Long live music piracy!
Should this be surprising? I don't know. Coming clean (to a degree) there have been countless times when I have been given USB sticks loaded with music in the past, and what has happened. Most of the bands on there are ones I would never listen to, and some remain unlistened to even now years down the line. This is mainly due to small things like their name or CD art looking unappealing to me, something that doesn't slot in line with my tastes. In short, stuff I wouldn't buy normally. But occasionally, there are a few gem discoveries. Without my friends at uni there is no way I would have given The Birthday Massacre another thought, yet I did and now I am a fan! So sure, there might be a couple of albums I have which I shouldn't, but overall, the band have more money from me then they would otherwise have!
So maybe we should start think of the music piracy as a sort of under the radar radio show, just one without royalties being dished out. I'm sure that is enough to launch 1,000 law suits, but think about it, what was the old model? The music industry executives wanted a new band's song to be a hit. What do you do? Pay out for massive amounts for prime time radio play, prime time MTV rotation, magazine centrefolds TV spots and interviews. Basically throwing everything at the wall in the hope that we, the public, hear them, like the song, get hooked and go and buy the album. Spot the difference? it is there, but it is subtle and may need some maths...
[insert pause for mathematical fear]
I'm no economist, but to my understanding this follows the rules of game theory. The old model looses money on the advertising in the hope you buy the new album, the new model looses money on old records in the hope you buy the new ones (or other old ones not pirated). Both has a sacrifice and a benefit. But what is most interesting is that the piracy as advertising model can be seen as an extension of 'Wikinomics'; decide where you main and unique money cow is coming from, find new ways to exploit it and give everything away for free. That's the philosophy in short, and I highly recommend reading the book to get a better feel of the models of economics which run the 'web 2.0' environment we currently live in.
But should we be surprised? Anyone who has seen Rob Reid's TED breakdown of the $8 billion iPod will be aware that the economic stories of industrial wow is not all what it is cracked up to be. Now, don't get me wrong, I do not condone piracy and say it is all good (artists need to eat too of course), but maybe we need to learn to embrace it just a little. Look at what is devalued in the world yet connected to valuable cash cows, release them to the world, let them be living adverts just like those free CD's on music magazines are.
One final musing with no answer as yet, what could this mean in the larger scope of interaction design. The Internet of Things promises to be more than just the internet only better, but concepts and emotions strung together to integrate with my life. In this environment where data and experience are intertwined from birth, could piracy have an active and healthy role? Could it be a force for encouraging the legal and open data (e.g. creative commons) which make exceptional user experiences possible. It is certainly true that open standards have been the bedrock of world shifting technologies (e.g. the internet and the polio vaccine), and it is also true that open data and open experiences has yet to be fully embraced. Lets see where this leads and follow its progress.
Comments
Post a Comment