Transcript
Page 1: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

How do audiences respond to issues surrounding digital music copyright law, in relation to peer to peer file-sharing?

!

David BreeseBRE07399019

MC601 - DissertationBA (Hons) Media & CommunicationBirmingham School of Media, Birmingham City University

2010

Page 2: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

! 2

Page 3: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

How do audiences respond to issues surrounding digital music copyright law, in relation to peer to peer file-sharing?

David Breese

BA (Hons) Media & Communication Birmingham School of Media,

Birmingham City University

2010

Abstract:

This dissertation presents an investigation into audience responses and understanding of the legal issues surrounding digital music copyright. Using the notion of peer to peer file sharing (p2p) as a focal point, findings highlight the effectiveness of copyright in the online environment and for digital media rights management. Applying relevant theories and building upon previous audience research studies, this dissertation provides evidence supporting arguments against current copyright legislation. Using two different focus group studies of different aged participants, notable differing responses between the two support claims that digital copyright is ineffective and biased towards a monopoly for the major recording industry. This research further presents the potential implications current copyright legislation has on audiences and the potential effects that this has in turn for music distribution, industry and retail, now and in the near future.

12,822 words

! 3

Page 4: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

Contents

Introduction 5

Review of Literature 7 Music Copyright Law 7

Audiences 10

Online Cultures 13

Methodological Considerations 19

Research & Findings 25 Consumption & Listening Habits 25

Engagement with Peer to Peer File Sharing 31

Responses to Legal Issues & Industry Implications 37

Conclusions 44

Bibliography 47

Appendices 52 i. Research Participant Consent Form 53

ii. List of Participants 54

iii. Focus Group 1 Transcription 55

iv. Focus Group 2 Transcription 74

Figures

i. Andersonʼs (2006) Long Tail Model 12

! 4

Page 5: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

Introduction

!

! This dissertation contributes to the extensive debates surrounding copyright

legislation regarding digital music, by examining audience opinions and behaviours to the

key legal issues of copyright, regarding online peer to peer file sharing. Music copyright

law is one of the most highly debated issues within music industries and digital media

spheres, with key thinkers like Negroponte arguing that ʻCopyright law is totally out of

dateʼ (1995, p58). Some are arguing time for reform and leniency, regarding file sharing

(see Ku, 2002), others arguing tougher rules need to be put in place to counter the ʻillegalʼ

sharing of music (RIAA, 2009 & BPI, 2009). This debate is not necessarily new, it has

been raging for years, today we see arguments surrounding the issue of online sharing,

whereas in previous years, we were told it was our ʻhome taping that was killing music.ʼ

However, despite all the discussion and debate, very little scholarly attention has been

paid to the way audiences and consumers adhere to copyright, and the implications that

might have for online music distribution. This dissertation looks specifically into the

relationship music copyright has with its audience and the suggested implications that

presents, by focusing on the notion of peer to peer file sharing of digital music. I review

relevant literature and previous studies and discuss the benefits of focus group research

for the purposes of this investigation. The findings are then broken down into precise

themes, providing supporting evidence for the various claims for and against digital music

copyright. It is hoped that my findings will not only highlight particular areas of interest for

further debate; such as the effectiveness of new online music distribution models, but also

highlight the level of effectiveness and applications of copyright law in the digital age.

! In this dissertation, I present the results, and discuss the findings, of two separate

focus groups, of two different demographics; a younger group of 20 to 25 year olds and an

older group of 40 to 60 year olds. After establishing the subjects interaction with digital

! 5

Page 6: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

music and specifically the extent of their familiarity with peer to peer file sharing services,

the groups discuss the effects that such activity has on the music industries, the recording

industry and the implications it presents for all parties. It is their understanding of the legal

issues and in turn, their reaction to them, that will provide the focal point of my research.

! The strength of this study, is in providing new analysis in a frequently debated, yet

under-researched field, supporting and challenging many of the current claims and

theories. The difference in age of the participants in the groups allows for a comparative

analysis of results, highlighting different schools of thought and perception between the

generations and any potential adaptive understanding of the convergence of new digital

and traditional forms of media consumption. The separated ideas are identified within the

different responses to the proposed surrounding issues of digital music copyright law.

Using previous theories and exemplar research findings, I aim to add support as well as

contradiction to some of the many, often opposing, theories within the field. In the next

chapter, I discuss some of these theories surrounding the specifics of copyright law, the

influence of online cultures, and relevant previous audience research studies, and show

how my research challenges or supports their arguments.

! 6

Page 7: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

Review of Literature

Music Copyright Law

! The central argument of the illegalities of sharing music online surrounds the issue

of copyright infringement. Discussed here are some of the defining arguments for and

against strict copyright legislation for digital music. My research demonstrates some of the

general audience understandings of how copyright law affects them, and how they

understand it, highlighting effectiveness and the usefulness of such regulation.

! Organisations such as the BPI (British Phonographic Industry) and the RIAA

(Recording Industry Association of America) exist to represent the best interests of the

recording industry in terms of their copyright ownership.

Music copyright as defined by the BPI;

! Copyright is the foundations which the music business is built. In its simplest terms, ! it is a form of intellectual property and, as such, gives the creator or the owner/! author of that work exclusive rights over how it is published, distributed and ! adapted. (BPI - [online] 2009)

! Cause for debate has, naturally, sparked plenty of recent research; Kembrew

McLeod ʻs (2005) article ʻMP3s Are Killing Home Tapingʼ suggests the issue of copyrighted

material shared online, provides a real threat to the major music labelʼs monopoly, yet

doesnʼt necessarily state this as a negative. Arguing against the side of the major record

labels, McLeod uses examples of various successes for little known independent

musicians, thanks to the development of peer to peer file sharing. In echo of McLeodʼs

statements, participants in the focus groups demonstrated an understanding of such

benefits that new retail and distribution models bring to independent musicians, working

against the grain of the major recording industry.

! It is a discussion that almost completely removes legal discourses from its

investigation, however for the purposes of my research, it is noteworthy that not all the

! 7

Page 8: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

issues surrounding my topic are presented from a legal angle, but their discussions still

present considerably important factors. McLeod (2005) argues that the legal aspects of

music copyright reinforce the powerful monopoly of the major recording industry. However,

he suggests popular music can continue to flourish and be financially sustainable to a

wider profile of musicians, regardless of the discourses that the major music labels present

to consumers. Contrary to the BPI (2009), who state that it is copyright which forms the

foundations of a successful music industry. In response to these claims my research

highlighted a tendency towards a belief that, whilst audiences seem to understand a need

for copyright legislation, they feel opposed to the domineering stance that is taken by

those who enforce it. According to McLeod, ʻPeople will only stop supporting musicians

and other artists when the concept of community breaks downʼ (p.530), hinting towards

ideas of fandom and suggestive of the culturally significant relationships that music has

with its audiences, rather than simplifying it to a more commercial operation of products

and end consumers. This notion, the research participants identified with most, siding with

support for musicians and artists, rather than that of the industry they are part of.

! Objective studies into the legal heart of copyright are equally important for a concise

understanding of the topic. Copyright is a large field within legal studies, with plenty of

evidence to support that there are considerable amounts of rules and regulations that the

music industries are expected to adhere to by law (see Sparrow, 2006 & Harrison, 2005).

Fisher (2001) says of intellectual copyright law, ʻThe economic and cultural importance of

this collection of rules is increasing rapidlyʼ (p.1). Fisher, a scholar in intellectual property

law, discusses the key theories behind the justification for copyright laws. He suggests,

that there are four key approaches to copyright law and why it is a necessary rule set. The

most notable of the four suggest that copyright law, particularly concerning creative works,

is there to protect the ʻpersonableʼ element of its creator (the artist) with no mention of

financial security benefits where commerce is concerned. Established here are the

! 8

Page 9: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

comparative differences in opinion, not only in the reasoning for copyright, but seemingly

in what ʻcopyrightʼ law is there to achieve. Challenging the claims of the recording

industries governing bodies (BPI, 2009), this ambiguity was also identified in my findings,

with audiences unsure of what exactly copyright is there to protect, with arguments for

protection of finances, some for less tangible reasons. Garofalo (2003, p.33) suggests that

copyright should, rather than swaying towards either side of the argument, perform ʻa

balancing act, weighing the legal protection of intellectual property against the public rights

of access to information and freedom of expression.ʼ

! Referring to the earlier definition of copyright, the statement; ʻMusic copyright

provides the foundations in which the Music Business is builtʼ (BPI online, 2009) arguably

constructs a discourse that the music industry equates to the recording industry.

Williamson & Cloonan (2007) cite this as a problem. They argue ʻthe music industry,ʼ is an

umbrella term for all the smaller industries all working within the field of music. The

recording industry, is merely one facet of these. It is the uses of words such as ʻtheftʼ and

ʻpiracyʼ (RIAA, 2009), plus the use of the term ʻmusic industry for representative and

umbrella organisationsʼ (Williamson & Cloonan, 2003, p. 306) that are creating a false

understanding amongst audiences of what exactly the music industry is and how they are

interacting with it when consuming recorded music. In support of Williamson & Cloonanʼs

arguments, there was a common misuse of the phrase ʻmusic industryʼ during the focus

group discussions, however understandings that file sharing has further implications for

supporting industries, seemed also prevalent, most notably from the older group. A ʻfalse

understandingʼ of the differences between music and recording industry practices amongst

audiences, may well indeed considerably affect responses to the issues surrounding peer

to peer file sharing, dependent on their perceived current understandings.

! It is clear that within the field of copyright law, there are discrepancies on what

exactly copyright is there to achieve, and particularly how it is relevant to new digital

! 9

Page 10: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

models of distribution and consumption. Such discrepancies are bound to have a direct

result on the way audiences perceive such regulations, and therefore directly how they

respond to them. As each side of the argument uses their own rhetoric to convince them, it

is they who are caught in the middle. In the next section, I develop the ways in which such

an argument can be interpreted by audiences based on similar audience studies of digital

media consumption.

!

Audiences

! Audience research is a highly developed field, but it is how audiences consume

specifically digital media, and the reasons for these consumption habits that are most

suited to my investigation. The following section aims to find and locate ways in which

some answers can be established to how audiences are consuming digital music and what

legal implications they are considering, if any. Similar studies discussed below, provide a

framework for which my own findings can build upon, strengthening their arguments as

well as my own.

! Longhurst (2007) states ʻThe most significant contemporary change to this

environment [music consumption] is coming through downloading.ʼ (p. 205). Despite the

debates around the significance of copyright in the digital age, one element of digital music

consumption is generally agreed upon; it has changed the way in which audiences are

consuming popular music. The discovery that the majority of the older focus group had

adapted their listening and consumption habits from sole use of more traditional, analogue

forms of consumption, to suit the digital environment, is certainly supportive of the vast

impact digital media consumption has on all audiences. Figures published by the RIAA

from a report (Siwek, 2007) conducted by the Institute for Policy Innovation (IPI) in

America, suggest that so called digital music ʻpiracyʼ is responsible for ʻ$12.5 billion of

economic losses every yearʼ (p.14). Such data would lean towards a conclusion that

! 10

Page 11: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

changing trends in audience consumption of digital music are having a profound effect on

the recording industryʼs turnover, but quantitative data like this contributes very little to

producing real answers to the surrounding issues.

! Tim Wall (2003, pp.167-176) provides three ways in which we can start to interpret

audience music consumption. These include fanaticism and mass culture; the mass

manufacture of media products for mass consumption and the excessive behaviour of

fans, subcultural practices; the relationship music has with social identity, and fan culture;

exploring the relevance of ʻcultural capitalʼ (Bourdieu 1984, cited in Wall, 2003) and its

significance and importance to individuals. Throughout my research, all participants had

something to say about the significance of their own music tastes and consumption and its

reflection on their life, whether than be in their record collecting habits or what their music

preferences say about their identity.

! As a relatively new academic field, audience use of file sharing lacks extensive

academic research. Chun-Yao Huang (2005) however, has carried out research into the

specifics of file sharing as a form of music consumption. Conducting focus groups of

college students, she concludes that music file sharing has become part of music culture

from a social perspective and almost ʻa way of life for someʼ (p.48). My studies have some

support for this claim with the younger subjects describing extensive p2p use by

themselves and their peers during their time at school, even describing it as a ʻfashionableʼ

practice as teenagers. Huangʼs study did not consider the reasoning behind the use of file

sharing, but presented more of an overview into the common practices of the process. The

findings and suggestive behaviors of audiences in my own research will therefore add

further nuance to some of his theories. Huang suggests that from his findings, those who

file share more often, are those that have expertise in technology and see ʻthe social

benefits of sharingʼ (p.49). Related work has also been carried out in Italy (Mascheroni et

al, 2008). Similarly, this research focuses on a younger audience, conducting ethnographic

! 11

Page 12: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

studies of the way digital television media is consumed, alluding to the media shift

between analogue and digital forms of consumption. The study deduces that younger

audiences are presently ʻredefining their relationship with mediaʼ (p.29) and further

highlights the social benefits digital media has to offer, pointing the way into further studies

for reasoning why audiences do, or donʼt engage with such media distribution methods.

! Perhaps the above studies are suggestive that older audiences can be said to be

more institutionalised, in a sense that they have become used to the traditional means of

purchasing music. Comparing the television viewing choices of different aged audiences,

Harwood (1997) found that audience choices are representative of their own perceived

ʻsocial identityʼ and values. Similar processes may also occur in the choices different

audiences make concerning file sharing activities. My research directly draws from

Harwoodʼs work, not only in its methods, but also in that it supports claims that

consumption choices are directly linked to the societal values of the consumer, therefore

similar claims can be made to the differing consumption habits of digital music and

engagement with online sharing between different generational demographics.

! With the convergence of digital media, user generated media, and the social

implications described above, mass media messages of copyright infringement and its

consequences could be described as having little, to no effect on new audiences.

Livingstone (2004) explores the idea that in the ʻinternet ageʼ and with new interactive

ways of media consumption more prevalent, the term ʻusersʼ is more applicable than

ʻaudiencesʼ, as often, mass communication models (one to many) are replaced by new

models (many to many), such as file sharing. However, the discourses presented by our

ruling forces (the major record labels and representatives) are still trying to promote and

facilitate traditional models, encouraging moral panics surrounding the negative effects of

file sharing. A moral panic can be defined; ʻA condition, episode, person or group of

! 12

Page 13: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

persons emerges to become defined as a threat to societal values and interests.ʼ (Cohen

1972, p.2). In this instance the ʻthreatʼ is identified as online piracy and illicit file sharing.

! The consumption of music in subcultures is a highly theorised area (see

Hesmondhalgh 2002, Longhurst, 2007). Clarke et al. (1976) provide the definition, ʻCulture

is the way, the forms, in which groups “handle” the raw material of their social and material

existenceʼ (p10). Application of basic subcultural theories to my investigation, would

therefore suggest that audience interpretations of legal discourses surrounding file

sharing, are indeed directly related to their sociological, subcultural practices. Wallʼs

(2003) application of the study of subcultural audience behaviour can be applied to my

study. Such applications to my findings of digital music consumption habits amongst

different audiences, lead to interesting correlation between the ʻsocial identityʼ (Huang

2005, Macheroni er al. 2008) of peer to peer music distribution, and how audiences

approach the legal or moral considerations of copyright in different ways.

! Based on the previous studies identified above and the various theories they

present, the relationships that audiences or ʻusersʼ have with the legal issues surrounding

peer to peer file sharing are different depending on their social perception and interaction

with the phenomenon. Different understandings between the two age groups studied adds

support to the claim that current copyright law for digital music is outdated and ineffective,

particularly in responses provided from younger consumers. Some of the ideas about the

different ways in which new online cultures have affected media consumption are explored

in greater depth in the next section.

Online Cultures

! The online environment, and the practices that occur within it, form a key aspect of

my studies. The internet provides the platform which allows peer to peer file sharing to

function, allowing the connection between two or more computers over the internet

! 13

Page 14: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

copying the files from one another. Many theories behind the way the online environment

has changed consumption of popular media, have already been mentioned in the previous

sections. Online culture lead to the facilitation of peer to peer networks, but in response to

the problems it has caused for the recording industry, using the same tools, new models

are being constructed to provide solutions.

! Monitoring the way in which people use the internet has lead to extensive scholarly

research but also a great deal of writing in general, some of the most referenced thinkers

within the field are not necessarily academics themselves, but their opinions are regarded

highly amongst academic peers. If we re-present the argument discussed earlier in the

chapter, discussing the potential for online commerce, Chris Andersonʼs Long Tail (2006)

model provides an example of such work. The Long Tail model refers to a distribution

graph applicable for online commerce. The more popular and commercial, mass market

material at one end of the graph represents a high volume of sales. Yet the graph

continuously tails out to show the almost, whilst smaller, limitless potential for online sales

in niche markets.

Fig i. - Basic Long Tail Model (Anderson, 2006)

!

! Through the long tail, Anderson suggests the internet has opened up more

possibilities for promotion and distribution of media, in this instance for music. ʻWeʼre

entering an era of radical change for marketers. Faith in advertising and the institutions

that pay for it, is waning, while faith in individuals is on the rise. Peers trust

peers.ʼ (Anderson 2006, p98). Some of the comments made in the focus groups, I think

! 14

Page 15: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

would challenge Andersonʼs last comment of trust, with many of the group voicing fears

over potential security threats from anonymous online users, however, they were aware of

the alarming affect in which online distribution models had for the market place, some

members even drawing upon the long tail model in their own arguments.

! These same arguments are cited by Andrew Dubber (2007). Applying Andersonʼs

long tail theory, it is suggested that ʻthe economics of the internet are different to the

economics of the offline worldʼ (p24). The amount of shelf space in the physical world only

allows for the ʻpopularʼ to be stocked. Online however, limitless possibilities for space allow

for more sales of smaller quantities of the less popular items, increasing the potential for

commerce. Most notably for the purposes of this dissertation however, is the notion that

the economic environment of the two is different, yet the laws of copyright remain the

same. File sharing is legally viewed as a form of copyright infringement, however is often

referred to as a form of ʻtheftʼ in the rhetoric of the recording industry. Audience awareness

of the crimes, if any, that are performed during the process of file sharing are likely to

affect their perception of right and wrong and therefore how they choose to participate in

such processes. In terms of digital technologies, music online being digital and not

physical, affects the way it can be reproduced. When digital music is shared, the original

remains intact and a carbon copy is generated. This is different to ʻtheftʼ in the physical

sense, such as stealing a copy of a record that cannot be replaced.

! Looking at the social and economic impact that file sharing presents, we can look

specifically at one of the major instances of its debate, prominent in my own research, the

case surrounding the late nineties, peer to peer software, Napster. Menn (2003) and

Merriden (2001) explore the history and unique position in web culture and technology that

Napster presented as one of the first prolific cases of file sharing on a large scale. In his

case study of Napster, Wall (2003) describes Napsterʼs closure as an example of ʻthe

demise of systems that benefit music fansʼ (p223) and the type of practices that are

! 15

Page 16: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

encouraged for the benefit of commercial operations. Court cases between the recording

industry and file sharing services are still prevalent today, highlighting the lack of change in

a decade of file sharing online. For example, the case in Sweden prosecuting major file

sharing service, The Pirate Bay (Johnson & Kiss, 2009) in which the defendants were

charged and the more recent case in the UK, where the operator of private file sharing site

OiNK was cleared of all charges (Rogers, 2010).

! The record companies proposed that the Napster system ripped off artists and ! would kill music, while they made the legal argument that Napster encouraged the ! infringement of copyrights they held. Napster countered by arguing that members of ! Napster were making fair non-commercial use of the rights already assigned with ! the original sale of the record that had been converted into mp3 files.! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! (Wall 2003, p223)

Interestingly, Napster was the p2p service most referenced to in my own studies, however,

its demise, also seemed to mark much of the disuse of peer to peer services, supporting

Wallʼs claim that its closure was indeed beneficial to the commercial recording industry.

