<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
<channel>
<title>Techdirt. Stories filed under &quot;pirates&quot;</title>
<description>Easily digestible tech news...</description>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/</link>
<language>en-us</language>

<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2012 10:40:09 PST</pubDate>
<title>Recording Industry Could Catch More Flies With Honey, But Keeps Betting On Vinegar</title>
<dc:creator>Tim Cushing</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121127/17093921162/recording-industry-could-catch-more-flies-with-honey-keeps-betting-vinegar.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121127/17093921162/recording-industry-could-catch-more-flies-with-honey-keeps-betting-vinegar.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ As Mike covered earlier, Ofcom, the UK&#39;s media regulator, has just released a new report on online piracy containing information it has been gathering for the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) ahead of the Digital Economy Act&#39;s eventual rollout. (<a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121126/00590921141/dear-riaa-pirates-buy-more-full-stop-deal-with-it.shtml" target="_blank">Surprise! Pirates buy lots of stuff!</a>) Andy Malt, editor of Complete Music Update (CMU) and freelance writer/copywriter for music and tech companies, <a href="http://www.thecmuwebsite.com/article/editors-letter-what-matters-in-ofcoms-piracy-stats/" target="_blank">has a look at the numbers and arrives at the conclusion that they&#39;re hardly discouraging</a>.
<blockquote>
<i>Of the 5099 people surveyed between May and July this year, 47% weren&rsquo;t able to distinguish with certainty between legal and illegal services, while only 16% actually admitted to accessing unlicensed content, and only 8% said they relied on illegal sources of music.</i><br />
<br />
<i>When those infringers were asked why they went to unlicensed content sources instead of legitimate sites or services, the most common responses were that the illegal sites were free, convenient and/or quick. Asked what would convince them to stop accessing illegal content, the three most common answers were that they would do so if legal services were cheaper and had all the content they wanted, and if it was clearer what was legal and what was not.</i></blockquote>
Malt points out that there are several legal services, most of which are inexpensive, including ad-funded streaming services which give listeners access to thousands of tracks for free. ("Inexpensive" is, of course, relative. Ofcom&#39;s study shows that music retailers and streaming services would convert a majority of casual infringers by cutting prices 50-70%. resulting in 2-3x the number of purchases.)<br />
<br />
Of course, Malt&#39;s speaking about music services in the western world. Worldwide, the situation isn&#39;t nearly as seamless. And TV/motion pictures are a <i>completely different</i> situation. While there are several services available, the content is much more fractured and more expensive. Most streaming services (Netflix, Amazon, Hulu) suffer from <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110901/20203315773/starz-netflix-how-industry-jealousies-strangle-golden-goose.shtml" target="_blank">major studios&#39; unwillingness</a> to license their output at reasonable rates, and pricing on digital products isn&#39;t all that competitive.<br />
<br />
But as for music services in the US, it's mostly good news, even if it took much longer than it needed to get to this point. Still, Malt then goes on to point out an area where these services disappoint, often through no fault of their own:
<blockquote>
<i>The missing content point is a stronger argument, providing file-sharers relying on it really are trying to access tracks that artists or labels have failed to make available through legit routes. And this is something the music business really ought to have solved by 2012.</i></blockquote>
<a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20121119/02552821089/acdc-kid-rock-finally-realize-that-selling-tracks-online-is-probably-good-idea.shtml" target="_blank">AC/DC joined the digital party</a> just within the past couple of weeks and a handful of other holdouts have chosen to stay CD-only. The list of holdouts for streaming services is much, much longer, however. But while these holdouts <i>may</i> be giving themselves a slight sales boost, they&#39;re doing so at the expense of their own industry.
<blockquote>
<i>[W]hile artists perhaps should have the power to control where their music is distributed, many of the Spotify resisters are acts who have made their millions already, and really should be thinking about the good of the wider music community. Because every artist shunning the streaming services is providing ammunition to the aforementioned self-confessed infringers.</i></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<i>The world has moved on, music consumption has changed, and the Napster generation are now at an age where they should be becoming the music industry&rsquo;s biggest customers, but that&rsquo;s not going to happen if the legit services they are embracing are lacking catalogue.</i></blockquote>
Here&#39;s where these artists make one of the worst assumptions -- that withholding their music from streaming services will result in a corresponding boost in sales. While there may be a few fans who opt to purchase rather than do without, a majority will find other options, none of which involve purchasing the album.
