The Other Side Of Piracy

Internet piracy is looked down upon by most but practiced by many. Many people (mostly internet-savvy students) are tight on money but have a strong desire for music. The option of free music, movies and even books or programs is very tempting. Also, it is widely understood in this community that getting caught is very rare (but the penalty is large). However, not everything about internet piracy is negative for the artist. Tim O’Reilly argues that “piracy is progressive taxation.” He says that having your work pirated is good for some artists, especially those who are not well known. I agree with this. In this age of technology artists can create from their own home with relatively inexpensive equipment. They can then post their work on the web for anyone to access. This creates a market where almost anyone can start to compete.
O’Reilly states that the people who are mainly hurt from this piracy are existing publishers. He claims that a middleman for distribution will always be necessary but the form changes. If a publisher cannot handle and adapt to the pressures of the market, then somebody else will capitalize on their loss. The market will always balance out. The question becomes, how is the artist affected? The artist will, in all likelihood, lose a certain percentage of sales (although O’Reilly claims that this has not even been proven). However, what they lose in sales they gain in reputation. This means the world to artists. To get your name out there and creating a fan base is the key for emerging artists. Also, in today’s music scene bands make more and more money from touring and less from album sales. The only way to get an audience is to be known. Piracy helps with this, especially in the key college student-age demographic who are less willing to spend money on albums.
O’Reilly calls piracy a progressive tax for artists. This is a good analogy because the artist loses in one area but gains significantly in another. Not only do they gain the following, but also fans are more likely to buy the album after having downloaded (pirated) a song they liked from it. They may then go and look for the album in a store and find a whole list of songs they may also be interested with the packet that customarily comes with CDs. They can get pictures of the artist/s, lyrics and other perks. Bonus songs and extra features for the computer can also be included exclusively with the album.
An important lesson learned from the history of “free” services is that it, as O’Reilly states, it “is eventually replaced by a higher-quality paid service.” The web used to be able to be accessed free of charge but now virtually everyone pays an ISP. Eventually, as we are starting to see, services will be available for online music and people will probably end up paying a monthly or yearly charge. An example from O’Reilly’s article is that Safari Books Online is growing at 30 percent per month and now has multi-million dollar revenue.
There’s no question that many artists (mostly the more popular ones) lose pretty significant sales from piracy. However, it would be wrong to say that there are no positive affects from it. Artists can more easily create a name for themselves. Eventually, a service industry will become popular and will allow for artists to earn more of what they are due in album/song sales.

Source:
http://www.openp2p.com/lpt/a/3015