Music piracy - who’s on the moral high ground?

 

Google says it already removes two million links a month on requests from rights holders.

It's a battle between one of the world's most powerful companies, Google, and the trade body representing British music labels, the BPI. The increasingly bitter confrontation over what responsibility the search firm has to help in the battle against web piracy is the subject of my film for Newsnight on Wednesday evening.

The BPI says Google has become a directory for piracy - put Adele or any artist plus MP3 into the search box, and you'll find page after page of unauthorised sites before you come to anything legitimate. The trade body wants the pirate sites pushed down the search rankings - Google says it already removes two million links a month on requests from rights holders, and it can't mess with its search algorithm.

I suspect that many of you reading this will come down on Google's side. After all the music industry is hugely powerful, and has been ripping off consumers for years, right? Who are they to take the moral high ground?

But don't forget that Google now earns about three times as much in the UK as the entire music industry. And if you think the call for action against the firm comes exclusively from bloated record industry executives who deserve no sympathy, listen to Alastair Nicholson.

He has been running the UK hip-hop label Son Records for more than a decade, battling to keep afloat. Visit his office, and you'll find no flunkies delivering flowers or a boardroom decorated with rock memorabilia - just one man in an attic flat.

Son Records has been a labour of love for Alastair, who believed UK hip-hop artists were more political and less crassly commercial than their American equivalents - and wanted to get them a wider hearing. He had modest success at first, but gradually found that sales were falling away. "When I looked online I'd just find a lot of my stuff myself lying around for free and it seemed to me to be getting a worse and worse problem."

So with one album, Genghis by Cappo and Stylee C, he tried a new approach to try to beat the pirates. First, he released a special edition of the album on vinyl, without handing out any digital copies to reviewers. They complained, but the vinyl version sold well - and when Nicholson searched the web he found no trace of any unauthorised copies.

Copying files

The vinyl edition covered some of the costs, but the album was never going to be profitable without a full release. Alastair prepared to release Genghis on a wide range of formats - CD, digital download, even a special edition USB stick. The day after the release he went to his computer:

"Every day up to the release it had been clean - links to our websites, reviews, and so on. The day after the release when it had become simultaneously available on all the download sites I was just horrified. I did a search for the artist name and the album titles and it was just page after page of file shares and free downloads and I didn't get to anything legitimate until the bottom of the fifth or sixth page."

He spent the next 10 days trying to hunt down every pirated link, contacting Google and issuing takedown notices. Eventually the search results began to look better, but the damage had been done. "In my opinion it pretty much killed it," he says. "Having had this month long period when I was selling a lot of copies of records - the limited edition - well to call it a trickle is to be quite generous. It slowed down to almost nothing."

Alastair says his kind of album has a short window to make an impact - and if in that time it is available free online then there is little prospect of any substantial sales. A couple of years on, and the prospects for Son Records do not look any brighter. In fact, the business has effectively shut down, and its owner puts much of the blame at Google's door as an enabler of piracy.

Downloading sign

I put it to him that it wasn't Google's fault if the web was awash with free music and that was what people were searching out.

"You're right," he said. "There's any number of people distributing music for free, I'm not trying to lay that at Google's door." So how would he describe Google's stance, I asked. He thought for a bit, and then said: "There's a lack of a moral viewpoint."

Google's Theo Bertram strongly disputes that: "I'm happy to say Google doesn't support piracy and does support freedom of expression," he told me. "Those are not in conflict."

But Alastair Nicholson also points to an irony in the way music fans behave. He thinks the people who like his kind of music and would get it for free online would see themselves as anti-establishment, "sticking it to The Man," as the saying goes. But the result of their actions is that the only future for a small music label is to cosy up to a corporate giant: "Unless you're going to become the corporate mascot for Barclaycard, Weetabix, whatever, I don't see there's that many ways to make a business selling music."

Whatever anti-piracy measures are tried - from blocking the Pirate Bay to changing Google's search rankings - seem unlikely to make much of a difference unless music fans become convinced that there is something not quite right about taking illegal downloads.

The big labels represented by the BPI will no doubt find a way to survive but music fans may find that an industry where Son Records can't make a living is not quite what they wanted.

UPDATE 10: 43 BST, 19 July 2012

Someone who knows music industry finances like the back of his hand has been in touch to point out that my line about Google earning three times as much as the entire industry does not tell the whole story. True, retail sales for music in the UK amounted to just under £800m, which compares to Google's UK revenues of around £2.4bn. But add in licensing income, and the growing receipts from live music - and you get nearer to £4bn for the entire UK industry. Now, if you wanted to have a punt on what would be worth more in the coming years - Google's advertising business or the music industry - I know which way I'd bet. But for now, there are still ways to make money from music.

