Domon, Melcarne and Ramello (2019)
|Domon, Melcarne and Ramello (2019)|
|Title:||Digital piracy in Asian countries|
|Author(s):||Koji Domon, Alessandro Melcarne, Giovanni B. Ramello|
|Citation:||Domon, K., Melcarne, A. And Ramello, B. (2019) Digital piracy in Asian countries. Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, 46(1), pp. 117 - 135|
|Key Related Studies:|
|About the Data|
|Data Description:||Data were obtained from surveys issued to undergraduate students in China, Vietnam, Korea and Japan, totalling 400 random respondents (100 per country). Variables included respondent location, demographic information, and psychological aspects e.g. feelings of guilt when engaging in piracy. A regression model was used to determine the impact of these variables on the overall likelihood to engage in piracy.|
|Data Type:||Primary data|
|Secondary Data Sources:|
|Data Collection Methods:|
|Data Analysis Methods:|
|Cross Country Study?:||Yes|
|Government or policy study?:||No|
|Time Period(s) of Collection:||
“Piracy has been one of the most flamboyant topics in the legal and economic literature of the last two decades. The increased importance assigned to copyright in national economies determined the imposing of this issue as one of the leading voices in the exports of many developed countries. However, the impact of several disruptive innovations (such as the internet and all its related technologies) has weakened the original role of copyright, thus stimulating a wide scholarly literature. While the core of this stream of literature has in general considered consumers like potential infringers and tried to check the impact of piracy on sales and industry profits, a few papers have considered the behavioral perspective. This aspect becomes crucial if one wants to take consumers’ viewpoint into account, while studying the inner factors that led them to infringe copyright. Yet, behavioral law and economics literature teaches us that beside any normative claims, the individuals’ compliance to the law depends on a complex interaction of factors including risk perception, size of sanctions, psychological determinants, and cultural values which jointly determine the social norms that must be properly understood in order to make efficient laws. If a handful of papers have already tried to gain insights on consumers’ behavior in western countries, the issue is still largely neglected in many countries in the rest of the world. This paper takes advantage of a survey conducted through field research in four Asian countries, (China, Japan, Korea and Vietnam) in order to provide an innovative picture of consumers’ behavior and sketch out some more general policy implications.”
Main Results of the Study
The study finds that local, non-legal rules and social norms are more fundamental to determining piracy than legal frameworks:
• Firstly, the study concludes that gender and economic justifications (e.g. cost-saving) have no significant correlation with determining engagement with piracy.
• Secondly, the data suggests that piracy behaviours diverge even across countries with similar legal frameworks. People in China and Korea are more likely to use P2P networks, whereas people in Japan are less likely to engage in piracy. The authors note that Japan and Korea have similar copyright systems, yet the differences between suggest this is not a determinant of piratical behaviour.
• Thirdly, in measuring feelings of guilt when engaging in piratical behaviour, the study finds that this impacts likelihood to engage; for example, people in Japan are least likely to use P2P, and correspondingly feel the most guilt when engaging in such behaviours. As such, having dismissed the significance of the copyright legal system, variance in ethical standards and social norms across countries are more likely to determine likelihood to infringe.
Policy Implications as Stated By Author
Having concluded that social norms have a stronger impact on behaviour than the legal framework, the authors suggest: (i) that a “one size fits all” approach to tackling piracy is inappropriate, and each country would be better to adopt their own tailored actions, and (ii) if persistent social norma and the legal framework diverge greatly, legislators may be better to look at the former for guidance.