You are on page 1of 11

Recipient:  Roy  Priest  

    THE  IMPACT  OF  THE   DIGITAL  ECONOMY  ACT  ON   THE  FUTURE  OF  THE  MUSIC   INDUSTRY        

   
       

Author:  Dan  Hess   Date:  01/05/2011  

Word  count:  3,058  
Dan  Hess   10504605  

Abstract  
  This  report  intends  to  consider  many  sources  and  opinions  in  an  attempt   to  answer  the  question  ‘Is  the  Digital  Economy  Act  the  best  way  to  safeguard  the   future  of  the  music  industry?’.  The  Act  was  introduced  in  May  of  2010  in   response  to  the  increase  of  illegal  music  distribution  on  the  internet,  and  was   backed  by  groups  such  as  the  IFPI  and  BPI.  The  Act  established  the  punishments   and  consequences  of  downloading  copyrighted  content  from  the  internet   illegally.  The  people  who  pushed  the  Act  through  parliament  hoped  that  it  would   scare  people  who  did  download  music  illegally  enough  so  that  they  stopped   doing  it,  and  instead  bought  their  music  legitimately.     Instead  of  considering  an  alternative  way  of  consumers  being  able  to   acquire  music,  record  labels  and  music  industry  executives  believed  that  the   threat  of  an  internet  restriction  was  enough  to  discourage  music  piracy.  The  Act   has  been  heavily  criticised,  and  even  Internet  Service  Providers  do  their  best  to   avoid  the  consequences  of  their  users  downloading  illegal  material.  Many  people   have  said  that  a  better  idea  than  the  DEA  would  be  to  introduce  a  system  where  a   user  subscribes  to  an  internet  package  through  an  ISP  that  has  a  deal  with  record   companies  allowing  the  subscribers  to  this  package  to  download  an  unlimited   amount  of  music  per  month.  This  would  generate  revenue  for  both  the  ISPs  and   the  record  labels,  who  would  have  lost  out  if  the  music  was  downloaded  illegally.     The  DEA  also  has  a  section  that  puts  the  existence  of  free  public  WiFi   networks  at  risk.  Under  the  DEA,  anyone  caught  downloading  illegal  material  on   a  network  is  the  responsibility  of  the  person  subscribed  to  the  internet  package.   This  means  in  situations  such  as  cafés  that  offer  free  WiFi  if  someone  was  to   connect  to  their  network  and  download  copyrighted  content  ,  it  would  be  the   owner  of  the  café  who  is  affected  by  the  DEA  and  could  have  their  internet   connection  terminated.     Services  are  starting  to  be  introduced  which  hope  to  reduce  the  amount  of   online  piracy  by  streaming  media  to  users  for  free  but  with  adverts,  or  without   adverts  for  a  small  price.  The  most  notable  service  in  this  case  is  Spotify,  whose   user  base  exceeds  10  million  people  and  have  recently  signed  a  deal  with  Virgin   Media  internet  providers  with  hopes  to  offer  a  music  based  internet  subscription   deal.  

 

 

Dan  Hess  

10504605  

1  

Chapters  
 
Abstract  .........................................................................................................  1  
               

Introduction  ..................................................................................................  3   The  Digital  Economy  Act  and  Copyright  Infringement   ...................  3   The  Digital  Economy  Act  and  Internet  Users  ................................  4   The  Digital  Economy  Act  and  Artists  ................................................  5   Streaming  Media  and  Record  Labels  ................................................  6   Conclusion  and  Alternatives  to  the  Digital  Economy  Act  ........  7   References   ....................................................................................................  9   Bibliography  .............................................................................................  10  

   

 

Dan  Hess  

10504605  

2  

Introduction  
    This  report  will  look  at  the  impact  that  the  Digital  Economy  Act  (DEA)  has  had   on  the  music  industry,  and  whether  or  not  it  will  be  beneficial  or  detrimental  to  the   industry  in  the  future.  It  will  consider  the  positives  and  negatives  of  the  Act,  and  how   the  people  who  are  affected  view  these  factors.  It  will  also  look  at  services  that  may   be  better  for  the  music  industry  than  the  Digital  Economy  Act,  and  how  these  affect   internet  users,  record  labels  and  artists.  By  sorting  the  facts  from  the  opinions,  it   should  be  possible  to  weigh  up  arguments  for  and  against  the  Digital  Economy  Act   and  come  to  a  conclusion  on  whether  it  is  necessary  for  the  survival  of  the  music   industry,  and  if  not  suggest  some  suitable  alternatives.    

