digital music piracy essay

S2569013 Rhiannon Moushall

1712QCM Assignment 1

From Problematic to Productive: Digital Music Piracy as a Marketing Tool and Distribution Model for Artists

Rhiannon Moushall

S2679013

2 S2679013 Rhiannon Moushall

Abstract

This paper explores the possibility of artists utilizing digital music piracy as a marketing tool

in an increasingly artist-driven distribution system. Psychological evidence indicates that

the general population partakes in music piracy and enjoys its processes; if harnessed, this

form of illegal distribution could result in financial gain, through exposure, lesser

production costs and manipulating current attitudes and behaviours towards piracy.

Introduction

Throughout history technological advancements have significantly impacted upon the

music industry, with both beneficial and detrimental results. Since the introduction of the

mp3 and P2P (peer-to-peer) file sharing networks digital piracy has become increasingly

prevalent. Despite copyright laws and anti-piracy initiatives, the RIAA (Recording Industry

Association of America) continues to attribute financial losses, in both MP3 and CD sales, to

illegal file-sharing (Gopal, Lertwachara, Marsden, & Telang, 2007) . This paper seeks to

discover how digital music piracy be utilized as a marketing tool and distribution model for

artists by analysing why consumers choose to pirate, and capitalizing on these attitudes

through advertising and distribution using the bands Wilco, OK Go and Radiohead as

examples.

Literature Review

Literature concerning digital music piracy often tends toward the belief that piracy is both

economically and ethically damaging, and seeks to monitor and eradicate its processes. The

RIAA maintain that the introduction of P2P (peer-to-peer) networks has negatively

impacted their business (Gopal, Lertwachara, Marsden, & Telang, 2007), and Zentner

(2004) identified a direct correlation between the fall in music sales and the introduction of


file-sharing technology. The RIAA’s aggression against the concept was epitomized in the

1999 case against Napster, one of the first popular online P2P networks, and it resulted in

Napster’s untimely closure. Other academics grapple with the moral issue of digital piracy,

such as Professor Goldstein (2003), who maintains that networks such as Napster are

simply promoting theft, and he suggests the introduction of a ‘celestial jukebox’ – a

network which offers a vast number of recordings, films and literature on a pay-per-use

basis – would be the most ethically viable option.

However, Easley (2005)argues that it is in fact the RIAA who are negatively affecting the

evolution of the music industry by clinging to excessive profit margins and suing their own

consumers, whom studies suggest are more inclined to pay for the product after partaking

in piracy. This argument is furthered by Ku (2002), who identifies digital copyright as

undermining the greater good as it inhibits the free exchange of ideas. He also notes that

the argument for digital copyright is only serving distributors; once upon a time, the rights

of the public, distributors and artists “... were aligned because of one important fact:

providing the public with access to content was costly.” (p. 267) However, they are

becoming increasingly obsolete as “...consumers themselves build and fund the distribution

channels for digital content.” (p. 263)

An Analysis of the Attitudes that Result in Music Piracy

In order to utilize digital music piracy in a positive manner one must determine why digital

music piracy takes place. Al-Rafee and Cronan (2008) have concluded that combinations of

moral, cultural and incidental factors persuade a consumer to commit the act of digital

piracy. Through understanding and exploiting the indicative behaviours, artists can appeal

to their audience on a deeper level and target their music appropriately.


Moral Factors People perceive certain crimes as more serious than others based on the consequences of

their action (Gupta, Gould, & Pola, 2004). Thus, people do not perceive piracy as being as

morally detrimental as physical theft as there is a lack of consequences experienced by

consumers of piracy. This attitude cannot be affected without violating the internet user’s

privacy acts – an action that would only agitate consumers to turn against the RIAA.

However, artists benefit from the exposure their work receives; a person who pirates a

song may not have initially purchased it (Easley, 2005) – this encourages the concept of

using digital piracy as a marketing tool.

Cultural Factors We live in a society in which famous musicians and artists are idolized; many consumers

who pirate blame the producers for charging too much, and see these entertainers as

enjoying a high standard of living and therefore do not feel the need to contribute (Chiou,

Huang, & Lee, 2005). This image is perpetuated by constant media coverage, and

“...individual consumers perceive themselves in a David against Goliath relationship with

impersonal big business[es], something akin to consumer or cultural resistance.” (Gupta,

Gould, & Pola, 2004, p. 258). Therefore, consumer equity also drives the decision to pirate.

Through the removal of recording labels, consumers are more likely to pay for the product,

creating a more cost-effective distribution model.

Incidental Factors Al-Rafee and Cronan (2006) determined that sex, perceived importance, moral judgement,

happiness and cognitive behaviours all contributed to the act of digital piracy, but none so

significantly as Machiavellianism and age (p. 248). Understanding that these are the

dominant indicators of piracy, allow artists to aim their distributive strategies accordingly.

For example, appealing to a rebellious teen with a free album should encourage a positive

response.


Digital Music Piracy as Advertising

As previously asserted in the discussion of moral factors that influence digital music piracy,

the process provides exposure to a greater demographic than initially intended. Easley

(2005) notes that while the RIAA attribute billions of dollars in losses to record sales,

“...there are others who might suggest that they are ignoring the benefits of a massive, free

viral marketing campaign.” (p. 165) There is also indirect evidence that suggests that people

who pirate music are also more likely to spend money on music products (p. 164).

