Every day, millions of computer users share files online.

Peer-to-peer (or P2P) file sharing can

give people access to a wealth of information, including music, games and software. Often the
files are free and easily accessible.

The risks of file sharing

If you don't enable the proper settings for your computer, you could allow access not just to the
files you intend to share, but also to other information on your hard drive, like your tax returns,
email messages, medical records, etc.
Alternatively, you may have downloaded or shared material that is protected by copyright laws,
which would mean that you could be breaking the law. In some instances, media can be used or
shared under the Creative Commons license or for academic purposes. See the MIT Libraries for
more information on the dos and don'ts of using copyrighted material.
In addition, files that you download from the Internet could be laden with dangerous code (this
type of malware is called a Trojan horse). While you think you might be downloading a piece of
software you want, you could unintentionally be downloading a virus as well.

Piracy and copyright infringement

The copyright infringement of media, referred to as piracy, is regulated in most countries by
copyright laws. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) was enacted in the United
States in 1998 and pertains in particular to copyright of digital material. Proposed laws such as
SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) and PIPA (Protect Intellectual Property Act) are seeking
additional penalties regarding websites where copyrighted material is pirated.
https://ist.mit.edu/security/file_sharing
Software piracy is the illegal copying, distribution, or use of software. It is such a profitable
"business" that it has caught the attention of organized crime groups in a number of countries.
According to the Business Software Alliance (BSA), about 36% of all software in current use is
stolen. Software piracy causes significant lost revenue for publishers, which in turn results in
higher prices for the consumer.
When you purchase a commercial software package, an end user license agreement ( EULA ) is
included to protect that software program from copyright infringement. Typically, the license
states that you can install the original copy of software you bought on one computer and that you
can make a backup copy in case the original is lost or damaged. You agree to the licensing
agreement when you open the software package (this is called a shrink wrap license), when you
open the envelope that contains the software disks, or when you install the software.
Software piracy applies mainly to full-function commercial software. The time-limited or
function-restricted versions of commercial software called shareware are less likely to be pirated

since they are freely available. Similarly, freeware , a type of software that is copyrighted but
freely distributed at no charge, also offers little incentive for piracy.
Types of software piracy include:

Softlifting: Borrowing and installing a copy of a software application from a colleague.

Client-server overuse: Installing more copies of the software than you have licenses for.

Hard-disk loading: Installing and selling unauthorized copies of software on refurbished

or new computers.

Counterfeiting: Duplicating and selling copyrighted programs.

Online piracy: Typically involves downloading illegal software from peer-to-peer

network, Internet auction or blog. (In the past, the only place to download software was
from a bulletin board system and these were limited to local areas because of long
distance charges while online.)

http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/piracy

Music piracy is the copying and distributing of copies of a piece of music for which the
composer, recording artist, or copyright-holding record company did not give consent. It has a
long history, as Beethoven was afflicted with pirated copies of his music, which reduced the
income he could make from publishing.[1] In the contemporary legal environment, it is a form of
copyright infringement, which is a civil wrong and, under certain circumstances, even a crime in
many countries. The late 20th and early 21st centuries saw much controversy about copyright
piracy, regarding the ethics of redistributing media content, how much production and
distribution companies in the media were losing, and the very scope of what ought to be
considered "piracy"and cases involving the piracy of music were among the most frequently
discussed in the debate.

Contents

1 History
o 1.1 Arguments over legality
o 1.2 Law enforcement

2 Economic ramifications

3 Digital copies

4 Rights Holders Solution

5 Minimising Online Music Piracy

6 See also

7 References

History
Music piracy was very limited in the decades prior to the invention of the internet and digital
media. With the invention of newer technology that allowed for the piracy process to become
less complicated, it became much more common. Users of the web began adding media files to
the internet, and prior potential risks and difficulties to pirating music, such as the physicality of
the process, were eliminated. It was much easier for people with little to no knowledge of
technology and old piracy methods to gather media files.[2]
The first application that demonstrated the implications of music piracy was Napster. Napster
enabled users to exchange music files over a common free server without any regard for
copyright laws.[3] Napster was quickly shut down after a lawsuit filed by Metallica and a separate
lawsuit in regards to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.[2] Other music sharing services such
as Limewire continued to be a resource to those searching for free music files. These platforms
were also removed after a few years of service due to copyright laws and the Digital Millennium
Copyright Act. After finding some loopholes, piracy began to exist in more legal forms, an
example being Pirate Bay. This technical legality was due to the format of the websites and their
country of origin and administration. The websites were set up so that the site itself did not host
any of the illegal files, but gave the user a map as to where they could access the files.
Additionally, in Pirate Bay's case, the website was hosted under Swedish law, where this map
was not illegal.[2]