The  Digital  Economy  Act  and  Copyright  Infringement  
    Following  on  from  the  Digital  Britain  report  published  in  2009,  the  Digital   Economy  Act  was  brought  into  effect  in  April  and  June  of  2010  to  help  bring  Britain   forwards  into  the  digital  age  by  setting  out  some  laws  and  regulations  that  must  be   followed  regarding  digital  media.  Arguably  the  most  important  part  of  the  Act  (and   definitely  the  most  controversial)  is  found  in  sections  3  to  16,  which  refer  to  the   infringement  of  copyrighted  content.  This  part  of  the  Act  contains  such  sections  as:    
‘3  -­‐  Obligation  to  notify  subscribers  of  reported  infringements’   ‘4  -­‐  Obligation  to  provide  infringement  lists  to  copyright  owners’   ’10  -­‐  Obligations  to  limit  internet  access’   ’13  -­‐  Subscriber  appeals’  

Digital  Economy  Act  2010  

 

These  sections  describe  what  should  happen  if  an  Internet  Service  Provider   (ISP)  discovers  that  someone  is  downloading  copyrighted  content,  without   permission,  from  the  internet.  In  this  situation,  the  ISP  must  notify  both  the   subscription  holder  of  the  account  that  the  illegal  downloading  was  completed  on,   and  the  copyright  holder  the  material  that  was  downloaded.  If  illicit  downloading   persists  after  being  sent  a  warning,  a  technical  obligation  may  be  imposed  on  the  ISP   to  limit  the  internet  access  of  the  user  in  question.  The  subscriber  then  reserves  the   right  to  appeal  against  this  imposition  if  they  believe:    

(a)  that  the  apparent  infringement  to  which  the  report  relates  was  not  an  infringement  of   copyright;   (b)  that  the  report  does  not  relate  to  the  subscriber’s  IP  address  at  the  time  of  the  apparent   infringement.   Digital  Economy  Act  2010,  section  13  (3)  
 

Sections  17  and  18  refer  to  the  prevention  of  users  from  accessing  certain   internet  locations  deemed  to  be  connected  with  copyright  infringement.  Some   people  see  this  as  a  breach  of  human  rights,  and  some  of  the  ISPs  are  reluctant  to  go   through  with  it.  This  is  because  their  main  concern  is  providing  their  customers  with   internet  access,  and  by  restricting  them  from  viewing  certain  sites  the  customers   Dan  Hess   10504605   3  

may  become  upset  with  the  provider  and  take  their  business  elsewhere.  To  try  and   keep  the  customer’s  satisfaction,  providers  often  do  what  they  can  to  prolong  the   process  of  blocking  internet  locations  by  taking  the  issue  as  far  as  high  court  judges.   UK  Internet  Service  Provider  TalkTalk  stated  on  their  official  blog  that  they  will  not   give  out  a  customer’s  details  to  a  copyright  holder  without  a  court  order  and  if  they   are  instructed  to  disconnect  a  subscriber  from  accessing  the  internet,  they  will   refuse  to  do  so  and  take  the  issue  to  court.     The  government  have  recently  asked  Ofcom  to  re-­‐evaluate  the  sections  of   the  Act  regarding  the  restriction  of  certain  websites,  stating  that  it  is  “not  clear   whether  the  site  blocking  provisions  in  the  Act  could  work  in  practice”  (culture.gov.uk,   01/02/2011).  Some  of  the  main  reasons  for  the  request  to  re-­‐assess  these  sections  are   questioning  the  possibility  of  the  user  gaining  access  to  the  restricted  site  (via  proxy   servers),  how  they  can  be  sure  they  are  not  blocking  a  legitimate  site,  and  how  costly   would  this  be  to  the  Internet  Service  Providers.    

