Difference between revisions of "Waldfogel (2012) 2"

From Copyright EVIDENCE
 
Line 2: Line 2:
 
|Source={{Source
 
|Source={{Source
 
|Name of Study=Waldfogel (2012)
 
|Name of Study=Waldfogel (2012)
|Author=Joel Waldfogel;
+
|Author=Waldfogel, J.;
 
|Title=Copyright Protection, Technological Change, and the Quality of New Products: Evidence from Recorded Music Since Napster
 
|Title=Copyright Protection, Technological Change, and the Quality of New Products: Evidence from Recorded Music Since Napster
 
|Year=2012
 
|Year=2012
Line 9: Line 9:
 
of music released since 1999, and the two usage-based indices suggest an increase since then. Researchers and policy makers thinking about the strength of copy-right protection should supplement their attention to producer surplus with concern for consumer surplus.
 
of music released since 1999, and the two usage-based indices suggest an increase since then. Researchers and policy makers thinking about the strength of copy-right protection should supplement their attention to producer surplus with concern for consumer surplus.
 
|Link=http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/665824?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
 
|Link=http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/665824?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
|Reference=Handke (2006); Oberholzer-Gee and Strumpf (2007); Boldrin and Levine (2008); Waldfogel (2011);
+
|Reference=Handke (2006);Oberholzer-Gee and Strumpf (2007);Boldrin and Levine (2008);Waldfogel (2011);
|Plain Text Proposition=• Overall, the quality of new recorded music has not fallen since the introduction of Napster in 1999, and may in fact be higher.  This is demonstrable despite substantial revenue (and potentially profitability) declines.
+
|Plain Text Proposition=• Overall, the quality of new recorded music has not fallen since the introduction of Napster in 1999, and may in fact be higher.  This is demonstrable despite substantial revenue (and potentially profitability) declines.• Based on a share of the top 100 albums of each decade, independent labels have significantly increased supply post-Napster. From the 1980’s – 1990’s, 50% or less of the top 100 albums were produced by independent labels. This increased to 60% following the advent of Napster in 1999. • The author theorises that whilst technology has reduced copyright protection in the music industry, similar technological changes in creative programs (such as Pro Tools), and reductions in distribution model costs, have resulted in an increased creative output.
 
+
|FundamentalIssue=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)?
• Based on a share of the top 100 albums of each decade, independent labels have significantly increased supply post-Napster. From the 1980’s – 1990’s, 50% or less of the top 100 albums were produced by independent labels. This increased to 60% following the advent of Napster in 1999.  
+
|EvidenceBasedPolicy=E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts)
 
 
• The author theorises that whilst technology has reduced copyright protection in the music industry, similar technological changes in creative programs (such as Pro Tools), and reductions in distribution model costs, have resulted in an increased creative output.
 
|FundamentalIssue=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)?,
 
|EvidenceBasedPolicy=E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts),
 
 
|Discipline=O34: Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital, O4: Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity
 
|Discipline=O34: Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital, O4: Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity
 
|Intervention-Response=• Given that revenue decline has not impacted the quality of music produced following the introduction of Napster, the author suggests that policy makers should also focus on consumer surplus (as opposed to only producer surplus).
 
|Intervention-Response=• Given that revenue decline has not impacted the quality of music produced following the introduction of Napster, the author suggests that policy makers should also focus on consumer surplus (as opposed to only producer surplus).
Line 25: Line 21:
 
|Method of Analysis=Quantitative Analysis Methods, Regression Analysis
 
|Method of Analysis=Quantitative Analysis Methods, Regression Analysis
 
|Industry=Sound recording and music publishing;
 
|Industry=Sound recording and music publishing;
|Country=United States; Canada; England; Ireland;
+
|Country=United States;Canada;England;Ireland;
 
|Cross-country=No
 
|Cross-country=No
 
|Comparative=No
 
|Comparative=No
Line 31: Line 27:
 
|Literature review=No
 
|Literature review=No
 
}}
 
}}
|Dataset=
 
 
}}
 
}}

Latest revision as of 07:11, 21 May 2020

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

Waldfogel (2012)
Title: Copyright Protection, Technological Change, and the Quality of New Products: Evidence from Recorded Music Since Napster
Author(s): Waldfogel, J.
Year: 2012
Citation: Waldfogel, J. (2012) Copyright Protection, Technological Change, and the Quality of New Products: Evidence from Recorded Music Since Napster. The Journal of Law & Economics, Vol. 55, No.4 (November 2012), 715-740
Link(s): Open Access
Key Related Studies:
Discipline:
Linked by:
About the Data
Data Description: The study quantifies changes and evolution in music quality over time. Firstly, critic-based retrospective lists (for example, Rolling Stone’s 500 best albums) are used to create an index of the number of high-quality albums released since 1960. Secondly, service flow, as determined by sales and airplay time, is used to create two separate indices to determine the quality of the music. 1999, being the year Napster was established, is used as a crucial indicator in the data.
Data Type: Primary and Secondary data
Secondary Data Sources:
Data Collection Methods:
Data Analysis Methods:
Industry(ies):
Country(ies):
Cross Country Study?: No
Comparative Study?: No
Literature review?: No
Government or policy study?: No
Time Period(s) of Collection:
  • 1960-1999
  • 1999-2010
Funder(s):

Abstract

While some recent technological changes reduced revenue for digital products, other changes reduced the costs of bringing creative works to market. Therefore, we do not know whether copyright protection now provides weaker incentives to bring forth new products. This paper assesses the quality of new recorded music since Napster was established in 1999. First, I create an index of high-quality music from critics’ retrospective lists. Next, I rely on music sales and airplay data, using the idea that if one vintage’s music is better than another’s, its superior quality should generate higher sales or greater airplay through time, after accounting for depreciation. I find no evidence of a reduction in the quality of music released since 1999, and the two usage-based indices suggest an increase since then. Researchers and policy makers thinking about the strength of copy-right protection should supplement their attention to producer surplus with concern for consumer surplus.

Main Results of the Study

• Overall, the quality of new recorded music has not fallen since the introduction of Napster in 1999, and may in fact be higher. This is demonstrable despite substantial revenue (and potentially profitability) declines.• Based on a share of the top 100 albums of each decade, independent labels have significantly increased supply post-Napster. From the 1980’s – 1990’s, 50% or less of the top 100 albums were produced by independent labels. This increased to 60% following the advent of Napster in 1999. • The author theorises that whilst technology has reduced copyright protection in the music industry, similar technological changes in creative programs (such as Pro Tools), and reductions in distribution model costs, have resulted in an increased creative output.

Policy Implications as Stated By Author

• Given that revenue decline has not impacted the quality of music produced following the introduction of Napster, the author suggests that policy makers should also focus on consumer surplus (as opposed to only producer surplus).


Coverage of Study

Coverage of Fundamental Issues
Issue Included within Study
Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare
Green-tick.png
Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)?
Green-tick.png
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)
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)
Green-tick.png
Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Datasets

{{{Dataset}}}