Arguments over legality

In face of the growing encroachment on potential sales from internet piracy, industry associations
like the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) have lobbied for stricter laws and
stricter punishment of those breaking copyright law. Record companies have also turned to
technological barriers to copying, such as DRM, to some controversy. These organizations have
tried to add more controls to the digital copy of the music to prevent consumers from copying the
music. For the most part, the industry has come to a consensus that, if not DRM, then some
similar measures are necessary for them to continue to make a profit.
According to the article, "The Illegal Downloading Debate: Is it OK to Download Songs without
Paying?" By Stephen Richards, Copyright laws are put into place to try to ensure that people in
creative industries (filmmakers, musicians, music engineers, writers, composers, software
developers etc.) are able to get paid for the things they create (their intellectual property). If
artists work hard to compose and record songs, shouldnt they be able to gain financial rewards

like professionals in any other field? Not paying for something which is supposed to be paid for,
no matter whether it is a physical object or not, is still wrong.
Critics of the record companies' strategy have proposed that the attempts to maintain sales rates
are impeding the rights of legitimate listeners to use and listen to the music as they wish. When
the US Congress passed the Copyright Act of 1909, it deliberately gave less copyright control to
music composers than that of novelists: "Its fear was the monopoly power of rights holders, and
that that power would stifle follow-on creativity".[4] According to the internationally established
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development,[5] "Existing laws and regulations
may be too broad and general to deal adequately with the rapid technological developments that
facilitate digital piracy, and policy makers may need to consider enacting some specific
provisions to deal with these infringements. Such provisions should not unduly impede
legitimate digital communications, nor unreasonably impact on the Internet as an effective
communications platform, commercial channel and educational tool..."[5]
There have been several means of free access to copyrighted music for the general public
including Napster, Limewire, and Spotify. Napster was a free file sharing software created by
college student Shawn Fanning to enable people to share and trade music files in mp3 format.
Napster became hugely popular because it made it so easy to share and download music files.
However, the heavy metal band Metallica sued the company for copyright infringement.[6] This
led to other artists following suit and shutting down Napsters service. Likewise, Limewire was a
free peer-to-peer file sharing software similar to that of Napster. The software enabled unlimited
file sharing between computers and ended being one of the most popular sharing networks
around. Like Napster, Limewire struggled through multiple legal battles and inevitably wound up
being shut down.[7]
According to the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) since Shawn Fanning
started the program file sharing program Napster in 1999 music revenue has gone down 53%
from $14.6 billion to $7.0 billion in 2013.[8] A study done in 2007 by the Institute of Policy
Innovation states that music piracy resulted in a loss of 71,060 U.S. jobs, out of which 23,860
would have been in the recording industry and 44,200 jobs in other unrelated industries.[9]

Law enforcement
The RIAA, a powerful lobby for the recording industry, is responsible for carrying out most of
the lawsuits against music piracy in the United States. Some claim that the enforcement against
music piracy, which may cost copyright violators up to $150,000 per infringement,[4] is
unreasonable, and that it may even violate United States constitutional protections against cruel
and unusual punishment. Some have accused the RIAA of outright bullying, as when one of their
lawyers, Matt Oppenheimer, told the defendant in one lawsuit, You dont want to pay another
visit to a dentist like me".[4] In that same case, according to Lawrence Lessig, "the RIAA insisted
it would not settle the case until it took every penny [the defendant] had saved".[4]
Further attempts at progress towards controlling the privacy of public media content by targeting
the elimination of piracy were made when the highly anticipated yet often debated bill known as
the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) was passed in recent years. The bill was first introduced in

October 2011 by the United States House representative Lamar S. Smith.[10] The general scope of
the law was to fulfill the goal of putting a stop to online piracy by expanding upon existing
criminal laws regarding copyright violations. The essential goal of the bill was to protect
intellectual property of content creators by raising awareness of the severity of punishments for
copyright infringement. Naturally, the bill was met with considerable opposition from various
parties. One instance of this was an article comment by Edward J. Black, president and CEO of
the Computer & Communications Industry Association, who questioned the potential
effectiveness of the bill by reasoning that the major pirate websites that SOPA attempts to
eliminate could just as easily respawn under a different name if taken down as early as a few
hours later.[11] Additionally, strong protest attempts were made across the internet when numerous
high profile online organizations including Tumblr, Facebook, Twitter, and participating in
American Censorship Day on January 18, with some sites including Reddit and Wikipedia going
as far as completely blacking out all of their pages, redirecting the user to SOPA protest
messages.[12] Ultimately, as a result of aggressive protests and lack of consenting opinions within
the congress, SOPA was tabled on January 20 by its creator, House representative Lamar Smith.
[13]