<blockquote>
<i>[A]n increasing number of people, when then can&rsquo;t find an album on their streaming service of choice, will not just fall in line and go buy the record from the three shops that the artist or label has dictated can sell their music.</i><br />
<br />
<i>When I can&rsquo;t find &lsquo;Red&rsquo; by Taylor Swift on Spotify, I don&rsquo;t think, &ldquo;Gosh darn it, I&rsquo;ll just have to <a href="http://www.thecmuwebsite.com/article/taylor-swifts-album-not-on-streaming-services-but-is-available-with-pizza/" target="_blank">go and buy it from Papa John&rsquo;s pizza parlour</a>&ldquo;. I think, &ldquo;Well fuck it, I&rsquo;ll just not listen to it then, cos I&rsquo;ve listened to enough sixteen track pop albums lately to know that a good chunk of it will not be very good. Also, Ed Sheeran co-wrote one of the tracks on it&rdquo;. Meanwhile those others not willing to take the financial risk of being lumbered with a handful of filler tracks will Google &lsquo;Red for free&rsquo; and download it off someone else&rsquo;s hard drive for nothing.</i></blockquote>
So, while some <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120622/16193319442/myth-dispensing-whole-spotify-barely-pays-artists-story-is-bunk.shtml" target="_blank">artists may despise</a> the Spotifys and Pandoras of the world, withholding their music cedes ground to infringers and other artists. Even if the bump in sales is bigger at this point in time, that won&#39;t always be the case. The law of diminishing returns is going to kick in as a new generation of music fans raised on always-on internet and streaming services is just going to bypass artists that aren&#39;t available on the services they use.<br />
<br />
He then goes deeper into the numbers, looking at what it takes to convince infringers to utilize legitimate services -- and it&#39;s here that the involved industries continue to shoot themselves in the wallet. Yes, there are some people who are <i>never</i> going to use legitimate means and will <i>never</i> pay for music, movies, etc. So, why spend so much time worrying about something you can&#39;t fix?
<blockquote>
<i>OK, some of the infringers who complained about being confused may be taking the piss again. After all, most people finding content online via a search engine with &lsquo;pirate&rsquo; in its name know there&rsquo;s a very high chance the content they download isn&rsquo;t legal, even if they plead ignorance. So education probably won&rsquo;t work with this group. Then again, these are also the people who know how to hide their file-sharing from the three-strikes police, and to circumvent the web-blocks put up in front of The Pirate Bay, so there&rsquo;s probably not much you can do about them.</i><br />
<br />
<i>But remember, this was only 8% of those surveyed, so I say fuck em. Let&rsquo;s focus on the 47% who implied that they want to do the right thing, but find the whole thing too confusing. Let&rsquo;s stop handing over cash to lawyers and technology whizzes who want to go after the 8% and focus on doing some decent education with everyone else. Because if OfCom&rsquo;s research tells us anything, it&rsquo;s that the music industry&rsquo;s current educational initiatives, including the Music Matters programme, which <a href="http://www.thecmuwebsite.com/article/music-matters-launches-in-us/" target="_blank">expanded into the US</a> this week, just aren&rsquo;t working in the slightest.</i></blockquote>
If you&#39;ve got approximately 92% of the population to work with, why on earth would you spend your time trying to legislate, sue or otherwise inconvenience the other 8%? The thought process seems to be that only 0% piracy is acceptable and that accepting less is ceding the battle. Taking a hardline against file-sharing will only alienate potential customers. File sharing isn&#39;t limited to an "unlawful" fringe. A full 2/3rds of the study&#39;s respondents admitted to infringing activity, but if the content industries insist on treating customers as thieves, they&#39;re just going to end up with fewer and fewer customers.
<br /><br />
The half-assed "educational" programs are a joke as well, with most of the effort going into telling people how file sharing is wrong, rather than playing up the advantages of legitimate services (please -- no more of the "your illegal download is probably a virus" ridiculousness). Or better yet, move that time, money and energy into convincing rights holders to work with existing services to make them <i>better</i>, by adding <i>more</i> content, reducing idiotic, arbitrary restrictions that make no sense with digital goods and negotiating rates that work for everyone involved.<br />
<br />
Malt has a couple of excellent points on how to do education right. As he says, the Music Matters campaign <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110818/12234515587/is-talking-about-beatles-as-wonderful-shared-experience-really-wise-anti-piracy-psa.shtml" target="_blank">is a farce</a>. It fails to do anything resembling "education," preferring to use guilt as negative reinforcement rather than give the undecided a reason to choose legitimate services. Not only that, but the Music Matters mark isn&#39;t even displayed by the two largest music services (iTunes and Spotify).
