Most internet pirates say they would pay for content

News.com.au and CoreData conducted a survey about illegal downloads, the survey got over 7000 responses and found that the majority of people would pay for things they download illegally if it was made available for the right price.

The study found that users who typically download movies would be willing to pay the most, up to $10, if it was made available in a format that they could use how they wanted. While the majority of music downloaders were only willing to pay 50 cents.

Australian Pirate Party president David Crafti says, "People aren't just looking for a free ride. They're living in the modern world and expecting business models to keep up with them."

"They just want to know that they've got the data, they can watch it whenever they want, on whatever device they want, they can watch it three months later, or a year later, and not have any time limitations."

Neil Gane executive director of anti-piracy group Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft responded to the survey as well saying, "This is something that consumers obviously want, and it's something that legitimate businesses are striving for."

"Movie industries obviously want to make their content available online, but they can't compete currently with a free alternative that's perpetrated through theft. "Once there is a level playing field, I think you'll begin to see a lot more flexible, innovative business models."

Mr. Gane also said that they prices that users think are reasonable are unrealistic for the music and film industry.

download survy

Thanks to forum member Hum for the story.
Image courtesy of news.com.au

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Nintendo announces Wii Party amidst declining profits

Next Story

Apple's Gianduia framework to rival Flash and Silverlight?

155 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

my steam account is perfect examble of this before steam i pirated pretty much everything..

now my steam account has upwards of 70 games, a good platform and a good service will get my $$

doesnt make it right but meh

Midgetman said,
my steam account is perfect examble of this before steam i pirated pretty much everything..

now my steam account has upwards of 70 games, a good platform and a good service will get my $

doesnt make it right but meh


That's exactly the situation of many Steam users, and best thing is you can buy and play from anywhere in the world. (my collection is a little more modest at just 20 games or so)
iTunes is a let down however, even if you want to pay for your music they won't sell it to you if you are from certain countries.

So pirates are willing to pay a cent a song. Yeah, sure they are willing to pay for content.
All people I know who pirate stuff (and we are talking about a lot) say they are not willing to pay for software, movies or music. These studies are wrong.

babyHacker said,
So pirates are willing to pay a cent a song. Yeah, sure they are willing to pay for content.
All people I know who pirate stuff (and we are talking about a lot) say they are not willing to pay for software, movies or music. These studies are wrong.

The people you know never buy new hardware for their computers or new computers? They are paying for software when they do that. Absolute statements are usually dumb and make the person saying them look like a liar.

I never bought as much music as since DRM free quality music was for sale. However the day i buy a movie........don't think so. Or the prices should really drop immensely. I mean 20$ for a pic you're going to watch once, twice max?

With things like Guevera there's no real reason to pirate music, and I often do just buy the CD because I like having a CD to hold.

Where I find pirating necessary is TV and Movies. Some movies I can never see because they don't get to Australia, some are so cultish that the chances of finding them are nil and there's of course the wait between seeing the movie and buying the DVD (Which I do whenever I have the option)

TV is a different thing altogether, often I would have to wait 6 weeks after a show airs in the states to see it or possibly longer (Dollhouse and Dexter leap to mind), sometimes it only airs on pay TV which I can't afford (Real Time With Bill Maher is a good example) and sometimes I just don't know if it's even going to be on TV, or I know it won't get a DVD release (Drive)

Often times I'll look on American iTunes and see something that I would gladly pay for, but it's not available in my region so i'm left with no option. Several times I've had money in my hand that i want to spend on a DVD of a show or movie I want to see but there's no one willing to take my money

I think music is cheap enough. I buy albums for a tenner or less here in the UK and ... well, what's expensive about that? I don't make that much money but I listen to the albums I buy a LOT ... so I get great value from them. Every single person here complaining in the UK about prices (I wont comment on elsewhere) is a cheap punk. Pirating because you can't afford it is something I did when I was a 10 year old ... then I grew up and realised that the world isn't free. How would you like it if you went to work, and at the end of the month your boss paid you 10% of what you should have and said "Sorry, I think you're too expensive, so I kept back some of the money and kept the work you did for me". Pirates are scum. And this survey means nothing. Actions speak louder and just because they SAY they'll buy it, doesn't mean they will. Pirates steal because it's free... not because it's 'cheaper'...

Neil Gane said,
"Once there is a level playing field, I think you'll begin to see a lot more flexible, innovative business models."
That is called putting the cart before the horse. If you want to stop piracy (which is not even a remote possibility) - so if you actually want to reduce piracy by a reasonable amount and continue to make profits then you should prioritize introducing 'innovative' business models.

I think the prices flat out s*** I got into a store and buy a CD that is let say 10 years old and I am paying 16.99 for it?
I walk out the door

sullysnet said,
I think the prices flat out s*** I got into a store and buy a CD that is let say 10 years old and I am paying 16.99 for it?
I walk out the door

I very rarely buy physical CDs now, they are just too expensive when you can download albums for £6/£7 and compilations for less than £10 from iTunes, Napster, Amazon etc.

"Once there is a level playing field, I think you'll begin to see a lot more flexible, innovative business models."

Don't hold your breath. Company will always like consumers try to grab the bigger side of the stick.

If you look at Hulu you can see the trend easily, and this is just paying with 'ads'.


Other models are having success like Netflix, last.fm, and is even keeping the Zune alive.