The  Digital  Economy  Act  and  Internet  Users  

    In  most  cases,  internet  users  will  remain  relatively  unaffected  by  the  DEA.   The  people  at  risk  of  being  affected  by  it  are  the  people  that  engage  in  the  illegal   distribution  and  downloading  of  copyrighted  material.  The  International   Federation  of  the  Phonographic  Industry  (IFPI)  Digital  Music  Report  2011  claims   that  76%  of  all  music  obtained  online  in  the  UK  in  2010  was  unlicensed,  and   acquired  through  illegal  methods  such  as  peer-­‐to-­‐peer  (P2P)  or  BitTorrent   rather  than  legitimate  music  sites  like  iTunes  or  Amazon  MP3.  Under  the  Digital   Economy  Act  this  could  see  some  of  those  users  receiving  warnings  from  their   ISPs,  restrictions  to  their  internet  access,  or  even  (as  seen  in  some  extreme   cases)  lawsuits  from  copyright  holders.     One  very  important  argument  in  the  case  against  the  DEA  is  concerning   who  would  be  affected  if  an  internet  ban  was  imposed  against  a  subscriber.  This   part  of  the  Act  is  highly  controversial,  as  it  places  innocent  people  at  risk  by   stating  that  the  internet  subscriber  is  responsible  for  the  actions  of  anyone   accessing  the  internet  through  their  network.  Because  computers  on  the  same   network  share  an  Internet  Protocol  (IP)  address,  it  is  not  possible  for  the  ISP  to   tell  which  computer  within  a  network  was  downloading  the  illegal  material.  This   could  result  in  the  internet  being  restricted,  which  would  then  mean  that  no   computer  across  that  network  could  connect  to  the  internet.  For  example  if  a   teenager  living  at  home  was  caught  downloading  illicit  material,  the  whole   household  could  be  cut  off,  resulting  in  innocent  users  being  disallowed  internet   connection.  This  could  affect  their  work,  business,  or  education,  and  would  have   a  major  impact  on  their  personal  lives.     Many  places  offer  public  WiFi  access  (such  as  libraries,  universities  and   cafés)  but  if  a  user  chooses  to  download  copyrighted  material  while  connected  to   this  network,  the  Digital  Economy  Act  would  make  it  the  responsibility  of  the  

Dan  Hess  

10504605  

4  

person  that  holds  the  internet  subscription.  There  are  things  that  can  be  done  to   try  and  avoid  this  situation,  such  as  taking  information  of  people  that  use  the   WiFi  network.  This  would  mean  that  if  the  subscription  holder  was  accused  of   piracy,  they  could  appeal  and  (with  evidence)  give  the  details  of  the  guilty  user.   For  large  organisations  or  chains  this  could  be  feasible,  but  for  small   independent  businesses  this  could  mean  the  end  of  their  public  WiFi  service.     One  of  the  main  questions  regarding  internet  users  and  the  Digital   Economy  Act  is  why  do  people  download  music  illegally?  The  primary  reason  for   this  is  because  it  is  free,  and  considering  the  number  of  people  that  partake  in   copyright  infringement,  very  few  get  caught.  It  is  very  easy  to  do,  with  websites   like  The  Pirate  Bay  being  entirely  dedicated  to  sharing  media  over  the  internet   and  being  very  open  and  public  about  the  fact  that  they  share  copyrighted   content.   Services  such  as  Napster  and  Limewire  were  previously  used  for  sharing   copyrighted  content,  but  after  legal  action  have  ceased  to  exist.  Napster  was   created  by  university  student  Shawn  Fanning  to  be  a  P2P  file  sharing  application,   where  users  can  simply  run  the  program  and  download  as  much  free  music  as   they  desired.  After  much  attention  from  record  labels,  Napster  was  shut  down  as   a  free  P2P  site,  but  was  later  bought  out  and  reinvented  as  a  legitimate  service   where  users  can  pay  for  tracks,  or  for  an  account  where  they  can  stream  music.   People  who  used  Napster  as  an  illegal  source  of  music  were  shown  a  legitimate   alternative,  but  may  have  opted  to  continue  sourcing  their  digital  music  illegally.    