! Technological development governing the changing practices of digital music

consumption is often cited as the main scrutiny of scholars in the field (see Vale, 2009).

As a response to the growth in popularity of peer to peer music sharing, many new models

for online distribution have been suggested and put into operation such as flat fee

subscription services, like those discussed by Myška (2009). Incidentally, Napster provided

a similar model after it was relaunched as a legitimate download service. These models

along with the streaming models mentioned in the focus groups, such as those envisaged

by Last.fm and Spotify, are regarded by some, as a saviour to the recording industry for

the problems file sharing presents. Gerd Leonhard (with Kusek 2005 & 2008) is famed for

referring to such models as presenting a ʻfeels like freeʼ option to consumers, whilst

generating revenue streams elsewhere in the process, usually through advertising.

! The changes in music distribution online thanks to technological development,

harks back to the classic writings of McLuhan (1964), ʻWe shape our tools and thereafter

our tools shape us.ʼ Our development in online environments has completely reshaped ! 16

Page 17: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

traditional models of retail and the way in which audiences listen to and consume music.

Jones suggests the internet needs to be approached on numerous levels, as ʻa social

space, medium of distribution, and engine of social and commercial change: as a space of

interrelated practices rather than a text to be critiqued, or a technology in need of

assessment and controlʼ (2000, p22).

! As a social space, the anonymity provided by communicating with others online, in

our case, sharing music files, may provide users with a lack of concern about what they

are doing and a tending to acting like the normative behavior of others (Watt, Lea &

Spears, 2002). ʻIf others are doing it, why canʼt I?ʼ Responses from my own research

would tend to support such claims that users feel that their actions alone canʼt possibly be

having substantial economic effects. The internet and the modern notion and applications

in Web 2.0 (OʼReilly 2005), as well as its ever growing use for more social communication

(Boyd & Ellison, 2007), points towards a more open network of facilities and functions

oriented by the user, and facilitating user to user connectivity, perfectly exemplified by the

practices of peer to peer file sharing. As people start living in online environments such as

social networks, p2p could be said to represent the online version of exchanging tapes or

CDs face to face, which my results would suggest is generally accepted as common

practice.

! In ʻThe Future is User Ledʼ, Bruns (2008) describes this tendency towards an online

future of user led development and says of its relation to copyright;

! ʻThe community-based development of any form of content necessarily requires ! members of the produsage community to adopt more permissive approaches to ! legal and moral rights in intellectual property than is the norm in traditional, ! corporate content productionʼ. (p4)

This note, perhaps, describes the relationship users of peer to peer services are starting to

inherit as a direct product of online technological development.

! Many of the theories surrounding online culture displayed above, highlight

significant changes in retail and consumption of media presented by online technologies, ! 17

Page 18: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

and the way users have come to adopt the various new models introduced. The idea that

the internet is not owned by anyone and should be viewed as a space for interaction rather

than a medium for media distribution, actually facilitates the production of file sharing sites

like Napster, in a way governing media bodies canʼt regulate. In summary, the key

argument presented here, is that traditional models of commerce and media regulation are

completely useless in an online environment where users have a greater influence on its

development. The case for online music distribution is unsettled, both industry and

consumers still seem to be jockeying for the best position to suit their needs.

! 18

Page 19: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

Methodological Considerations

!

! In this chapter I justify and examine the effectiveness of my chosen research

methods for the purposes of obtaining audience responses to the legal issues of peer to

peer file sharing. Using two separate focus groups of different aged participants; one

group of younger individuals aged between 20 and 25 years as well as a comparative

group, from an older demographic of consumers, of over 40 years of age. Based on

guidance and exemplar literature, I discuss the merits and disadvantages that focus group

research provides, and specifically what was effective for this study, as well as the

necessary ethical implications that had to be taken into consideration, and how they were

dealt with. Whilst only conducting two focus groups, definitive conclusions based on my

findings alone are difficult to ascertain. However, the strength of conducting the

comparative focus groups, is the provided overview of generalised responses,

strengthening and supporting some of the central arguments, discussed in the previous

chapter, of the legal issues with copyright and its relationship to digital music. This will in

turn open areas for further investigation.

! Findings from the previous research of Huang (2005) and Macheroni et al (2008)

advocate that younger audiences are more open and relaxed about the notion of peer to

peer sharing, as well as any suggested implications of their actions. Using similar research

methods I am able build upon their work, highlighting and supporting such claims by

providing evidence and similar findings. Huangʼs (2005) use of focus groups highlighted

specific areas of interest with direct feed back from audience members, whilst

Mascheroniʼs (2008) research adopted ethnographic studies of online, as well as off line

interaction, that their subjects were having with digital media. Due to the nature of peer to

peer sharing, online ethnographic study of users in certain environments could be directly

applied to researching users of file sharing services. However, the anonymity in this type of

! 19

Page 20: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

online interaction, alluded to by Watt, Lea and Spears (2002), would allow very little data

to be extracted about the type of demographic using the service. Whilst it would, perhaps,

allow for a clear insight of how the audiences share music online, it would be difficult to

ascertain why, and the reasoning they have behind their actions, providing very little

evidence to justify audience behaviour.

! The common attention paid to younger audiences in the above similar studies, also

presents an interesting aspect of age relation. Particular interest in my research, aimed at

conducting comparative studies to different aged audiences, will allow for further analysis

of not just how audiences are interacting with new digital forms of media, but specifically

some of the reasons why they choose to act they way they do regarding file sharing, and

whether or not the central debate of copyright infringement carries any influence.

Conducting focus groups with pariticipants of similar age, worked not only well for the

purposes of the investigation but also allowed the subjects to respond respectively of each

other, removing any underlying social hierarchies that would perhaps hamper responses in

a group of varied ages.

! This particular area of research could be carried out in numerous ways and on

varying levels of detail. My own study, affected by time constraints and available

resources, limited the use of extensive one on one interviews for example, coupled with

the nature of online sharing proving difficult to conduct ethnographic studies of its users.

Therefore, one of the more effective ways in which I could have conducted such research

was by conducting these focus groups. Based on the guiding of Bertrand and Hughes

(2005, p81), focus groups, conversely to individual interviews, benefit from inciting

discussion between participants and relieves pressure on those involved. As an

established method for audience research, focus groups can be effective at inciting

ʻnaturalʼ responses involved in group discussion and participation. Whilst using focus

groups is the most useful method to encourage this type of discussion, it must be taken

! 20

Page 21: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

into consideration that the participants are not in an unmonitored environment. They will be

aware that what they say is being recorded and documented, as well as the fact they are

being guided by a questioning moderator.

! Focus groups have in the past, and continue to be, a widely used method for

market research, however in many instances they are now used for a variety of academic

study. Morgan (1997) describes the recent history of the academic use of focus groups or

group interviews. Whilst originally used as an effective research method within the fields of

social sciences, Morgan describes the early use of focus groups for media audience

research. Of particular notice are, its early use by Lazarsfeld (1942) as a method for

qualitative responses to a number of radio broadcasts, and more recently Lunt and

Livingstone (1996) explain how the method was used in the early 1980s by British

communication researchers, examining how audiences interpreted media messages.

Since these early studies and the development of focus groups for audience research, the

process has become widely used for a number of applications. Highlighted by the vast

array of guidance material available, carrying out focus groups for my own primary

research, it would suggest, would therefore be a suitable and effective method.!

! The legal aspect of my research may discourage research participants to shy away

from full, honest answers, yet the focus group environment should allow participants to

open up to ʻsensitiveʼ issues whilst also encouraging ʻcandourʼ and more unforced

responses than that of one on one interviews for instance (Boubour 2007, p27).

Participants are also able to react to each others contributions, with the discursive nature

and ʻgroup influenceʼ of focus groups easing participants, generating more inherent

responses to the topics at hand (Fern 2001, p137). Such ʻinfluenceʼ could be seen as

having a negative effect on realistic responses, providing a ʻfalse consensusʼ and

generating a more uniform response than would ordinarily be obtained (Bertrand &

Hughes 2005, p81). However individual answers from any means, would not allow any

! 21

Page 22: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

reaction for any agreements, or disagreements, within the group providing interesting

responses to issues surrounding the topic. One of the main unique and useful features of

focus group research, for this investigation, is the generation of discussion between the

participants, which empowers those taking part, leaving participants more likely to provide

fuller contributions (Kitzinger, 1994). Certainly in both of the focus groups, leaders in the

conversation soon emerged and therefore, mixed contributions were received. The

behaviour of these leaders encouraged further conversation as members reacted to their

statements.

! Regarding the legal concerns of my research, ethical considerations need to be

taken into account, particularly regarding the anonymity of the subjects. Bertrand and

Hughes (2005) name three reasons in which ethical considerations are necessary when

conducting audience research. In this case, anonymity is paramount ʻto ensure that the

research subjects are not placed at any risk of physical, emotional or financial harmʼ (p15).

In this case, by way of legal repercussions to any unlawful activity mentioned. To facilitate

such measures, all subjects are referred to under false identities throughout this

dissertation and all participants were required to sign a consent forms agreeing to their

free will of participation (see appendix i.) before taking part in the discussions.

! Just like any research method, focus groups naturally have their drawbacks.

Focusing on such a small section of the public, the participants used are not

representative of a wide cross section of the public and therefore results wonʼt be fully

representative of wider society. However my investigation, in the comparative examination

of results between the two different age groups, highlights some of differences in social

values and responses to the surrounding issues of digital music consumption and peer to

peer file sharing.

! Gathered data on the occupation and background of the participants may also

provide useful in identifying noticeable responses (see appendix ii.). Within the younger

! 22

Page 23: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

group, all the participants were either full time students or employed in low income jobs,

limiting the amount of disposable income they have to spend on unessential purchases,

including music. This will in turn likely affect their decisions when deciding how to source

music. Conversely, all the of the participants of the older group, were either in full or part-

time employment, with most supporting families, and earning a far greater amount

disposable income. Various social factors of the participants may also have influence on

their responses, for example, their job roles and in the case of the students, what subjects

they are studying. The two focus groups, provide a snap shot of comparative findings on

which to base my own conclusions. Using similar structures and discussion topics within

each, comparative analysis of the answers and discussions of both will highlight

differentiating ideas and responses to the presented issues of file sharing and its relation

to copyright.

! When structuring the groups, Krueger (1994) notes that the common misconception

that ten to twelve participants are needed for a focus group, is a largely unworkable

amount for complex topics. In light of this, the older group consisted of six participants and

there were five in the younger group. Recruitment for both groups proved problematic at

times, having to cancel various arranged meetings due to last minute drop outs. Generally

the most effective method of recruitment was by relationship chains, encouraging

confirmed participants to bring a partner, or friend, who was also willing to contribute. In

the cases where participants were familiar with one another previously, it also helped to

ease any apprehension and flowing conversation was generated more rapidly. The groups

were both held in informal, relaxed surroundings and recorded discreetly as possible.

Reducing any major awareness of the recording equipment and a feel of formality,

avoiding placing participants under unnecessary pressure. Both conversations within the

groups produced consistent responses and both were able to formulate concise opinions

! 23

Page 24: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

on all of the prior formulated questions and conversations topics. The audio from the focus

groups was recorded and full transcriptions are available in the appendices (iii. & iv.).

! 24

Page 25: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

Research & Findings

! The following chapter presents the findings of primary research investigating

audience responses to the legal issues surrounding online file sharing of music. The

material presented here is the product of the two separate focus groups. The discussion

taking place in both instances revolved around the same various themes including the

participants own consumption of digital music and listening habits; raising discussion in

areas surrounding their own personal issues presented in downloading music via peer to

peer services, and how that affects their interaction and understanding of the process.

Most notably for my research, of these implications, particular attention is paid to any

responses they may or may not have had towards legal discourses surrounding the notion

of file sharing. These themes will form the basis of the structure of this chapter in aim to

discover any differences noted between behaviour, opinions and responses of the two

groups.

!

Consumption & Listening Habits

! Before we can start to establish any responses to the legal issues surrounding the

usage of peer to peer file sharing, we need to establish exactly how, and if the participants

interact, use and listen to digital music, whether or not it be acquired through p2p. The

following section examines the participants personal music consumption habits and in

particular their digital music consumption habits. Based on the responses, I challenge the

preconceptions that older audiences are less likely to interact with new forms of media,

whilst identifying suitable comparisons between the groups in other traditional forms of

music consumption.

! On first introduction of the idea of use of digital music with the older group, it was

evident that most participants were familiar users of the concept, most either using mp3

! 25

Page 26: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

players or their mobile phone to consume digital music. When the group was asked if they

owned mp3 players the response was as follows,

!! Harry: Of course (laughter). How many?... Iʼve had mp3 players for going on, Must ! be ten years I should think.!! Pete: Ditto...!! Harry: Way before the iPod came out!! Pete: I had a Creative Labs 10GB one, which was about the first one to have a hard ! drive.!! Rachel: Creative Labs was the first one that I had but it was much smaller than that. ! Then it took me a while to go down the iPod route and I went nano. Now Iʼve got an ! iPhone and thats brilliant because it does everything.

In total, five out of the six participants, owned mp3 players for use in various instances. A

similar proportion of participants in the group of younger people also used similar devices;

!! Steve: 90% of the time, if Iʼm listening to music, itʼs off my phone!! Mark: I only really listen to it on my laptop now, my phone can have mp3ʼs on it, but ! my phone is nearly four years old. the headphones are long broken. !! Katie: I use my iPod all the time.

Overall, despite no input from one or two of the participants, most interacted with digital

music on a regular basis in some fashion or another. This goes some way to disproving

any preconceptions that may be had that older generations are out of touch with new

technologies and new forms of media, hinted at by the studies of Mascheroni et al (2008).

However, whilst here we have acknowledged the similarities between the groups in their

music consumption habits of mobile music listening, in the form of portable mp3 players or

mobile phones. We are yet to establish other listening and consumption habits or even

where the participants source their digital music collections.

! 26

Page 27: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

! In the older group, the idea that mp3 and digital music consumption provided the

main part of their listening produced mixed responses, the most notable from the men in

the group.

!

! Pete: For home, physical music is always my first choice.

! Elli: (to Frank) I think you would say the same, wouldnʼt you?!! Frank: Yeah the same, exactly the same (pause) and vinyl for choice.

Throughout the conversation held in this group, it was clear that physical music collecting

was still a process they engaged in, whether this be in the form of CDs or vinyl records.

Of the three women in the group, only one, Rachel, demonstrated an active consumption,

and collection, of music. The other two women, present in the group alongside their

husbands, tended to let their spouses talk about their collections, evident in the example

above.

!! Rachel: Yeah I mean, Iʼve got it [my music] on the computer. Iʼve still got all my CDs ! I havenʼt got my vinyl any more.

! Harry: I must admit thats the way I tend to buy things. Iʼll buy a CD then immediately ! rip it onto various machines and then Iʼll stick it in a cupboard and occasionally it ! comes out.

In the extract above, despite the purchase of music in a physical sense, interestingly,

some members of the group tend towards consuming it digitally, rarely using the physical

medium, in a CD player for example. Whereas other members described still playing vinyl

and sitting down specifically to listen to records. Despite the usage of physical CDs, it

must be noted that the effort is still taken to purchase the music physically rather than

obtaining just digital files, either from a digital retail store or other means. Interestingly the

record collecting habits and the listening habits of the men in the group supports Will

! 27

Page 28: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

Strawʼs (1997) observations that record collecting tends to be a phenomenon normally

carried out among men.

! Such observations are not necessarily present in the second group of younger

participants. In this group, there was no apparent common method of music consumption.

However, comparatively to the older group, almost all the members consumed music on a

regular basis and it was almost always in a digital format. Most music consumption in this

group came from either listening to digital forms of music straight from a computer source

or from a portable device. Despite the consumption habits there was still small elements of

commodity collecting evident as well. Katie describes that she ʻfinds owning a CD really

importantʼ and keeps CDs as an identification of her music tastes and personality.

Whereas for others, Mark, for example suggests that CD purchases will only come with a

specific connection to an artist. Steve even mentions a small collection of vinyl,

!! Steve: So it is almost all about novelty with that. I donʼt even have my turntable ! plugged in at the moment because have everything on mp3 that Iʼve got on vinyl. ! So you donʼt even have to play it.

! Largely it can be said that members of both the groups choose to expose

themselves to, and regularly consume digital music, just in different ways. Conversely,

differences in the methods in which the different groups went about obtaining access to

digital music was quite noticeable. As mentioned, the elder group, whilst they are

consumers of digital music, they preferred to consume digital versions of their own

physical music collection, making their purchases online via sites like Amazon. One

participant even expressing the fact he digitizes his extensive vinyl collection.

!! Pete: One of the things about Amazon, it definitely demonstrates the different ways ! which you can buy things.

! Harry: Amazonʼs been very very useful as far as that goes. People whoʼve bought ! this might also be interested in that. Iʼve bought so many CDs on that basis over ! the years and got into several bands that perhaps otherwise I wouldnʼt of heard of.

! 28

Page 29: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

Within the younger group, however, extensive different ways of obtaining music were

referred to, including plenty demonstrable of Leonhardʼs (2008) ʻfeels like freeʼ music

streaming services such as Spotify and Last.fm. Other sources. as well as a peer to peer

file sharing, included hosting platforms, such as ʻRapidshareʼ and blog search engine tools

for hosted downloadable mp3 files like ʻHype Machineʼ. The following extract is taken from

the beginning of the focus group;

! Mark: Umm, I only really use Spotify, and youtube, um because, Spotifyʼs just ! simple and if they havenʼt got one thing well theyʼve got a bunch of other stuff. And ! so you can just go on that, and if you canʼt find it on Spotify, odds are you can find a ! sort of dodgy replica of it on Youtube. The only thing thatʼs mildly annoying about ! Spotify is that you get adverts on it, but its not worth paying the 140 quid a year to ! get rid of them. Iʼm not really bothered by it, itʼs just like listening to the radio without ! having to listen to a tedious DJ. !! Steve: I think the thing with Spotify, and Youtube as well, is that it is just that ! browsing factor. Itʼs that browsing factor isnʼt it, you donʼt have to actually make any ! real decision.

! Clare: (interrupts) You donʼt have to commit to buying a CD.

! Steve: You donʼt have to commit to buying a CD, you donʼt even to commit to ! buying an mp3, you donʼt even have to download a whole album or wait an hour, ! your just on it and itʼs there in front of you. But, I donʼt personally use it at the ! moment, because Iʼve had to switch computers bout three times, because I keep ! breaking them. But um, yeah it would be preferable [Spotify]. That said, itʼs nice to ! find some some stuff that you canʼt find on there sometimes. You just have to dig ! that little bit deeper, but it depends what it is. I reckon a large amount of the ! conversation is going to be based on Spotify.

It should be noted at this point, that all the members of this group were full time students or

employed in low income positions, therefore perhaps disposable income may have a

considerable effect on where they decide to obtain their music. Services such as Spotify

and Last.fm are music streaming services which allow users to freely stream music over a

web connection without actually downloading a digital music track to their computerʼs hard

drive. One notable feature of these kinds of services is that music cannot be transferred to

! 29

Page 30: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

personal portable mp3 devices. Spotify presents a new and unique distribution model in

that it can fit both into the categories of Myškaʼs (2009) subscription service models

discussed by Mark in the extract above, where a fee can be paid to remove adverts from

the audio stream and have access to more features such as offline listening, as well as the

ʻfeels like freeʼ model (Leonhard, 2009), that is financially supported by the

advertisements.