(From my own personal experience with friends, the Zune subscription is one of the best models to circumvent having to pirate music. Being able to grab whatever song or album you want from your player or computer is a nice alternative to digging through torrents and doing it legally.)

these music label companies are just junk and only in it for the money and the employees should be shot and hung to dry, i agree with those who say that they would support the artist if they downloaded the content to try it out and if they liked it then they would support the artist not the music label junk comps. these restrictions on stuff need to go as it only hurts everybody and the ones who made those restrictions have no life and want to control what your entitled to do without any restrictions, be open and that will solve all your problems and the ones who made the restrictions should be out of a job and live on the street till they perish(nobody would care that they were here at all)

I think the reason a good number of people do it is because of the restrictions on the paid product. It's ludicrous. When I first got my iPod, I felt I should do the "right" thing, and downloaded a lot of things from the iTunes store. However, when I connect my iPod to the bluetooth in my car (the Microsoft Sync system), it can't play those songs. "Restricted content", it says. I had to go out and download a copy of those songs I could actually listen to. (I didn't feel bad about this, as it was just a copy of something I had already paid for once.) But if they are going to cripple the product when there's a free version out there--free as in speech AND free as in beer, as Stallman would say--they can't be too surprised when their sales go down.

Personally I disagree. Regardless of the price people will pirate it. Hell allow it to be distributed for free via a single channel and people will download it via channels that don't have permission to distribute the content. People do what is easier and cheaper for them and if the content hits their monetary bar it will be only a few years before they get set in their ways and then expect an even lower price.

Smigit said,
Personally I disagree. Regardless of the price people will pirate it. Hell allow it to be distributed for free via a single channel and people will download it via channels that don't have permission to distribute the content. People do what is easier and cheaper for them and if the content hits their monetary bar it will be only a few years before they get set in their ways and then expect an even lower price.
Good point, the content distributors should make their content available in the easiest way possible for the customer.

movie/tv show, I'm already willing to pay BUT when they include the freaking French QC dubbed version! I see on the TV my shows, 3-5 months later it's out on dvd/blue-ray but hey, living in quebec, the show is only english, something have spanish or other foreign language, but no french! Something they put french subs on it, and even worst if we check something like stargate, season 1-3 english/frensh, 4-8 english (something spanish/italian/portugal), season 9 and 10, english and french* where * stand for "some episodes only". WTF, some episode only???

Then, I see in france the same dvd/blu-ray. Hell, it have french qc dubbed version on it!!! Since my blu-ray isn't region free, I'm force to use torrent! So instead of paying for dvd/blu-ray movie, I pay for bandwidth.

That's the main problem, studio not offering the languages of the movie/tv show that is already available.

If things are worth it then id pay for it. 90% of things simply arn't worth paying stupendous amounts of money for. Hell im willing to bet that the admins who made the graphics for this site used a not so legal version of Photoshop to do it. Why they can't admit it, It proves my point that software is way to over priced.

I wouldn't pay for anything either way, because I'm completely and utterly broke 90% of the time. If I actually had to pay for all my movies and music, I'd have absolutely none at all. +1 for piracy.

I would like to see the next one about software. Adobe is extremely high priced for what they offer just to name one company, and there are open source alternatives offering what they have for free.

Operating systems aren't really that expensive, but the applications which people sell is ludicrous.

I pay for stuff if it's really cheap... like the deals on steam. I always pre-order special edition things from the bands I like too, vinyl & boxset type stuff. If I want a film I'll get it on LoveFilm or buy it on Play if it's under £5.

This survey just reiterated what I've been saying all along and the reason I got 2 warnings LOL
Pirates only pirate because legitimate software is just WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY over priced. If movies (blu rays) for example cost $10 a pop, id have an absolute crapload of em. At $40 a pop however, forget it. Adobe Creative Suite 5 Master Edition at what... $2599.99 ???? For some software?!!

This survey says it all. Lower the price of movies at the cinema, lower the price of software you buy and games, tv needs to release their stuff world wide on the same day, not 3-6 months later.

Anyway theres my rant

I know right, £40/$80 for ONE Playstation 3 game, they have got to be kidding if they think I'm going to buy any. I only have one game, and I got that at a discount.

When you think about all of those pay services like demonoid and so on. you pay a monthly rate of probly 14.99 to download as much as you want and if you don't like it simply delete it. and if there willing to pay for that service why not netflix or gamefly both seem to have a pretty reasonable model for games and movies and tv. now on the music side of things some artists can be a total letdown and you pay 14.99 for 10 to 8 songs on a cd? and get lucky enough to have a itunes bonus? thats just unfair. if music sells for 8 bucks flat no matter the artist i would say things would be a bit more fair for the consumer market that just uses limewire to get what they want.

One small point. You wouldn't be a pirate if you paid for it. So pirates wouldn't pay anything lol. I get the point though. There is a point where things are reasonable where it would lower it enough that you'd get most of the pirates to stop pirating and actually pay but then there's always going to be those who just want it for nothing. "Why pay if you don't have to?" even if it is stealing. The pirates won't stop until they're caught or get an insanely cheap price.

of course people would pau 50cents a song, because that is how much it is worth it ...
as for movies, 5$, and tv shows 2$ ... then again, games might be 10$ and others in between ...

BUT, why do it when you have DRM ad other things floating around?!

zeta_immersion said,
of course people would pau 50cents a song, because that is how much it is worth it ...
as for movies, 5$, and tv shows 2$ ... then again, games might be 10$ and others in between ...

BUT, why do it when you have DRM ad other things floating around?!

the problem with games only being worth $10 would be unrealistic simply because a game takes lots of TIME/$$$ to make. they ain't like a film which can be churned out fairly quick plus games typically sell much less than movies do so it's probably more important for game companys to charge higher prices for there games in general vs a typical movie in my estimation.

TV shows worth 2? ... i would say ZERO "IF" the TV Show was from a regular TV source which most are out there simply because as i said before you could always record it to your VCR etc.

but i totally agree with you on the whole DRM thing as if i payed for something it would have to be free from any BS and i could do whatever i wanted with it.

hell4life said,
i m willing to pay nothing!!! to all those thiefs out there !! !!!!!!LONG LIVE PIRACY!!!!!!

