Difference between revisions of "Towse (2013)"
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|Source={{Source | |Source={{Source | ||
|Name of Study=Towse (2013) | |Name of Study=Towse (2013) | ||
− | |Author= | + | |Author=Towse, R.; |
|Title=The Economic Effects of Digitization on the Administration of Musical Copyrights | |Title=The Economic Effects of Digitization on the Administration of Musical Copyrights | ||
|Year=2013 | |Year=2013 | ||
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
|Reference=Towse (2012); | |Reference=Towse (2012); | ||
|Plain Text Proposition=Digital technology is providing great challenges for the music industry and collecting societies within it, particularly with the adoption of new music streaming services. There is much collaboration taking place between societies and agencies in different territories; this is to be encouraged. While there is much discussion about the potential need for further regulation, it is recommended that regulation is not added while this collaboration takes place in order to avoid creating extra complexity. | |Plain Text Proposition=Digital technology is providing great challenges for the music industry and collecting societies within it, particularly with the adoption of new music streaming services. There is much collaboration taking place between societies and agencies in different territories; this is to be encouraged. While there is much discussion about the potential need for further regulation, it is recommended that regulation is not added while this collaboration takes place in order to avoid creating extra complexity. | ||
− | |FundamentalIssue=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) | + | |FundamentalIssue=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) |
− | |EvidenceBasedPolicy=D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability) | + | |EvidenceBasedPolicy=D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability) |
|Discipline=D23: Organizational Behavior • Transaction Costs • Property Rights, D42: Monopoly, L31: Nonprofit Institutions • NGOs | |Discipline=D23: Organizational Behavior • Transaction Costs • Property Rights, D42: Monopoly, L31: Nonprofit Institutions • NGOs | ||
− | |Intervention-Response=* The non-profit nature of collecting societies has led to collaboration over how to deal with the challenges of new technologies and multi-territorial licensing | + | |Intervention-Response=* The non-profit nature of collecting societies has led to collaboration over how to deal with the challenges of new technologies and multi-territorial licensing* Less intervention by regulation from the state is recommended during this process |
− | * Less intervention by regulation from the state is recommended during this process | ||
|Description of Data=This study examines the effect of digitisation on sales in the music industry, with a particular focus on collecting societies. The studies uses sales data from the financial reporting provided by performing right collecting society, PRS for Music. | |Description of Data=This study examines the effect of digitisation on sales in the music industry, with a particular focus on collecting societies. The studies uses sales data from the financial reporting provided by performing right collecting society, PRS for Music. | ||
|Data Year=2008-2013 | |Data Year=2008-2013 | ||
|Data Type=Secondary data | |Data Type=Secondary data | ||
− | |Data Source=CISAC Annual Report 2008; CISAC Annual Report 2013; BPI Annual Yearbook 2013; PRS | + | |Data Source=CISAC Annual Report 2008;CISAC Annual Report 2013;BPI Annual Yearbook 2013;PRS for Music |
|Method of Collection=Qualitative Collection Methods, Case Study, Qualitative content/text mining | |Method of Collection=Qualitative Collection Methods, Case Study, Qualitative content/text mining | ||
|Method of Analysis=Quantitative Analysis Methods, Descriptive statistics (counting; means reporting; cross-tabulation) | |Method of Analysis=Quantitative Analysis Methods, Descriptive statistics (counting; means reporting; cross-tabulation) | ||
|Industry=Sound recording and music publishing; | |Industry=Sound recording and music publishing; | ||
− | |Country=European Union; United Kingdom; United States; | + | |Country=European Union;United Kingdom;United States; |
|Cross-country=Yes | |Cross-country=Yes | ||
|Comparative=No | |Comparative=No | ||
Line 31: | Line 30: | ||
|Dataset={{Dataset | |Dataset={{Dataset | ||
|Sample Size=1 | |Sample Size=1 | ||
− | |Level of Aggregation=Collecting society financial data | + | |Level of Aggregation=Collecting society financial data |
|Data Material Year=2008-013 | |Data Material Year=2008-013 | ||
}} | }} | ||
}} | }} |
Latest revision as of 13:18, 13 April 2021
Contents
Source Details
Towse (2013) | |
Title: | The Economic Effects of Digitization on the Administration of Musical Copyrights |
Author(s): | Towse, R. |
Year: | 2013 |
Citation: | Towse, Ruth. The economic effects of digitization on the administration of musical copyrights. Review of Economic Research on Copyright Issues 10.2 (2013): 55-67. |
Link(s): | Definitive , Open Access |
Key Related Studies: | |
Discipline: | |
Linked by: | Towse (2017) |
About the Data | |
Data Description: | This study examines the effect of digitisation on sales in the music industry, with a particular focus on collecting societies. The studies uses sales data from the financial reporting provided by performing right collecting society, PRS for Music. |
Data Type: | Secondary data |
Secondary Data Sources: | |
Data Collection Methods: | |
Data Analysis Methods: | |
Industry(ies): | |
Country(ies): | |
Cross Country Study?: | Yes |
Comparative Study?: | No |
Literature review?: | No |
Government or policy study?: | Yes |
Time Period(s) of Collection: |
|
Funder(s): |
Abstract
Digitization has had a profound effect on the management of musical copyrights in terms of data requirements and has vastly increased the volume of transactions: both impacts have raised net costs of administration to collecting societies. This paper explores these points using information provided by PRS for Music, the UK’s collecting society managing musical rights and considers them in the wider context of moves on the political front to increase competition in rights management as well as to promote multi-territorial licensing within the EU. An important question for economists is whether the natural monopoly argument for single national collective rights management using blanket licensing still holds up with digitization of music and management of musical rights. This paper suggests that collaborative concentration may be preferable to competition.
Main Results of the Study
Digital technology is providing great challenges for the music industry and collecting societies within it, particularly with the adoption of new music streaming services. There is much collaboration taking place between societies and agencies in different territories; this is to be encouraged. While there is much discussion about the potential need for further regulation, it is recommended that regulation is not added while this collaboration takes place in order to avoid creating extra complexity.
Policy Implications as Stated By Author
- The non-profit nature of collecting societies has led to collaboration over how to deal with the challenges of new technologies and multi-territorial licensing* Less intervention by regulation from the state is recommended during this process
Coverage of Study
Datasets
Sample size: | 1 |
Level of aggregation: | Collecting society financial data |
Period of material under study: | 2008-013 |