! From the findings displayed above we are able to deduce that interaction with digital

music is not limited to younger generations of consumers, challenging the suggestions of

Huang (2005) and Mascheroni et al (2008). Both of these studies, solely focused on media

consumption of younger demographics, yet hinted towards a reluctance to engage with

new media models from older generations. Whilst, my findings would tend to disprove this

initial aspect of consumption habits, they go a considerable way to reaffirming

Mascheroniʼs (2008, p29) statements that young audiences are in the process of

redefining the relationships they have with digital media. This is particularly evident in the

varied identified methods in which the younger group were listening to digital music, and

seemingly on a more regular basis than the older group as well. Whilst the elder

participants did demonstrate an interaction with digital music, much of their music sourcing

was still rooted in purchases of physical music artefacts, as was the practice of record

collecting. Of the various methods of consumption identified, extensive use of new digital

music consumption models, like Spotify, demonstrate a lack of reliance of peer to peer

networks, unlike the recording industry would suggest (Siwek, 2007) and tend to support

the claims of Leonhard (2009) that these new, legitimate models, provide a real alternative

to go some way to relaxing recording industry fears. The seemingly quick acceptance of

these models by the younger, less affluent participants would also go someway to suggest

they are keen to find alternative methods of sourcing music, rather than having to resort to

controversial peer to peer downloading sites.

! 30

Page 31: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

Engagement with Peer to Peer File Sharing

! Under the previous heading, I provided an overview to the general consumption

trends the subjects were following with digital music. In this section, I develop this theme

closer to my investigation, with specific findings of the participants interaction with peer to

peer file sharing facilities. I uncover reasoning behind the participants decisions whether or

not to engage with peer to peer networks and present the case that they may not

specifically be linked to any legal concerns.

! As the conversation developed, unexpectedly within the older group, many of the

participants had used peer to peer services in the past, whilst perhaps their usage was

limited, responses seemed mixed.

!

! Harry: Iʼve downloaded about 3 or 4 albums, ever, and those have all been in the ! last 6 months. Because Iʼd never actually purchase an mp3 download. I have got ! some illegal ones, not ones that I listen to particularly often, but Iʼve got some. !! Rachel: Yeah. Iʼve got some illegal. I suppose Iʼve got, I use iTunes a lot, I have ! used Napster.

Here, Harry, reinforces the fact he would rather purchase music in a physical format.

Whilst rachel mentions her use of Napster, the file sharing service.

!

! Sarah: Iʼve used Limewire in the past...! Yeah. I did subscribe to Limewire. We didnʼt download without the subscription, but ! now itʼs deleted, I donʼt know what my sons use (laughter) but yeah, Limewire I ! used to get a lot of my music. DVDs too, because you could download films too, ! so it was really good.

From above extract, Sarah understands Limewire as a file sharing service, yet seems to

emphasise the fact that she used the subscription service, apparent that, she feels by

paying for the subscription version of Limewire there are no copyright laws being broken.

In fact, the subscription service offered by Limewire just enhances the type of service they ! 31

Page 32: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

provide, in terms of download speeds and availability of some files, it goes no way to

ligitimising any copyright infringing downloads. This reinforcing of the fact that she paid for

the service however, whilst demonstrating a misunderstanding of what she was actually

paying for, shows a conscious effort to pay for something that she feels she should. Similar

thoughts were highlighted by Frank,

!! ʻIʼve only ever downloaded one album, and I have to admit to feeling slightly ! guilty because it was an illegal one.(chuckles) Which is stupid I know but (pauses) ! perhaps Iʼm a dinosaur, I dunno.ʼ

!The idea of ʻguiltʼ suggesting a thought of wrongdoing. Throughout the conversation within

this group, any mention of downloads obtained from peer to peer networks were referred

to as ʻillegalʼ in the same way that representative bodies (RIAA, 2009 & BPI, 2009)

constantly refer to such online sharing, presenting the idea that their understanding of

what is legal and what is not, is representative of the discourses of the major recording

industry. Following this Pete, one of the more vocal members of the group, announcing his

support of bands by financially backing them and purchasing their records and claiming

not to download music, admitted,

! ! ʻIʼm not sure if I should mention this, but a friend of mine who is in the states, ! somehow got hold of a copy of a hard drive from an american radio station. Which I ! now have a copy of (laughs), which is about 500GB of assorted albums. But most of ! it, is now stuff that if I hadnʼt got it that way, that I wouldnʼt even consider buying. ! Some of it has just saved me digitising bits of my vinyl collection.ʼ

In this quote, Pete feels the need to justify his acquisition, claiming that he already owns

some of the records in other formats or that he would not have purchased some of the

music anyway. Apprehension is certainly identified in the opening statement, ʻIʼm not sure

if I should mention this.ʼ Whilst not providing evidence of interaction with peer to peer file

sharing services, it does provide evidence of copyright infringement. Voicing an avoidance

of peer to peer networks, he seems at ease receiving extensive amounts of digital music ! 32

Page 33: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

without payment by other means. Demonstrable in all the responses within the elder

group, was some sort of understanding that by engaging with peer to peer networks, they

were involved in a criminalised activity. Whether or not they knew exactly which laws they

were breaking was uncertain, or if indeed, it was they who were breaking them.

! As expected, within the younger group there was a greater mention of interaction

with p2p networks, however only one member of the group, Pat, referred to extensive use

and demonstrated a detailed understanding of how the process worked. The rest of the

group, tended to state that they had previous experience of using p2p services, but had

since stopped for a variety of reasons. Pat describes,

!! ʻItʼs more of a community, youʼre encouraged to share back. Rather than just ! download it and leave, youʼre encouraged to seed it. So if you download 100 songs, ! you seed 100 songs, so your sharing with other people.ʼ

Clearly the most active in peer to peer networks from the younger group, evident in the

above quote, he provides an example of the ʻsocial elementʼ of online sharing, also

identified in Huangʼs (2005) studies in the idea of ʻcommunityʼ. Conversely to the recurrent

idea of the social element that online sharing provides, the older participants also alluded

to a similar social element of physically sharing records. A practice that they state they

performed when they were younger, and to some extend still do now, by borrowing and

lending CDs to one another. Applying the theories of Boyd & Ellison (2007), the above

example supports the idea that the online environment is tending towards facilitating user

oriented connectivity and cannot facilitate top down commercial models easily. However,

after Pat placed emphasis on p2p as a community of likeminded sharers, as a Computer

Science student he was able to describe the mechanical functioning of p2p exchanges

and described (see extract below) the lengths that he goes to avoid any potential legal

repercussions. A practice, suggestive that despite his regular engagement with peer to

peer sharing, he understands there is threat of legal implications, yet remains undeterred. ! 33

Page 34: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

! ʻI understand that itʼs very easy to find someone on the internet, you can literally ! find exactly where their house is, so I take a precaution so itʼs a bit harder to find ! me. I mask my IP address, so it looks like its somewhere else and not your ! computer, somewhere else in the world.ʼ

! As described earlier, for the rest of the younger group, the discussion surrounding

p2p centered around past experience of using such services. Both Mark, Clare and Katie,

on separate occasions described interacting with the peer to peer service, Limewire. The

following extract shows the three participants in a discussion over why they no longer use

peer to peer services.

!! Mark: I downloaded Limewire once, and it broke my mums computer and never ! went near it again.

! Katie: Same here.

! Clare: But like sometimes when you download the file, you get the file but then you ! have to download a programme to unlock the file. I just donʼt understand it. So I buy ! things of iTunes or I steal them from my friends or I just use Spotify, yeah. Then it all ! just goes my iPod.

In this instance, the participants are displaying that it is not necessarily any legal

implications that deters them from using p2p but fear of risking personal computer security.

Katie describes that after purchasing a new computer, she would not engage with any

ʻillegalʼ downloading activity. Other factors, highlighted in the above extract included a lack

of technological understanding of how to download from bit torrent, peer to peer sites.

However Clare states, ʻItʼs a technical thing for me. If someone taught me how to use it,

then Iʼll downloadʼ, similarly to Pat, she is evidently not put off by any legal implications.

Likewise, in the older group the participants provided similar reasoning for not using p2p;

! Pete: Iʼm computer savvy enough and have encountered enough genuine horror ! stories to steer well clear, I would never be part of a peer to peer network....! I think itʼs a real threat to computer security.! 34

Page 35: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

! Frank: Thats the thing thats always worried me I have to say.

Coupled with the fact that earlier in the discussion Pete described obtaining free digital

music elsewhere, through the above he also supports the idea that a major factor in not

engaging with peer to peer file sharing comes from a fear of the threat against personal

computer security.

! Presented below are extracts taken from the focus group of the younger

demographic. The participants, were all in their teenage years and at school when the first

prolific file sharing service, Napster, was increasing in user popularity.

!! Mark: But then when you were younger, when everyone started downloading, when ! I was about 12, when Napster was still like starting out and everyone was ripping ! stuff off that, yeah. It was the cool thing. Everyone was always banging on about ! how much music theyʼd got for free and stuff.

! Clare: Yeah and then it was all about myspace when you were 15.

! Steve: I remember downloading so much stuff off napster that I just never listened ! to. Just for the sake of having complete albums on that little page you had at the ! beginning. (Laughs) But, its true, theres a lot of people who were like that, that just ! wanted to have collections and stuff. And illegal downloading does open the door to ! being just able to do it right away, those are probably the people who download the ! most Iʼd say.

The group, describes their interaction and understanding of Napster in their school years.

The trends of peer to peer usage, among their age group, at that time in their lives is

demonstrable of the normative behavioral activity theory of Watt, Lea and Spears (2002),

perhaps facilitated by the anonymity of online communication. The emergence in

popularity of Napster, evident in the actions of Steve described above, allowed users to

compile music collections with relative ease (Menn, 2003). Building on the work of

Bourdieu (1984) in fan culture, Matt Hills (2002) suggests that such ʻfanʼ behaviour can be

labelled as ʻcommodity-completismʼ and presents a startling contradiction against the

tendency towards a fansʼ anti-commercial beliefs. This idea is also representative of the

! 35

Page 36: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

contradictory digital music consumption habits and opinions of Pete, of the older

demographic, in that he also, voiced extensive anti-commercial remarks regarding the

recording industry, pronouncing his support for artists and bands, yet demonstrates such

ʻcommodity completistʼ practices in his extensive record collecting habits.

! The findings in this section of my investigation bear upon many of the issues

highlighted in previous academic works, yet do not necessarily support them entirely. Patʼs

technical proficiency backs the idea that those who have greater technological expertise

are more likely to see the social benefits of p2p and actively engage with it (Mascheroni et

al, 2008), as he was the only participant that described it as a regular activity. Contrary to

this, other responses seem to demonstrate a more complex situation. Pete from the older

group, who works in I.T. and is professedly ʻcomputer savvyʼ, mentions his reluctance to

file share, due to the computer security threats it presents. Whilst casting doubt on the

theory, this reaction could also be considered to exemplify the differences in attitudes from

the separate demographics. The security threat was fairly widespread in both groups, yet,

no participant was particularly clear on what exactly the security threats were from file

sharing, suggestive of a ʻmoral panicʼ (Cohen, 1972) where the perceived threat presented

is based on the effects to the user instead of the financial effects to the recording industry.

These results therefore are more suggestive there is little to no consideration of legal

implications by the majority of users. Of the suggested social benefits of online sharing,

the practice seems more in line with a feature of subcultural music consumption (Wall,

2003) common within only particular groups of people, particularly noticeable in the

younger groups usage of p2p while they were at school age.

! 36

Page 37: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

Responses to Legal Issues & Industry Implications

! Surmising the responses to the legal implications of file sharing, based on the

subjects actions and interaction with p2p discussed above, can only go part of the way to

providing firm conclusions based on the thinking that their actions may demonstrate. In this

section, further weight is added to some of these initial suggestions by highlighting some

of the direct responses to what the participants believe are the surrounding legal issues of

file sharing, as well as what they understand as the potential implications for the music

industries. Particularly noticeable in these findings are the differences in thought between

the two age demographics.

! As mentioned in the earlier chapters, there have been a number of recent legal

cases of current providers of peer to peer facilities, such as the well documented trials of

ʻThe Pirate Bayʼ and ʻOiNKʼ in the media. Whilst many of the participants of both the focus

groups appeared to have no particular awareness of such cases, some limited knowledge

from Harry in the elder group and Pat from the younger group was demonstrated;

!! Harry: Yeah, Iʼve got a reasonable idea... Of course the pirate bay have been ! prosecuted havenʼt they? Allegedly they have been making a lot of money by ! selling advertising, alongside their download stuff. So thats one clear way its ! done. ! ! ! !

-------!! Pat: Pirate bay was a major name. It was one of the big torrent providers and ! people just sort of targeted it. They thought theyʼd take the big one out, but as soon ! as people see they canʼt use that one, theyʼll just go to another one, they donʼt ! disappear. People just didnʼt want them giving away free stuff.

! Steve: Yeah, what actually happened, what was the resolution?

! Pat: Theyʼve shut down.

! Steve: Oh they have shut down.

! Pat: I think someone took over, or someone bought the website or at least a share ! of it and decided they would try and do some sort of legal activity with it.

! 37

Page 38: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

In the end, the case was settled with the founders of The Pirate Bay sentenced to one year

imprisonment with substantial fines for ʻcopyright infringementʼ. In her studies of the Pirate

Bay case, Irmak Ertuna (2009, online), suggests that The Pirate Bay was more than just a

torrent site, it is instead ʻa symptom of the inherent contradictions embedded within a

capitalist societyʼ, echoing the similar opinions of Wall (2003) surrounding Napsterʼs case.

! Of the specific responses to the legality of digital piracy and sharing music online,

the clearest difference in collective thought of the the two groups was generated. Below is

an extract from the older group.

!

! Harry: Well, ʻillegalʼ means you havenʼt paid for it...

! Moderator: Is it stealing then?

! Harry: Thereʼs lots of debatable points about that, you can argue either way.

! Elli: I suppose theoretically, it is.

! Frank: Strictly speaking it is stealing.

! E: Yeah, theoretically it is.

Here the elder group, used to traditional models of retail consumption of media and music,

understand digital music piracy through file sharing as an illegal activity because no

payment has been made, despite the differences in all other areas of production and

distribution cost between digital music and physical music. To them, even obtaining a

digital music file without paying for it, is a form of stealing. Of course ʻtheftʼ and copyright

infringement are two different criminal acts, but perhaps the labeling of such forms of

activity as ʻtheftʼ by the RIAA (2009) and the BPI (2009) and mainstream media has helped

reenforced these opinions and understanding. Of course similar discourses would also

have been encountered by this group, during the ʻhome taping is killing musicʼ campaign

of the early 1980ʼs (McLeod, 2005). The blurring of the lines between copyright

! 38

Page 39: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

infringement and theft is what McLeod suggested was used as a tactic to reenforce the

monopoly of the major recording industry. These findings add particular support to this

claim, suggesting that older audiences who have had more exposure to recording industry

campaigns denouncing piracy, are more likely to think of copyright infringement as a form

of theft.

! Moving on to the group of younger participants, similar thoughts of theft were

echoed, with Clare stating, ʻif you pay for it [digital music] then itʼs legal (laughter) and then

if you donʼt, itʼs not.ʼ However a greater degree of apathy towards the legal issues

surrounding digital piracy was also evident, noticeable in the earlier identified interaction

with peer to peer facilities also, reiterating the facts for not downloading through peer to

peer amounted to technical and security reasons not legal reasons (see the last page of

transcript, appendix iv.).

! The generational differences in opinions towards the issues was also mentioned by

some of the subjects without any prompting. Harry states, citing the example of his own

Children, ʻThe kids donʼt understand. Well, a. they donʼt understand that itʼs illegal and b.

they donʼt care itʼs illegal. Itʼs getting it without paying for it isnʼt it?ʼ. Based on the

responses from my research, this seems to be largely untrue, there is some understanding

of the legal issues surrounding digital music piracy, but the responses given tend to be one

of apathy. Steve, from the younger group suggests a reason for the differences of opinion,

!

! ʻThereʼs an age issue here too. Because obviously, there are people who are over a ! certain age who have not gone through the same system and their buying habits ! have stayed the same as they were when they were younger.ʼ

It could be said that these different social and economic environments from physical to

digital consumption trends between the two generations, demonstrate similarities with

Harwoodʼs (1997) findings between different aged audiences. And therefore the changing

trends and following of normative social behaviour (Watt, Lea & Spears, 2002) play a big ! 39

Page 40: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

part in the polarising of opinions and difference between generational responses over

digital piracy and peer to peer sharing. The ʻdifferent systemʼ described by Steve during

the focus group, highlights an understanding that he and his peers have had a different

experience to those of an older generation, in support of Livingstoneʼs (2004) suggestion

for the term ʻusersʼ over audiences or consumers as they are more likely to interact than

consume online media.

! Of their believed significance file sharing has for the music industry, the groups

displayed an array of responses. The following extracts are taken from the older group;

!

! Elli: I donʼt understand the legal stuff

! Pete: The danger is, particularly with smaller bands, is that at the end of the day ! you are depriving them of the income they need to record their next album or do ! their next tour... you can effectively end up killing that band off.

! Elli: But somebody must be making some money somewhere then, surely?

! Frank: But itʼs not the band

This passage provides evidence that members in this group, believe that the majority of

income for musicians, particularly less prolific artists, is provided by their record sales. This

may be true in some instances, but the younger participants contributions suggested

otherwise with Steve stressing;

!! ʻThings are going to change if everyone wants them to. You canʼt just make what ! everyone does criminal. Theres a lot less people telling you its criminal, than the ! people that do it and think they should be allowed to.ʼ

In the above quote, Steve displays greater acceptance to commercial change in music

than that of the older participants, suggesting that how consumers act regarding their

consumption trends is unalterable by regulation. The younger group also particularly

identified with the idea that file sharing presents greater financial opportunities elsewhere

for music, contrasting entirely with the thoughts of the older group. Pat believes, ! 40

Page 41: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

! ʻThe artists donʼt actually get that much money from a CD sale, they make their ! money from other means like merchandise and concerts and things. Like you said ! before, if you had 300 people in Germany, who would come to a show if you were ! there. Theyʼre still going to make money from it.ʼ

These are findings that would support McLeodʼs (2005) sentiments of anti-commercial

copyright legislation and the greater benefits that freely available music brings. The extract

below shows that members of the younger groups discussion; in support of a particular

band or artist, they are more likely purchase a ticket to see them perform, rather than their

latest record.

! Clare: If i want to buy something though, iʼll buy a gig ticket instead or something ! like that and Iʼll think that Iʼm supporting the band that way.

! Steve: There another point right there. I think live music has gone up massively in ! the last 10 years.

This understanding of the wider income channels available in the music industries also

demonstrates a more up to date understanding of exactly what the term ʻmusic industryʼ

entails. Williamson and Cloonanʼs (2007) arguments against the wide spread use of the

term, based on my findings, suggest older generations are indeed more inclined to

understand the term equating to the recording industry as displayed in the extract below.

!! Pete: I was going to say that I think the music industry is a dead dinosaur and it just ! doesnʼt know it yet.

! Harry: Well thats right yeah, they are definitely missing a trick though, its this long ! tail thing, [to moderator] which no doubt youʼve heard of. Everythingʼs concentrated ! up here right in the peak of sales, then theres this massive distribution curve, with ! stuff at the end where you might sell two downloads a year or whatever and theres ! millions of songs like that.

Also evident above in Harryʼs comment, is an understanding of the benefits for music

retail, online commerce can have, even referencing the Long Tail model (Anderson, 2006)

! 41

Page 42: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

discussed in the earlier chapters. Harry was however the only advocate of this type

understanding, and the rest of the group leant towards their more traditional forms of

music consumption as comparison, describing that when buying physical music from

websites such as large online retailers like amazon, there was widespread use of the

amazons ʻrecommended itemsʼ facility promoting music for sale based on purchases they

had already made.