This is the reason people hate piracy. Piracy isn't cool.

nevann said,

This is the reason people hate piracy. Piracy isn't cool.

people don't hate it, the RIAA/MPAA does. there's a difference lol

I'd be more than happy to get lets say, a Zune Pass. I would not pay per song.

Now the problem is that MOST of the services are US/UK only.
I'm pretty sure the piracy rate would drop if iTunes/Zune Marketplace and others would be available in other countries, especially in Europe.

That's the problem. When you buy an album, you support the label, not the artist. The only way to really support the artist is to go see him (her) at a concert.

Setnom said,
That's the problem. When you buy an album, you support the label, not the artist. The only way to really support the artist is to go see him (her) at a concert.

Added to that, most labels don' care about the artist, and only the money.

When it comes to music, my problem lies with the fact that these days a lot bands release cds with maybe one or two good songs and the rest are filler on top of the huge prices. If there was at least 80% good material on each album, it would be such a big deal. So I generally download an album and if I like it, I'll buy it to support the artist.

Kreuger said,
When it comes to music, my problem lies with the fact that these days a lot bands release cds with maybe one or two good songs and the rest are filler on top of the huge prices. If there was at least 80% good material on each album, it would be such a big deal. So I generally download an album and if I like it, I'll buy it to support the artist.

So, quit listening to crap people/bands like Britney Spears or M&M or Lady GaGa.

That's total BS that you'd buy it after downloading it. Nobody in their right mind would pay for something they already have!!

I'd pay for Windows even if it wasn't for their stupid licensing crap. Not paying what they want for something I can only use on one machine!!

Then again, no I wouldn't because I can and did get it for free!!

Edited by cork1958, May 8 2010, 11:49am :

cork1958 said,

So, quit listening to crap people/bands like Britney Spears or M&M or Lady GaGa.

That's total BS that you'd buy it after downloading it. Nobody in their right mind would pay for something they already have!!

I'd pay for Windows even if it wasn't for their stupid licensing crap. Not paying what they want for something I can only use on one machine!!

Then again, no I wouldn't because I can and did get it for free!!

You clearly don't speak for everyone. I bought Windows 7 after they offered it for £30.

Many of my favourite artists, only became favourites after I downloaded their albums. Then some time (varying from days to years) later I've bought their albums properly even though I already had all the songs. I've also bought merchandise, so they've had plenty of support from me, even though originally I may have downloaded their stuff for free.

Kreuger said,
When it comes to music, my problem lies with the fact that these days a lot bands release cds with maybe one or two good songs and the rest are filler on top of the huge prices. If there was at least 80% good material on each album, it would be such a big deal. So I generally download an album and if I like it, I'll buy it to support the artist.

hell, don't waste your time as most of that $$$ when you buy a CD etc goes to the record companys and not the artist. hence, the reason i basically have not bought a music cd in probably 7 years or so and the last time i regularly bought cd's was 1998.

Edited by ThaCrip, May 8 2010, 11:03am :

cork1958 said,

So, quit listening to crap people/bands like Britney Spears or M&M or Lady GaGa.

That's total BS that you'd buy it after downloading it. Nobody in their right mind would pay for something they already have!!

I'd pay for Windows even if it wasn't for their stupid licensing crap. Not paying what they want for something I can only use on one machine!!

Then again, no I wouldn't because I can and did get it for free!!

one of my favourite bands releases all their music for free, and you can donate whatever you want, and it goes directly to the band. i think that is the best way of doing it. i like paying them money, so that they can make more music. it also means there's no torrents of their music, because it's available for free from their site, and so everyone that downloads it has the chance to donate. i think that would be quite a successful method, though i have no figures to back that up.

i would never pay for any music that i had not had the chance to listen to properly first. just as i would never buy a movie i haven't already seen.

cork1958 said,

So, quit listening to crap people/bands like Britney Spears or M&M or Lady GaGa.

That's total BS that you'd buy it after downloading it. Nobody in their right mind would pay for something they already have!!

I'd pay for Windows even if it wasn't for their stupid licensing crap. Not paying what they want for something I can only use on one machine!!

Then again, no I wouldn't because I can and did get it for free!!

You obviously dont know me. I downloaded Slash's new album (oh look at that, its not the garbage you mentioned) and guess what? I loved the album so much I went and bought it. As I've done many times over the years. Your assumptions are wrong, as most usually are. Have you heard that saying "dont assume things. it makes an ass out of you and me?" That just happened to you. Think next time before you post. Not everyone is like you or like everybody else either.

hell, don't waste your time as most of that $$$ when you buy a CD etc goes to the record companys and not the artist.
Most of the ones I've bought over the last couple of years are small bands with no major label support (and Ive ordered a lot online directly from the band) so I'm confident a lot of the time they're getting a fair share. Even if they don't get a large cut from retail stores, they get something and I like buying legit cds too.

if the price is right and all that garbage was removed(DRM,Any and all copy protection)apple does not help as they are the most restrictive of them all and steve jobs is not helping as all his responses point that it is all about him and nobody else(what he says and does is final and if somebody challanges him he drags them down till they die which is wrong)steve jobs makes more than enough so he could donate almost all he has and if he changed his attitude about it's all about me to what would be best for the rest.copy protection/DRM/WGA only hurts everybody.

soldier1st said,
if the price is right and all that garbage was removed(DRM,Any and all copy protection)apple does not help as they are the most restrictive of them all and steve jobs is not helping as all his responses point that it is all about him and nobody else(what he says and does is final and if somebody challanges him he drags them down till they die which is wrong)steve jobs makes more than enough so he could donate almost all he has and if he changed his attitude about it's all about me to what would be best for the rest.copy protection/DRM/WGA only hurts everybody.