The  Digital  Economy  Act  and  Artists  

  Despite  all  of  the  negative  attention  BitTorrent  and  P2P  services  get,   some  people  see  them  as  a  golden  opportunity  for  publicity.  One  band  that  has   notably  benefited  from  this  is  Radiohead.  Back  when  Napster  were  offering   music  for  free,  Radiohead  were  struggling  to  reach  an  American  audience  and   the  chance  of  getting  an  album  in  the  US  charts  seemed  unlikely.  However,  their   fourth  album  ‘Kid  A’  was  released  on  2nd  of  October  2000  and  went  straight  to   the  top  spot  of  both  the  UK  and  the  US  album  charts,  despite  being  a  new   direction  for  the  band  and  a  far  cry  from  what  was  considered  popular  music  at   the  time.  Lots  of  people  believe  that  this  was  due  to  the  fact  that  before  the   album  was  released,  tracks  were  leaked  on  Napster  and  generated  a  buzz  about   the  album.  Bootleg  copies  of  Radiohead  concerts  appeared  on  Napster  just  days   after  they  had  taken  place,  and  before  the  album  came  out  the  fans  knew  the   songs  and  were  singing  along  at  live  performances.  The  whole,  completed  album   was  on  Napster  before  its  official  release,  and  despite  being  downloaded  by   people  all  over  the  world,  it  sold  millions  of  copies  and  went  platinum  in  the  UK   in  its  first  week  of  release.  In  response  to  the  album  leaking,  Radiohead  singer   Thom  Yorke  said  “The  cool  thing  about  Napster  is  it  encourages  bootlegging,  it   encourages  enthusiasm  for  music  in  a  way  that  the  music  industry  has  long   forgotten  to  do”.  Radiohead  have  since  taken  on  many  different  approaches  to   releasing  music,  and  were  even  suspected  to  have  leaked  one  of  their  own  songs  

Dan  Hess  

10504605  

5  

(‘These  Are  My  Twisted  Words’)  onto  the  internet  themselves  via  BitTorrent  to   generate  attention  before  releasing  it  officially  through  their  website.     In  Radiohead’s  case,  they  clearly  benefited  from  the  illegal  sharing  of  their   material,  and  even  encouraged  it  to  an  extent.  Record  labels  however  would  not   back  this  idea  because  their  sole  interest  in  the  band  is  to  generate  profit,  and   with  illegal  file  sharing  the  label  loses  out  on  potential  sales.  This  could  generate   interest  which  may  result  in  more  legitimate  sales,  but  record  labels  would  not   promote  or  tolerate  piracy  of  their  own  music.  However,  it  has  to  be  considered   that  the  more  an  artist’s  music  is  downloaded  illegally,  the  more  people  are   evidently  interested  in  this  artist.  This  means  that  potentially,  more  people  will   attend  their  live  concerts.  Live  shows  have  always  been  a  way  to  promote  an   artist’s  music,  but  recently  it  has  become  a  much  larger  part  of  the  industry.   There  are  more  concerts  and  festivals  now  than  there  ever  have  been  before,  and   ticket  prices  are  continually  going  up.  Many  artists  care  much  less  about  piracy   than  their  record  labels  because  their  main  interest  is  making  music,  being   heard,  and  playing  shows,  whereas  the  labels  just  care  about  exploiting  artists  to   make  as  much  profit  as  possible.     Artists  often  disagree  with  their  labels,  but  are  bound  by  contracts  and  do   not  get  much  of  a  say  in  what  happens  to  them  or  their  music.  To  help  protect  the   rights  of  the  artists,  the  Featured  Artists’  Coalition  (FAC)  was  set  up  in  2009,  and   its  members  include  Ed  O’Brien  from  Radiohead,  Billy  Bragg,  Dave  Rowntree   from  Blur,  Annie  Lennox,  Tom  Jones,  Robbie  Williams  and  Little  Boots.  The  FAC   promotes  the  rights  of  artists,  as  well  as  being  a  unified  group  where  artists  can   join  together  and  make  a  stand  against  the  traditional  views  of  the  music   industry  that  they  disagree  with.  They  are  also  firmly  against  the   ‘criminalisation’  of  fans  that  choose  to  download  music  illegally,  believing  that   the  measures  taken  when  someone  is  accused  of  copyright  infringement  should   be  much  less  aggressive.    

