TechSpot giveaway: Win a DJI Spark drone & a Star Wars BB-8 droid

IFPI report reveals stream ripping is on the rise

By Cal Jeffrey · 9 replies
Sep 21, 2017
Post New Reply
  1. The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) has released its 2017 Music Consumer Insight Report and is none too pleased with the findings.

    Despite the fact that listeners on licensed streaming services have increased from 37 percent in 2016 to 45 percent this year, the IFPI remains distressed at what it perceives as a “value gap.” Even though labels receive billions of dollars from uploaded music that has been monetized, they feel it’s not enough. The IFPI sees a significant “mismatch” in value between how much user-upload services like YouTube make in ad revenue and what they pay out to the labels.

    “User upload services, such as YouTube, are heavily used by music consumers and yet do not return fair value to those who are investing in and creating the music,” the report says.

    According to IFPI CEO Francis Moore, the value gap is the biggest threat to the music industry. It is so intimidating that the record labels are actively lobbying Congress for legislation to force the closure of this gap. YouTube is reportedly not even a break-even business.

    The other big thorn in the IFPI’s side is piracy in the form of stream ripping.

    The report notes that 40 percent of listeners consume unlicensed music and that the vast majority (35 percent) use stream ripping services. That’s up from 30 percent in 2016. Over half of those using illegal services are in the younger (16-24) age bracket.

    “The industry is taking action against these [ripping] sites and fighting for the rights of those creating music,” said Moore. “With the wealth of licensed music available to fans, these types of illegal sites have no justifiable place in the music world.”

    Moore’s stance is not just empty words. Earlier this month, stream ripping website YouTube-MP3 was defeated in copyright court and forced to hand over its domain to the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). The owner of the stream ripping service, Philip Matesanz, will also pay the labels an undisclosed monetary settlement.

    The problem for the record labels with ripping is that there are hundreds of sites that will convert YouTube videos to MP3s. The RIAA v. Matesanz win was only a drop in the bucket toward combating the problem. The issue makes the peer-to-peer legal battles of almost two decades ago look insignificant.

    Moore’s hyperbole on the value gap falls flat in the face of the growing problem of stream ripping. However, I can understand the IFPI’s tactic here. There are no more laws that can be enacted to make ripping more illegal than it already is. It is far easier to lobby for new legislation that takes money from legitimately licensed streaming services versus chasing the rippers.

    Top Image by Android Central

    Permalink to story.

     
  2. Squid Surprise

    Squid Surprise TS Evangelist Posts: 1,403   +604

    "Value gap".... Can they give some hard numbers on why they believe they should be making more money? Where did they get their figures for people illegally stream-ripping music? And can they prove that the people who stream-rip would purchase music if ripping was unavailable?

    The RIAA is full of cr@p and simply want more profits...

    I'm not saying that illegal downloading is right or anything.... It's just not the reason for the music industry's problems.
     
  3. OutlawCecil

    OutlawCecil TS Addict Posts: 201   +96

    Sounds like a good ol' greed issue to me.
     
    alabama man likes this.
  4. BSim500

    BSim500 TS Evangelist Posts: 324   +505

    It never is, is it?...
     
    Jamlad, Nobina and alabama man like this.
  5. turismozilla

    turismozilla TS Booster Posts: 161   +47

    Didn't we tell you guys that if we can see it we can copy it? Yup, we did.
     
    Cal Jeffrey likes this.
  6. Jamlad

    Jamlad TS Booster Posts: 89   +78

    Well ****, they better get on to banning radio too.
     
  7. Cal Jeffrey

    Cal Jeffrey TS Maniac Topic Starter Posts: 467   +145

    No. But they have some nice infographics to prove what they are saying is true. lol
     
    kapital98 likes this.
  8. Thorney

    Thorney TS Enthusiast Posts: 32   +8

    Stream ripping is just a very long winded way of not paying £10 a month. Yes I would like to be able to have mp3s of the albums I like from Spotify, which legal Napster used to do btw, they let you download the tracks and stream them for your subscription. But stream ripping is just more hassle than its worth, to me time is more important than money and paying £15 for all the family to use Spotify is a lot less hassle than ripping tracks from a free service, downloading them on to my HD and then having to share them out with the various devices in the house for various people. nah.

    Sayin that there are those rare times that you can only get a piece of music from YouTube and sometimes you cant even buy the physical version anymore so to me that doesn't harm anybody.
     
    Reehahs likes this.
  9. paul s2

    paul s2 TS Rookie

    If you make it cost more to stream more will pirate this has been a issue scene IRC and 56K modems.
     
  10. kapital98

    kapital98 TS Addict Posts: 175   +135

    That report came off as someone who learned the basics of excel and then went crazy with a publishing program.

    Would it have been so hard to include some appendices with relevant charts? Maybe even be really generous and provide the regressions? (Though it makes sense as a trade group that they do not disclose their analysis -- weird as that sounds).

    All in all, this is a sham article made by a special interest. It's useful as maybe their starting position in negotiations (which is why it exists really) but it's by no means objective.
     
    Cal Jeffrey likes this.

Similar Topics

Add New Comment

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...