Liebowitz (2006b)

From Copyright EVIDENCE

Advertising Architectural Publishing of books, periodicals and other publishing Programming and broadcasting Computer programming Computer consultancy Creative, arts and entertainment Cultural education

Film and motion pictures Sound recording and music publishing Photographic activities PR and communication Software publishing (including video games) Specialised design Television programmes Translation and interpretation

1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare 2. Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)? 3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors) 4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption) 5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)

A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right) B. Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction) C. Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing) D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability) E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts) F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Source Details

Liebowitz (2006b)
Title: File-Sharing: Creative Destruction or just Plain Destruction?
Author(s): Liebowitz, S. J.
Year: 2006
Citation: Liebowitz, S. J. (2006). File Sharing: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?*. Journal of Law and Economics, 49(1), 1-28.
Link(s): Definitive , Open Access
Key Related Studies:
Discipline:
Linked by: Ahn and Yooney (2008)
About the Data
Data Description: Data are taken from various reports and compared against each other to test conclusions.
Data Type: Secondary data
Secondary Data Sources:
Data Collection Methods:
Data Analysis Methods:
Industry(ies):
Country(ies):
Cross Country Study?: No
Comparative Study?: No
Literature review?: Yes
Government or policy study?: No
Time Period(s) of Collection:
  • Various
Funder(s):

Abstract

The impact of copying, in the form of file-sharing, has become a stormy policy issue. Previous copying technologies have mostly failed to live up to the extravagant predictions of harm that arose with those new technologies although precise measurements of copying's impact was rarely accomplished or attempted. One impediment to measuring the impact of copying with prior technologies was the difficulty of measuring copying activity. File-sharing is the newest technology for making copies and carries with it the possibility of more precise measurement of copying than has been possible in the past. This paper examines the measurement of file-sharing activity, the theory of file-sharing's likely impact, and the impact of file-sharing. Analysis of various data sets indicate that they do not yet live up to their hoped for precision. Data limitations not withstanding, the evidence seems compelling that file-sharing is responsible for the recent large decline in CD sales for which it has been blamed.

Main Results of the Study

- Given the flawed setup of recent surveys, it is likely that the impact of file-sharing is larger than what has been reported.

- The pattern of file-sharing’s birth and rapid growth followed immediately by the unusually large decline in the sound recording market supports a claim that file-sharing is responsible for the decline in sales. Add to this the predictions of economic theory that file-sharing should lead to a decline in sales and we have what appears to be a very strong case that file-sharing is the cause of the decline.

- Overall, the evidence appears to be that the lawsuits had an initial negative impact on files-haring, as hoped by the RIAA, but after this initial decline the impact of the lawsuits appears to be wearing off.

Policy Implications as Stated By Author

- Economists are often merely consumers of data but particularly in markets that are new, or where data vendors have not yet created and demonstrated the value of their methodologies, we need to heed the caveat emptor warning before we accept the numbers that we are all so eager to put to use.



Coverage of Study

Coverage of Fundamental Issues
Issue Included within Study
Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare
Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)?
Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors)
Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption)
Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)
Green-tick.png
Coverage of Evidence Based Policies
Issue Included within Study
Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right)
Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction)
Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing)
Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability)
Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts)
Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)
Green-tick.png

Datasets

Sample size: 6
Level of aggregation: Survey source
Period of material under study: Not stated


Sample size: 60,000.000
Level of aggregation: User
Period of material under study: Not stated