Streaming  Media  and  Record  Labels  
  On  iTunes,  it  costs  £0.99  to  buy  the  current  iTunes  number  one  single   (‘Where  Them  Girls  Are  At’  (feat.  Nicki  Minaj  &  Flo  Rida)  by  David  Guetta),  and   £7.99  to  buy  the  number  one  album  (‘21’  by  Adele).  Both  of  these  can  be   streamed  in  full,  legally,  for  free  on  the  internet  via  Spotify  and  Napster   (although  some  country  restrictions  aplpy).  The  only  differences  between   streaming  these  tracks  and  buying  them  as  a  legal  download  is  the  quality,  which   in  most  cases  is  barely  a  noticeable  difference,  and  the  option  to  put  the  tracks   on  a  mobile  device  (MP3  player,  phone,  tablet  etc.).  However,  many  phones  and   tablets  can  connect  to  the  internet,  and  with  the  right  device,  it  is  even  possible   to  connect  an  MP3  player  to  a  WiFi  connection.  Coupled  with  the  availability  of   Spotify  on  most  mobile  platforms,  this  makes  iTunes  and  other  digital  music   stores  much  less  relevant.  The  only  issue  with  this  is  that  it  is  much  easier  to   have  a  song  stored  on  a  device  than  to  have  to  stream  it  (which  requires  a  mobile   contract  with  internet  access  and  enough  bandwidth  to  cope  with  the  streaming   Dan  Hess   10504605   6  

of  music).  So,  many  people  would  argue  that  if  they  could  access  it  for  free   anyway,  what  is  the  difference  if  they  just  downloaded  the  file?  Record   companies  often  promote  new  albums  and  singles  by  putting  complete  streams   of  them  online,  as  has  recently  been  seen  with  new  releases  from  Foo  Fighters,   Manchester  Orchestra,  The  Strokes,  Okkervil  River  and  Beastie  Boys  to  name  a   few,  but  as  soon  as  a  listener  downloads  the  files  to  be  stored  on  a  device  this  is   seen  as  a  breach  of  copyright  and  legal  action  must  be  taken.     Spotify’s  approach  to  music  streaming  is  one  that  has  recently  come  into   the  spotlight,  demonstrating  a  service  that  offers  free  music  to  users  that  record   labels  can  agree  with.  They  currently  boast  over  13  million  tracks  from  different   artists  and  labels,  including  Universal,  Sony,  EMI  and  Warner.  Spotify  have  deals   that  allow  them  to  stream  music  owned  by  these  labels  to  internet  users,  and  in   return  some  of  the  revenue  that  Spotify  generates  is  given  to  these  labels.  Spotify   get  their  money  by  selling  advertising  and  by  users  paying  for  an  upgraded   service  that  offers  more  functionality.  Because  Spotify  is  one,  large  service,  it  is   easy  for  them  to  keep  track  of  what  users  have  been  playing,  which  determines   how  much  money  should  be  given  to  each  record  label  and  to  which  artists.  They   currently  have  three  kinds  of  accounts,  each  with  different  prices  and  features:    

Open    
 

Free  

Unlimited  
 

£4.99/month  

Premium  

£9.99/month  

Occasional  adverts     Limited  music  streaming  

No  advertisements     Unlimited  music  streaming  

  Available  on  mobile  devices     Offline  mode  for  playlists     No  advertisements     Unlimited  music  streaming  
 

 

Spotify  have  also  very  recently  added  the  ability  to  synchronise  with  a  users   local  media  library  (including  any  ripped  CDs  or  purchased  downloads),  which  is  fully   integrated  with  the  Spotify  service.  This  means  users  can  play  their  own  music  and   assuming  the  artist  is  on  Spotify,  simply  click  the  artist  name  to  view  their  Spotify   profile  and  start  streaming  their  other  albums.  Alongside  the  ability  to  purchase   songs  within  Spotify  and  to  sync  with  a  whole  range  of  portable  devices,  it  is  easy  to   see  the  benefits  of  Spotify  over  applications  like  iTunes,  which  does  not  allow  users   to  stream  full  tracks.  This  shows  that  even  under  the  Digital  Economy  Act  there  are   legal  services  that  encourage  users  to  listen  to  music  without  paying,  and  that  these   services  are  proving  successful.    

