com/

Different types of torrents

Legality and Government Regulations on Music Downloads
According to the Copyright Act of Canada you may burn a copy of a music CD for personal use (i.e. to have one at home and one to listen to in your car) because royalties have already been paid on blank CDs when you purchase them. You may lend your friend a CD, but you may not burn it for yourself and then give it to them, nor may you burn a copy of your CD for a friend, as that is distributing.

It is not legal to download music using P-2-P networking, such as Kazaa or LimeWire, despite what your friends might say, as it is an infringement on the Copyright. People assume that because everyone does it, it must be okay, but this is not the case. Distributors such as iTunes are legally able to do so as they pay copyrighting fees to the Copyright holders, operating within the legal constraints surrounding their distributions. ITunes allows you to authorize your songs on 5 different computers, allowing you to use the songs for your own personal use but preventing the mass distribution of songs.

The FBI and other organizations investigate allocations of copyright infringement and if charged, you are liable in civil court and can face up to 5 years and/or up to $250 000 in charges, making it no small matter for those caught and charged. The copyright holders can also sue you up to $150 000 in statutory damages for EACH work you have copied or distributed. That's an expensive song.

Changes Artists have had to Make Since Piracy has Increased in Prevalence
The music industry has evolved greatly over the past few decades. With music piracy on the rise, artists have had to adjust the ways that they conduct business. With CD sales on the decline, touring has become an ever increasing venture that artists are engaging in. These tours provide fans with an experience that the internet cannot. Bands are putting more emphasis on providing their fans with a solid show, and it is becoming more common for bands to be on the road for an extended period of time. In 2003, concert ticket sales brought in 60 percent of revenues in the music industry, while record sales accounted for only 40 percent (Spiegel Online 2006). With the touring business booming, bands now have an opportunity to benefit in a big way. According to estimates by Rolling Stone, U2 brought in a whopping €110 million in 2004 from concert and merchandise sales alone. With music piracy increasing in prevalence, artists have sure found an effective way to combat this problem. Today another large stream of revenue comes from the promotion of various goods and services. Endorsement deals vary greatly, but it is not uncommon for the deal to be in the multi-million dollar range. Over the years Britney Spears has received over US$370 million for various endorsement deals (Forbes, 2007). The use of branding and endorsing has netted musicians great sums of money over the past few years, and the end is not yet in sight for this lucrative business.

As the music industry gets more complex, artists now have to consider many more things before they sign with a label. CD sales are no longer the main source of income and now bands and labels have to negotiate how to share the profits of these many different endeavours. Musicians now have to act like business people, and think outside the box in an attempt to discover new ways to generate income. The days when bands relied on their CD sales to generate the majority of their income are long gone.

Artist's Perspectives on Music Piracy
Downloaded music had been given the mainstream label of “piracy”, thus associating this action with stealing. Consequently, many people consider the downloading of music to be unlawful, criminal and explicitly against the wishes of the artists they are downloading. However this statement could not be any less true.

Music downloading is an issue which is reshaping the way popular music is distributed, and the way artists are able to get exposure in a very positive way. A prodigious example is the well known artist Soulja Boy Tell-Em, and his first hit single “Crank That”.

The fame and profit this song earned, is almost entirely due to the internet. In July 2006 Soulja Boy Tell-Em started a Myspace site with the intention of allowing fans to get closer to him. Within 4 months, he broke Myspace history for an independent artist with over 700,00 profile views, 2.5 million total plays, approximately 15,000 – 30,000 plays per day and between 1,500 and 3,000 downloads per day. These figures are solely from Myspace; in combination with downloads from other websites or downloading programs such as Napster, Kaza and Limewire, Soulja Boy set an unbelievable standard for an independant artist purely relying on downloading and internet sites. Another notable landmark in music downloading is an experiment Radiohead did with their album “In Rainbows”.



In what was definitely considered a unique and bold move, Radiohead put their album for sale on their website, but did not give an exact price for it. Buyers were allowed to pay however little or much they desired for the album. The result was 1.2 million copies sold, along with approximately 600,000 downloads. This is something Radiohead was thrilled about! The album was distributed about six times more than their previous release and the band was allowed to keep all the profits. In addition to these two examples, the downloading of music has even been known to save artists in some cases. A prime example of this was experienced by the band smashing pumpkins. After a disagreement with their record label, Virgin Records, Virgin decided not to release the band's album Machina II due to the poor sales figures of the band's previous album. Thus, Smashing Pumpkins decided to send 25 unsolicited copies of the album to a group of loyal fans who were active in the online music downloading community, along with explicit instructions for redistribution.

Thus, it seems this shift in the music industry may actually be beneficial for artists. Although the artist may not profit as much from the initial album sales, artists are making substantial gains in other areas. It is now far easier for artists to gain exposure and credibility amongst a more diverse fan base. More exposure creates a desire for more live tours which in the end can result in profit for the band.

Survey Results
We performed a survey, of 100 individuals, which asked about how people obtain their music. The following are the results that we received:



Another fact: 694,000 songs downloaded illegally all over the world in less than 5 minutes!!