For years, the entertainment industry has argued that online piracy has devastated business for movies, music and gaming.

However, a new policy brief from the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) says that not only does piracy not hurt the creative industry but it is actually helping. Millions of people across the globe illegally access copyrighted material on a daily basis. The most common method of digital pirating is through torrent sites, which let an individual download and upload content through a peer-to-peer file-sharing system. Individuals in the U.S. who are found guilty of violating digital piracy laws can face severe legal penalties, including a felony record, five years in prison and $250,000 in penalties.

In the policy briefing, the authors call on governments to re-evaluate their antipiracy laws to include data from studies beyond those directly sponsored by the entertainment industry itself. In a recent interview with torrent freak, policy author Bart Canmaerts had this to say: “Contrary to the industry claims, the music industry is not in terminal decline, but still holding ground and showing healthy profits. Revenues from digital sales, subscription services, streaming and live performances compensate for the decline in revenues from the sale of CDs or records,”

In a separate story,  the website TorrentFreak says that independent data actually suggests that those who pirate content are also more likely to spend their money on film, music and gaming content.
A June 2013 study found that roughly 45 percent of all Americans pirate copyrighted content on a regular basis, including 70 percent of those under 30.

In the LSE report’s key messages, the authors say that evidence does not back up claims that individual cases of copyright infringement are affecting entertainment industry revenues, that antipiracy laws around the world are not achieving their desired impacts and that governments should update their policies to include more evidence from a diverse set of sources. “Despite the Motion Picture Association of America’s (MPAA) claim that online piracy is devastating the movie industry, Hollywood achieved record-breaking global box office revenues of $35 billion in 2012, a 6% increase over 2011,” the report states.

While music sales have faced steeper declines in recent years, the authors say those numbers have largely been balanced out by increased sales in live performance and other outlets. “The music industry may be stagnating, but the drastic decline in revenues warned of by the lobby associations of record labels is not in evidence,” the authors write. Interestingly, in the same Columbia University study, which found that nearly half of all U.S. Internet users pirate copyrighted material, nearly half of those individuals say they would willingly pay a monthly fee for unlimited access to multimedia content.

The LSE study authors say that is one possible solution for the entertainment industry going forward as a way to bridge the gap between content providers and consumers. “Within the creative industries there is a variety of views on the best way to benefit from online sharing practices, and how to innovate to generate revenue streams in ways that do not fit within the existing copyright enforcement regime,” the authors conclude. “When both [the creative industries and citizens] can exploit the full potential of the Internet, this will maximize innovative content creation for the benefit of all stakeholders.”

Dear readers, what are your thoughts on digital piracy? Do you feel that convictions of digital piracy are fair? We found this article to be very interesting to share. It may fuel more insight into the legal matters of piracy. Give the following article a read and share with us your thoughts and opinions.

IP address does not prove online piracy, US judge says in landmark ruling

After reading this article, it is shocking how quickly "suspected" pirates are named guilty of pirating digital movies and music solely from their IP (internet protocol) addresses. What the film industry failed to take into consideration, is that just because an IP address can be traced, is it being traced to the correct perpetrator? Like the article mentioned, an IP address is basically a label for each device in a network, but cannot trace each user of a device, only the user in which the device is registered under. So for example, what if there are 6 people in the household? Or what if a friend borrows your computer and illegally downloads the latest season of Breaking Bad without your knowledge? How does the copyright holder know who is responsible for the illegal act? Well they don't, but that does not stop them from pointing fingers at the simplest target.

These devices can include, phones, tablets, laptops or really anything that can connect to the Internet with the touch of a button. With this being said owners of a Wi-Fi connection should be extremely careful or protective over their password and who they allow to have access to the Internet through their home or facility. This password that most connections have allow others to associate under a specified IP address which will in the end trace back to the original owner if a lawsuit were to arise.   

From previous work experience this is the exact reason why a former employer would not allow the staff to hand out the Wi-Fi connection password to customers who were taking part in the services being sold. Although some companies do offer free WI-FI to lure in customers, such as Starbucks who encourages their patrons to stay connected or Panera Bread who offers free WI-FI but only allows one to use the internet for thirty minutes. In comparison certain companies charge a fee to their customers to use the Internet based on their usage time. The companies who do not allow their Wi-Fi connection to be used by others or charge customers are smart and are avoiding lawsuits that could come from patrons who decide to pirate. Companies and individuals who decide to share their personal Wi-Fi connection password are at risk in that they could facing a lawsuit for committing a crime that they did not commit. Situations such as these are sticky and could be extremely detrimental and one might not even realize what is happening under their roof when focusing on their IP address.