 
Rory Cellan-Jones Article written by Rory Cellan-Jones Rory Cellan-Jones Technology correspondent

Nokia's brand name merry-go-round

Nokia launches a new tablet as Microsoft drops the company's name from another. What does this all mean, asks Rory Cellan-Jones?

Read full article

More on This Story

More from Rory

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
 
  • rate this
    -2

    Comment number 12.

    So the test proves that if you publish digital information then it is re-published multiple times over the internet in a short space of time... Not only that, but more people will visit and link to the illegitimate copies than to the legitimate one... Should Google rank results which are unpopular higher? Should exceptions be made for those who pay them? Or for those with power? Goodbye Google

  • rate this
    +9

    Comment number 11.

    I have firsthand knowledge of the situation, as both an artist, and a former record label copyright enforcer.
    It's their own fault in short, for the actions they chose in 1999.

    When you drive your cars, you don't worry about the saddle-maker or livery stable put out of business.

    As is here. New technology obsoletes some businesses. You can't force people to live in the past.

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 10.

    The music industry have really only got themselves to blame at the end of the day.
    Their relentless churning out of atypical mass-produced tripe has meant that most intelligent people just aren't willing to pay for their utter dross they produce.

    And not being funny but no way in hell am I paying any of my money for music when most of it is going to end up in the pockets of the fat cats.

  • rate this
    +6

    Comment number 9.

    All businesses have to compete intelligently online so I don't see why the recording industry should be immune to the Google algorithm. They obviously do not have a clue about trading online today. Instead of spending money on lawyers or wasting their time moaning to Google they should be spending their resources on quality webmasters and the arts of online trade and search engine optimisation.

  • rate this
    +2

    Comment number 8.

    The whole concept of 'intellectual property' is the root of the problem. It was always a fantasy; the current problems are simply making this fact ever clearer. If we do not, as a society, reject the IP laws which are doing more and more damage to us, we will end up with corporations demanding we have their copyright or patented material removed from our very brains.

  • rate this
    +3

    Comment number 7.

    Not sure what Rory has against Google, their search algorithm is pretty good at making sure the most legitimate/respected pages show up first in their search results. Yes, pirate sites are going to be on there somewhere because they also recognise freedom of expression on the web. You can't have it both ways.

  • rate this
    -4

    Comment number 6.

    Websites such ase Pirate Bay are a form of organised crime - it makes no difference to them that their victims are small acts. They have deep pockets that fund servers in exotic locations like the Seychelles and finance successful PR campaigns that whip up online protests to impede new laws. The result is longer dole queues and greater burdens on taxpayers who have to make up for lost VAT.

  • rate this
    +4

    Comment number 5.

    The excellent american punk band Fugazi use their website not just distribute the CD's of the bands on the label they formed themselves, but also to sell recordings of their live shows from years ago. They have always charged a very reasonable prices compared to the over inflated amounts that the mainstream labels demand which means their piracy rates are probably negligible as fans respect them.

  • rate this
    +4

    Comment number 4.

    With their lawsuits for ridiculous damages and now trying to extort of of biggest companies on the web, the record companies are showing it is just about their greed and desperation to hold on to profits from a monopoly they've been granted an has only been in around for less 50 years.
    Consumers also know now that very little of the money they pay for CDs actually reach the artists themselves.

  • rate this
    +7

    Comment number 3.

    I smell something... He must have done an amazing job getting sites to block and remove the downloads as I cannot find any data to suggest that what he has said in this article has any basis in reality... yes you heard me, this album isn't on The Pirate Bay, ISOHunt or even in a Google search! Oh and what I smell is Bull.

  • rate this
    +5

    Comment number 2.

    I'm sorry that smaller label are getting hit where it hurts, but the root cause remains the same, the record and movie industry have been treating consumers for mugs for far too long and yet still are trying to maintain the same business model to squeeze the consumer out of more cash.
    The entertainment industry is not losing out because of piracy, its because of a expensive sub standard product.

  • rate this
    +7

    Comment number 1.

    Yep, blame google, it's the easiest way. Bit naive really - if the music really was popular enough for 6 pages of illegal downloads (highly dubious in my opinion) then legitimate sales would also have been buoyant. What he really means is: no one liked the music but I did find some illegal copies somewhere. Might as well blame bbc site for mentioning pirated music.

 

Page 6 of 6

 

Features

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.