Go troll somewhere else, anti apple fanboy. Let the grownups talk here. Also go read this:
http://www.wikihow.com/Use-English-Punctuation-Correctly

Firstly here are some facts and suggestions for media companies word-wide -

1. If someone does not want to or can't pay for something then they will forgo it or find a way to get it free and the Movie, Music or TV company would likely never have earned anything from this person anyway so (Using the current business model) it's not lost revenue.

2. If you make your content more accessible by providing high quality, low cost items available quickly and easily via the Internet then you will sell a lot more and more people will be willing and able to buy it because of it's price point and easy accessibility. Also your costs will be lowered (Distribution and packaging) and so although you may be selling your product for less, you will have many more customers and much lower fixed costs which if you get the right level should be a viable and highly profitable business model.

3. Stop d1cking around, the Internet is global so stop thinking local. Provide your content at the same price everywhere and stop restricting content to a local audience (take note BBC, as an British Expat I would love to PAY for access to UK TV here in Italy, just give me the chance).

SonicSam said,
Firstly here are some facts and suggestions for media companies word-wide -

1. If someone does not want to or can't pay for something then they will forgo it or find a way to get it free and the Movie, Music or TV company would likely never have earned anything from this person anyway so (Using the current business model) it's not lost revenue.

2. If you make your content more accessible by providing high quality, low cost items available quickly and easily via the Internet then you will sell a lot more and more people will be willing and able to buy it because of it's price point and easy accessibility. Also your costs will be lowered (Distribution and packaging) and so although you may be selling your product for less, you will have many more customers and much lower fixed costs which if you get the right level should be a viable and highly profitable business model.

3. Stop d1cking around, the Internet is global so stop thinking local. Provide your content at the same price everywhere and stop restricting content to a local audience (take note BBC, as an British Expat I would love to PAY for access to UK TV here in Italy, just give me the chance).

+1 .. i strongly agree with your 1 comments!

even your #2 sounds good to me because as you said... if they sell for lower prices but get much more customers then there bottom line $$$ will increase.

because say a film was selling for 20 dollars and 500,000 people bought it but then you lowered it to say 10 dollars and then a couple million people bought it. it's a no brainer

BUT... at the end of the day you know businesses in general like to extract as much $$$ from the public as they can before they slowly lower the prices as this happens with a lot of stuff. like say a 300 dollar item. they put it at that price for a while til they get all the rich people to get it and after a while they lower it some to see how many more will by it and then lower it a little more until it hits that sweet spot where it's priced reasonably to where everyone will damn near buy it.

SonicSam said,
Another obvious, but oft overlooked/denied fact is that people like to try before they buy, someone will download something without the intention of ever buying it, but turns out they like it enough that they will either a) buy it at any price because it would be worth it or b)buy it at the right price. Either way money is made.

People might lie, but I believe some of them including me would REALLY pay if the price is right. I do buy originals when the price is being discounted.

You see, even if I am lying now, I would still say the same thing. I would buy original if the price is right. And even if the price is right, would I really buy? Depends on the quality of the show/music/tv series.
I would gladly pay for CSI series, Doctor Who, Medium, Ghost Whisperer.
I would HAPPILY pay for Star Wars (IV, V & VI), Avatar...and many other great movies out there.

However, quality is now mostly lacking in many movies/tv series/music. Why would I pay for crap when I can just find some at my local dump site or even my own toilet?

Utter bull, if movies/music was reduced to those prices people will still bitch and moan it's too much and pirate it still. There is a small percentage that would do the right thing I'm sure but they'd be vastly out weighed by the people who would pirate regardless of the price. 90% of the time they use price as just an excuse to justify pirating to themselves in the first place (which can't be justified), that is my 2 cents take with a grain of salt.

Xerxes said,
Utter bull, if movies/music was reduced to those prices people will still bitch and moan it's too much and pirate it still. There is a small percentage that would do the right thing I'm sure but they'd be vastly out weighed by the people who would pirate regardless of the price. 90% of the time they use price as just an excuse to justify pirating to themselves in the first place (which can't be justified), that is my 2 cents take with a grain of salt.

i think your right. some people will pirate regardless simply because all the money saved there could be used on other things.

but i think pirating is not as bad as 'they' make it out to be as i would be willing to bet the majority of people who could not pirate a film would most likely not buy it anyways so there 'losses' are far less than they claim they are. (i am sure SOME who if they could not pirate it might buy it though)

but i think at the end of the day... Piracy is not the exact same as genuine stealing from a store since your not physically stealing anything that the store actually payed real money for.

i know your probably thinking pirates will say anything to justify it and you may be right, but i do think i make a reasonable argument here

OMG totally.. I would gladly pay for anything that I download illegally... and I often try to do it anyways. example video games... i can't stand all the safety features they add in so I buy the game and just put it on my shelf while i use the cracked copy. it's much easier to use them and more to my terms.

rashidkaviani said,
OMG totally.. I would gladly pay for anything that I download illegally... and I often try to do it anyways. example video games... i can't stand all the safety features they add in so I buy the game and just put it on my shelf while i use the cracked copy. it's much easier to use them and more to my terms.

exactly! ... all that 'anti-piracy' stuff does is hurt the end user as it does really nothing to stop the pirates who will crack the game shortly and bypass all the BS included.

it seems nowadays PC games are starting to get more and more BS included in them which makes it less and less likely i would consider buying them.

i think they should just keep to the standard (for single player games)... install the game and keep the disc in the drive tray to play and play the game without any additional BS as that 'games for windows live' crap i don't really care for.

