Comment by thanksgiving
10 hours ago
> The idea that piracy helps audiences find and then buy the stuff they like, is also, for the most part, wishful thinking.
You are thinking logically. Humans are NOT logical.
In some other countries, Politicians hold huge banquets right before election day. Lots of people eat at these banquets. They could go vote for someone else after eating the free food because it is a secret ballot. However, overwhelmingly those who got to eat the free food will vote for the people who reliably show up to feed them every election. Why? Because humans are not logical.
Same applies here. You'd think people have already gotten free books or music or whatever. But if they like something, they want to be a part of it. Even if they don't personally pay for it, If they really like it, they will share it with others. Who in turn will likely pay for it.
Also I remember something profound I read when I was younger. The opposite of love isn't hate, it is apathy. The fear for anything that is worthy of copyright isn't piracy, it is being irrelevant and forgotten, out of the zeitgeist. If piracy can keep something relevant, it is worth the cost.
Anecdotally, a pro-audio software company I worked with had to fire 1/3 of the company when their copy-protection was cracked and sales tanked immediately afterwards, and recovered once a new copy-protection scheme was developed and applied. And just to be clear, software licenses in direct-to-user sales are not that company's only revenue stream (they sell hardware and software to OEMs).
This is to say, the evidence in this natural experiment points towards piracy reducing sales by a lot.
Well, "had to."
I think the EU study is bogus too. Largely based on questionaires on self-reporting.
If it was professional audio, then your main concern would be acquiring business sales, right? If certain companies stopped paying after a new crack comes out then that sounds like a rather blatant example of piracy that could have been pursued legally.