Economic ramifications
Piracy's real effect on music sales is difficult to accurately assess. In neoclassical economics
prices are determined by the combination of the forces of supply and demand, but the
participators in the digital market do not always follow the usual motives and behaviors of the
supply and demand system. First, the cost of digital distribution has decreased significantly from
the costs of distribution by former methods. Furthermore, the majority of the filesharing
community will distribute copies of music for a zero price in monetary terms, and there are some
consumers who are willing to pay a certain price for legitimate copies even when they could just
as easily obtain pirated copies,[5] such as with pay what you want vendors.
Another issue is that because many people in the world illegally download music because they
cannot afford to purchase legitimate copies, not every illegal download necessarily equates to a
lost sale. This has some effect on music sales, but as Lawrence Lessig points out, there is wide
asymmetry between the estimated volume of illegal downloading and the projected loss of sales:

In 2002, the RIAA reported that CD sales had fallen by 8.9 percent
period that the RIAA estimates that 803 million CDs were sold, the

According to Woolley's introduction each year It is estimated that 12.5 billion dollars are lost due
to file sharing and music piracy, and 5 billion of that is profits lost from the music industry
directly. Due to this dramatic loss in profits the music industry has been forced to cut down their
staffing. Music piracy has become such an issue that the industry is encouraged to adapt to this
new era and change.[14]

Digital copies
The article, "The Music Industry On (The) Line? Surviving Music Piracy In A Digital Era" By
Jelle Janssens, Stijn Vandaele, and Tom Vander Beken presents an analysis of the prevalence of
piracy in music trade, which has affected the global sales of CDs. This article points out that
technological development such as file sharing; MP3 players, and CDRs have increased music
piracy. The most common forms of music piracy are Internet Piracy and compact disc piracy. It
also discusses the association between music piracy and organized crime, which is defined as
profit-driven illegal activities. The fact that digital products are virtual instead of physical affects
the economic mechanisms behind the production and distribution of content, and how piracy
works for digital as opposed to physical products: "the main consequence of the non-physical
form of digital products is their virtually negligible marginal cost of reproduction and their
ability to be digitally delivered."[5] The cost of burning a CD drastically lowered the overhead for
record companies, as well as for music pirates, and with the growing tendency toward online
distribution among legitimate and illicit distributors alike, the expense of distributing shrunk
further from the costs of printing and transporting CDs to merely the costs of maintaining a
website.[5] By sheer volume of file transfers, though, distributing music through traditional web
servers and FTP servers were not as popular as peer to peer (P2P) now, because the traditional
direct download method is slower.
The 2008 British Music Rights survey[15] showed that 80% of people in Britain wanted a legal
P2P service. This was consistent with the results of earlier research conducted in the United
States, upon which the Open Music Model was based.[16] In addition, the majority of filesharers
in the survey preferred to get their music from "local sources" such as LAN connections, email,
flash drives, sharing with other people they know personally.[5] The other most common method
of filesharing was with P2P technologies. By 2007, P2P networks' popularity had grown so much
that they used as much as 39% of the total volume of information exchanged over the internet.[5]

Rights Holders Solution

Alongside the RIAA and BPI's industry anti-piracy service sit a number of other independent
companies offering anti-piracy solutions. These companies tend to have a better reach and
success rate than the slower industry bodies and provide an alternative solution. Notable market
leaders include AudioLock, Web Sheriff, Topple Track, Detecnet, Muso and Attributor.

Minimising Online Music Piracy

There are ways to minimise music piracy on using the latest Google court decisions on the right
to be forgotten as well as using some proven techniques relating to adding a watermark to the
tracks and uploading the files yourself with promotional intent.[17]
A paper called the Music Anti-Piracy Best Practise Guidelines [18] has been published by music
anti-piracy specialists AudioLock and endorsed by the Association of Independent Music, the
Association For Electronic Music (AFEM), music distributors Believe Digital and Judge Jules

(DJ and Lawyer). These guidelines give advice on how to minimise exposure to music-piracy
and how best to utilise the solutions that are not available.
Statistics have shown that since the latter half the 2000s, there has been a decline in music
piracy. According to a NPD survey, in 2012, approximately one in ten Internet users in the
United States downloaded music through a file sharing service similar to BitTorrent or
LimeWire. This number is significantly less than 2005, the peak of the piracy phenomenon,
when one in five users used peer-to-peer networks to gather music files. The emergence of free
streaming services has decreased the amount of users who pirate music on the internet. Services
such as Spotify and Pandora have easy-to-use interfaces and decrease the risk for computer
viruses and spyware.[19] In comparison to the illegal software used by older music piracy
networks such as Napster or Limewire, current music streaming services such as Spotify and
Rdio offer cheap yet legal access to copyrighted music by paying the rights holders through
money made off of payments made by premium users and through advertisements[20]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_piracy