<blockquote>
<i>I suppose Music Matters is better that the American record industry wheeling out millionaire pop stars to complain about how file-sharing is depriving them of record sales, but it still feels decidedly mediocre for an industry that, when it comes to selling artists and albums, is actually pretty good at engaging and enthusing consumers. It&rsquo;s easy for me to sit here and criticise, and I don&rsquo;t claim to have the answers. But for a start, perhaps instead of forcing ISPs to send out angry letters to those consumers mistakenly downloading unlicensed music files, the labels could start sending thank you letters to those who inadvertently use a legal store.</i></blockquote>
There&#39;s an idea. Thanking your customers for purchasing from you rather than taking alternate routes to the same content. It would make for some great PR and maybe start altering the general image of the average record exec as a grouchy, out-of-touch robber baron with dollar signs for eyes, surrounded by lawyers and starving musicians.<br />
<br />
Education <i>can</i> be a good idea, but it needs to be handled with a much defter touch than any of the content industries seem able to manage. Think more carrot, less stick. And try to let bygones be bygones. You can&#39;t keep bemoaning the post-Napster climate when you&#39;ve got a whole new generation of potential customers who are accustomed to streaming services, low prices and instant access across multiple devices. Like it or not, streaming services and single track sales are here to stay. Ad-supported apps may not bring in great money, but that&#39;s the new reality. There&#39;s no going back, no matter how much legislation you throw at the internet. A continued preference for enforcement over engagement is only going to make things worse.&nbsp;<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121127/17093921162/recording-industry-could-catch-more-flies-with-honey-keeps-betting-vinegar.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121127/17093921162/recording-industry-could-catch-more-flies-with-honey-keeps-betting-vinegar.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121127/17093921162/recording-industry-could-catch-more-flies-with-honey-keeps-betting-vinegar.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>chasing-8%-at-the-expense-of-the-other-92%-is-just-more-bad-math</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20121127/17093921162</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 27 Nov 2012 09:33:52 PST</pubDate>
<title>Dear RIAA: Pirates Buy More. Full Stop. Deal With It.</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121126/00590921141/dear-riaa-pirates-buy-more-full-stop-deal-with-it.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121126/00590921141/dear-riaa-pirates-buy-more-full-stop-deal-with-it.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Just a few days after Joe Karaganis posted <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121114/07180721044/riaa-prefers-customers-who-buy-little-to-pirates-who-buy-lot.shtml">his response</a> to the RIAA's favorite researcher, Russ Crupnick of NPD Group, who suggested that Karaganis must be drunk and have little knowledge of statistics to publish a study showing that pirates tend to buy more -- and then revealing his own numbers that showed <i>the exact same thing</i> -- UK regulatory body Ofcom has <a href="http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/market-data-research/other/telecoms-research/copyright-infringement-tracker/?utm_source=updates&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=online-copyright-research" target="_blank">come out with a study saying the same exact thing again</a> (found via <a href="http://torrentfreak.com/uk-movie-pirates-spend-way-more-at-the-box-office-121122/" target="_blank">TorrentFreak</a>).  
<br /><br />
From this, I assume the only <i>logical</i> conclusion is that Ofcom officials are drunk and should have their statistics "licenses" taken away.  That, or, it's pretty obvious that people who pirate aren't all just "evil pirates," but also include the industry's best customers, who are apparently being somewhat under-served by the industry.  And that's actually supported by other data in the report.  When asked what would make people stop infringing, people wanted <i>cheaper legal services</i> and services that had <i>everything they want available to them legally</i>, rather than piecemeal efforts that leave it impossible to get what you want much of the time.  It also becomes clear that infringement is not on the margins, but a common activity.  66% of people noted that they had downloaded, streamed or shared <strike>infringing</strike> content -- with 56% doing so in the last three months -- with 16% admitting to illegal content streaming, downloading or sharing.  And of course, the numbers are much bigger for younger people, meaning that those overall percentages are only likely to increase over time.  Of course, the amount of sharing varied based on the content, but the idea of getting infringing content this way is clearly quite mainstream.
<br /><br />
The study also looked at what they spent on, and, not surprisingly, money spent seems to be shifting to <i>scarce</i> goods -- the things that can't be "pirated."  In the music world, that includes merchandise and live, as well as online subscriptions, rather than "buying music."