DVDs and Blurays are the biggest scams going anyway. Movie studies make the production costs and then some back during a film's cinema release, so claiming that $2 for a DVD is unrealistic is just corporate greed talking. Maybe if they didn't ridiculously overpay actors and spend money churning out romantic comedies every 2nd week, they'd be able to make decent profits regardless of piracy.

i live by the rule that i dont download anything that is made by New Zealand Artists, i.e. NZ Music / NZ Movies / NZ TVshows, i support my local contect, cause we dont make those big large amount of money you see US/UK market make. Support your locals, Download the rest!!!

qdave said,
Would not pay for tv content or music, however movies...yeah $1

i typically agree.

because TV Shows, especially ones recorded from a TV Source are not worth buying and i really don't see a real issue with this simply because you could have just recorded it yourself right from the TV.

as for Music... there is not much that 'i would go out of my way to listen to' but the stuff that i do i think is still not worth paying for ESPECIALLY when those greedy record execs get the vast majority of the money from CD sales etc.

because i understand that they advertise the music etc etc and deserve some money but to take damn near all the money from CD sales with the artist getting very little is just plain BS. us fans want to support the artist not the greedy record execs.

as far as movies... those i think are much easier to find a quality film than it is to find quality music. but even finding a quality film that would be worth buying. i definitely would not care to support a movie with my $$ that's already made MAJOR $$ in theaters as they don't really 'need' the money. but if you can find a top quality film that did not do super well in $$ in the theaters then i could see supporting that much more.

so my point... support the little guys. the heck with the major cash cow film companys.

Edited by ThaCrip, May 8 2010, 11:55am :

ThaCrip said,
because i understand that they advertise the music etc etc and deserve some money but to take damn near all the money from CD sales with the artist getting very little is just plain BS. us fans want to support the artist not the greedy record execs.
so my point... support the little guys. the heck with the major cash cow film companys.
Exactly, giving money to people who don't do anything to produce content, and waste it by 'fighting piracy' when it only makes it worse, is not my cup of tea.
Supporting the little guys who have more intelligence in their little fingers than greedy unrealistic tw@ts like tinchy stryder and lilly allen is also something that is appealing. Aside from the fact they're music would most likely give me an earache.

Edited by duneworld, May 9 2010, 1:20am :

Microsoft wouldn't have to worry much about piracy if they offered Windows & Office for 99.99
not to mention they'd probably make MORE money at that price point and SAVE a ton of money not having to waste resources on combating piracy.

naap51stang said,
Microsoft wouldn't have to worry much about piracy if they offered Windows & Office for 99.99
not to mention they'd probably make MORE money at that price point and SAVE a ton of money not having to waste resources on combating piracy.

Microsoft does offer some sensible discounts for those in education, I personally don't disagree with their pricing as it's very flexible. It's not for those who make under 22K, but I'd assume your in school if you are making that much. And if not a new emachine should suffice with a office package.

nevann said,

Time limitations?

so, 10.00 is justifiable to you to do what you want? please, you won't accept it, i know it and so do you.

SaltLife said,

so, 10.00 is justifiable to you to do what you want? please, you won't accept it, i know it and so do you.

No, it's not. It's too much

I call BS for starters, let's look at avatar when it was released the Blu-Ray was 19.99 yet it's still the number one pirated movie the dvd was 14.99 at wal-mart and it's not the only movie that sells discounted when it's first released. Piracy will always be a problem, plain and simple.

This is just a justification. So for 4 extra dollars you want to be able to do what you want with the content, even though now you can (rip, convert as will). Just doesn't make sense.

and that doesn't count for the crap that's old and sold for less. I'm sorry this just seems like BS

SaltLife said,
I call BS for starters, let's look at avatar when it was released the Blu-Ray was 19.99 yet it's still the number one pirated movie the dvd was 14.99 at wal-mart and it's not the only movie that sells discounted when it's first released. Piracy will always be a problem, plain and simple.

This is just a justification. So for 4 extra dollars you want to be able to do what you want with the content, even though now you can (rip, convert as will). Just doesn't make sense.

and that doesn't count for the crap that's old and sold for less. I'm sorry this just seems like BS

Exactly. 19.99?. Even if the movie was good, I couldn't justify paying anywhere near that. So I choose not to. I'll wait til it's on tv or watch it at a friends house. (And mock them for paying so much)

nevann said,

Exactly. 19.99?. Even if the movie was good, I couldn't justify paying anywhere near that. So I choose not to. I'll wait til it's on tv or watch it at a friends house. (And mock them for paying so much)

watching it on TV is legal? so, your point is moot

SaltLife said,
I call BS for starters, let's look at avatar when it was released the Blu-Ray was 19.99 yet it's still the number one pirated movie the dvd was 14.99 at wal-mart and it's not the only movie that sells discounted when it's first released. Piracy will always be a problem, plain and simple.

This is just a justification. So for 4 extra dollars you want to be able to do what you want with the content, even though now you can (rip, convert as will). Just doesn't make sense.

and that doesn't count for the crap that's old and sold for less. I'm sorry this just seems like BS

I think the magic # is $9.99. If they sold them for that, a lot less people would pirate it.

As to your comment below, why would you drive all the way to the video store and back when you have have it in a couple of mouse clicks?

