Blog 2

This blog will center around why P2P software is controversial.

I used google to find these sites because the way they deliver their results (most pages linked to them) helps the most when trying to find the most concrete and solid knowledge on this subject.

I searched for "p2p file sharing effects on record sales" and the best site I found was: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070212-8813.html

1) Ken Fisher of ARS TECHNICA is responsible for this website article.
2) This site is funded by CondeNet Inc.
3) This information was published on February 12th, 2007, so it is fairly current information.
4) The main argument and opinion given on this site is that p2p file sharing has had no noticeable impact on record sales. The research used to support this found that file sharing affected no more than .7% of record sales. It concluded that popular music will have both high downloads and a high purchase rate. This was based on a study which tracked a p2p server and Nielsen Soundscan for a particular music product. An interesting point it rbings up is that record companies rely on "units shipped" rather than "units sold" to determine how many units they sell. In this economy, places like Best Buy do not want merchandise sitting around so they try to order the lowest amount possible. This would account for the 80 million cd sales drop, not piracy, whcih accounts for about 6 million.
5) The main point missing from this site is that of the artists. Do they like it when their music is constantly downloaded for free? Whether they do or do not is not told in this article. A site funded by the record industry would be a good place to look for a second source.

The second phrase I searched for on google was: p2p file sharing record sales fall which found this website: http://www.thelongtail.com/the_long_tail/2005/11/the_effect_of_p.html

1) This was written by Chirs Anderson, a blogger from "The Long Tail" who quotes almost exclusively from a report written by David Blacburn, a Harvard PhD student.
2) This site is funded by the Wired Blog Network.
3) This article was published on November 24, 2005, which is not too current but it presents some intriguing points that I had not thought of.
4) The main argument given on thsi site is that piracy does hurt record sales, but it's effects can best be seen at the top. In other words, people are more likely to download, rather than purchase, more popular music. Therefore leaving realatively underground albums selling at a stable clip and more popular albums suffering greatly. This could easily explain the lack of "platinum" albums in recent years, nobody wants to buy the new Kanye West CD because everybody can just download it. Some math from the article states that if there were 30% less file sharing, the msot popular record would leap from sales of (for example) 130,000 to 160,000. Which goes without saying that without any file sharing the totals would nearly double. The math in this article also shows how lower ranked albums are not greatly affected by piracy, but if good artists are not encouraged to release more music due to album sales then tehre will be less music to purchase or download. A big factor in the music industry that this article brings up is that artists will not want to continue to make music if they know they could be selling twice as much without piracy. An intriguing topic that I hope to cover in my project.
5) The main viewpoint missing from this site is what was covered in my first site: the downloaderss perspective. I think tehse two site contrast each other nicely and give a wide spectrum of information.