<center>
<a href="http://imgur.com/dxg04"><img src="http://i.imgur.com/dxg04.png" width=560 /></a>
</center>
The report also suggests that, when you take into account price elasticity of both downloads and subscription services, the industry appears to be overpricing both significantly, and they could probably make a lot more money with significantly lower prices, making it up (and then some) based on volume:
<center>
<a href="http://imgur.com/1l2Rp"><img src="http://i.imgur.com/1l2Rp.png" width=560 /></a>
<a href="http://imgur.com/SUtRR"><img src="http://i.imgur.com/SUtRR.png" width=560 /></a>
</center>
Note that, in both cases, if prices went much lower than they are today, even those who currently pirate everything would be much more likely to pay.  They have similar tables for other types of content, showing the same basic thing as well.  The elasticity on ebooks is really quite impressive, actually:
<center>
<a href="http://imgur.com/a6etS"><img src="http://i.imgur.com/a6etS.png" width=560 /></a>
</center>
All of this paints the same basic picture that plenty of us have been arguing for over a decade: treating "pirates" like criminals is a mistake.  They're often either the best customers or the potential best customers <i>if they were better served</i> by the industry, which often means offering things more conveniently and at a lower price.  But the industry still resists this notion and wants to continue to demonize all infringement and any service that helps infringement.  What a wasted effort.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121126/00590921141/dear-riaa-pirates-buy-more-full-stop-deal-with-it.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121126/00590921141/dear-riaa-pirates-buy-more-full-stop-deal-with-it.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121126/00590921141/dear-riaa-pirates-buy-more-full-stop-deal-with-it.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>just-wondering</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20121126/00590921141</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 14 Jul 2011 13:28:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Incubus Promotes New Album With Misguided Anti-Piracy 8-Bit Video Game?</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110714/10052015091/incubus-promotes-new-album-with-misguided-anti-piracy-8-bit-video-game.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110714/10052015091/incubus-promotes-new-album-with-misguided-anti-piracy-8-bit-video-game.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ The band Incubus has decided that a way to attract fans to its new album is to <a href="http://mashable.com/2011/07/14/incubattle/" target="_blank">release an 8-bit video game in which the point is to "fight music pirates,"</a> by literally punching them as they try to get and leak Incubus' new album.
<center>
<img src="http://i.imgur.com/2kEk2h.jpg" width=560>
</center>
However, as <a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/117325987826570582942/posts/fyRuzuuT8LL" target="_blank">Rob Sheridan points out</a>, the new album has already actually leaked in real life, "so I guess the game can't be won."  I think Sheridan sums it up nicely:
<blockquote><i>
Seriously? How about fighting the record label dorks or manufacturing companies who let the album leak in the first place? Maybe the boss battle should be with the label exec who can't come up with a modern release plan that avoids leaks entirely?
</i></blockquote>
Oddly, Mashable claims that attacking fans who are interested in the band's music is part of the band's savvy "social-media flavored album release campaign."  Sorry, but calling your fans pirates, and showing how you want to beat them up doesn't seem particularly social.  The whole target of the campaign just seems weird and misguided.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110714/10052015091/incubus-promotes-new-album-with-misguided-anti-piracy-8-bit-video-game.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110714/10052015091/incubus-promotes-new-album-with-misguided-anti-piracy-8-bit-video-game.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110714/10052015091/incubus-promotes-new-album-with-misguided-anti-piracy-8-bit-video-game.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>yeah,-that'll-win-fans</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110714/10052015091</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 25 May 2011 11:00:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Live Stream Of My Interview With Paulo Coelho</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110525/05312914429/live-stream-my-interview-with-paulo-coelho.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110525/05312914429/live-stream-my-interview-with-paulo-coelho.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ As <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110513/00143514257/interviewing-paulo-coelho-about-books-social-media-free.shtml">mentioned</a> recently, today I'm interviewing Paulo Coelho at BookExpo America concerning both his new book, <i>Aleph</i>, as well as his many interesting experiments with the internet, including things like very actively "pirating" his own works using BitTorrent -- and seeing his sales shoot up because of it.  Anyway, it looks like there's going to be a live stream of the event, which is scheduled for "around" 2pm ET today (though I've been warned it may actually start slightly later than that):
<center>
<object classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" width="480" height="296" id="utv476546"><param name="flashvars" value="autoplay=false&#038;brand=embed&#038;cid=8359943&#038;v3=1"/><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true"/><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"/><param name="movie" value="http://www.ustream.tv/flash/viewer.swf"/><embed flashvars="autoplay=false&#038;brand=embed&#038;cid=8359943&#038;v3=1" width="480" height="296" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" id="utv476546" name="utv_n_378820" src="http://www.ustream.tv/flash/viewer.swf" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" /></object><br /><a href="http://www.ustream.tv/" style="padding: 2px 0px 4px; width: 400px; background: #ffffff; display: block; color: #000000; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10px; text-decoration: underline; text-align: center;" target="_blank">Streaming .TV shows by Ustream</a>