SaltLife said,

watching it on TV is legal? so, your point is moot

Yes, I'm pretty sure it's legal. What's your point? My point was that I'm not paying that much, so I don't pay it. Instead I'll watch it on TV or something else, although I'm not likely to admit to piracy here am I? However, if the price was reasonable, I'd be more likely to pay.

nevann said,

Exactly. 19.99?. Even if the movie was good, I couldn't justify paying anywhere near that. So I choose not to. I'll wait til it's on tv or watch it at a friends house. (And mock them for paying so much)

That is $19.99 for the movie and $300 for the Blu-ray player :-)

ilev said,

That is $19.99 for the movie and $300 for the Blu-ray player :-)


dono where you're getting your bluray players...samsung do 1 for £79 so what $135?

nevann said,

Exactly. 19.99?. Even if the movie was good, I couldn't justify paying anywhere near that. So I choose not to. I'll wait til it's on tv or watch it at a friends house. (And mock them for paying so much)

i agree. 20 dollars is a tad steep especially if the movie is not top top spec. (which 'Avatar' is not. it's decent but quite overrated as it mostly did it's roughly 2.7BILLION in sales due to the 3D as if you removed that (which is how i seen it) it's not all that good overall. James Cameron has had much better films anyways like T1/T2/The Abyss/Aliens/True Lies)

about THE MOST i would feel comfortable paying for a movie is 15 dollars and at that price it would have to be very good. (and as i said in my post earlier... i seen 1200+ films and i would estimate only around 100-150 i would classify as 'top top spec')

Edited by ThaCrip, May 8 2010, 10:23am :

ThaCrip said,
s if you removed that (which is how i seen it) it's not all that good overall.

Except that the WHOLE POINT of AVATAR is to see it in 3d...8P

No wonder you didn't "get it".

Maybe some of those pirates were people who bought it and couldn't play it because the DRM gave them a black screen?

Speaking of digital costs, iTunes are really milking it. Take a new show like The Boondocks. $38 for 13 HD episodes @ 22 min each. I'm pretty sure I got seasons 1 and 2 on DVD from Amazon for less that combined. And while you do get 720p you don't get any extras.

philcruicks said,

dono where you're getting your bluray players...samsung do 1 for £79 so what $135?

My Toshiba Blu-Ray player is £80 (discount with the TV deal) and provides a year of free lovefilm Blu-Ray rental! So not need for pirating or paying!

Reverend Spam said,
Seriously? People lie in polls all the time.
Yes, but not all respondents, just a very small number "Yes I've taken tin foil".

One thing I must say before it gets by. There are sometimes that you download tv shows, i.e anime, which the one who subs it, is going to be a plethora of times better (In subs quality not in video) than the one you are going to get on a DVD or streamed down "officially", and in case of anime, you won't need to buy an extra DVD to see the "uncensored version", which they cut because of any "violent" or "adult explicit material".

the tv issue for me stems in the government intervention.if they left the tv digital thing alone i wouldnt need to go online just for tv shows.my complex doesn't allow for satellites or antennas and we only have 1 cable company at $80 a month for tv on $1000 monthly disability doesn't compute.so,we make choices.just pray they leave the internet the hell alone.but,sadly,you know they won't.

cl42 said,
the tv issue for me stems in the government intervention.if they left the tv digital thing alone i wouldnt need to go online just for tv shows.my complex doesn't allow for satellites or antennas and we only have 1 cable company at $80 a month for tv on $1000 monthly disability doesn't compute.so,we make choices.just pray they leave the internet the hell alone.but,sadly,you know they won't.

talk about a monopoly ... i feel for you.

in your case i would not feel bad at all for bypassing there monopoly and getting it 'other' ways because $80 is a little unreasonable for basic cable TV. i think a fair price would be around $50.

p.s. USENET is basically a cheap way (i.e. $11 per month) to max out your download speeds and get quick easy access to loads of files out there. once i tried this i can't go back to torrents anymore.

Edited by ThaCrip, May 8 2010, 10:10am :

I would pay if it was affordable, $160 for COD MW2? hell no. especially if the games ends up sucking. you have to rely on what everyone else thinks or lose 100+ for a coaster and a cd key. most movies are overhyped and really bad anyway. I boards at a boarding school and people sell movies (thats not on though, selling illegal rips at your own profit) for $1-2 so yes i'd say this survey is accurate.

Also: Software, MS office, photoshop etc 5-10 (or trade)
Games 10
Music, usually on a trade basis

Auzeras said,
I would pay if it was affordable, $160 for COD MW2? hell no. especially if the games ends up sucking. you have to rely on what everyone else thinks or lose 100+ for a coaster and a cd key. most movies are overhyped and really bad anyway. I boards at a boarding school and people sell movies (thats not on though, selling illegal rips at your own profit) for $1-2 so yes i'd say this survey is accurate.


Also: Software, MS office, photoshop etc 5-10 (or trade)
Games 10
Music, usually on a trade basis

That's the main reason why to flash an Xbox 360

Auzeras said,
most movies are overhyped and really bad anyway.

ill say this... i seen 1200+ films total and i would estimate only around 100 or so to be 'top quality' and probably worth 15 dollars or so range for a DVD. (those blu-ray's are overpriced when you see this 20-30 dollar stuff. nothing should be more than around 15 dollars for a brand new release on DVD and MAYBE 20 dollars for the blu-ray MAX)

then you got the 'pretty good' stuff that you would like to own but not at a full price which i would suspect is another 100-200 films out of that 1200+ i seen.

then you got the rest of that 1200 that i just don't think is even worth buying at all unless you got them dirt cheap (say 5 bucks MAX).

and besides... unless a film did not make big money in the theaters then pirating the film is highly unlikely to effect anything in the real world as most of those major name films usually make $$$ to where if you pirated the film it's basically not going to effect the quality of life for those involved (because going from super rich to just slightly under that is basically nothing). hence, victimless 'crime'

even 'TV Shows'... i think that's one area that's total BS for those high up's to complain about ESPECIALLY when you could have recorded it from the TV yourself.

then their come back to that is to complain... 'well you get to skip the commercials by downloading it and they pay for you to see those ads etc' ... but for me personally damn near all commercials have very little to no effect on me buying what they are advertising. only rarely does that happen because the stuff i typically buy i already know what i want and where to get it at a great price etc since most of the stuff i get is usually technology related stuff.

dogmai said,

That would have to be the Prestige Edition.


