Difference between revisions of "Wang, Chen, Yang and Farn (2009)"

From Copyright EVIDENCE
m (1 revision imported)
Line 31: Line 31:
 
|Cross-country=No
 
|Cross-country=No
 
|Comparative=No
 
|Comparative=No
|Funded By=Not Stated;
+
|Government or policy=No
 +
|Literature review=No
 
}}
 
}}
 
|Dataset={{Dataset
 
|Dataset={{Dataset
 
|Sample Size=261
 
|Sample Size=261
 
|Level of Aggregation=Individual,
 
|Level of Aggregation=Individual,
|Data Material Year=January 2006 through March 2006
+
|Data Material Year=2006
 
}}
 
}}
 
}}
 
}}

Revision as of 09:55, 8 October 2016

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

Film and motion pictures Sound recording and music publishing Photographic activities PR and communication Software publishing Video game publishing 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

Wang, Chen, Yang and Farn (2009)
Title: Pirate or Buy? The Moderating Effect of Idolatry
Author(s): Wang, C.-C., Chen, C.-T., Yang, S.-C., Farn, C.-K.
Year: 2009
Citation: Wang, C. C., Chen, C. T., Yang, S. C., & Farn, C. K. (2009). Pirate or buy? The moderating effect of idolatry. Journal of Business Ethics, 90(1), 81-93.
Link(s): Definitive
Key Related Studies:
Discipline:
Linked by:
About the Data
Data Description: 350 mail-intercept personal surveys were collected from randomly selected teenagers in several metropolitan areas of Northern Taiwan from January 2006 to March 2006. The final sample size included 261 complete surveys. The majority of the respondents were between 12 and 21 years old (46.4% of the respondents were between 16 and 18 years of age); 65.9% of the respondents were female.

Surveys were organized using a Likert-type seven-point scale ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree” A pretest was used to clarify the effects of idolatry, involving 145 students.

In order to gain more insights as to the results, further interviews were conducted on a sample of high school students who own both the licensed and downloaded versions of music.

Data Type: Primary 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:
  • January 2006 through March 2006
Funder(s):

Abstract

Due to the development of information technology, music piracy has become an escalating problem. This study attempts to employ the theory of planned behavior (TPB) and the social identity theory to investigate the antecedents of downloading pop music illegally from the Internet, the relationship between the intention to illegally download music and the intention to buy music, and the moderating effects of idolatry. Data were collected from 350 teenagers in Northern Taiwan through questionnaire interviews conducted in city centers where teenagers gather. The results of partial least squares (PLS) analyses reconfirm the explanatory power of the TPB model with regard to the pop music illegal downloading behavior. However, it is interesting to note that the intention to illegally download music does not have a significant influence on the intention to buy music. This finding contradicts our common intuitions. Further analyses also reveal that idolatry moderates the relationship between the intention to illegally download music and the intention to buy music. For teenagers with high idolatry, a higher music downloading intention results in a lower buying intention. One possible explanation is the price of music CDs. Several interviews were also held to verify our results. Implications and a discussion are then provided.

Main Results of the Study

  • Results show that “attitude to illegally download music,” “subjective norms,” and “perceived behavioral control” are significantly positively related to “intention to illegally download music.”
  • Further, the relationship between “intention to illegally download music” and “intention to buy music” is not significant. This implies that the intention to illegally download music does not necessarily suppress the individual’s intention to buy CDs. This contradicts the claim that music downloading decreases CD sales, thus implying the importance of the moderating effect of idolatry.
  • Finally, “idolatry” is significantly positively related to the “intention to buy music.” When the moderating effect of “idolatry” is high, downloading behavior decreases teenagers’ buying intention.


Policy Implications as Stated By Author

  • Attitude to illegal music downloading and significant others’ influences would affect intention to illegally download music. Therefore, building a negative attitude to illegal music downloading and creating a consensus among peers is one of the methods to prevent piracy. Strengthening teenagers’ understanding of copyright and ethical education is another possible solution.
  • If the music industry cannot meet teenagers needs in buying licensed music CDs, they may resort to acquiring music through illegal channels.
  • Young people have very high price elasticity of demand for music since they are usually economically dependent. Hence, differential pricing could be a useful marketing strategy.


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)
Green-tick.png
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)
Green-tick.png
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: 261
Level of aggregation: Individual
Period of material under study: 2006