Cockrill and Goode (2012)
|Cockrill and Goode (2012)|
|Title:||DVD Pirating Intentions: Angels, Devils, Chancers and Receivers|
|Author(s):||Cockrill, A., Goode, M. M.|
|Citation:||Cockrill, A., & Goode, M. M. (2012). DVD Pirating Intentions: Angels, Devils, Chancers and Receivers. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 11(1), 1-10.|
|Key Related Studies:|
|About the Data|
|Data Description:||The study began with two subsamples: (1) 300 (18-25 year olds) students in the South Wales area of the UK; (2) 300 (varying ages) UK residents in London, Leeds, Glasgow and Bristol. However, the total useable sample set consisted of 482 cases.
The final sample consisted of 46% women and 53% men. Sixty-five percent were 18-25 years old, 23% were 26-35 years old, and 13% were 36 years and older. 44% were students and 53% were either employed or self employed. 1% were retired, unemployed, or stay-at-home parents.
|Data Type:||Primary data|
|Secondary Data Sources:|
|Data Collection Methods:|
|Data Analysis Methods:|
|Cross Country Study?:||No|
|Government or policy study?:||No|
|Time Period(s) of Collection:||
Digital piracy is perceived as a considerable problem by the film industry, and numerous preventative strategies have been introduced, but so far with limited success. This paper explores DVD piracy in particular, and focuses on identifying different types of pirating behaviour and the antecedents to this behaviour. Four distinct types of ‘pirates’ were identified, based on a cross-sectional sample of UK adults. These groups were serious pirates (‘Devils’), opportunists (‘Chancers’), receivers (‘Receivers’) and non-pirates (‘Angels’). A structural equation modelling approach was used to establish the importance of key antecedents for the overall sample and the four sub groups. The base model fitted the overall sample very well as for the sub group ‘Chancers’, but as expected, there were significant differences in model fit and the importance of key variables between the different behaviour types. The construct of ‘perceived harm’ emerged as an important differentiator in all models. The results suggest that targeting anti-pirating measures specifically at different types of behaviour and their antecedents may increase the effectiveness of such measures and also assist with the efficient allocation of limited resources in this area.
Main Results of the Study
- Four different types of pirating behavior occur: (1) angels (22%), who are not a threat; (2) receivers (27%), who do not actively pirate themselves but do not mind passively receiving pirated content; (3) chancers (23%), who use an opportunity to and pirate when they see it, but do not engage in this behavior frequently; (4) devils (largest group at 29%), who are the most active pirates, see no harm no their behavior, and are not affected by ethical considerations.
- Ethical considerations and crime perception do not seem to be important considerations when pirating behavioral is considered, as the relationship is only marginally significant. Most people do not view pirating as an ethical issue.
- Perceived harm has the strongest impact on behavioral intentions, both for the overall sample and for all groups (except for the angels), and overall there is a strong perception that pirating does not cause any harm.
- The nature of this research suggested that the attitudinal constructs are interlinked: the perception of harm caused by pirating and ethical considerations are interlinked, and with concepts of fair price, and perceived harm and perceived value are related.
Policy Implications as Stated By Author
- Since perceived harm was the most important contributor to pirating intentions, one of the key objectives for the film industry has to be to raise awareness of the true damage that piracy causes. A way forward would be to develop strategies and advertising campaigns that focus on lost profits not just for the film industry but also for distributors and intermediaries and that are based on the effects of the 'small people', rather than 'big bosses' in industries concerned.
- To raise awareness toward ethical issues, effective campaigns should emphasize realistically the serious and harmful effects of piracy, rather than focusing on 'downloading is stealing.'
- A more promising avenue might be the cooperation between governments, industry and Internet service providers to identify, warn and possibly punish copyright offenders (exclude them from the Internet).
Coverage of Study
|Level of aggregation:||Individual|
|Period of material under study:||Prior to 2012|