I am not sure how it works for MW2, but for many games the 'Prestige Edition' is actually the 'Normal Edition' and their 'Normal Edition' is more like a 'Download Only' edition: You get a DVD and a little paper with a key, and that's it. No nice gimmicks to pull me into buying it. No, for those gimmicks I have to pay 80 euro's for a headset that's worth 30 euro's, but it has a nice sticker on it...

I understand commercial companies want to make profit, but they are trying to rip you off at every little thing. If they can save 1 cent per copy on production, they will, even if it gives lower quality.

It's just about time those companies start to open up their eyes. I think I am a fairly average joe when it comes to spending money in the entertainment industry: I go to the movies about 4 to 6 times per year (€50/year), go to 2 concerts per year (€75/year), go to a festival every other year (€150 tickets -> €75/year) and I play World of Warcraft (€13/month + one €40 expansion per year = €196/year) and sometimes buy some other games (€50/year). This doesn't seem to be extremely much, I really think I'm an average user. Still this adds up to €446 per year. However, I am also a 'pirate' (yarr!). So how can they say they don't make money off of pirates? I personally think that is a ****load of money.

Tim Dawg said,
$160 for COD MW2?? You put a $ leading me to believe you're takling about U.S. dollars but $160??

You must be from the US. The dollar sign actually originated in Spain/Mexico and is used by hundreds of countries..

ascendant123 said,

You must be from the US. The dollar sign actually originated in Spain/Mexico and is used by hundreds of countries..

Please don't use one person's ignorance to make a snap judgement on a whole nation, thanks.

Pirates pay? No. What I really hate about pirates is that they always try to hold the higher ground by saying companies "charge outlandish prices" and that we will pay for it willing if is cheaper.

Are you having us as idiots? In the real world, when you are unhappy, you boycott. Not just have it anyway by pirating.

Eddo89 said,
Pirates pay? No. What I really hate about pirates is that they always try to hold the higher ground by saying companies "charge outlandish prices" and that we will pay for it willing if is cheaper.

Are you having us as idiots? In the real world, when you are unhappy, you boycott. Not just have it anyway by pirating.

Plenty of pirates pay for quality piracy services (i.e. usenet, etc) so I hardly see it as farcical. There have been many cases in history where people don't boycott, they clone it, or worse--burn it down. Which do you prefer?

You can't pull the 'real world' line when the real world has changed. The internet is very much a part of the real world now and cultures have changed to suit it--what you said may of been true 15 years ago but not anymore.

ascendant123 said,

Plenty of pirates pay for quality piracy services (i.e. usenet, etc) so I hardly see it as farcical. There have been many cases in history where people don't boycott, they clone it, or worse--burn it down. Which do you prefer?

You can't pull the 'real world' line when the real world has changed. The internet is very much a part of the real world now and cultures have changed to suit it--what you said may of been true 15 years ago but not anymore.

What? Awesome, they pay to steal. I guess that makes them better after all. And what's different here? You can still boycott the product without obtaining it illegally.

ascendant123 said,

Plenty of pirates pay for quality piracy services (i.e. usenet, etc) so I hardly see it as farcical. There have been many cases in history where people don't boycott, they clone it, or worse--burn it down. Which do you prefer?

You can't pull the 'real world' line when the real world has changed. The internet is very much a part of the real world now and cultures have changed to suit it--what you said may of been true 15 years ago but not anymore.

+1. I agree.

Solid Knight said,

What? Awesome, they pay to steal. I guess that makes them better after all. And what's different here? You can still boycott the product without obtaining it illegally.

It shows they are willing to pay. I think it saves them money in the end.

Boycotting? It doesn't work that great unless there is a major outrage against something, I would think. Some people will pay even if the cost is high.

At any rate, you often don't get anything resolved for yourself, at least not anywhere close to immediately.

Solid Knight said,

What? Awesome, they pay to steal. I guess that makes them better after all. And what's different here? You can still boycott the product without obtaining it illegally.

That's not really the point I was getting at--the point was that they aren't cheap and it isn't really about the monetary cost. A big part of it is the convenience and the rest is essentially boycotting, it serves the same purpose and accomplishes the same thing just with questionable ethics.

I don't have an opinion one way or another on the ethics but I think it is a perfectly valid form of boycotting especially while the law, in many jurisdictions, is justifiably unclear on the legality.

Perhaps the people who made this poll should have realized one little fact: most internet pirates lie.

Nogib said,
Perhaps the people who made this poll should have realized one little fact: most internet pirates lie.

Mr. Rogers would be proud to know someone out there is still putting their imagination to use.

Nogib said,
Perhaps the people who made this poll should have realized one little fact: most internet pirates lie.

Evidence please.

I would have to argue that in an anonymous poll like the one cited, they have no reason to lie whatsoever.

excalpius said,
I would have to argue that in an anonymous poll like the one cited, they have no reason to lie whatsoever.

Because answering "no" is an admission of being lowly.

Nogib said,
Perhaps the people who made this poll should have realized one little fact: most internet pirates lie.

I might pirate a few things. Maybe I because don't have the money to pay for some of those prices (Photoshop anyone? I won Win7 Ultimate in a giveaway, so I didn't have to do anything on that).

But I don't have any reason to lie. Yes, I probably would buy some things and do (if they supported PayPal, for I keep some extra "pocket cash" there).

Udedenkz said,

AMEN

Really? I pirate quite a bit, yet I regularly buy games on steam. Hell, I've bought games on steam after having pirated them. And my DVD collection takes up more than a few shelves, although I'll admit I pretty much never buy music.