! This phenomenon of the recording industries actions and the following responses

from consumers could be described to be an prime example of Michel de Certeauʼs idea of

ʻstrategies and tacticsʼ (1984). The ʻstrategiesʼ of the structures of power in the

relationship, in this case, the recording industries retention of traditional retail models and

the discourse that it equates to the music industry (BPI, 2009), verses the ʻtacticsʼ of their

consumers. This investigation finds that between the two age demographics studied, the

response tactics are identifiably different. Whilst the older group do create their own space

to an extent, through their skepticism of recording industry practices, their consumption

habits and opinion demonstrate stronger ties with the recording industry discourse of

illegality and theft. The younger group however, seemed much more separated from these

strategies, demonstrable in their greater endorsement of file sharing, anti-commercial

remarks and greater reluctance to trust media and government regulation and law

regarding copyright infringement.

! Based on the focus group responses identified above, they suggest audiences are

completely aware that there are considerable legal issues surrounding file sharing,

however their opinions and responses to the legitimacy are separated between the

generations. The evidence provided by the younger demographic provides plenty of

support for the theories of McLeod (2005) in particular in their justification for copyright,

whereas the older demographic, whilst understanding of the complaints against incorrect

applications of copyright law, demonstrated a much more accepting response for its

! 42

Page 43: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

necessity against the prevention of theft. Applying the theories of music retail and

commerce presented by Anderson (2006) and Dubber (2007), many of the pariticipants

seemed aware of the changes online commerce was having and should have, yet there

was an apparent reaction that the recording industry is reluctant to develop along with

them. If as Fisher (2001) suggests, copyright is there to protect the personal element of

artistic creations and not necessarily the associated financial assets of such work, industry

applications of copyright sending the wrong messages to audiences about what it is there

to achieve. The noted differences of opinion in the application of copyright between the

two groups add considerable weight to the arguments presented by Garofalo (2003),

performing the balancing act between the two sides of the debate, preventing the financial

exploitations of free music, whilst managing a freedom of access to consumers.

! !

! 43

Page 44: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

Conclusions

! One thing that can be said in confidence based on the results of this investigation,

is that audience opinions on the justifications for copyright law, in relationship to digital

music are certainly divided. Whilst there is a widespread adaptation to digital media

consumption trends, there is a distinct generational difference in the ways in which

different demographics source music digitally. Older generations seemingly fall into line

with traditional models of commerce, purchasing music in physical formats and

understanding online copyright infringement as a form of theft. New, younger audiences

however, having grown up in a time when the internet was becoming more accessible to

more users, with online sharing increasingly prevalent, display a more relaxed attitude

when it comes to obtaining digital media files. Whilst they understand they are potentially

going against the grain of the recording industryʼs wishes, they seem to show a distaste

and rebellion against their ideals.

! This paradigm shift in music consumption in the online environment is something

copyright has, and is, failing to adapt to. During the process of writing this dissertation, a

number of developments have occurred concerning the legal implementation of copyright

for the digital environment. Based on the contents of the Digital Britain Report (DCMS &

BIS, 2009), a new government bill was drafted in an attempt to reform copyright legislation

regarding digital media. The bill entitled ʻThe Digital Economy Billʼ (DCMS & BIS, 2010),

after little debate and scrutiny in the House of Commons, was pushed through in the ʻwash

upʼ before the election of a new government in the UK. Despite all the calls for digital

copyright reform, there has still been mass opposition and criticism for the new law, and

what new legal implications it presents for digital piracy and the users of file sharing

facilities.

! 44

Page 45: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

! Organisations such as the Open Rights Group are actively campaigning against the

new laws in the bill stating that disconnecting peoples internet connection is a

ʻdisproportionate response to alleged copyright infringement and will breach citizens’

fundamental human rights, including their freedoms of expression and association.’ (2010)

! Online infringement is the result of the absence of legitimate markets and licensing regimes. The legal market has failed to satisfy the desire of music fans to use new technological possibilities to access music as easily as possible. Illicit use of peer-to-peer technologies has filled the gap. (Open Rights Group, 2010)

Such a reaction to these new legal measures, along with the findings of this investigation,

further support the argument, that an overhaul of copyright for digital media is imperative,

and this new bill fails to adhere to these needs. Indeed many of the theories discussed

throughout this dissertation display an overwhelming agreement that the recording industry

has failed to adapt to the online environment successfully, paving the way for audiences to

develop their own ideas.

! As time moves on and older audiences are replaced by current younger audiences

and online users, the gap between industry and audience will only increase, unless

copyright is suitably adjusted to perform the necessary balancing act between the two

(Fisher, 2001 & Garofalo, 2003). The current use of copyright seems structured around the

need to protect the income of the recording industry, arguably responsible for the division

and cause for debate in the first instance. The aggressive tactics proposed in new

legislation can only furthermore enhance this drift.

! It is incredibly hard to predict the future based on the past, widespread use of new

ʻfeels like freeʼ models may perhaps produce noticeable changes in audiences music

consumption, reducing the use of illicit file sharing in the near future, and todayʼs children

will grow up with a completely different set of music consumption habits. This study opens

! 45

Page 46: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

up plenty of areas for further investigation, particularly in the way different generations are

introduced to new models of consumption. A wider more comprehensive study of a bigger

audience quota, would also strengthen and challenge many of the presented arguments to

a greater degree. Whilst no one really knows what future changes and the implications

they will have for recorded music consumption, change will, and must happen.

! 46

Page 47: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

Bibliography

Anderson, C. (2006)! The Long Tail: How Endless Choice is Creating Unlimited Demand, ! London: Random House

Baker, C. E. (2002)! Media, Markets and Democracy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Barbour, R. (2007)! Doing Focus Groups! London: Sage

Bertrand, I. & Hughes, P (2005)! Media Research Methods: Audiences, Institutions & Texts! Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan

Bourdieu, P. (1984)! Cited in Wall (2003), Studying Popular Music Culture, p. 172, London: Arnold

Boyd, D.M. & Ellison, N.B. (2007)! Social Network Sites: Definition, History, Scholarship! Michigan State University

British Phonographic Industry (2009)! Copyright (Online) - http://www.bpi.co.uk/music-business/article/copyright.aspx! [Accessed October 2009]!

Bruns, A. (2008)! The Future Is User-Led: The Path Towards Widespread Produsage,! Perth: Fibreculture Journal, 15-18

Certeau, M. de (1984)! The Practice of Everyday Life, ! Los Angeles: University of California Press!Clarke, J., Hall, S., Jefferson, T. & Roberts, B. (1976)! Subcultures, Cultures and Class: A Theoretical Overview, Resistance Through ! Rituals: Youth Subcultures in Post-war Britain [Ed. Hall, S. & Jefferson, T], pp 9-79, ! London: Hutchinson

Cohen, S. (1972)! Folk Devils and Moral Panics (Third Edition), London: Routledge

DCMS & BIS (2009)! Digital Britain Report! UK Government: Department for Culture, Media & Sport, Department for Business ! Innovation and Skills

! 47

Page 48: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

DCMS & BIS (2010)! Digital Economy Act, Chapter 24! UK Government: Department for Culture, Media & Sport, Department for Business ! Innovation and Skills

Dubber, A. (2007)! The 20 Things You Must Know About Music Online, ! E-Book: http://www.newmusicstrategies.com/ebook/ [Accessed Dec 2009]

Ertuna, I. (2009)! Digital Pirates and the Enclosure of the Intellect, ! Darkmatter Journal, Issue 5: Pirates & Piracy! Online: www.darkmatter101.org!Fern, E.F. (2001)! Advanced Focus Group Research! California: Sage!Fisher, W. (2001)! Theories of Intellectual Property, (in Stephen Munzer, ed) New Essays in the Legal ! and Political Theory of Property, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Garofalo, R. (1999)! From Music Publishing to MP3: Music and Industry in the Twentieth Century, ! American Music 17:3, pp 318-354, Illinois: University of Illinois Press

Garofalo, R. (2003)! I Want My MP3: Who Owns Internet Music, Policing Pop, pp. 30-45! Philadelphia: Temple University Press

Harrison, A. (2005)! Music The Business: The Essential Guide to the Law and Deals (3rd Edition), ! London: Virgin

Harwood, J. (1997)! Viewing Age: Lifespan Identity and television viewing choices, Journal of ! Broadcasting & Electronic Media 41:2, pp. 203-213, Routledge

Hesmondhalgh, D. (2002)! Popular Music Audiences and Everyday Life, Popular Music Studies [Ed. ! Hesmondhalgh, D. & Negus, K], London: Arnold

Hills, M. (2002)! Fan Cultures! London: Routledge

Huang, CY. (2005)! File Sharing as a Form of Music Consumption! International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 9:4, pp 37 - 55, !

! 48

Page 49: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

Johnson, B. & Kiss, J. (2009)! Pirate Bay owners pledge to fight again after court jails them for copyright theft,! Guardian (Online): http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/apr/18/pirate-! bay-prison-sentences-sweden! [Accessed Dec 2009]

Jones, S. (2000)! Music and The Internet! Rethinking the Music Industry, Popular Music 19:2, pp. 217-230! Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Kitzinger, J. (1994)! ʻThe Methodology of Focus Groups: The Importance of Interaction Between ! Research Participantsʼ, Sociology of Health & Illness, 16:1, pp 103 - 121

Krueger, R.A. (1994)! Focus Groups: A Practical Guide For Applied Research (Second Edition)! London: Sage

Kusek, D. & Leonhard, G. (2005)! The Future of Music: Manifesto for the Digital Music Revolution,! Boston: Berklee Press

Ku, RSR. (2002)! Creative Destruction of Copyright: Napster and the New Economics of Digital ! Technology! Chicago: University of Chicago Law Review!Lazarsfeld, P.F. (1942)! The Effects of Radio on Public Opinion, in Print, Radio & Film in a Democracy [Ed. ! Waples, D.], Chicago: University of Chicago Press

Leonhard, G. (2008)! Music 2.0: Essays by Gerd Leonhard, ! Mediafuturist (Gerd Leonhard), www.mediafuturist.com

Lewis, J. (1991)! The Ideological Octopus: An Exploration of Television and its Audience, ! London: Routledge

Livingstone, S. (2004)! The Challenge of Changing Audiences: Or, What is the Audience Researcher to do ! in the Age of the Internet, European Journal of Communication 19:1, pp. 75-86,! London: Routledge!

Longhurst, B. (2007)! Popular Music & Society (Second Edition)! Cambridge: Polity Press

Lunt, P. & Livingstone, S. (1996)! Rethinking the Focus Group in Media and Communication Research, Journal of ! Communication 46:2, pp. 79-98!! 49

Page 50: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

Mascheroni, G. et al (2008)! Young Italiansʼ Cross Media Culturesʼ, Observatiorio Journal 4, pp 13 - 32

McLeod, K. (2005)! MP3s Are Killing Home Taping: The Rise of Internet Distribution and Its Challenge ! to the Major Label Music Monopoly, Popular Music and Society 28:4, pp 521-531, ! London: Routledge

McLuhan, M. (1964)! Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man! London: Routledge

Menn, J. (2003)! All The Rave: The Rise & Fall of Shawn Fanningʼs Napster! New York: Crown Business

Merriden, T. (2001)! Irresistible Forces: The Business Legacy of Napster & the Growth of the ! Underground Internet! Oxford: Capstone

Morgan, D.L. (1997)! Focus Groups as Qualitative Research [Second Edition], Qualitative Research ! Methods: Series 16, Thousand Oaks: Sage

Myška, M. (2009)! Flat Fee Music, Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology, 2:1!Negroponte, N. (1995)! Being Digital! London: Hodder & Stoughton

Open Rights Group (2010)! Consultation on Legislation to Address Illicit Peer-to-Peer (P2P) File-Sharing,! Open Rights Group [Online: Accessed April 2010)! http://www.openrightsgroup.org/ourwork/reports/consultation-on-p2p-file-sharing!Recording Industry Association of America (2009)! Piracy: Online & On the Street - http://www.riaa.com/physicalpiracy.php! [Accessed December 2009]

Rogers, G. (2010)! OiNK man no guilty! BBC 6 Music News (Online): ! http://www.bbc.co.uk/6music/news/20100107_oink.shtml! [Accessed Jan 2010]

Siwek, S. (2007)! The True Cost of Sound Recording Piracy to the U.S. Economy,! Institute for Policy Innovation: Policy Report 188

! 50

Page 51: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

Sparrow, A. (2006)! Music Distribution And The Internet: A Legal Guide for the Music Business,!! Aldershot: Gower

Straw, W. (1997)! Sizing Up Record Collections: Gender and connoisseurship in rock music culture,! in Seeing the Groove: Popular Music & Gender [Ed. Whiteley, S.]! London: Routledge

Vale, J. (2009)! Piracy, Pinolas and the Internet! Brisbane: ANZCA09 Communication, Creativity and Global Citizenship!Wall, T. (2003)! Studying Popular Music Culture, London: Arnold!Watt, S.E., Lea, M. & Spears, R. (2002)! How Social is Internet Communication? A Reappraisal of Bandwidth and Anonymity ! Effects, in Virtual Society: Technology, Cyberbole, Reality [Ed. Woolgar, S.]! Oxford: Oxford University Press

Williamson, J. & Cloonan, M. (2007)! Rethinking the Music Industry, Popular Music 26:2, pp. 305-322! Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

! 51

Page 52: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

Appendices

i. Research Participant Consent Form 53

ii. List of Participants 54

iii. Focus Group 1 Transcription - 40 to 60 year olds 55

iv. Focus Group 2 Transcription - 20 to 25 year olds 74

! 52

Page 53: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

Research Consent Form for Focus Group Participants

Topic: ! Digital Music Consumption

Researcher:!David Breese

! ! Undergraduate Dissertation Project: BA (Hons) Media & Communication

Institution:! Birmingham School of Media, Birmingham City University, UK

You are being given this form as an invited participant of a research focus group for an undergraduate dissertation project. The topic of discussion being ʻdigital music consumptionʼ. The focus group will be directed by a moderator, but is designed to incite as much natural conversation and discussion as possible.

The following discussion will be audio recorded and transcribed for analysis, forming part of the research for my dissertation project.

You are required to fill out the following information form before participating, however you should be aware that the focus group remains completely anonymous. False names will be given and reference to anything said or discussed within the groups will not be linked to your real identity in any way. I am the only person which will have access to the details submitted on this form.

It should also be understood by all parties that, you are agreeing to participate at your own free will and are able to withdraw your participation at any time.

A copy of the final research document will be made available in the library at Birmingham City University and potentially published on a wider scale in the future.

By signing below you have understood and agree to the above terms and provide consent for your participation in the research focus group.

Your Name: _____________________________________________________________

D.O.B:! _____/______/__________

Occupation: ____________________________________________________________

Tel: _________________________! E-mail: _________________________________

Signature: ! __________________________________! Date: _____/______/2010

Thank you for your participation in my research, if you have any further questions please feel free to contact me. A copy of this form is provided for your personal records.

Tel: xxxxxxxxxxxx! ! E-mail: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

David Breese! ! Signature: ___________________ Date: ____/______/2010! 53

Page 54: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

List of Research Participants

Focus Group 1: 40 to 60 Year Olds

False Name Birthdate Occupation

Sarah 24 Apr 1965 Admin Clerk

Harry 9 Apr 1962 Sales

Rachel 2 Jan 1965 Admin Manager

Pete 8 May 1962 Library Systems Manager

Elli 5 Nov 1951 Customer Service Officer

Frank 3 Aug 1953 Oil Terminal Controller

Focus Group 2 - 20 to 25 Year Olds

False Name Birthdate Occupation

Mark 2 Apr 1987 Student (Undisclosed)

Clare 14 Jul 1989 Shop Manager

Pat 19 May 1989 Student (Computer Science)

Katie 22 Jun 1989 Student (Design)

Steve 20 Feb 1988 Market Researcher

! 54

Page 55: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

Focus Group 1 Transcript - 40 to 60 Year Olds

6 Participants aged between 40 and 60 years. For confidentiality, the participants are given false names. All participants agreed to ad signed to the consent form before proceeding.

Key:

M: Moderator, H: Harry, P: Pete, R: Rachel, F: Frank, E: Elli, S: Sarah

M: The subject of my research is digital music consumption, initially Iʼm interested in your own digital music consumption - do you own mp3 players?

Harry: Of course (Laughter). How many?

M: Yeah? so youʼve had quite a few then?

H: Iʼve mp3 players for going on, must be ten years I should think.

P: Ditto.

H: Way before the iPod came out.

P: I had one of the first hard drive based ones...I had a creative labs 10GB one which was about the first one to have a hard drive

R: Creative Labs was the first one that I had but it was much smaller than that. And then it took me a while to go iPod route and I went, Nano. But now Iʼve got an iPhone and that (pause) thats brilliant because it does everything. (laughter & agreement) ...itʼs easy.

P: Iʼm a great believer in having tools for the job, I like a phone that mostly does phone and a mp3 player that mostly does music. (Chuckles from group)

R: Nah nah, you see I have that, and it does everything.

F: Iʼve got the cheap Nokia version

P: I mean my phone does play mp3ʼs but I donʼt use it for that. The only thing I use mp3ʼs on the phone for is specific ringtones for specific people.

H: Itʼs surprising how difficult it is to get a phone mp3 player thats actually got a sensible jack socket, thats you can plug a normal pair of headphones into.

M: Do mp3ʼs dominate your general consumption of music then?

P: (Interrupting) No... I mean for home, physical music is always my first choice.

E: (to Frank) I think you would say the same, wouldnʼt you?

F: yeah the same yeah, exactly the same (pause) and vinyl for choice! 55

Page 56: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

P: For various reasons. I like to read the lyrics while Iʼm listening to something. Er, which is difficult to do on any mp3 player. I mean, iTunes provide a lyric facility, if you can find a downloadable lyric file in the right format. Again, like [Frank] for preference, I do prefer vinyl because I like the tone, I prefer the warmth you get from vinyl. The size of the thing as well, I mean the fact you can read the lyrics with the lights half down. Although, I must admit sometimes when Iʼm listening to things on CD, Iʼm starting to use a laptop.

H: So your 90% of the way to going fully digital then? Listening to music on a laptop.

P: Yeah, but unless you sample at very high quality, and if you do that you lose the space on a portable player where you donʼt need good quality, you donʼt even get the quality of a CD with most mp3ʼs or wmaʼs or whatever because theres always gonna be a loss.

F: I must say I donʼt understand how it compresses it, but itʼs always been the case that if you compress it, youʼve got to loose quality, because youʼve got to chop bits off. Either top and bottom or...

P: Itʼs very noticeable with a lot of download stuff if you just download to be able to listen to something rather than to go to a site where its to actually download it and burn it to a CD. That if you play it through on a graphic, you can see the top and bottom completely chopped.

F: Oh right, yeah.

R: See, I suppose Iʼm different because you say download it to burn it to a CD. Now, you see, that wouldnʼt occur to me.

H: What you mean burn it to a CD as an MP3.

R: Yeah I mean Iʼve got it on the computer. (Stutters) Iʼve still got all my CDʼs, I havenʼt got my vinyl anymore, I donʼt use the CDʼs at all.

H: I must admit thats the way I tend to buy things. Iʼll buy a CD then immediately rip it onto various machines and then Iʼll stick it in a cupboard and occasionally it comes out but,

R: yeah thats right.

Moderator:Would you say then, whilst you use digital music, does it all predominantly come from CDʼs?

H: Urm. Iʼve downloaded about 3 or 4 albums, ever, and those have all been in the last 6 months. Because Iʼd never actually purchases an mp3 download. I have got some illegal ones, not ones that listen too particualrly often, but Iʼve got some.

R: Yeah, yeah, Iʼve got some illegal. I spose iʼve got... I use iTunes a lot, I have used Napster er, what I really want is an invite to Spotify so I donʼt have to pay for it. (Laughter)

(together) F: Iʼve got that P: Iʼve downloaded that

H: I havenʼt understood Spotify yet. ! 56

Page 57: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

R: You can stream anything, thatʼs it. Okay you donʼt download it, but you just stream it.

