By Jo Best, 20 April 2005 13:00
NEWS UK record industry trade body the BPI (British Phonographic Industry) has announced it has won a court order to force ISPs to reveal the identities of 33 suspected file-sharers.
Five ISPs will now have days to turn over the details of the suspected uploaders,who, the BPI claims, have posted 72,000 music files to the internet illegally. The BPI is pursuing the 33 for compensation.
The BPI has also revealed more about the second wave of file-sharers to be collared. One third of the unlucky 31 are parents whose children's uploading habits have landed them in legal hot water.
A spokesman said of the process of negotiating compensation with such parents: "In the first round of cases, we took into account the fact that a lot of parents wouldn't be aware.
"But it's not like we go, 'You're a parent, we'll let you off'."
Illegal downloaders are costing the music industry over half a billion pounds over the last two years, new research has claimed.
The research, carried out by TNS on behalf of the BPI, found that illegal music downloaders are likely to have spent £654m less.
The research also found that half of illegal downloaders said they will continue to get their music illegally, 34 per cent were unsure whether they will switch to legal sources or carry on using illegal file-sharing services and 15 per cent said they intend to start paying for their downloads.
The BPI spokesman said illegal downloaders who claim their file-sharing prompts them to buy more music are talking nonsense.
"Whether they go out and buy 50, 100 or a million albums, file-sharing is still illegal," he said. "This isn't the first piece of research that shows any promotional effect is outweighed... by the damaging effect."
Comments
There are 16 comments. Join the discussion
1. anonymous
What about privacy issues and entrapment? It has to be wrong that The BPI or anyone else can be granted court orders to force ISPs to reveal 'suspects' identities.
2. anonymous
Hmmm.
I don't buy music because it's crap.
I don't download music because it's illegal.
Also, can parents really be held responsible for the actions of their children? If a child commits a crime can you really sue the parents? I would have thought that's going to be a hard one to make stick.
3. anonymous
Surely downloading can only be considered to be costing the music industry money when that is money they would have had otherwise. Most young "filesharers" would have gone without, not paid for the music in a different format (eg.CD). In some cases sharing files is even generating real business by introducing listeners to music they would never have heard otherwise, which they then purchase afterwards. I always wonder how much the BPI take those ideas into consideration when stating their "losses" stats.
4. Shaolin
"The research, carried out by TNS on behalf of the BPI, found that illegal music downloaders are likely to have spent £654m less."
Lets be realistic here, does that figure even seem vaguely reasonable? Especially considering that more albums were sold in 2004 that EVER before, both in the UK and worldwide...
see http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4150747.stm or google for more supporting figures
5. tony
it would be interesting to know whether the authorities chasing the downloaders check their postcodes and backgrounds before they decide to prosecute. i.e., affluent postcodes are more likely to pay up than council estate postcodes.
6. none
Its the cost that the record companies make that makes me download for free.
The cost of making a cd costs little to nothing and they insist in charging up to £20 for it on the shelves. I think problem would be sovled if ppl could walk into a shop and buy an album for less than a fiver.
7. Tom Allen
Hello in my oppinion you will never stop p2p music, even if you delete all p2p programs people will still use things like messenger. I would like to say "Ouch!" to the parents that were faced with the bill.
8. steve
i'd really like to use online legal sites for download, but oh wait, they only work on ipod, personal mp3 players, oh wait i cant burn them to cd, oh and wait a minuete the 4 month subscription i have and downloaded the 12,000 music files are worthless once you cancel ur subscription or the service decided to close down, hmm free p2p music you can 1, burn 2 listen to on anything, and hmm yes 3 it's free,
9. robert jordan
And where do they think parents are going to get that kind of money, or they going to be in debt for the rest of their lives and their childrens childrens lives
10. Terry Carlin
Some more interesting research on this has been done recently in Canada.
http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue10_4/geist/
11. tuppennyblue
Back in the 80's we had the skull and crossbones cassette "Home Taping Is Killing Music" - Did people stop home taping? No. Did the music industry die? No.
File sharing is no more a threat to the music industry than masturbation is a threat to the prostitution industry.
12. anonymous
'Loss' figures are absolute nonsense. As another commentator noted, sales are up! Downloaders I know use the services to track down obscure tracks and bootlegs that are not on sale anyway. There are also a number of older bands whose back catalogues are not available (except via sharing)either because they are just not big enough money-spinners for the companies or because of rights disputes (Hawkwind for example).'Trialling' music also goes on, people hear of a band so download some tracks and, if they like what they hear, go and buy the CDs or DVDs.
I appreciate this is not always be the case - and may also be a generational thing ie younger downloaders (apologies for forthcoming gross generalisation) may be more inclined to download 'new', available to buy, music rather than buy it - but you certainly cannot equate all downloads to lost sales...nowhere near.
I'm always surprised at the ferocity with which downloaders are pursued whereas, if I understand the copyright on CDs etc, second-hand 'record' shops or record fairs are equally illegal. Doesn't the copyright notice say something about non-transferable, not to be re-sold etc. Always confused me that one!
13. Mark SPLINTER
do the bpi ever talk about quality or just quantity?
do they talk about the hundreds of artists stuck in deals with idiot record labels who can't get it together to release the music?
do they even know what music is?
14. Derek
While not condoning illegal file sharing, I have to agree with others that the record industry should look into the subject in more detail for the following reasons:
1. Sales have actually increased (whilst at the same time prices have reduced - thanks to supermarkets and online companies such as CDWow & Play).
2. There is so much more choice, namely DVD's and Console/Computer games.
3. People only have so much money, so can only buy so many CD's, etc. each month, stopping illegal downloads will not change that.
4. They drop artists with loyal fan bases, prefering the one year wonders to generate vast sums over as short a time as possible, rather than a steady stream over a number of years.
5. They keep re-releasing old material with extra features & tracks, how many of us have items on vinyl, as well as copies on CD? They then expect us to buy new versions of these every other year.
6. Swapping & copying has been present for over 30 years in the school playground and will still be around, even if they do stamp out online file-sharing.
15. Zakala
And if we turn off the internet tomorrow will the record companies make £650m more next year? No. Absolutely not. Are all the illegal downloaders saving the money they would have spent on CDs in offshore accounts? NO.
It is disposable income we are talking about and with debt increasing year on year I think we can be pretty sure that it, and more, is being disposed of. People are just spending it on other things - DVDs, cinema tickets (cinema going on the rise), PC and console games, Bratz dolls, and everything else consumer Britain is told it "must" have.
CD sales have been falling for years and whilst P2P may be exacerbating the fact perhaps the BPIs members might want to think about changing their 50 year old business model to meet 21st century technology.
Have I download tracks via P2P? Occasionally. Do most of them end up in the recycle bin? Yes. Do I spend more on CDs than I might have done because of hearing those tracks? Probably not, but I am more likely to purchase music from artists who's tracks I've heard. So good news for artists, bad news for the BPI's business model.
Could I use the radio or an in-store listening post to do the same? Not for independant lables and artists that haven't charted. So, even better for the small guys and worse news for the big 5 (4? 3?). Now I wonder how much of that £650m was spent trying to garner chart success for manufactured acts last year...
16. anonymous
I use file share almost as a discovery of new musical interest. In fact much of my more recent 'legal' collection has come about by this method. There is absolutely no way I would have found this new material without this kind of resource. It really is time for the music industry to sit up and learn. Those that don't, then good luck with the rest of the dinosaurs!