</center><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110525/05312914429/live-stream-my-interview-with-paulo-coelho.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110525/05312914429/live-stream-my-interview-with-paulo-coelho.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110525/05312914429/live-stream-my-interview-with-paulo-coelho.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>enjoy</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110525/05312914429</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 16 May 2011 16:02:55 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Interviewing Paulo Coelho About Books, Social Media And 'Free'</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110513/00143514257/interviewing-paulo-coelho-about-books-social-media-free.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110513/00143514257/interviewing-paulo-coelho-about-books-social-media-free.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ I've written a <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/search.php?cx=partner-pub-4050006937094082%3Acx0qff-dnm1&#038;cof=FORID%3A9&#038;ie=ISO-8859-1&#038;q=paulo+">bunch of times</a> about Paulo Coelho and how he's completely embraced social media, new business models and the economics of digital and infinite goods to increase his already considerable level of success.  So, I'm thrilled to announce that I'll have the pleasure of <a href="http://searchitfindit.bookexpoamerica.com/?action=viewevent&#038;eventid=3662" target="_blank">interviewing Paulo at BookExpo America</a> in NYC on May 25th at 2pm, where we'll be discussing his various experiments, how he's using social media, and how others can take advantage of social media and use "free" to their advantage, rather than fear it.  We'll also even have some time to discuss his latest work (honestly, what good is interviewing someone like Paulo Coelho if we don't also talk about some of his writing!).  In the meantime, though, I'm interested in any suggestions folks have for questions for Coelho in this particular forum.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110513/00143514257/interviewing-paulo-coelho-about-books-social-media-free.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110513/00143514257/interviewing-paulo-coelho-about-books-social-media-free.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110513/00143514257/interviewing-paulo-coelho-about-books-social-media-free.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>have-any-questions?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110513/00143514257</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 4 May 2011 21:58:46 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Paulo Coelho Explains Why He 'Loves Pirates'</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110429/01144214078/paulo-coelho-explains-why-he-loves-pirates.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110429/01144214078/paulo-coelho-explains-why-he-loves-pirates.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ We've written a few times before about <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/search.php?cx=partner-pub-4050006937094082%3Acx0qff-dnm1&#038;cof=FORID%3A9&#038;ie=ISO-8859-1&#038;q=paulo+">Paulo Coelho</a> and his views on copyright, unauthorized use of his works and the importance of sharing.  Coelho, of course, is one of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_fiction_authors" target="_blank">best selling authors <i>ever</i></a>, but set up his own <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080124/08563359.shtml">"pirating" operation</a> called "Pirate Coelho" to get his works more widely read... and found that his sales increased massively because of it.  He's also spoken out about how the world is changing and authors will be <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090817/0318065899.shtml">punished</a> for <b>not sharing</b> their works more freely.
<br /><br />
<a href="http://torrentfreak.com/paulo-coelho-loves-pirates-110428/?utm_source=twitterfeed&#038;utm_medium=twitter&#038;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TorrentfreakBits+%28TorrentFreak+-+Bits%29" target="_blank">TorrentFreak</a> alerts us to the news that he's posted yet another blog post on the subject about how <a href="http://paulocoelhoblog.com/2011/04/28/who-deleted-the-song-in-my-profile/" target="_blank">he "loves pirates"</a> and how people underestimate that artists can and do get paid, even when their work is being shared in an unauthorized fashion.  In fact, he's selling more books now that he's actively offering up more "pirated" copies of his own work than ever before:
<blockquote><i>
How did all these social communities start?<br />
At first it was just wanting to chat with another person. But chatting isn&rsquo;t enough &ndash; we have to share the music, the book or the film that we love. When there was no law against it, this information was exchanged freely. Finally, when the entertainment industry caught on, the repression began.
<br /><br />
Art is not an orange.<br />
If you buy an orange and eat it, you have to buy another one, and then it makes sense that oranges should not be given for free, because the consumer consumes the product. Art is about beauty. Music is about beauty. If I visit a page and I like the music, I am sure I will buy the CD, because I want to know more about the work of the artist.
</i></blockquote>
Always nice to see successful content creators speaking out on important subjects like this.  A nice contrast to those who are so <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110418/00404013931/u2-manager-still-blaming-everyone-else-not-giving-him-more-money-as-u2-sets-record-highest-grossing-tour-ever.shtml">narrowly focused</a> on making sure that no one else benefits from their work.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110429/01144214078/paulo-coelho-explains-why-he-loves-pirates.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110429/01144214078/paulo-coelho-explains-why-he-loves-pirates.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110429/01144214078/paulo-coelho-explains-why-he-loves-pirates.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>world-has-changed</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110429/01144214078</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 7 Feb 2011 15:59:48 PST</pubDate>
<title>The Inefficiency Of DRM: Empires Built On Barbed Wire Never Last</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110207/03361612992/inefficiency-drm-empires-built-barbed-wire-never-last.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110207/03361612992/inefficiency-drm-empires-built-barbed-wire-never-last.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ While there's not much necessarily <i>new</i> in this recent TechCrunch piece by author Jon Evans, it does make a nice point that's worth repeating, in that <a href="http://techcrunch.com/2011/02/05/in-praise-of-piracy/" target="_blank">empires built on barbed wire never last</a>.  The article notes that one of the problems of the old Soviet economy was the fact that so much effort was wasted on production of things that didn't really aid the overall economy, but instead held back others.  For example, a significant amount of effort from the metallurgical industry was focused on creating barbed wire, rather than building something that might actually improve the economy.  And, as he notes, "DRM is the barbed wire of the media world."  It serves no productive purpose, but is simply designed to "protect."  From there he notes:
<blockquote><i>
Although it pains me to say this, it's the pirates who are on the right side of history. Empires built on barbed wire inevitably collapse, and the sooner the better; while this one reigns, it perpetuates yesterday's regimes, and squelches innovation and progress. Is piracy wrong? Yes, but that's the wrong question. The right question is, which is worse: widespread piracy, or the endless and futile attempt to preserve DRM everywhere? So long live the pirates. Those jerks. Please don't make me say it again.