P: Well streaming, if you use winamp and you go to the winamp radio site there are umpteen thousand streaming radio sites. (Inaudible) but yeah you go on there and theres several thousand people all streaming their music collections.

H: you can to say then with internet radio and mobile technology, whats the future for DAB then? I think its very questionable, shutting down 6 music for example. In terms of broadcasting though, I think internet radio has all the legs on it which DAB hasnʼt.

Further discussion about radio FM and US am radio. approx 6:00 - 6:30

S: Iʼve used Limewire in the past.

Moderator: You say youʼve used Limewire?

S: Yeah. I did subscribe to limewire. We didnʼt download without the subscription. Erm, but now itʼs deleted, I donʼt know what my sons use (laughter) but yeah, Limewire I used to get a lot of my music. DVDʼs too, because you could download films too, so, it was really good.

P: Theres been a number of bands that I follow, that one of the options when buying a CD has been download the tracks at CD quality and burn the CD yourself and then you also get all the cover and so on to print yourself. Iʼve done that with about 3 or 4 bands.

F: Iʼve only ever downloaded one album, and I have to admit to feeling slightly guilty because it was an illegal one.(chuckles) Which is stupid I know but (pauses) perhaps Iʼm a dinosaur, I dunno, but I still, or perhaps I earn enough that if I want to buy some music, I go out and buy it.

P: I mean (pauses) when it comes to raising money, I think its down to the band. It shouldnʼt be down to either their record companies, if they have one, or somebody who says I donʼt want to pay for music to decide whether or not a CD, or a set of their music, should be charged for. You know, if a band wants to give away their stuff, its fine. Erm, the band thats just won the um (pauses) BBC Folk Awards for best duo, erm ʻShow of Handsʼ say you have to pay for their CDʼs if you buy them online, but then you are free to make as many copies as you like and then give them to your friends because then hopefully it will get those friends to their gigs.

M: How do you view sharing music online then? Does that work in a similar vein?

P: Yeah, I mean again, with streaming its a lot of the time better than downloading mp3ʼs, because you people the option to listen to stuff without them being able to take it and then if you want to be able to make a career out of it or more importantly a living out of it urm ... then... the option is there to go and buy it whether is by download or CD or otherwise. I actually havenʼt bought a CD in a music shop for a long time, even when I buy, I buy everything online, because the range is great.

(General murmurs of agreement)

! 57

Page 58: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

E: The last time you a bought a CD was the other week wasnʼt it, you usually by yours online donʼt you? (to Frank)

F: Yeah I normally do yeah. I forget the site I normally use. Just happened we were out shopping, and [Elli] went to get a pair of shoes; Iʼll see you in HMV. I always have a look round and see what theyʼve got on the sale.

(murmurs of agreement)

F: I got a triple, a double and single CD for 12 quid, I thought Iʼll have them.

E: and you will keep on doing that wonʼt you, youʼll keep on buying CDʼs rather then downloading it wonʼt you?

F: Yeah. Thinking back to the old days of taping, when we all had cassette players in the car. I would never buy a pre-recorded cassette.

R: Oh no.

F: Iʼd buy the album and tape it, to play it in the car. It seemed more permanent then, Iʼd got the album.

P: Yeah exactly, I think the other thing is, itʼs how you listen to music. If Iʼve got the mp3 on, in the car or on the headphones or whatever, its normally always music as background. Iʼm not really listening to it.

E: Yeah, if you use mp3 players, its usually if you go the gym or something like that. For a purpose, whereas if your at home you listen to your vinyl or your CDʼs.

P: Yeah, if Iʼm at home, I donʼt have music as background at all. If I have music at home, itʼs to listen to, and that means sitting down in front of the speakers and listening.

H: I think a lot of people do that though, itʼs probably a relative minority there. Often, or very frequently when Iʼm listening to music, Iʼm driving at the same time, or Iʼm on the train or whatever. Frankly speaking, if youʼve got an engine roaring away, who cares about the fine details of the [audio] quality. Sometimes the opportunity to actually sit down and listen to something (laughs) isnʼt always there. Thereʼs other things going on in the house as well (pause) or Iʼm working, you know, sitting at a PC.

R: Yeah thats right, yeah yeah. I donʼt think I do just sit down and listen to music. Iʼll always be doing something else, whether it be reading or whatever. I donʼt just sit and listen.

P: Weʼll you see theres no point to me just sitting listening and reading, beacuse Iʼd never hear what Iʼm listening to, Iʼm so concentrating on the book. I think a bomb could off next door and Iʼd barely notice if Iʼm reading.

F: (interrupts) I agree with you, I like to sit a and listen. I donʼt switch it on that often, but when I do, Iʼll sit and listen.

P: and therefore Iʼd sit and listen to whole sides and whole albums.

F: Yeah, Yeah. ! 58

Page 59: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

P: I do have a CD jukebox, which sometimes Iʼll put on random play, particularly at the end of an evening when I canʼt be bothered to pick anything else out.

Moderator: So digital music is more of a convenience then?

(All agree)E: Yeah, I would say that, it serves a purpose.

P: We do now have a computer hooked up to the hi-fi, but this is partly because erm. Iʼm not sure if I should mention this, but a friend of mine who is in the states, somehow got hold of a copy of a hard drive from an american radio station. Which I now have a copy of (laughs), which is about 500GB of assorted albums. But most of it, is now stuff that if I hadnʼt got it that way, that I wouldnʼt even consider buying. Some of it has just saying me digitising bits of my vinyl collection.

H: Thats hard work that is, digitising vinyl.

P: Itʼs not.

H: It is...

E: Have you tried it?

H: Yeah, audacity is a programme that you can get quite easily which does that. But once youʼve divided it up into tracks and put in the track names and got rid of the pops and crackles. Itʼs a of work and frankly itʼs not worth it.

(General laughter)

P: Most of my vinylʼs not got any pops and crackles.

H: Everybody's got pops and crackles.

P: Yeah but I just leave it on there.

F: Yeah I donʼt mind the pops.

H: That does have an interest side effect actually. That pop or crackle you remember because youʼd spilt beer on it or whatever when you were 15 or something..

(Group Laughter).

H: It is preserved on the record, and thatʼs good.

P: Thats true, there are some tracks that just donʼt sound right if they donʼt have a noise in a certain place.

Moderator: Lets discuss downloading habits. Would you buy? or weʼve used the term ʻillegal downloadʼ, what does that mean to you?

H: Well illegal means you havenʼt paid for it. ! 59

Page 60: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

P: Well no, illegal means you havenʼt paid for it, when the band want you to pay for it.

H.. well yeah (group agrees)

P: ... or in more cases their record company.

H: It always used to be the case, the music was tied to the physical medium and ofcourse that is not not only the case but is the business model the music industry has worked with up to abut 10 years ago, and thats whats changed. Thats why they deem it as being illegal to copy it, even to tape it. Everyone remembers ʻhome taping is killing musicʼ.

(murmurs of agreement)

S: (inaudible...its different. Thereʼs companies putting it on there for you to download it, whether you want to pay for it or not, theyʼve still got in on there for you to download it, it comes into a totally different...

P: (interrupts) The big difference between ʻhome taping is kiliing musicʼ and the current situation is that home taping was never as good as what you were taping it from, whereas if you copy a CD or rip it a CD quality, you end up with something that is as good as the original.

H: So home taping now is killing music, whereas before, it wasnʼt but they said it was. For example, if you look at the pirate bay. Thats their whole logo, with the skull and cross bones and the pirate ship. They are pirates!

P: Now you get more and more bands that arenʼt using the conventional record companies anyway because, itʼs so cheap to bulk press CDʼs. You donʼt have to have a big studio, you can equip a home digital studio for peanuts of what it used to cost. And even if you do use a professional studio, ʻMostly Autumnʼ [Band] asked their fans to pay for the record in advance and then used to money to pay for their studio time.

H: I think theres a business model question going on. Apart from the legalities and moralities, technologies even of it all, you know what is it thats kept the music industry going for past 50 years, or whatever it is, was, in part anyway, people buying singles and so on. Thats how the pop music industry was invented. (pauses) and a side effect of that, if you like, is that it was dominated by the top 40. Most sales anyway are dominated by the top 40, and thats tended to have been the case for the last 50 years. But now, they are still trying to maintain the same business model, but itʼs dominated by the top 40, top 100, whatever, when theres, if you consider the whole catalogue of music out there its probably millions long and they only play a tiny fraction of whats available.

P: That is exactly right, if theres one thing, theres no doubt, the digital revolution has done has made music much more widely available to people.

E: Yeah, more accessible to people.

P: When we were in school, college or whatever. Once you liked a certain type of music, if you wanted to hear that type of music, you were limited to what was played on the radio, which tended to mean one specialist show once a week.

! 60

Page 61: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

F: John Peel, yeah... (laugher)

P: ...or if you were lucky to have local radio station with specialist music shows, you may get another injection. Um and what your peer group listened to.

F: Yeah, yeah.

P: and that made it very limited. On the whole you only listened to a very limited number of bands. Now, if you like a particular style of music and you start investigating on the web, and you find all sorts of things on the fringes of it....

....Nowadays everybody likes something slightly different. You donʼt get groups of people all liking exactly the same kinds of music.

H: I still think the music industry has not made enough effort to broaden out, okay you can get stuff, but is it really publicised. I donʼt think so.

F: No, no, I donʼt think it is.

P: I was going to say that I think the music industry is a dead dinosaur and it just doesnʼt know it yet.

H: Well thats right yeah, they are definitely missing a trick though, its this long tail thing, [to moderator] which no doubt youʼve heard of. Everythingʼs concentrated up here right in the peak of sales, then theres this massive distribution curve, with stuff at the end where you might sell two downloads a year or whatever and theres millions of songs like that.

P: The bands who are making a living from it are the bands who have stepped away from the music industry and have started their own labels, they do all their own distribution, um they find their own tours, and then they make money touring. Which of course is another way the model has changed, you used to tour to promote an album and the tour lost money.

F: Yeah.

P: in most cases now, certainly below the stadium level, you make money.

(20:30 - Omitted conversation about live music performances.)

M: Earlier we discussed different services such as Limewire and The Pirate Bay, does anyone have an understanding of how these companies work?

H: Yeah, Iʼve got a reasonable idea. Well, selling advertising is one thing, of course the pirate bay have been prosecuted havenʼt they? Allegedly they have making a lot of money by selling advertising, alongside their download stuff. So thats one clear way its done.

Itʼs peer to peer isnʼt it? Itʼs come from somebody else PC, or several probably, to yours.

P: A number of the less reputable ones, if you can have less reputable pirates use spyware and malware and all sorts as a way of generating extra money.

H: Iʼm not sure if the pirate bay have done that! 61

Page 62: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

P: No, no I wasnʼt thinking of pirate bay, but as I say there are sites out there. I mean erm, I found some links on ʻBrain damageʼ, which is a Pink floyd site, to a number of Pink Floyd downloadable bootlegs and two of those came up, my antivirus software just said ʻyou are not opening this siteʼ, there is something very nasty trying to get into your system.

M: Music such as bootlegs is interesting, because theyʼre not commercially available.

P: Well yeah, the other interesting thing is that it depends on where you live. I have a mate who has been out in the states for years and has amassed an enormous collection of bootlegs, because only the recording of bootlegs is illegal in the states. Once they are recorded there is no law against distributing them. So theyʼve been available in specialist record shops since someone decided it would a good idea to tape gigs.

M: its the legality of sharing music that is a topic iʼm interested in. When using peer to peers who do you believe is at fault?

(inaudible brief mass discussion)

H: The kids donʼt understand. Well a. they donʼt understand that itʼs illegal and b. they donʼt care itʼs illegal. Itʼs getting it without paying for it isnʼt it.

F: Yeah.

M: Is it stealing then?

H: Thereʼs lots of debatable points about that, you can argue either way.

E: I suppose theoretically it is.

F: Strictly speaking it is stealing.

E: Yeah theoretically, it is.

P:.. and think thats why it should be down to the band about how they make their music available. If they have signed a record contract, they have signed that away and its not up to them. Until they negotiate a new contract, they are stuck with what theyʼve signed.

H: Thereʼs two cases really isnʼt there. If youʼve already got the CD or youʼve already got it on vinyl from years ago and you go and download it again. Is that illegal? I suggest youʼd probably win a case in court because youʼve already got a copy of it in the first place, youʼve already paid for it. Nevertheless, the music companies will tell you its illegal, right? So thatʼs one case and then of course theres the other case where you havenʼt got any such thing and your getting it free of charge and that almost certainly is illegal. And uploading is almost certainly more illegal because youʼre allowing lots more people to do it as well.

E: Hmm, I donʼt understand all the legal stuff.

! 62

Page 63: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

P: The danger is, particularly with smaller bands, is that at the end of the day you are depriving them of the income they need to record their next album or do their next tour or whatever.

F: Hmmm

P: you can end up effectively killing that band off.

E: But somebody must be making some money somewhere then, surely?

F: But itʼs not the band. E: No, its not the band.

P: Thats why more and more bands now are doing their own thing.

E: Yeah.

H: I think some of these ʻall you can eatʼ type download licenses you can get, are what I suspect strongly is what the actual amount of money that gets back to the band... they donʼt even know what youʼve listened to for heavens sake, most of the time. So the morality of that has got to be highly questionable.

M: What about if it was released physically, would that be any different?

H: Well at least it would be easier to get an idea of how many copies theyʼve sold.

P: Part of that same argument applies to whole performing rights thing anyway. You know, if you played nothing but obscure bands in your store or what have you, no information of that would ever get back to the [PRS] because theres no tracking of what you play.

H: Yeah, the performing rights society has got a huge problem I think.

F: Yeah I had a really obscure phone call at work last friday, from the performing rights people. This is an oil terminal, you know. They asked, do you have any music there? I said well radio 2ʼs usually on somewhere and they came back said you need a license.

Rest of group - Yeah, oh yeah, absolutely.

H: Yeah, at my wives work theyʼve been told to switch the radios off because of that. Theres all sorts of areas of dodgy stuff, but how the heck is it the performing rights society knows what your listening to?

(Laughter)

H: Theres no way, theres way they know, all they are doing is keeping themselves in business.

P: Yep, and its digital licensing thats based on a [similar] model, thats the problem. Which is why on the whole its the smaller bands who have taken things into their own hands.

! 63

Page 64: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

H: Well I think we can see there, its a new business model thats starting to emerge and bypasses the record companies and the rest of it and its very immature at this point, I mean its not mainstream is it?

P: No. But it can be quite interesting because it was only recently after talking to someone from ʻMostly Autumnʼ at cambridge that I discovered, Amazon had come to them, asking if they could sell their records. Because theyʼd had a lot of searches on Amazon, but amazon didnʼt stock them because mostly autumn were releasing them through thir own record company. And so mostly autumn were able to cut a fairly favourably deal for themselves.

H: Not bad, not bad.

F: Well thats great, because its a fairly obscure band and they seem to be making their own way which is great. And actually good for amazon, for actually taking that on board.

H: Well, all my legal downloads come from amazon. I havenʼt bought them from anywhere else.

M: So you buy digital music from amazon?

H: Yeah, because youʼve got the choice. You can get either the CD or the digital download and because its non- DRM encrypted nonsense, it just comes in and it works and thats fine.

P: One of the things about Amazon, it definitely demonstrates the different ways which you can buy things.

H: Amazonʼs been very very useful as far as that goes. People whoʼve bought this might also be interested in that. Iʼve bought so many CDʼs on that basis over the years and got into several bands that perhaps otherwise I wouldnʼt of heard of.

F: Think perhaps we do that now, rather than when we were at school, college or whatver. “ere are, have you heard this?”, and we used to lend each other albums. Youʼd take somebodies album home and play it, “oh thats good”, give it back and go out and buy it. thats how we used to do it.

Group - yeah, hmm

H: Yeah, thatʼs the crazy thing, because your friend had it and they lent it to you and you bought it as well!

F: Yeah (Laughter)

H: What do you mean you bought it as well, surely you just copied it didnʼt you? (inaudible murmuring). That thing certainly doesnʼt happen now, you get on CD and they just all copy it and thats it.

P: Well I donʼt know, even if you donʼt by that CD, youʼll probably investigate what else theyʼve released and buy that.

R: Yeah, thats right. ! 64

Page 65: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

F: Yeah thatʼs true.

P: Particularly again if its a small, not very well known band. Again, you have this feeling of being personally involved in supporting that band.

M: So if you wanted to go and listen to music by a certain band or artist that you didnʼt already have access to in a personal collection, how would you first go about doing that?

H: A google search and see what you can find. (Agreement in group)

M: To stream or download or...

H: Whichever, well personally I often buy a CD.

P: Iʼd often try and find somewhere to stream to start with, so I could listen to it, if I liked it, Id then go and buy definitely.

E: Definitely, sure.

F: Its a sample almost, a try before you buy kind of thing.

M: If you were to download via peer to peer file sharing then, lets discuss the idea of ʻstealingʼ, are you stealing if you download?

E: Your like stealing profit arenʼt you. Your still stealing something, it might not be physical but it is stealing.

R: Itʼs potential income for that artist isnʼt it. Thats the thing.

E: Yeah.

H: Its intellectual property isnʼt it.

E: but it doesnʼt feel like your stealing, because you havenʼt got anything physical in your hands.

P: I think it gets blurred when you get to the point in which you download or otherwise acquire stuff that you would never ever buy. Because you donʼt like it enough to actually spend money on it but you donʼt mind having a copy of it about.

F: Yeah, yeah.

P: I mean theres a huge amount on that hard drive for example,

F: Yeah theres a load of stuff, out there in the big wide world, every now and again you just fancy listening to one of their tracks.

P: Every single rolling stones album or every single beatles album is on there. Stuff that Iʼm not going to go out and buy, but Iʼm not going to wipe it off there because I donʼt mind having a copy about. ! 65

Page 66: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

H: So the music companies would tell you, youʼve stolen all of it.

(Laughter and joking)

P: The days of the big record companies are severely numbered and big stadium bands as well. I think its moving more and more towards lots of people having much more diverse music tastes than they used to have going to see a much bigger range of bands.

(Omitted discussion about live music. Main point: ease of buying tickets online)

What is your overall impression of the current working or failings of the ʻmusic industryʼ?

P: I think the music industry is struggling. I think music itself is probably alive and well and better than it has been for many years.

R: With the big names especially, it is shifted and is changing.

Is that the music industry or is that the recording industry?

E: Thats the confusing thing isnʼt it.

R: Theres lots of different companies isnʼt there.

P: I think the whole thing is, itʼs moving away from being an industry and becoming a whole like a big industry and becoming a series of cottage industries.

R: Yeah I think thats probably it.

(General agreement)

(Omitted repeated discussion)

H: The problem with the music industry is its not just about the artist is it? Itʼs a food chain. Youʼve got the artists doing the actual production and theres lots of people doing the distribution and selling and marketing and setting up shows. The artist, out of the whole thing is probably only worth about 10%. and its all the other people that are being put out of business that are getting really upset about it. The artist can be quite happy because theyʼre getting themselves enough sales, but itʼs actually really quite selfish.

F: Is the music industry in that respect, just like any other industry, lets face it, itʼs cut throat isnʼt it. Especially in ʻthese daysʼ urm if youʼve got two bakers, if he can produce bread cheaper than that one and sell it cheaper heʼs going to get the most business.

H: The difference with music of course is that someone bread is not the same as someone else's bread.

F: Well yeah, but for the record companies it is.

P: The whole digital music model has music that much more available.

! 66

Page 67: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

This issue we identified earlier about intellectual property is related to copyright, what further issues do you think this presents?