It is important to remember that “...music is an experience good whose true value is

revealed only after its consumption, a product whose evaluation is based primarily on

personal experience and individual consumer tastes...” (Gopal, Lertwachara, Marsden, &

Telang, 2007, p. 1362). Therefore, it seems foolish for an artist to deprive billions of

listeners of the opportunity of listening to their work. An intelligent artist would take

advantage of both psychological and economic evidence, and promote their music on P2P

networks.

Wilco One such performer who has benefited from P2P networks is Jeff Tweedy, front man of the

band Wilco, who reported that some fans were happy to find a copy of their album, A Ghost

is Born, on a P2P network and wanted to give something back to the band. While they could

not accept the money themselves, Wilco asked people to direct any money to the charity

Doctors without Borders. The charity reported receiving $15000 thanks to the contributions

of their fans. Following this example, Wilco then released their next album, Yankee Hotel

Foxtrot, for free over the internet. They then capitalized on this free publicity through

releasing it under the label, Nonesuch; it debuted on the charts higher than any of their

previous albums (Easley, 2005).


Positive Application Resulting in a Model for Distribution

While the concept of online distribution, particularly through P2P technologies may appear

financially detrimental, Easley (2005) asserts that “...maximizing the value of intellectual

property requires different strategies...” (p. 165). However, the advent of file-sharing

“...technology makes viral distribution possible at no cost to the content provider.” (Ku,

2002, p. 268). Therefore, artists are able to mass-distribute their music and take advantage

of P2P technologies to advertise their works, with no fear of financial loss.

Radiohead In 2007, successful alternative rock band ‘Radiohead’, having fulfilled their contract with

EMI/Capitol in 2003, set about producing and releasing their next album, In Rainbows,

independently through their website (Tyrangiel, 2007). They also allowed the consumer to

pay whatever price they saw fit. Front man Thom Yorke said that “... the time is at hand

when you have to ask why anyone needs [a recording company].” (p. 1) He also suggested

that it was a failing business model, and that in order to survive artists had to adapt to the

developing technology.’ Radiohead’ still refuse to release how much was money was made

from the sales of ‘In Rainbows’, but they referred to the profits as “...a nice surprise.” (NME

News, 2008)

OK Go Similarly, indie DIY band ‘OK Go’, have enjoyed unprecedented success through P2P

technology; they produce and distribute all their work online through their own record

label, ‘Paracadute’. They were dissatisfied with the manner in which record labels where

dictating artistic content. So “... with only five bucks and a camcorder – [they] did what

none of the giant record labels could...” (Glass. http://www.okgo.net/bio) They

revolutionized how people viewed music and the internet. Through removing the


distributor, they are not only benefitting financially, but allowing themselves greater artistic

control.

Conclusion

In conclusion, artists can utilize digital music piracy in a financially and artistically beneficial

manner as it continues to urge the industry towards an artist-driven distribution system.

This argument has been substantiated with psychological and economic evidence as well as

practical examples. As technology and society continue to evolve, it is vital that the music

industry follows, and adapts with humanity; after all, it is a humanity.


Works Cited Al-Rafee, S., & Cronan, T. P. (2006). Digital Piracy: Factors That Influence Attitude

toward Behavior. Journal of Business Ethics , 63 (3), 237-259. Retrieved April 2,

2010, from JSTOR.

Al-Rafee, S., & Cronan, T. P. (2008). Factors that Influence the Intention to Pirate

Software and Media. Journal of Business Ethics , 78 (4), 527-545. Retrieved April 2,

2010, from JSTOR.

Chiou, J., Huang, C., & Lee, H. (2005). The Antecedents of Music Piracy Attitudes and

Intentions. Journal of Business Ethics , 57 (2), 161-174.Retrieved April 2, 2010, from

JSTOR.

Easley, R. F. (2005). Ethical Issues in the Music Industry Response to Innovation and

Piracy. Journal of Business Ethics , 62 (2), 163-168.Retrieved April 2, 2010, from

JSTOR.

Glass, I. (n.d.). Bio OK Go. Retrieved April 23, 2010, from OK Go:

htttp://www.okgo.net/bio

Goldstein, P. (2003). Copyright's Highway: From Gutenburg to the Celestial Jukebox.

Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.

Gopal, S., Lertwachara, K., Marsden, J., & Telang, R. (2007). The Effects of Digital

Sharing Technologies on Music Markets: A Survival Analysis of Albums on Ranking

Charts. Management Science , 53 (9), 1359-1374. Retrieved April 2, 2010, from

JSTOR.

Gould, S. J., Gupta, P. B., & Pola, B. (2004). "To Pirate or Not to Pirate": A

Comparative Study of the Ethical versus Other Influences on the Consumer's

Software Acquisition-Mode Decision. Journal of Business Ethics , 55 (3), 255-274.

Retrieved April 2, 2010, from JSTOR

Ku, R. (2002). The Creative Destruction of Copyright: Napster and the New

Economics of Digital Technology. The University of Chicago Law Review , 69 (1), 263-

324.Retrieved April 2, 2010, from JSTOR.

NME News. (2008, January 2). Radiohead: 'We've done really well out of 'In

Rainbows''. Retrieved April 28, 2010, from NME News:

http://www.nme.com/news/radiohead/33406

Tyrangiel, J. (2007). Radiohead Says: Pay What You Want. Retrieved March 22,

2010, from Time in Partnership with CNN:

http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1666973,00.html


Zentner, A. (2004). Measuring the Effect of Music Piracy on Sales. Retrieved March

17, 2010, from The University of Chicago Department of Economics:

http://economics.uchicago.edu/download/musicindustryoct12.pdf

digital music piracy essay

Documents