</i></blockquote>
Of course, there's a corollary to this as well.  If you recognize that getting rid of DRM helps allow for more openness and greater innovation, at some point it occurs to you that perhaps you shouldn't be so worried about "pirates," and can start focusing on actually using their enthusiasm to your own benefit.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110207/03361612992/inefficiency-drm-empires-built-barbed-wire-never-last.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110207/03361612992/inefficiency-drm-empires-built-barbed-wire-never-last.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110207/03361612992/inefficiency-drm-empires-built-barbed-wire-never-last.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>we're-still-having-this-argument?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110207/03361612992</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 10 Dec 2010 14:30:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>Warner Bros. Finally Realizes That 'Pirates' Are Underserved Customers</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101210/13123412237/warner-bros-finally-realizes-that-pirates-are-underserved-customers.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101210/13123412237/warner-bros-finally-realizes-that-pirates-are-underserved-customers.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ We've discussed in the past just how <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101116/16591611901/how-warner-bros-should-have-responded-to-harry-potter-leak.shtml">backwards</a> Warner Bros. has been at times in responding to "piracy." So it's a bit amusing that many, many, many years after plenty of us have been pointing this out (and have been told directly by folks at Warner Bros. that we're "full of it") that the company is finally recognizing that <a href="http://paidcontent.org/article/419-warner-bros.-targets-new-consumer-segment-pirates/" target="_blank">those who infringe are really just underserved customers</a>, whom they didn't give a good reason to buy:
<blockquote><i>
<b>Pirates Make Purchases:</b> Few subsist on copyright infringement alone; typical pirates steal in addition to making legitimate entertainment purchases like boxoffice, DVD and even online transactions. Even the most diehard pirates spend some money, though less than more casual infringers. "One of the main things we're doing is looking at why they do things legitimately on certain products and not on others," said [WB's director of business intelligence, Ben] Karakunnel.
</i></blockquote>
Apparently, they just started looking at this data only 18 months ago.  Frankly, the fact that they weren't looking at that data seven or eight years ago suggests a dysfunctional management team.  What's really silly, of course, is that plenty of folks have made this exact point to people at Warner Bros. and elsewhere for years, and were told that we were just "defending pirates."
<br /><br />
Another thing they realized was that in foreign markets, a lot of unauthorized copies are because WB didn't make translated/subtitled versions available quickly enough -- another point that sites like ours have been making for years and which WB just figured out:
<blockquote><i>
In the international markets, illegal WB content in which pirates dub or subtitle themselves is increasingly popular. For one unspecified program Karakunnel used as an example, it wasn't until the third day after its initial airdate that one such pirate-created translated version accounted for 23% of pirated files of that particular program. By day 10, it accounted for 74%.
<br /><br />
Said Karakunnel, "If we can get dubbed or subtitled language versions in the first two days, we can beat them to the punch."
</i></blockquote>
Kudos to Warner Bros. for finally figuring this out, but it's pretty amusing that the company thinks this is new, when just a couple years ago it was denying that any of this was possible.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101210/13123412237/warner-bros-finally-realizes-that-pirates-are-underserved-customers.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101210/13123412237/warner-bros-finally-realizes-that-pirates-are-underserved-customers.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101210/13123412237/warner-bros-finally-realizes-that-pirates-are-underserved-customers.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>took-you-this-long?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20101210/13123412237</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 14:59:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>China Cracks Down On Pirated Teaching Materials?</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090916/0211316207.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090916/0211316207.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ To hear the US entertainment industry talk about it, China doesn't respect any intellectual property at all.  The truth, of course, is a lot more nuanced than that, but it's still a bit odd to read that China is proudly <a href="http://torrentfreak.com/pirated-teaching-materials-threaten-health-of-chinas-youth-090915/" target="_new">cracking down on the threat of "pirated teaching materials,"</a> which the government deems dangerous because it "harm[s] the healthy development of the country's youth."  It's unclear how cheaper or even free teaching materials "harm" youth, but the speculation is that it's more about the government not liking the <i>content</i> than any real worry about "piracy."  But, these days, due to pressure from other countries, China doesn't mind an excuse to pretend that it's being tough on piracy.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090916/0211316207.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090916/0211316207.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090916/0211316207.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>for-the-children,-of-course</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090916/0211316207</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 9 Jun 2009 07:11:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>UK ISP Boss: 'The Pirates Will Always Win'</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090608/1921105172.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090608/1921105172.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Last year, when the recording industry in the UK was pushing for ISPs to act as copyright cops, Charles Dunstone, the head of Carphone Warehouse and its TalkTalk ISP, stood up and <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080404/084828750.shtml">bashed the recording industry</a> for even daring to suggest that the ISP should be responsible for the recording industry's own inability to adapt.  As he said at the time of the recording industry:
<blockquote><i>
"They're not just shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted -- the horse has left town, got married, and started a family."