(Seriously, how much would it cost to fill even half my iphone with music? )

I may or may not be the standard, but until I see evidence to contrary I'm willing to accept the poll at face value.

LaserWraith said,

I might pirate a few things. Maybe I because don't have the money to pay for some of those prices (Photoshop anyone? I won Win7 Ultimate in a giveaway, so I didn't have to do anything on that).

But I don't have any reason to lie. Yes, I probably would buy some things and do (if they supported PayPal, for I keep some extra "pocket cash" there).

I agree that is why windows 7 is fastest selling OS, cos it was very cheap at the start. Hence I got Windows 7 Pro for £40 last year and £50 for Windows Vista Ultimate with a 2008-2009 student deal. Adobe products are too expensive to buy for most ppl.

Solid Knight said,

Because answering "no" is an admission of being lowly.

But if they are a real pirate then they wouldn't mind being lowly. So according to the poll, they would pay since then they don't have to lie to themselves about being lowly.

So, what they are saying is many pirates are willing to pay, just not for the outlandish prices some places are charging these days? Imagine that.....I mean seriously, if an artist sells 1 million copies of a song at 50c per copy, that is $500,000....now, I do not know how much it costs to produce a song, but I am willing to bet you can rent a studio and what not for less than that. Obviously, some of that money is going to go to their agents and what not, but if you have enough money to pay for agents and your own equipment and everything, I'm willing to bet you have already produced one or more songs and have more than enough money to cover costs and still turn a hefty profit.

tl;dr - Pirates are cheap, but even at those really low costs, the producers are going to easily turn profit off of that.

Nagisan said,
So, what they are saying is many pirates are willing to pay, just not for the outlandish prices some places are charging these days? Imagine that.....I mean seriously, if an artist sells 1 million copies of a song at 50c per copy, that is $500,000....now, I do not know how much it costs to produce a song, but I am willing to bet you can rent a studio and what not for less than that. Obviously, some of that money is going to go to their agents and what not, but if you have enough money to pay for agents and your own equipment and everything, I'm willing to bet you have already produced one or more songs and have more than enough money to cover costs and still turn a hefty profit.

tl;dr - Pirates are cheap, but even at those really low costs, the producers are going to easily turn profit off of that.

They don't make money off music sales, generally. And 90% of royalties go to the companies. Concerts and touring is how they collect the cash.

Nagisan said,
So, what they are saying is many pirates are willing to pay, just not for the outlandish prices some places are charging these days? Imagine that.....I mean seriously, if an artist sells 1 million copies of a song at 50c per copy, that is $500,000....now, I do not know how much it costs to produce a song, but I am willing to bet you can rent a studio and what not for less than that. Obviously, some of that money is going to go to their agents and what not, but if you have enough money to pay for agents and your own equipment and everything, I'm willing to bet you have already produced one or more songs and have more than enough money to cover costs and still turn a hefty profit.

tl;dr - Pirates are cheap, but even at those really low costs, the producers are going to easily turn profit off of that.

Sony and other big record companies I believe take around 90% of the profit from the artists. Artists make the most money by doing gigs. Besides the point, a new album selling at $30 is quite a steep price. I like to buy Vinyl though.

Television shows I do pirate, mainly because Australia has a 6 month delay or the show is only available on Pay TV. And then there are the missed episodes and stuff like that.

Billus said,

Sony and other big record companies I believe take around 90% of the profit from the artists. Artists make the most money by doing gigs.

Lol you just repeated what I said.

And yeah, if I buy music, I normally go for the .wav, flac, or vinyl

Recon415 said,

Lol you just repeated what I said.

And yeah, if I buy music, I normally go for the .wav, flac, or vinyl

Haha, I must've clicked reply before your comment showed up. Sorry. Vinyl all the way, nothing beats it. Comes with some additional bonuses sometimes which is pretty cool.

Billus said,

Haha, I must've clicked reply before your comment showed up. Sorry. Vinyl all the way, nothing beats it. Comes with some additional bonuses sometimes which is pretty cool.

24bit 96KHz vinyl FLAC rip ftw

Some would not pay for anything. I believe it depends on the specific user. There are pirates, that just live to be pirates. There are those that are really into music and specific artists may pay something (not much) if the quality and ease of use is great. Those that want almost anything and everything that comes out, no matter what it is, or are feeding other people, will not pay for what they get for free if it's easy enough. It also depends on the scale they are doing it on. Some automatically get everything, then sift it later. Some people click line by line and it takes them forever to find what they are looking for. When it comes down to it, companies will do what it takes to make more money, this is business. It is 100% up to the artists to break this business cycle! How many "new" popular artists do you believe have not downloaded music? This is how change may happen, over time. This same business model war is going on with TV, Movies, Broadband, Radio, Cable, Satalite, OTA, and everything that is TECH.

Edited by justmike, May 10 2010, 2:46pm :

Nagisan said,
So, what they are saying is many pirates are willing to pay, just not for the outlandish prices some places are charging these days? Imagine that.....I mean seriously, if an artist sells 1 million copies of a song at 50c per copy, that is $500,000....now, I do not know how much it costs to produce a song, but I am willing to bet you can rent a studio and what not for less than that. Obviously, some of that money is going to go to their agents and what not, but if you have enough money to pay for agents and your own equipment and everything, I'm willing to bet you have already produced one or more songs and have more than enough money to cover costs and still turn a hefty profit.

tl;dr - Pirates are cheap, but even at those really low costs, the producers are going to easily turn profit off of that.

Award grammy artists make 5-10 cents a album they sell. So I can just imagine what a low-budget underground metal bands make, and the album still is $15-$20 a pop.

I'll buy my cds at music festivals, concerts or online from the artists website. Other then that, the record boys aren't making any money off of me, especially 90 percent of the profit.