@Ardichoke - For the record, I love ya bro. Nothing against you. Heck, I even love @Thrax when he is being a knucklehead. Icrontic is the one place in the world where I don't feel the need to acquiesce in order to keep the peace. I acquiesce at home, and at work frequently as well. On Icrontic, I get to be me, and I know I'm kind of a pain in the ass. Thanks for putting up with me. Spirited debate can be done with respect, I take no offense to your little jab, because I sorta kinda made a tiny little one myself, I mean, it was at least a tiny bit funny??
Anyhow on the topic. I understand the argument you are making, but I frankly don't agree with it, and not just on moral grounds, I just can't see eye to eye on the data. A great TV Dr. has said, "Everybody Lies" and that is true - @Tushion - note everybody does not necessarily mean literary everybody, you know, just in case you and @Thrax have never ever lied. Data is only as good as its agenda. In Baltimore the leadership has been caught fudging the numbers (to put it lightly) about crime statistics over and over again. I just don't trust data from any source that wants to make the argument that stealing is fine.
Once again, I'm not trying to beat up on anyone for past transgressions. I'm far from perfect, but lets be honest with ourselves. Did we do something that we perhaps had no right to? I find that the smarter people are, (and you guys are pretty damn brilliant), the more and more they will try to find some way to apply logic or data to an argument that really doesn't require it. For me, this is a really simple issue. I'm a person that deals in so many shades of gray in my everyday life that when I see something that's pure black and white, it surprising to me when so many really smart people don't see what I do. I respect you, and that is why the argument is worthwhile.
The small part that you've missed, Cliff, is that the bias, if there was any in the study, should be in the direction of the music associations: the study was performed by IFPI.
"Yesterday the music industry lobby group IFPI presented its 2009 figures.[...]
In their annual Digital Music Report, IFPI states that file-sharers are half as likely to buy physical CDs than the average music buyer. Although the report is about digital music, they carefully avoid saying anything about file-sharers and digital sales. That would actually show a completely different picture as we will explain below.
The music group made this statement based on an IFPI-commissioned study that was executed by Jupiter research.[...]
Compared to music buyers, music sharers (pirates) are…
* 31% more likely to buy single tracks online. * 33% more likely to buy music albums online. * 100% more likely to pay for music subscription services. * 60% more likely to pay for music on mobile phone.
These figures (as reported by the music industry) clearly show that file-sharers buy more digital music than the average music buyer. In fact, the group that makes up the music buyers category actually includes the buying file-sharers, so the difference between music sharers and non-sharing music buyers would be even more pronounced."
Comments
Anyhow on the topic. I understand the argument you are making, but I frankly don't agree with it, and not just on moral grounds, I just can't see eye to eye on the data. A great TV Dr. has said, "Everybody Lies" and that is true - @Tushion - note everybody does not necessarily mean literary everybody, you know, just in case you and @Thrax have never ever lied. Data is only as good as its agenda. In Baltimore the leadership has been caught fudging the numbers (to put it lightly) about crime statistics over and over again. I just don't trust data from any source that wants to make the argument that stealing is fine.
Once again, I'm not trying to beat up on anyone for past transgressions. I'm far from perfect, but lets be honest with ourselves. Did we do something that we perhaps had no right to? I find that the smarter people are, (and you guys are pretty damn brilliant), the more and more they will try to find some way to apply logic or data to an argument that really doesn't require it. For me, this is a really simple issue. I'm a person that deals in so many shades of gray in my everyday life that when I see something that's pure black and white, it surprising to me when so many really smart people don't see what I do. I respect you, and that is why the argument is worthwhile.
"Yesterday the music industry lobby group IFPI presented its 2009 figures.[...]
In their annual Digital Music Report, IFPI states that file-sharers are half as likely to buy physical CDs than the average music buyer. Although the report is about digital music, they carefully avoid saying anything about file-sharers and digital sales. That would actually show a completely different picture as we will explain below.
The music group made this statement based on an IFPI-commissioned study that was executed by Jupiter research.[...]
Compared to music buyers, music sharers (pirates) are…
* 31% more likely to buy single tracks online.
* 33% more likely to buy music albums online.
* 100% more likely to pay for music subscription services.
* 60% more likely to pay for music on mobile phone.
These figures (as reported by the music industry) clearly show that file-sharers buy more digital music than the average music buyer. In fact, the group that makes up the music buyers category actually includes the buying file-sharers, so the difference between music sharers and non-sharing music buyers would be even more pronounced."