</i></blockquote>
As numerous people are submitting, Dunstone is back at it, stating the obvious to a recording industry that needs to hear it.  He's trying to explain to them that, no matter how hard it tries, <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jun/05/dunstone-carphone-warehouse-results-pirates" target="_new">it can't stop unauthorized file sharing</a>, noting that "the pirates will always win" and any attempt to stop them is simply "naive":
<blockquote><i>
If you try speed humps or disconnections for peer-to-peer, people will simply either disguise their traffic or share the content another way. It is a game of Tom and Jerry and you will never catch the mouse. The mouse always wins in this battle and we need to be careful that politicians do not get talked into putting legislation in place that, in the end, ends up looking stupid....
<br /><br />
If people want to share content they will find another way to do it.... It is more about education and allowing people to get content easily and cheaply that will make a difference. This idea that it is all peer to peer and somehow the ISPs can just stop it is very naive.
</i></blockquote>
Of course, this is what plenty of people have been saying for years.  There have been plenty of opportunities for the recording industry to embrace opportunities, and they've failed almost every single time.  Instead, as always, they want to complain about the "pirates" and the "thieves" while other companies <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090519/0213544923.shtml">build the new music industry</a> around them.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090608/1921105172.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090608/1921105172.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090608/1921105172.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>so-now-what?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090608/1921105172</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 4 Jun 2009 11:11:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Yet Another Study: 'Pirates' Are Actually Industry's Best Customers</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090604/0117405122.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090604/0117405122.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ We've already seen a bunch of nearly identical studies, but it's worth pointing out that there's yet another study coming out this week that says <a href="http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2009/06/bittorrent-vuze-survey-purchasing-dvd.html" target="_new">that those involved in file sharing also tend to be the <i>best customers</i> of the entertainment industry</a>.  Now, it's worth taking the study with at least some grains of salt, given that it was funded by Vuze, a company trying to sell licensed videos via BitTorrent and has had trouble getting content companies to sign on.  However, given how many other studies have said the same thing, can we finally put to rest the idea that those who file share "aren't customers" as many in the entertainment industry insist?  They <i>do</i> tend to be customers, and frequent ones as multiple studies have now shown.  The issue is just that they <i>also</i> file share, meaning many file share, in part, to find out what's worth buying.  So the focus should be (once again) on giving them <i>reasons to buy</i> rather than trying to stomp out file sharing.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090604/0117405122.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090604/0117405122.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090604/0117405122.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>again-and-again-and-again</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090604/0117405122</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 06:28:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>A Look Back At The History Of The Word 'Pirate'</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090428/0324094678.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090428/0324094678.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ A couple years ago, we mentioned an interesting story about "book piracy" in the early 18th century, which (according to the article we linked to) the term "piracy" was <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071127/215734.shtml">first used</a> in reference to copying the creative works of another in 1701, concerning a a poem by Daniel Defoe (it's worth noting, as an aside, that even in this first case of "piracy" Defoe wasn't bothered by the practice, even encouraging them to try to sell their copies "if they please," -- he just wanted to make sure they copied the poem <i>accurately</i>).  Now, via <a href="http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/23/pirates-steal-ships-not-songs/" target="_new">Freakonomics</a>, we're pointed to a recent study by K. Matthew Dames <a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1392914&#038;download=yes" target="_new">on the history of the word "piracy,"</a> both for high seas privateering and when it comes to copying content.  This seems to be a small part of a larger project by Dames, who says his later research will help show why the use of the term "piracy" when it comes to copyright is inaccurate, and is misused by the entertainment industry to get laws repeatedly passed in their favor without a basis in reason.  I'm definitely looking forward that later study, but as a starter, this history of the term piracy, is certainly a worthwhile read.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090428/0324094678.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090428/0324094678.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090428/0324094678.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>useful-background-info...</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090428/0324094678</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 14 Apr 2009 07:34:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>BSA Tries To Exploit Somali Piracy News In PR Campaign Against Software Sharing</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090414/0113354494.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090414/0113354494.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ We already wrote about how ridiculous it is to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090403/0251264370.shtml">compare</a> Somali high seas pirates with music, movie and software fans downloading an unauthorized copy of something off the internet -- and even the press is starting to <a href="http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/13/is-it-time-to-rename-digital-piracy/" target="_new">question the wisdom</a> of calling unauthorized file sharing "piracy."  Yet, that hasn't stopped the BSA, masters of <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080718/1226541724.shtml">misleading</a> through questionable stats from <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13556_3-10217889-61.html?part=rss&#038;subj=news&#038;tag=2547-1_3-0-20" target="_new">ramping up a marketing campaign that purposely tries to compare software file sharers with Somali pirates</a>.  As Gordon Haff at News.com notes:
<blockquote><i>
 "This has got to be one of the most tone-deaf and cynically opportunistic PR pitches I've seen for quite some time. It's one thing to figuratively equate piracy with making digital copies of software, music, movies, or books. We can debate endlessly whether such actions are truly stealing or not. But that's not the point.  It's that to literally and deliberately equate the two in the wake of pirates taking a ship's crew hostage and the US Navy subsequently killing three of the attackers...Well, words fail me."