F: Is it perhaps that copyright law is not up to speed with non-physical music. Because copyright came out with things like books and theyʼve just used that law ever since for music as well, because it used to be a physical thing too.

R: Yeah, it is a big issue around intellectual property and who has the rights to say what happens with music.

H: Yeah, similar to patents, its similar concept.

R: Yes, its a concept, an idea(inaudible)

H: The question is how long should it be before it all becomes, if you like, public domain, and therefore free.

P: and theyʼre trying to get that extended arenʼt they.

H: Yeah they are yeah.

P: because some artists that are still alive and are making music, their music is going to become public domain whiles they are still alive.

If we relate this issue of copyright to peer to peer file sharing then, whats the relationship there?

H: The issue there is the relationship between the moral position and the legal position. I think the legal position is probably quite clear actually. If you take something without paying for it, thats stealing thats the legal position. But the problem is the moral position doesnʼt agree with the legal position is if youʼve bought it already, why should you buy it again.

If you share music online, how is that different than if you lend someone a CD to copy?

P: It isnʼt.

E: No its not

H: I donʼt think anybody ever knew how many vinyl records were taped, nobody ever knew that but with peer to peer, you can see it and people can see their sales going down and relate the two.

E: Itʼs the same thing, but just in a different way, just in a different format. Iʼve never really thought about it, but it is.

F: Its the scale, the scale is much bigger.

R: Yeah, yeah, it is.

! 67

Page 68: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

F: If you were lending a record to your mate, it was a one off. On the internet its to everyone on the planet.

P: I have to say, because I have a limited budget to spend I music, I have no qualms about borrowing stuff that I canʼt afford but would like to have. And Iʼll copy it to have my own. And yes, there is a certain amount of theft involved in that but it tends to be stuff, that at the moment I canʼt afford to buy. So there itʼs becoming a financial concern as well then?

P: Yeah, but quite likely Iʼll then go and see that person live instead. Iʼd rather spend the money going to see them live rather than spending it on the CD. I wouldn't download it though, I like having a physical copy. Iʼd copy it and burn my own one.

Is it fair to say that everyone here, doesnʼt particularly engage with peer to peer services on a regular basis?

(General agreement)

P: No, not at all, Iʼm computer savvy enough and have encountered enough genuine horror stories to steer well clear, I would never be part of a peer to peer network.

H: Well, actually I have used them a little bit, but my kids do it all the time. I tell them to never upload anything, but they are downloading stuff peer to peer all the time from lime wire etc.

And is that fine by you?

H: Well I wouldn't say its fine, but I canʼt stop them, now theyʼve got their own PCʼs, i donʼt know what theyʼre doing.

P: I think its a real threat to computer security.

F: Thats the thing thats always worried me I have to say.

So the thing that worries you is your personal risk isnʼt it?

H: I must admit though, whilst its not music, I have downloaded things like american TV shows like Lost through peer to peer, because its the only way you can get it. But to be honest with you, in that particular case, if you could spend an reasonable amount on a decent quality download, Iʼd prefer to do that than actually steal it. Because thats what it is and theres always this faint risk in the back of your head, that somebodyʼs going to catch you at it. It would be nice if there was an alternative.

F: Is it not perhaps an age thing though. Because we are slightly older, weʼre perhaps more weary of... (trails of) you know, the things you used to do on your bike as a kid, you certainly wouldnʼt do now.

(Laughter)

H: No, I think thatʼs true actually yeah. The kids donʼt realise what trouble they could potentially get into.

! 68

Page 69: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

P: Thatʼs it, you wonder how many kids would use peer to peer, if theyʼd seen what Iʼd seen and it was their credit card details and bank details at risk rather than their parents.

F: Is this not a whole new industry? or weʼre in the start up of a whole new industry f being able to download stuff legally and its not just music, its TV and you know, entertainment. P: yeah, the original digital music prices were the same as CDʼs. There was no difference.

F: CDʼs when they first came out..

P: (interrupts) twice the price of vinyl

F: yeah, they were 14 or 15 quid. now theyʼre like 8/9 quid for chart CDʼs. Its probably downloading thats brought the price of CDʼs down I think to try and compete.

H: The point about digital downloads not having a production cost, and the price of buying a CD and whether thats got any production cost, actually I think is slightly moot, because the production cost of a CD is actually nearly nothing as well. Youʼve got a distribution chain and youʼve got to send it to the shops and all that but its not as if

E: Yeah but then theres everything else, the packaging and you know.

P: its the actually transportation, i think is the biggest cost.

F: yeah and theres shop rental, heating and electricity bills, staff wages etc etc.

(Discussion continues about postal renting services.)

F: But thats legal though. Thats the thing it appeases your conscience doesn't it. Iʼm not nicking this. For a very modest fee, you a fiver a month or something silly like that, you can have as many films as you want.

H: Yeah, first of all you know your not going to get sued or taken to court or something silly like that. Theres that sort of peace of mind thing, and theres that moral thing about bands making money and what have you. But i think the big missing link in the whole of out thinking pattern is that nobody cares about the role of the distribution companies or the role of the music companies. Nobody care about them. The care about the bands, they even care about the physical shops to a certain degree, but nobody gives a monkeys about the record companies.

P: Yeah iʼd much rather see bands doing there own thing and staying away from the big record companies.

F: Iʼd put it like this, a simile is, a a fisherman, I aways buy my environment agency rod license, its £28 a years, you know, its nothing. But if I donʼt and Iʼm fishing somewhere and the environment agency inspector comes round. Iʼm poaching and my name will appear in the local paper as a poacher and its going to cost me a fine. The chances of it happening are minuscule but Iʼm not prepared to have my name in the paper as a poacher. And its the same thing...

H: its your moral compass then?! 69

Page 70: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

F: It is my moral compass yes. Its the same thing with illegal downloads, I would rather pay for it.

H: yeah, it removes the risk of problems.

F: yeah i feel comfortable with it. Its computer safety, which another big thing as well. And you know its also, I feel okay inside. Iʼm supporting the band by buying their stuff, okay Iʼm supporting their record company as well but you know.

M: So, based on what weʼve discussed. The surrounding issues of digital music are moral issues, financial issues, security and safety issues. Which are the biggest or most prominent for everyone?

P: I think its the moral one, definitely.

F: I think its all of the above. yeah, perhaps moral is the big factor i suppose.

H: Its a convenience thing though as well though.

S: Its a bit like sitting there and watching the TV without a TV license as well, you donʼt know whether your going to get that knock on the door.

E: Itʼs the same thing yeah.

F: yeah just the same thing.

R: For me, its a moral thing and its about the band and I want that band to do well, so I want to fund that band. The copyright thing is questionable, because Iʼm not sure copyright law is right. The world is moving on, thats a fact. These record companies have only been around for a very short period of time in the grand scheme of things. They come, they go, who gives a toss, it doesnʼt matter. As far as Iʼm concerned these are bands that I want to go and see, these are bands that I want to support, so I want to fund them, I want to give them the money, I donʼt want to give to record companies my money.

F: Because nobody cares about record companies.

R: No, but why should you. (inaudible)

F: In the past, they were a necessary part of the chain, but now theyʼre not.

(yeah)

H: and in my case, its the legal issue thats probably the scary one.

P: yeah, given how much my job is involved in preservation of copyright, i would probably be in very deep shit if I was caught.

(big laughter)

! 70

Page 71: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

H: on the other side of the convenience thing, and iʼm not particularly talking about myself here, but I know my kids use it, because you download it and here it is, its very very easy. so the convenience side of it, is a very strong counter-weight to the legal side.

E: thats the difference between us as teenagers and youngsters, they donʼt know any different, itʼs just been there so they use it, whereas we wouldnʼt because we not used to it.

R: its also, you know, i want it now.

H: and they havenʼt got any money which is the other thing.

P: i think theres a big argument for separating downloading and streaming and making streaming completely legal .

R: well it is, with things like Spotify isnʼt it.

R: itʼs interesting though. What therefore is their [younger people] understanding of how that band is funded. perhaps if you go to see the band.

H: they donʼt care

R: well maybe they do, maybe their thing is Iʼll go see them, Iʼll pay to go and see them, but to get something thatʼs not a physical product, why should they pay for it.

H: They just donʼt think about it, honestly I really donʼt think they do.

P: There is no doubt at all, that there are more live gigs happening now, than there has ever been before.

R: Yeah thats right.

P: Because there is so much more choice in much now, because theres so much more available via [the web] and everybody can put their opinion online and what have you, if you were marketing pink floyd today, they would not become as big as they were, because some people would spend their money on Pink Floyd and other people were say well actually I prefer this other band, that are similar to Pink Floyd, slightly more, Iʼm going to spend my money on them instead. But at the moment your not forced into you know, ʻright were going to back Pink Floydʼ as the prog band that EMI are going to promote at the expense of all the other prog rock bands, which is effectively what the record companies used to do.

F: Yeah.

H: And still do actually.

P: yeah but if you put your music on the web, everybody in the world can listen to it and choose if they want to download it, buy a CD...

H: I suppose a lot of it revolves around what is it thats important out there in this subject. Yeah , we might want to listen to music, other people want to make money out of it. They ! 71

Page 72: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

want to feed themselves and send their kids to university and what have you, they need to make some money out of it. Theres a lot of bits to this subject. The question of what is rigt and wrong and do laws matter and stuff like that, theres whole sort of mess of stuff.

R: It is huge, it is yeah.

M: Everyone is aware of the issues and problems surrounding peer to peer sharing. Are you aware of any particular cases where these issues were presented?

H: Oh yeah.

P: Yeah starting with Napster. I think the whole thing surrounding napster is what really brought it into the public eye.

F: Yeah, that brought it right up into mainstream TV news wasnʼt it.

H: Well Napster was effectively put out of business wasnʼt it, well in itʼs original form.

E: Yeah.

H: Theres not been very many cases of people going to prison or being fined very large numbers of money but there have been some. Teenagers being fined $300,000 or something like that just seems to be totally wrong. Thats another thing, that makes you think, well if theyʼre going to behave like that going to, you know, try and put them out of business.

P: They tend to find the people they can rather than the people who are actually causing the problem. Because the people who are causing the problem have got enough savvy to actually host their servers in China or wherever in the world, places where they donʼt have the right laws in place to deal with it.

H: The record companies are causing themselves some seriously really bad publicity by suing some teenager or single mum or whatever.

F: Itʼs not a new thing this though is it. I remember 30 years ago, at least, I used to go to Singapore quite regularly and used to be able to buy bootleg, not bootleg, like copy tapes there for 50 or 60 pence and it was photocopied covers. Some of them were okay and some of them were dreadful. And they were just rip offs, somebody had bought one and just you know. Its the same thing...

E: Its the same principle.

F: Yeah its the same principle.

H: Yeah in those days, well they probably still actually out of the reach of the law of the western legal system.

P: The amount of money being spent on music, I suspect is almost exactly the same as the proportion of peoples income as it was 20 years ago, 30 years ago.

E: Just in different ways.! 72

Page 73: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

P: But there are far more bands out there between whom it is being divided, so everybody is getting a smaller slice of the pie. Therefore there is less room, for people to be able to skim the profits from the top, like the record companies.

F: The food chain is getting shorter.

R: Yes, and wider.

! 73

Page 74: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

Focus Group 2 Transcript - 20 to 25 Year Olds

5 Participants aged between 20 and 25 years. For confidentiality, the participants are given false names. All participants agreed to ad signed to the consent form before proceeding.

Key:

M: Moderator, M: Mark, P: Pat, S:Steve, K: Katie, C: Clare

Moderator: Whatʼs your understanding of digital music at the moment. Do you all consume digital music and have listening habits when it comes to digital music?

M: Umm, I only really use Spotify, and youtube, um because, Spotifyʼs just simple and if they havenʼt got one thing well theyʼve got a bunch of other stuff. And so you can just go on that, and if you canʼt find it on Spotify, odds are you can find a sort of dodgy replica of it on youtube. The only thing thatʼs mildly annoying about youtube is that you get adverts on it, but its not worth paying the 140 quid a year to get rid of them. Iʼm not really bothered by it, itʼs just like listening to the radio without having to listen to a tedious DJ.

P: But you canʼt say you complain about the adverts?

M: actually incessantly (laughter)

S: I think the thing with Spotify and youtube as well, is that it is just that browsing factor. Itʼs that browsing factor isnʼt it, you donʼt have to actually make any real decision.

C: (interrupts) You donʼt have to commit to buying a CD.

S: You donʼt have to commit to buying a CD, you donʼt even to commit to buying an mp3, you donʼt even have to download a whole album or wait an hour, your just on it and itʼs there in front of you. But, I donʼt personally use it at the moment, because Iʼve had to switch computers bout three times, because I keep breaking them. But um, yeah it would be preferable [Spotify]. That said, itʼs nice to find some some stuff that you canʼt find on there sometimes. You just have to dig that little bit deeper, but it depends what it is. I reckon a large amount of the conversation is going to be based on Spotify. Do you use spotify? [to Katie]

K: No I donʼt, Iʼm a bit behind the times, everyone is using it and I keep meaning to go and do it, but for whatever reason, Iʼve just never bothered, but I do use iTunes. Because, I dunno, Iʼv just had a really bad experience with like Limewire and stuff like that like mucking up my computer. So, since Iʼve had an iPod, I just like using iTunes, itʼs easy and I like downloading whole albums and stuff. And Iʼll usually get vouchers and stuff for Christmas or whatever to use on there. So I just tend to save them and use them up. I also occasionally just by the one isngle song, I know I could get it for free elsewhere but its just like itʼs only 79p so I just do that.

S: If the whole world was like you, Steve Jobs would be a very happy man.

(Laughter)

C: I use iTunes as well, but thats just because I donʼt know how to download things illegally. ! 74

Page 75: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

M: (Laughs) Neither do I.

K: I donʼt know either.

M: I downloaded Limewire once, and it broke my mums computer and never went near it again.

K: Same here.

C: But like sometimes when you download the file, you get the file but then you have to download a programme to unlock the file. I just donʼt understand it. So I buy things of iTunes or I steal them from my friends or I just use Spotify yeah. Then it all just goes my iPod.

K: Yeah, Iʼve used that um, Hype Machine before, a few times. When we first started using it, it was quite simple, but I donʼt know whatʼs happened to it now, Itʼs not as simple.

S: Iʼve started using hype machine recently.

K: Yeah itʼs good.

S: A friend turned me onto it and as soon as I started using it, I realised theres a load of music that I should check out on here. Its just loads of recommendations from blogs and things like that. But to be honest the main sort of influences on what I listen to are probably friends. [A friend] will be like you know, have you checked out this band and theyʼre usually crap, but Iʼll at least check them out, do you know hat I mean, itʼs like theres sort of certain friends that I trust, that have vaguely sort of similar tastes to me, and will know hat turns me on because they like it too.

What about the ways in which you consume digital music, is it a mobile platform for you or otherwise?

S: 90% of the time, if Iʼm listening to music, itʼs off my phone, as mp3ʼs.

M: I only really listen to it on my laptop now, my phone can have mp3ʼs on it, but my phone is nearly four years old. The headphones are long broken.

K: I use my iPod like all the time, I think Iʼd die without it. Even at home really, Iʼve quite a good little speaker thats also quite portable. I take it whenever I go away anywhere so itʼs quite easy to use.

How about the nature of downloading versus streaming?

S: I download Iʼd say.

C: Half and half.

K: What is streaming?

C: You know like spotify and stuff, where you just play it online.

P: I do a lot of downloading.! 75

Page 76: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

ʻLegallyʼ or by other means?

P: (Laughs) other means yeah.

S: Yeah, Iʼd say all new music I put on my phone is gonna be downloaded illegally, literally the only examples I can think of in the past year are when Iʼve bought people a CD. You know family members a CD for mothers day or whatever and then Iʼll rip it for myself before I give it to them.

(Laughter)

C: See I give it to them first, and then ask to borrow it and rip it.

S: I seem to go through so many computers that Iʼve lost so much music. Itʼs like a constant renewal. Iʼve got tonnes on dormant hard drives that I canʼt use.

C: So itʼs easier to download it again?

S: Yeah, or just download new stuff.

M: Have you still got the hard drives?

S: er, yes.

M: Because you can get an adapter, because Iʼve got one and you plug your hard drive into the adapter.

C: yeah but that costs money when you can just download the music again.

M: but if you wanna get all your stuff off it, you plug in into this adapter, then the adapter into the wall and then on the end of it is a usb and it turns your hard drive into a portable usb hard drive to retrieve all your stuff. Its a portable adapter, you can get them online.

S: oh cool, yeah Iʼll google that. (laugh) yeah thats what I do, google, thats what I do. To get music, you know, literally just put in what you want and put Rapidshare at the end of it in the search.

P: You can use google though to specifically search for mp3ʼs

S: Can you actually do that?

P: Yeah you can do like proper searches with google and itʼll just give you a list. A lot of people just host their, a lot of their music on their own personal file servers and google indexes it and finds it and you can just download it straight from within google. Perfectly good quality.

Is that how you would download your music?

P: Google if Iʼm looking for a single song, or albums Iʼll just look on BitTorrent sites.

! 76

Page 77: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

So you download shared music via peer to peer? Whatʼs you understanding of peer to peer?

S: Isnʼt it a little bit more legal than just downloading just straight of a blog where its just been illegally ripped up. A little bit more legal (laughs). Its probably not actually is it. It;s directly from the persons, whatever, I donʼt really know the specifics.

P: Its more of a community, youʼre encouraged to share back. Rather than just download it and leave, youʼre encouraged to seed it. So if you download 100 songs, you seed 100 songs. So your sharing with other people.

S: Similar to the way Limewire used to work then?

C: Yeah, when I used to Limewire, thats what I used to do, but I never used to let any of my songs go back out, because I didnʼt want like any trouble. I only took other peoples stuff, I never gave any stuff back, because, because...

S: it was scary?

C: No, just like because I didnʼt now what the legal aspects were. Could I get in trouble for giving people songs.

M: Yeah, you see Iʼve always thought that it was illegal to give it to someone else and to like distribute it, but not to take it.

C: Yeah exactly thats why I took it, but didnʼt give any return (laughs)

P: I donʼt think it matters

M: But then when they all started saying, well your a thief if you take it, and you (sarcasticly) beat old women and steal cars.

Whos saying that?

M: The government, have you not seen the start of a DVD lately.

S: Isnʼt it like its illegal to sell a CD on to your friend? Technically.

M: No no because that would mean things like ebay wouldn't be allowed to work.

S: Oh yeah, I suppose your right. But I mean, itʼs definitely illegal to borrow a CD and rip it.

M: Yeah

S: How can you possibly police something like that?

K: Yeah but if thats illegal, how comes you can rip CDʼs on something like windows media player.

S: Because it could be a CD youʼve bought.

C: Yeah to put it on your iPod.! 77

Page 78: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

K: Oh I see, yeah, that makes sense

S: Some CDʼs have incriptions and stuff.

P: A lot of CDʼs have like DRM, in the disc and you have to use a different kind of software to rip it and things like that. You canʼt just get an mp3 straight from it.

S: But itʼs relatively easy though isn;t it.

P: oh yeah.

S: even using something like iTunes though its easy enough to get an mp3 from a CD. P: Oh yeah, if you want it bad enough, youʼll find a way to get it.

(Pause)

S: Thatʼs probably a key point though, because if you want something, youʼre gonna get it. Itʼs not like I mean, it doesnʼt take a lot, to get something illegally from the internet. Its fairly easy to do, for anyone really.

The term ʻillegalʼ has been used a bit already, whats your understanding of the legal aspects of sharing music online.

C: If you pay for it then itʼs legal, (laughter) and then if you donʼt, itʼs not.

S: well yeah, but streaming is obviously legal off certain sites. So last.fm, Spotify...

C: (interrupts) theres still an exchange of money though, from the spotify people to the bands

S: and there is with last.fm as well technically.

M: But then itʼs illegal if you record that from last.fm, like its illegal to record songs off the radio. Like, you can stream that, but your not then allowed to keep it. Itʼs a bizarre situation where theyʼre saying, well here you are have this, but if you try and keep it then weʼre going to cut your internet connection off and all the other cobblers. Itʼs just wierd that theyʼre saying, yeah go on have this, go on its free, its free, its free. What are you doing trying to keep it? (Laughter) Itʼs like if you say to someone can I borrow your lighter and then you try and pocket it.

S: Yeah yeah

M: You know, how do they sort of draw the lines out, when they say, you can have this for free, if you just listen to it once and then you have to come back to our website to listen to it again.

S: Also, without getting to political motivated about it, thereʼs also a moral aspect behind all of it. Major labels have got far more weight and ability to follow that sort of thing up, if its like your local record label, whoʼs independent, you know and someone in Canada tries and downloads it illegally, they havenʼt got a leg to stand on. Thereʼs no way they could possibly challenge that. Feasibly anyway. And so it just promotes the separation like that ! 78

Page 79: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

[between major and independent record labels]. Everyones going to download what they can download easily. If anything major labels should be stopped from trying t police it, because it favors them earning more and more money. People turning to places they can download things and ultimately that would be what was going to happen, you know they would turn to places where they could easily find and download things without be challenged in doing so. And thatʼs bad, thatʼs bad for music in general.

M: I think the governments got a massive misunderstanding of what downloading music is as well. Theyʼre saying things like ʻweʼll cut your internet connection off if your persistently downloading stuffʼ, its like well who are you planning on catching out. Because theres not many people who are sitting at home..

C: (interrupts) arenʼt they trying to load the responsibility onto the internet service providers

M: the ISPs yeah, but theres not many people who are sitting at home with a massive hard drive, just tearing through all the music they find on line. Itʼs just people downloading the odd song here and there. There are people who sort of download regularly and take albums and stuff, but itʼs just how much does anybody realistically download? When your about 14, your at it all the time. Your not 14 anymore, youʼve got it.

P: But there are 14 year olds though.

M: Yeah I suppose, but youʼve already got it, you get to the point where youʼve already got what you want and you just getting the odd new stuff here and there. Maybe itʼs just me because Iʼll only go out a buy a CD if itʼs something I really want, otherwise Iʼll listen to it on spotify.

S: Thats another thing Iʼve noticed with this conversation. You donʼt really share your consumer habits with other people, that readily, about this anyway, in particular. Itʼs not something that you regularly talk about, you talk about music, because thats something your interested in. You donʼt talk bout how much you do or how much you donʼt download or consume or whatever. Itʼs not really a priority.

M: But then when you were younger, when everyone started download, when I was about 12, when Napster was still like starting out and everyone was ripping stuff off that, yeah. It was the cool thing. Everyone was always banging on about how much music theyʼd got for free and stuff.

C: Yeah and then it was all about myspace when you were 15.

S: I remember downloading so much stuff off napster that I just never listened to. Just for the sake of having complete albums on that little page you had at the beginning. (Laughs) But, its true, theres a lot of people who were like that that just wanted to have collections and stuff. And illegal downloading does open the door to being just able to do it right away, those are probably the people who download the most Iʼd say.

K: I remember for my 13 birthday or something. My mums boyfriend went and got, like he had a mate who did loads of downloading and ripped a load of CDʼs and we had about 25 albums which he just got them and gave them us all for Christmas. But i dunno you donʼt really..

C: cheap Christmas presents! 79

Page 80: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

K: Exactly, yeah, but I well chuffed getting all these albums for christmas. There was always that person at school that was said ʻoh I can do a CD for you, give me listʼ.

M: Yeah

K: yeah but obviously, now everyone can just do it themselves, its just more available

C: is like would you rather have one actual CD, thats a real one or 25 albums that your going to listen to anyway, but youʼve got 25.

S: Im not sure if theres any real point to what Iʼm about to say, but in marketing and things like that. Marketing, where the consumer comes to you is obviosuly much more highly valued than when you have to go to the consumer. Because theyʼre already interested, so theres a higher chance that theyʼre going to buy a product and things like that. With this kind of thing, it used to be so hard, it used to be quite difficult to do, so not many people would have done it. (inaudible) As itʼs got easier, its still not that easy that you can just got on the internet, click, and youʼve got everything you need. It isnʼt as easy buying something off eBay or Amazon or something to do it illegally anyway, but still do it. Theres obviously a massive market for it, thats just completely being missed, Spotify have kind of hooked onto a little bit, to an extent last.fm. Loads of people want to do it, so if theres a way of monetizing it through advertising revenues or whatever. i mean obviously there are sites that do this now, but considering how big the volume of people downloading and how big a market the music market is in general, youʼd be an idiot to miss it, but there is legislation in the way.

How about peoples engagement with p2p services then? How you engaged with them and why or why not?

S: Well, I used to use things like bit torrent and things like that and its the same with spotify, youʼve got to download a programme and put it on the computer. I just get through computers, willy nilly, Iʼm always borrowing an old one off someone. So i just tend to go straight on to the blogs and stuff and download stuff from there. Itʼs just convenience for me. If I had a computer that I knew would never break or I had to give back, maybe it would be different. I donʼt really care for the legal implications, I just donʼt think about it.

Pose that to the rest of the group then, how to the legal implications affect your decisions about using p2p services?

M: Thatʼs something that puts me off, getting limewire and stuff. Something where it sort of centralizes you, something where it feels its just that bit easier to find you.

C: Where youʼve got a username, so they can pin you down.

M: Yeah, whereas like if the new Gervais podcast comes out, iʼve got a mate who will give me the link to the a Megauplaod page and be like there is it, there you go. And yeah Iʼll download that without worrying, but that is the only thing Iʼll ever download, music and stuff, I dunno, Iʼm just not that fussed. If I want a CD, because its something I really like, then Iʼll make to effort to get it, but other than that Iʼm not really that bothered. I can borrow the odd CD from someone else, or I can get a friend to get it for me. But now theres Spotify, and for a very short while there was myspace until you realised well you can get to ! 80

Page 81: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

three songs... and then there was last.fm and then they did something weird and I donʼt really like it anymore. One day they started asking me for money, so I closed that and went back to spotify.

S: Last.fm was a funny one, I think it was just the interface that got in the way. Particularly in comparison to say, Spotify. Spotify is just so easy to use, itʼs just like iTunes isnʼt it basically.

M: Their [last.fm] search, the way their searches come up, sometimes its just awkward you have to sort of sift through, sometimes if can make it more arduous than probably actually downloading the thing in the first place.

S: Itʼs turned into more of a trivial thing, itʼs interesting to see what your friends are playing and stuff like that. And I find itʼs more interesting to do that than actually look at new stuff, that they recommend to me. Because I know what I like, and more often than not, I like a vast majority of things, you know many different genres, and they will give me the best of the different genres that I like. So itʼll just give a load of new stuff from that genre, and I donʼt like it.

P: Well I just use bit torrent, its nice and clean. Big sort of names like isohunt, bitjunkie, youʼll get thousands and thousands of torrents on there and Iʼll just download them through a client that you have on your computer. Your downloading them from other people rather than a website. I understand that its very easy to find someone on the internet, you can literally find exactly where their house is, so I take a precaution to its bit harder to find me. I mask my IP address, so it looks like its somewhere else and not your computer, somewhere else in the world.

C: How does that work?

P: Well you can do whats called a shell or tunneling, and you can use a service, basically you rent out access to a computer anywhere in the world.

C: So youʼll get someone else into to trouble.

P: No itʼs, the other company, thatʼs how they make their money, itʼs not just me using one computer, itʼs thousands of people using the same machine as a server, and you have access to a slot on it. You pay a few a few pounds a month and its basically a tunnel. Iʼll send it a request, it does the downloading and then it sends me the file back.

and you feel safe doing that?

P: Safer, yeah. It still regardless of, you know if they want to find you, they will find you. You canʼt be anonymous online.

S: Does it not worry though, that the fact your taking precautions would possibly alert people more to the fact your downloading. I mean, on the grand schemes of things, weʼre talking proper internet security people, they find anyone whose doing anything really.

P: Exactly

! 81

Page 82: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

S: but for me its just like, do I get paranoid about it and it just lead down this route where I end up just not doing it all. Or, do I just not give a monkeys and just do it, without worrying.

P: Itʼs a good way [tunneling] to get you across continental barriers. For example, in america you canʼt use iplayer and we cant use certain american streaming services. I like to use some of the american streaming services. They have a music streaming service called pandora, it used to be that you could use it anywhere in the world, but now the legislation says you can only stream in in North America. But i use it just because its convenient. I can just my Ip to a computer in america, and stream it over here.

S: I have to admit I didnʼt realise you could do that. (rest of group agrees). I know what an IP is, that is a far as it goes. (laughter)

C: Of peer to peer, Iʼve only ever used limewire in the past and then I got a virus so I stopped. My peer to peer sharing now, involves me going to friends computers with my usb stick and just borrowing their music.

K: Yeah, me too. I used to have limewre, when I was a teenager at home on my mums computer, but exactly the same situation, I just got a virus and just didnʼt like it after that.

C: You feel a bit naughty.

K: yeah, I never really used bit torrent, I donʼt really know how to to be honest. I wouldnʼt really know what to look for.

M: I canʼt get my head around it. (laughter). Everyones always saying to me, oh I just use torrents. Iʼve looked at it and frankly it just looks sketchy, Iʼll just leave it alone, I donʼt really know what Iʼm clicking.

For the people that donʼt download then, it seems its a ʻscareʼ factor that puts you off, is it fears of the legal factor or fears of personal computer security being at risk?

M: Its more that fact that virusʼ might harm my computer, thats at the forefront of my worry (agreement in group).

P: Thats the thing though, because with bit torrent, its more community orientated, if someone uploads something thats malicious, someones going to post back and say so and people are just going to avoid it. Itʼs very highly moderated, people and because the people who run these things know what theyʼre doing, they can just block a certain person from any access to it at all. Its not just people can make an new account with a different username, they can just block the whole computer, basically. So, I think itʼs much safer to use bit torrent, rather than peer to peer programs like limewire. Whilst bit torrent its peer to peer is not as easy as limewire to spread viruses. You can upload a virus and name it as a song on limewire and people download it and as soon as they play it its too late. Whenever you download something on bit torrent, thereʼs usually pages and pages of comments, you can flick through the first few and see if it is what it is. If people say its not, just avoid it and you can move on to the next one, rather than it being too late after youʼve already got it.

! 82

Page 83: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

Are we aware of any of the legal implications presented by downloading in this way?

S: Well itʼs copyright laws isn;t it, which is (inaudible). You used to hear when napster started and things like that, stories like, someone got done for it, and it would be like spot checking but on a vastly diluted scale.

C: They would try and make examples of people.

S: yeah exactly, trying to make examples of people to scare others off. I donʼt even know if it would be that would be punished, whoeverʼs broken the law, theyʼre going to try to punish them to an extent. Its such a deep and intertwining thing in terms of...

C: because everyones breaking the law

S: because everyones breaking the law (laughs). They could feasibly turn round to someone from one of those companies and be like ʻgive us a listʼ and excuse you from whatever youʼve done. Although I know bit torrent sites are different. There was the whole pirate thing obviously. It was in the news and I remember Pete Waterman and people like that on tele and I remember thinking, you look so out of date and so many people just completely disagree with what you are saying. You canʼt criminalise common activity. It is a massive moral argument, at the end of the day, if everyone does it, it shouldnʼt be illegal.

M: It should when Lily Allen thinks it bad (laughter)

S: Theres obviously the two sides to it, theres the ʻwe shouldnʼt get something for free etcʼ as well, but markets change, what people pay for does change. You get things for free now, that you never used to. You get DVDʼs free with newspapers for goodness sake. You know what I mean. Things are going to change, if everyone wants them to. You canʼt just make what everyone does, criminal. Theres a lot less people telling you its criminal, than actually the people that do it and think they should be allowed to. I think thats just the evolution of law, thats happened for years. Obviously theres been a lot more dramatic cases in history, but its just an extension of the same sort of thing.

Was anyone else aware of the pirate bay case?

K: No, no idea what it is

C: Me either.

P: Yeah, I know quite a bit about it. The pirate bay is whatʼs called an indexing site, basically it doesnʼt host anything. It doesnʼt host the files exactly, it host links to the files rather than the actual files. So people will go onto it and they will download whats called a torrent, like a starter, it just contains links to everybody whos got it. So yeah its just an index, you to that, search for what you want and itʼll list it. Its a bit like google but just specified towards bit torrent.

K: Is it a bit like hype machine then?

P I have no idea what hype machine is.

! 83

Page 84: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

S: No, no, hype machine is just a list of blogs. In a way its similar in that it collates things. With pirate bay it just a website. Bit torrents is just a concept, whereby theres a file within the file it has a list of links to the people who have this file. You then download that into your client, and then it downloads it for you and then you have it complete.

K: Oh I see, right.

P: Pirate bay was a major name. It was one of the big torrent providers and people just sort of targeted it. They thought theyʼd take the big one out, but as soon as soon people see they canʼt use that one, theyʼll just go to another one, they donʼt disappear. People just didnʼt want them giving away free stuff.

S: Yeah, what actually happened, what was the resolution?

P: Theyʼve shut down.

S: Oh they have shut down.

P: I think someone took over, or someone bought the website or at least a share of it and decided they would try and do some sort of legal activity with it.

S: The crux of the argument was that although, they were not breaking the law, if they are then making money from other people breaking the law, isnʼt that then, in some way illegal. Im not sure what the resolution was, they did get shut down, it was probably out of court, lets be honest. I donʼt know what happened but I imagine it was.

M: I think they got sued or something. Well there was something in the news, there was a massive sum, like millions of pounds, that someone was trying to get them to pay.

S: It kind of came and went before you had a chance to really follow it.

M: Well the news just generally came up with stop stealing stuff. Be afraid. (Laughter) and then they thought, bollocks, this isnʼt going to look as bad to people as it should do, they just make it go away very quickly, to keep you scared enough that there was a problem in the first place and before you could of realised it wasnʼt that bad after all, they just quickly whipped it away and moved onto something else.

S: (of pete waterman on channel 4 news) It was like a grumpy old man, shouting at kids to get off his lawn. That is literally the best analogy i could give it.

What benefits do you think freely available music brings?

C: You can try it before you buy it (pauses) if your going to buy it.

S: I think, as a musician, Iʼd be happy, well I am happy that if you google my music and then you see it on blogs with links to download it for free where it had been uploaded illegally. Our label didnʼt like it, but we didnʼt mind. You know, that is 300 people in Germany, or wherever, if we went over there, they might come to a show. Why do you care [label] your not going to sell thousands of CDs of our music.

! 84

Page 85: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

P: Yeah exactly, that Iʼve heard, Iʼve read that thatʼs where musicians make their money, off concerts. They donʼt make a lot of money from their CDʼs. Itʼs the labels that suffer really I suppose. Bands come out and say your stealing from us, but actually their just stealing from people with such high profit margins, they donʼt really loose any money.

M: I think people have got used to downloading now, youʼll get a song, a now that itʼs not on CD anymore, you see that itʼs just a file on you computer and you think, what the hell is that, why am I having to pay a pound for that, when I can download it for free. If you could come up with some sort of thing, like spotify where you could get to music for free and they would say, well give us 10p and you can have it, you might well see a transfer of people starting to use it. Because it is hassle trying to get stuff for free, but then you could get it someone very easily and then pay at least something for it. Or you could have website where its like 2p, or you can give us more if you think its worth more. It could be like spotify if you want to listen to it, listen to it, but if you want to buy it download it. Now youʼve got this thing where people are well aware that you can have a CD or an album, you take that album away and unlike when your in a shop and you pick up an album and take it away and thats gone, itʼs still there. Wheres the commodity? Why is someone in a music label able to charge me, 10 quid, for something that they arenʼt doing any work to replace. You just take it and itʼs still there, theyʼre not doing anything.

S: It breaks down to essentially, what is music? I see, and Iʼve convninced myself to see because I think this is the way that itʼs going, physical music in any form, as merchandise. So if its a CD or youʼre doing special edition tapes or vinyl, or anything like that. At the end of the day, that is as much worth to me as a T-shirt that Iʼm selling. And yeah, maybe a little bit more effort has gone into things like the artwork and I do want people like collectors to take an interest. But thats all it is, itʼs people buying it purely on the novelty of owning a physical thing.

M: Oh exactly. Iʼll by a CD, because I want it, the CD. I think the last CD i bought must have been Jamie T - Sticks and Stones, because I like him as an artist and I want to have some kind of affinity with that. The album artwork looked cool and just something you can pick up and hold it and you know, Iʼve got this (hold hand up expression). Whereas if it was something where I sort of liked two of their songs, didnʼt really care who they were, and then got their album for free, perhaps if you liked it, youʼd go out and buy it. In fact, frank Turner, I had all three of albums, for free, liked it and went out and bought the CDʼs anyway, because liked it and I then wanted to be able to own it and have that sitting at home.

K: Yeah I find owning CDʼs really important, because I love album artwork, I just like having a CD collection, because itʼs like something thats going to be a lost art. Well it almost already is. I do miss having them all the time as well. When I first moved to uni, I stupidly bought all my CDʼs with me. Not because I needed them, because I had them all on my computer, I just wanted them there, in a way that said ʻthis identifies my music tastesʼ, so if anyone came into my room, ʻoh youʼve got this, youʼve got thisʼ, You canʼt see that necessarily went its all on your computer. Its kind of like an arty thing to me really.

S: Yeah, theres nothing wrong with it, but I think part of that is nostalgia, and thats a good thing. And I think weʼre probably the last generation to have that as people growing up now wonʼt even have that in the first place. Theyʼll have their mates looking at what files theyʼve got on the computer.

! 85

Page 86: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

K: Yeah definitely. Itʼs also kind of a taught thing, you know, everyone looks at their parents record collection, and thats like a nostalgia thing, and for me, it like Iʼve got these old CDʼs and its the same thing.

Itʼs interesting because weʼre the first ones of the...

M: of the transition

S: We are the children of the digital revolution (laughs

Yet, it seems to me that your all still attached to physical music as a format.

(Group agreement)

C: I think that if you buy a CD, well if I buy a CD. Then Iʼll put it onto my computer and then Iʼll never touch the CD again. So I just think whatʼs the point.

S: The joy is within the first 20 minutes of taking it home. You know, looking at it on the bus. (Laughter)

C: If i want to buy something though, iʼll buy a gig ticket instead or something like that and Iʼll think that Iʼm supporting the band that way.

S: There another point right there. I think live music has gone up massively in the last 10 years.

C: Yeah:

S: On every front, front down there to up there (hand gestures signal high and low), itʼs gotten huge. Up and up and up.

Do you think more freely accessible music has had an effect on that?

S: Itʼs incredibly hard to actually correlate the two, without doing some sort of mass research. But possibly, yeah.

C: I think it is though, because imagine you were in a band and there was no internet. How would you communicate that you were playing.

K: Yeah exactly, without physically getting out there and selling your CD.

S: Definitely without things like myspace. (inaudible) Theres no denying the impact things like myspace had on the music scene, from a grass roots level. Doesnʼt matter what scene you were involved in. But just speaking from sort of personal experience in Heavy [Metal] music. I mean, I know many people who still primarily use Myspace still (expression) to check out bands. Even though no one else uses it, they wonʼt log in and use it socially, but they will browse around and click on top 8ʼs and see whats good. It has dyed out a bit, but in terms of the effect it had on live music, it gave it such a community.

C: Itʼs not really used by individuals anymore, its like a portfolio kind of thing isnʼt it?