</i></blockquote><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090414/0113354494.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090414/0113354494.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090414/0113354494.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>great-moments-in-dumb-marketing-campaigns</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090414/0113354494</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 19 Jan 2009 05:28:37 PST</pubDate>
<title>Valve Exec: Pirates Are Just Underserved Customers</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090118/1653083452.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090118/1653083452.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ We've had a ton of people submitting this, so figured a quick writeup is in order.  Jason Holtman, the director of business development and legal affairs for Valve, was speaking a video game conference, when he noted: <a href="http://www.gamedaily.com/articles/news/valve-pirates-are-just-underserved-customers/?biz=1&#038;page=1" target="_new">"Pirates are underserved customers."</a>  This is a point that plenty of folks have been <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080109/013441.shtml">making</a> for a while, but having an exec at a company like Valve make it is important.   But, even more important was his next sentence:
<blockquote><i>
"When you think about it that way, you think, 'Oh my gosh, I can do some interesting things and make some interesting money off of it.'"
</i></blockquote>
This past weekend at the MidemNet conference (on which I'll be writing much more), I heard a few music industry folks say something at least somewhat similar to the first part of the comment: talking about how they had to learn to bring "pirates" back into being legitimate customers.  But, then they missed that second part.   As one attendee said, the music industry execs kept freaking out about how much money they will lose, while ignoring how much money there is to be made.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090118/1653083452.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090118/1653083452.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090118/1653083452.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>and-then-you-see-the-opportunities</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090118/1653083452</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2007 08:28:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>Even The First Copyright 'Pirates' Didn't Do Much Harm</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071127/215734.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071127/215734.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Since the original meaning and purpose of intellectual property laws has become so <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070521/015928.shtml">distorted</a> these days, it is quite useful to look back at the history of such things and why they were put in place.  That's why we often talk about the debates on intellectual property held by <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20061026/102329.shtml">Thomas Jefferson</a> and <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070613/161904.shtml">James Madison</a>.  It's why we bring up things like the problem of <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071015/015844.shtml">patent sharks</a> in the nineteenth century.    The more you look, the more you realize that many of the big "problems" people insist are happening today in the intellectual property world really aren't all that different than things that happened in the past.
<br /><br />
William Patry has been posting a few <a href="http://williampatry.blogspot.com/2007/11/1878-uk-royal-commission-report.html">interesting posts</a> lately on <a href="http://williampatry.blogspot.com/2007/11/revisionism-of-originality-and.html">historical views</a> of copyright -- but even more interesting is an article in Toronto's Globe and Mail, where the author discusses the first known case of someone copying another's writings <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20071127.wtq-1107pirates/BNStory/GlobeTQ/?pageRequested=all">being referred to as a "pirate."</a>  It was apparently first used in 1701 to describe people who had copied a poem by Daniel Defoe, called "The True-Born Englishman" in order to sell it themselves.  The most interesting part: Defoe actually learned how to take advantage of the situation, rather than whining about it.  If only today's copyright holders could learn what Defoe figured out 300 years ago.
<br /><br />
It is true that Defoe was upset... but not at people copying and making money off of his work.  He was upset that they made <i>mistakes</i> in copying his poem.  He published a corrected version, noting: 
<blockquote><i>"I should have been concerned at its being printed again and again by pirates, as they call them, and paragraph-men; but would that they do it justice and print it true according to the copy, they are welcome to sell it for a penny if they please."</i></blockquote>
Defoe quickly realized that obscurity was a much bigger threat than "piracy" and by encouraging these "pirates" to sell copies of his work, it built up his own reputation and allowed him to go around the cumbersome publishing process of the time.  The rest of Defoe's career was then built off of his name recognition since that poem was so widely distributed, allowing him the ability to make much more money off of future works.  In other words, even the original "victim" of "piracy" quickly recognized how it could be used to his advantage, rather than worrying that it was a threat.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071127/215734.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071127/215734.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071127/215734.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>learn-your-history</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20071127/215734</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>