! 86

Page 87: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

S: Definitely yeah, definitely. It interesting myspace though, because seems to be looking for its big replacement, but I donʼt think there will be one. Blogs on the up, but you know how is that going to last?

Weʼve sort of established then that the majority of the group doesnʼt really engage with peer 2 peer sharing networks?

S: Itʼs a personal thing though, itʼs used but not really as a way of discovering music. Itʼs a way of acquiring music. Thereʼs a difference.

P: Usually is somebody asks me, can I get them something? Iʼll say yeah I can get it, and it just stays on my computer. It doesnʼt take up much room, you can always have infinite space for files. Itʼs not hard to just keep i there, itʼs not a nuisance or a hassle. I just leave it there. And then if somebody wants it again, its there for me.

So you download for other people rather than for yourself?

P: Yeah, if somebody asks me for it. I never say Iʼll do it for a few pounds, I just say well it doesnʼt cost me anything so I donʼt charge people anything. I wonʼt use it to find out about music, itʼs not something that you can really go to and expect the answer to jump out at you, you have to tell it. Tell the engines what you want, exactly what your looking for so you need other means, like the spotify or last.fm or anything.

S: Personally, where do you find out about new music then?

P: Personally, I listen to pandora quite a lot or other streaming stuff. I donʼt like typing in an artist and just getting all their stuff. I like how pandora and last.fm give you recommended things. But yeah, after a while you are just doing a loop of the same stuff over and over again. Youʼll type in x artist and it will just lead back to one you typed in weeks before. I listen to a lot of just radio as well i suppose, you know that way I donʼt have to choose what I listen to. My music collection has stopped growing, I donʼt download as much as used to anymore.

So even though the members of this group are still relatively young, it seems that fFilesharing was something that we did when we were younger?

P: Yeah I downloaded a lot more when I was younger.

K: I think it was because it was a new thing wasnʼt it. Everyone just wanted to do it didnʼt they. Especially, sharing in the physical sense of copying a CD for a friend. That was the cool thing to do at the time, but obviously now the whole world does it and itʼs not something thats new.

S: I go in peaks in and troughs though. Iʼll have long periods of time without checking out any new music. And then Iʼll finally just sit at the computer and be on the internet and remember something I was going to check out and then itʼll turn into 3 months of trying out new stuff and it will all predominantly be downloaded illegally. In terms of physical acquisition of music, the only thing Iʼll ever do and sometimes Iʼll ban myslef, if go into [a record shop] and have a browse. But I only ever do it when Iʼve got money in the bank and subsequently spend all the money I have in the bank (laughter).

On record shops closing down...! 87

Page 88: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

M: Is this a reflection on the consumption of music changing or a reflection of the recession. Because if you can get it for free in times of recession rather than paying 12 quid for it in HMV, youʼre going to do that. Or you know, listen to on spotify for free.

Is convenience a factor here at all then? Because you can easily download legally.

M: Its still money though isnʼt it.

C: It is convenience because you donʼt have to leave the house to get it.

S: For the reason I donʼt download and pay for it is often not the money, because you can get it from some places so cheap. You know amazon do songs for like 30p and stuff. Itʼs not the money so much, with me, itʼs more the effort of having to put my credit card details in. (laughs) it really is though. As opposed to illegal downloading.

M: but even going to town for something like that, your outside, your looking at CDʼs. And you can see and look though other CDʼs. When Iʼm online, I donʼt know where to find new music, Iʼll get what I want and that will be that. When Iʼm in a CD shop, Iʼll be looking and then in the same section, thereʼll be a bunch of other stuff that will catch your eye. Thats the only other time Iʼve ever picked up music, other then when Iʼve been using last.fm or whatever. Where Iʼve actually gone a sought out one kind of music and then seen other stuff, and thought that looks interesting, that looks interesting. And a couple of times I may have flicked through kerrang and thought the same, go into the shop and it would be in the same section as something else and Iʼll decide Iʼll have that as well then. Itʼs being out of the house and itʼs being to see everything in a tangible state. When your online, its different (changes sentence) its man shopping, thats what being online is, itʼs man shopping. You go to what you want, you get it, you can get on with something else.

S: No cup of coffee when you get there (laughter)

M: Exactly, youʼre seeing all these other things. I mean you do see artwork and stuff when your browsing online, but it doesnʼt have the same effect as when its 3D and you can sort of pick it up, have a look at it and have a look in the book and stuff.

S: Itʼs interesting, I think music now for people who take a massive interest in it themselves beyond, sort of, the average person, whatever that may be, itʼs hard to define in itself, are going to use things like blogs. I know [a friend] does. Theyʼre going to look through things like that and find new things and follow artists like that. So it will be in front of them, because they will be going to those mediums, but you are right, the average punter will now not be looking in CD shops through the sales, seeing whats on offer etc etc.

M: Yeah, itʼll be on play.com, youʼll type in that artist and youʼll get that artist.

P: But amazon for example will give you those recommendations

M: Yeah amazon will give you these ʻyou might be interested in thisʼ things but by that point your so sick of amazon telling you might be interested in this, itʼll be rubbish anyway, so you donʼt even look at that. Youʼve got what you want, in the basket, move on.

! 88

Page 89: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

S: And also, those recommendation things, they can only go so far. You know, theyʼre computerised, they can only go so far in actually telling you about something your not already aware of.

M: Itʼs just people who bought the same as you also bought this, or, windows media player says that this is the same genre, (sarcastically) rock and indie. (laughter).

S: Actually yeah, when you think about it, it actually pigeon holes people even more, so they are going to look for less and less music in a way because they are not going to spread what they listen to. They are going more and more down the same road as everyone else.

M: Thatʼs the other thing about record shops, they will have music playing. Iʼve been in a record shop before and theyʼll have a CD on and Iʼll gone up to the desk and asked what it is and then Iʼve actually bought the CD because Iʼve liked what they were playing when I was walking round the shop, so theres more promotion when your walking round the shop. Whereas, again, play.com, your already listening to what you want, which youʼve got previously and youʼll just be looking at what you want next, and thats it, thats where the experience of it ends. If you are someone who users consumer websites, such as blogs, its different. Thats obviously someone whoʼs into a bit more, they are into the scene, they are looking further, whereas if your a mainstream consumer and your like me and your lazy, its straight onto play.com. If itʼs outside of facebook, youʼre not interested.

Its interesting you still want the physical product, because theres exactly the same convenience of buying digital downloads and you get the product immediately.

S: Itʼs exciting getting stuff in the post though isnʼt it (laughter)

C: If you get a package it so exciting.

What are your perceptions that ʻillegal downloadingʼ has on the ʻmusic industryʼ?

S: Well, itʼs just changing it, its not (pauses). Musicʼs not going to go away because big companies are going bust. There arenʼt going to be a lack of feasibly good artists. Thatʼs the just the one thing you donʼt have to worry about along as there are people, there will be good music. Itʼs just funny, I donʼt think most people worry about it. I donʼt think most people will think ʻoh my God, is Beyonce going to be able to afford to release her next albumʼ. (laughter). They donʼt though, do you know what I mean? The people who are more inclined to worry about it are people who have already got a vested interest anyway and so a re probably more worried about the little artists, who if anything, on the whole have probably benefitted from the way things have gone and are starting to go. Although, itʼs interesting, where I think itʼs got to a saturation point now where I think itʼs actually harder than everybody thought, because thereʼs so much competition on a smaller level. Independent-wise musically, so that would be the same on a business level as well.

C: I think for things like the record labels, the big ones, theyʼre going to be bothered because they are not making a much money as they can and although their business isnʼt being affected dramatically, all it is for them is making the most profit out of it, so they are going to want to protect that. But, then like you say, for bands, if people can listen to your music for free, then more people are going to listen to it, so then yourʼre going to get more people at the shows.

! 89

Page 90: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

S: Itʼs all about building a fan base for most artists. There are artists who will go into it thinking, ʻI want to be a big, big star, I want to make lots of money. But there is a reason, that for generations, those people have been ripped off and you know, havenʼt actually put that much of a fight up to big companies, and they are just happy to bloody do it. And itʼs the same from the top to the bottom. People just want to do it, theyʼre not bothered about, well obviously people want to make bread, they want to be able to eat. I think most people who want to make a lot of money, go into business, they donʼt pick up a guitar.

C: Thatʼs why theyʼre [major record labels] looking at music as a business, rather than as a creative thing.

P: Well, I think that because the record companies profits are, the margins are so big for them. The artists donʼt actually get that much money from a CD sale, they make their money from other means like merchandise and concerts and things. Like you said before, if you had 300 people in Germany, who would come to a show if you were there. Theyʼre still going to make money from it.

C: Yeah, but you still can say ʻWell Iʼm the only person downloading, it doesnʼt matter because people are still going to buy it and they are still going to get some moneyʼ. It the same as saying ʻIʼm not going to recycle, because everyone else recycles, so I donʼt need to do itʼ. it doesnʼt make that much of an impact, but its the collective; what everyone else is doing.

S: I donʼt think itʼs a bad thing that the big labels are going down though, because the artists arenʼt going anywhere. If the artists are good enough, they will survive, there is means for them to get their music out, and there is means for them to make money if they need to and want to. At the end of day, if youʼre good enough, it may be hard, but there will be room for you to do something. You may think your brilliant and a select few may agree but everyone else thinks your crap, thatʼs just the way things go and thatʼs the way life is. If you took all the major label acts in the world and then dropped them and gave them no support whatsoever, a lot of them are really good, are really hard working and are very inventive and would probably make a go of it. I mean, look at Nine Inch Nails, itʼs a classic example, he had a massive cult following and then just went it alone and how well did he do. He did a lot better than on the label. As for starting from the bottom and going to the top from now on, yeah, I think its going to be an ever evolving thing. I think it is going to be as random as it was before. It think its possibly going to be more of a level playing field, but the people who come through, theyʼre not suddenly going to be the best of the best of the best, its going to involve things like working hard and having a business head and of course youʼre still going to get the random acts when youʼll wonder how the hell did they get where they are, theyʼre crap, but their selling millions of records and theyʼre doing it without a record label, you will get that.

What it will be surprising to see is who does sell a lot of records because everyone has a different tastes and actually things wonʼt change that much from an artist point of view. If you wanted to get signed, 20 years ago to a massive label, the people who did get signed would suprise anyone who knew them personally or was into those bands. Thatʼs never been different, thatʼs always been the case and that will probably carry on being the case if all the major labels disappeared tomorrow because people latch on to weird things. You predict that kind of thing. itʼs not about how catchy your songs are or how hard your working all the time, thereʼs a randomness to it.

! 90

Page 91: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

P: The internet has made the distribution of music so much easier. You donʼt need thousands of pounds to set up things like marketing or sending out sample CDʼs anymore, you can just put it online; on a blog, and just let the people come to you.

M: Yeah like [Steve] was saying, itʼs just going to be about hard work. If the major labels went away, that would just mean there wonʼt be someone whoʼs going to able to your face on billboard, straight away and you be a talentless nobody like Keisha, but because your good looking, there will no rich fat cat somewhere willing to financially support that. That will be taken away and youʼll have to put the leg work in and you have to do all the networking yourself. These days youʼve got Facebook, Myspace, Linked In, Bebo, all of those things. The world is available to you as single person and people do do it. You have these people of Twitter and Myspace and they have thousands upon thousands of people they can connect with. You can do it, itʼs just the fact that itʼs hard and you will have to go out more and put more effort in. Thereʼs not going to be somebody who will be able to do it for you.

S: I do think its important to note. I donʼt think the market for people like Keisha is going to go away.

M: Thats unfortunate that isnʼt it? (laughter)

S: Equally, what the major record label does to get someone like Keisha out there, she could have done by networking with famous people anyway, she could have done by getting on some TV shows by blagging it. Its a snow ball effect, once you pick up that thing and theres a market for it, its going to go more berserk anyway. The label is kind of redundant, itʼs not really there for any reason other than to make things a little bit more formalised; theres a set formula. Now things a re just going to be a bit more interesting, youʼre really going to have to work out work your going do, because now the set formula doesnʼt apply. In terms of the industry at the moment, Iʼm not convinced they are suffering that much anyway.

M: The question you have to ask is out of the people who are downloading for free, how many of them are realistically going to go out and buy stuff. No one is going to go out and buy 100 CDs a year anyway. Theyʼre downloading it because they can, theyʼre downloading stuff they probably donʼt even need. Its just for the sake of having it. No one was ever going to create a massive music catalogue over days and days of music by buying it, so you have to think realistically, how much money are you loosing. Maybe they may have bought one CD a month and thats it, or even four CDs a month.

P: I think its just the normal standard deviation of people, there will always be someone at the bottom end of the scale, someone at the top and someone who just flicks through the downloads and just gets it for the sake of having it and their just the people who are doing it rather than someone who just gets what they need.

S: Yet, the singles chart at the moment id bigger than ever. Itʼs not suffered that much. Like you say people get turned on to it and then theyʼll acquire it. I think the average person probably does buy the same amount as what the average person bought 10 years ago. I donʼt know that but it wouldnʼt surprise me, I wouldnʼt think it would be particularly different.

M: And when they reference back to say how many records people are buying compared to 40 years ago to get a number one. For God sake, it was brand new. [in comparison]Broadband was brand new. The industry was still fairly brand new. Everyone was ! 91

Page 92: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

downloading because ʻlook what we can doʼ. The same as, ʻyou can a buy a CD, look for youʼ but then you get used to it and people arenʼt really that fussed now.

C: So they need to invent a new way of making a different physical product is that what your saying and they weʼll all go out again like we bought CDs.

S: People do things on mass, so as soon as somethings picked up, itʼs done on mass. Just like everyone now seems to use Spotify.

Yeah thats true, apart from our guy who downloads all his stuff.

(Laughter)

P: I listen to the radio mostly, Iʼd say really. I have my music in the background rather than actually listening to it.

S: But even you donʼt use it now, Iʼm sure you will.

M: Even if you want spotify now thought, theres like a six week waiting list or something ridiculous.

C: Is there?

M: Yeah, if you canʼt get an invite or donʼt want to pay for it, you have to wait weeks and weeks and weeks for Spotify to let you have it. Theyʼve sort of set this aura up around themselves now.

S: Once youʼve got a username and password your sorted though.

M: Yeah you can download it, but to get that account now, itʼs like gold dust, it just take forever. I knew this girl who was waiting the best part of a month to get hers. Just waiting for the email to come through to give her account.

C: Maybe they have kept it limited to make it more, so you appreciated it more once youʼve got it.

M: Yeah, also to push you into paying the tenner to get it straight away.

S: But whats to stop me or you just publishing our account details or giving them to everyone we know.

M: Well exactly, but I donʼt know if you can start using on two separate computers, Iʼve never tried it.

P: I think thing like that, they probably have systems to deal with misuse.

M: Yeah they probably have systems in place or guess it would become apparent after a while.

S: Thereʼs an age issue here too. Because obviously, there are people who are over a certain age who have not gone through the same system and their buying habits have stayed the same as they were when they were younger. ! 92

Page 93: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

C: No no, my Dad uses Spotify and heʼs almost 50.

S: Yeah I mean, well, who bought Susan Boyleʼs album?

P: My Grandad.

S: Thats the thing theres more people over 60, than there are children in this country. Thatʼs a massive market. They might not buy things as much, they may be more thrifty, but at the end of the day they will still buy stuff it they want to. That really is a huge market.

Individual summing of participants responses to peer to peer file sharing:

C: I would want to use it, Iʼd learn how to use it if Spotify wasnʼt available and if my friends has rubbish music tastes. Itʼs a technical thing for me. If someone taught me how to use it, then Iʼll download. itʼs not the legal side of it, no. Because I just think that Iʼm one little fish and theyʼre not going to find me.

K: I think I donʼt really want to use it. Iʼm worried that itʼs going to much up my computer and thats the main issue really. I have experience of it damaging my computer before and because my laptop is quite new-ish and I want it to stay nice. Thats it really.

M: Thatʼs like mine yeah, I downloaded some sketchy stuff and it broke my pc.

K: yeah, I just download nothing because I donʼt want any rubbish on it.

S: See I download so much crap and the past couple of years Iʼve gone through so many laptops and its just a case of getting the software on to it. Also I have a rubbish internet connection at the moment, it just circumstances. Once Iʼve got it all sorted, I probably will have bit torrent on there. Iʼd probably use it from time to time.

K: Itʼs never really bothered me that its free. i would rather pay money, happily. When I say I buy things off iTunes, Iʼll buy an album every couple of months. But Iʼd rather pay 7.99 for one album every few months than pay to get my laptop fixed or have to get a new laptop. i suppose the free thing does tempt me a little bit, but I think because Iʼve got so much music, from when I was younger and downloading then. Iʼve go so much, I donʼt really need it all the time and like I said, Iʼll still go out and by the occasional CD as well.

C: I think that if Iʼm paying for an album, Iʼd rather have the physical product, to be album to hold it and say, ʻthis is what Iʼve paid forʼ.

K: I think, as well, whatʼs nice with iTunes, in a way, in somethings it does help you feel like you have the physical product. For example, I downloaded Billy Talents new album and it came with, obviously the album cover, and it came with a video and a digital booklet thing. Which is still quite nice because you can still see it, its not there to hold in your hand, but it kind of tempts you further I guess.

S: Image marketing in music has always been huge and thats where that comes from.

M: Yeah. Iʼve bought 7” vinyls in the past because they look nice. Iʼve only got two of them, but again, I was walking round a record shop, it was on the side, fairly inexpensive so I got it. It was just in a interesting artwork and it was a coloured vinyl. I looked at it and thought that it was novel. Itʼs just the tangibility of it.! 93

Page 94: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

S: Iʼve got a relatively modest vinyl collection and its half mine and half what my Dad has passed on to me. So it is almost all about novelty with that. I donʼt even have my turntable plugged in at the moment because have everything on mp3 that Iʼve got on vinyl. So you donʼt even have to play it.

M: No itʼs just the fact that itʼs just there.

S: And the whole package is nice. It is nice.

M: Just like having something to hang on the wall, its just like having a picture.

S: Yeah or a t-shirt.

K: Yeah I was going to say its just like having a poster isnʼt it.

M: I know this lad who bought one of those thing and you put all your CD case in them. You get the ones with the interesting cases and its a shape and presents a nice little montage sort of thing of your CDs to hang up on the wall.

With the whole peer to peer thing for me, its partly a technical thing and also, and this might be a sweeping statement, but I think its quite a British thing that it is ingrained into you that paying for something is where the quality is. I was definitely brought up like that anyway, I donʼt know about anyone else.

C: You get what you pay for.

M: Yeah exactly, you get what you pay for, it you par for it, thats where the quality is. Theres something sort of dodgy and not quite right about getting it for free. Even if you buy stuff on the market, something in your brain is telling you, ʻif you got it from a shop, it would be betterʼ. (laughter) You know its not true, but it just seems to be ingrained in me.

P: I agree with James, having a CD, well its not a million miles better quality but when you analyse it down to quality. You can download something thats not quite as good as a CD. I wouldnʼt be able to tell the different on my set up. If you play an mp3 that you got a download and then you put a CD in, you know on quality speakers, you would be able to tell the difference, but it still doesnʼt affect me. If I had a professional set up mybe it would be different.

S: Your also not an audiophile.

P: Yeah me and my desktop with 2.1 standard speakers, I canʼt tell the difference.

Its tending towards whatever people find the easiest method of accessing music that they use then.

M: Other than that indefinable thing and feeling of being able to hold it in your hand.

S: I dunno, since Iʼve started buying vinyl, now I just donʼt like CDs. Iʼll download it for free, but Iʼd rather have it on vinyl if I like it. It just a thing I have.M: Theres just something purer about vinyl I guess. Itʼs bigger and itʼs prettier.

! 94

Page 95: David Breese Undergraduate Dissertation

! 95


Top Related