Conclusion  and  Alternatives  to  the  Digital  Economy  Act  

    Reuters  reported  that  2010  saw  a  7%  fall  in  the  sale  of  physical  albums   and  a  30%  increase  in  the  number  of  albums  bought  digitally,  but  this  is  not  to   say  that  people  prefer  digital  media  to  physical.  People  enjoy  buying  CDs  and   Dan  Hess   10504605   7  

vinyls  for  all  kinds  of  reasons,  including  the  artwork  and  booklets.  While  an   attempt  has  been  made  to  recreate  this  by  including  Digital  Booklets  with  some   album  releases  on  iTunes,  it  is  not  the  same  as  owning  the  physical  product.   People  of  an  older  generation  are  often  more  reluctant  to  move  on  to  a  new   media  format,  and  people  who  already  own  many  vinyl  albums  will  wish  to   continue  their  vinyl  collection.  There  are  also  those  who  argue  that  the  sound   from  a  vinyl  album  or  CD  is  of  a  higher  quality,  and  that  playing  a  physical  vinyl   album  has  a  certain  ‘feel’  to  it  that  cannot  be  achieved  with  digital  music.  The   primary  reasons  for  buying  music  digitally  are  the  simplicity  and  cost,  as  it  is   usually  (but  not  always)  cheaper  to  buy  an  album  digitally  than  physically.     Although  the  Digital  Economy  Act  may  scare  a  few  people  out  of  music   piracy,  new  services  for  the  public  to  access  music  digitally  have  to  be  made   available  for  the  music  industry  to  thrive  in  the  long  term.  Record  labels  are   slowly  coming  around  to  the  fact  that  they  have  to  reconsider  their  traditional   views,  and  sign  up  to  new  online  services  in  an  attempt  to  win  back  some  of  the   customers  they  may  have  lost  to  music  piracy.  By  agreeing  to  partnerships  with   music  providers  such  as  Spotify,  Grooveshark  and  We7,  labels  are  making  a  step   in  the  right  direction.  Since  Spotify  began  as  a  small  invite-­‐only  service  in  2008,  it   has  gained  massive  amounts  of  attention  from  internet  users  and  currently  has   over  10  million  members  (around  1  million  of  whom  pay  for  the  service).       In  2009,  Virgin  Media  announced  that  they  had  made  a  partnership  with   Universal  and  would  soon  be  offering  an  internet  subscription  package  that   would  allow  users  to  download  as  much  music  as  they  liked  for  a  small,  monthly   fee.  However  after  failing  to  get  any  other  record  labels  to  sign  up  to  the  idea,  the   service  never  came  into  existence  and  was  delayed  until  further  notice.  On  5th  of   May  2011  the  Telegraph  reported  that  according  to  a  senior  music  industry   executive,  Virgin  had  signed  a  deal  with  Spotify  and  will  be  launching  their  long   awaited  subscription  music  service  within  “the  next  three  months”.  The  details   are  uncertain  and  there  is  a  chance  that  it  never  takes  off,  but  this  is  definitely  a   step  forwards  for  the  industry  and  could  end  up  encouraging  people  to  pay  for   their  music  much  more  than  the  Digital  Economy  Act  ever  did.       In  conclusion  the  Digital  Economy  Act  provides  a  reason  for  people  to   stop  downloading  copyrighted  content  illegally,  but  will  not  work  in  the  long   term.  The  number  of  people  involved  with  music  piracy  is  far  too  large  for  most   people  to  feel  threatened,  and  will  always  assume  that  it  will  not  happen  to  them.   There  are  also  simple  measures  that  can  be  taken  that  prevent  a  user  from  being   caught,  rendering  the  Act  almost  useless.  A  possible  solution  to  preventing  piracy   and  encouraging  the  purchase  of  legal  music  could  be  for  record  labels  to   reconsider  their  marketing  plan  and  encourage  new  services  like  Spotify,  putting   the  consumers  first  rather  than  punishing  them  for  taking  an  interest  in  music.  

Dan  Hess  

10504605  

8  

References  
  DEPARTMENT  FOR  CULTURE,  MEDIA  AND  SPORT.  (2011).  Ofcom  to  review  aspects  of  Digital   Economy  Act.  [WWW]  Available  from:  http://www.culture.gov.uk/news/media_releases/7756.aspx   [Accessed  03/05/2011]     DIGITAL  ECONOMY  ACT.  (2010).  Ch  24   Available  from:  http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/24/pdfs/ukpga_20100024_en.pdf   [Accessed  03/05/2011]     TalkTalk  Blog.  (2010).  Digital  Economy  Bill  –  it’s  a  wash  up.  [WWW]   Available  from:  http://www.talktalkblog.co.uk/2010/04/08/digital-­‐economy-­‐bill-­‐its-­‐a-­‐wash-­‐up/   [Accessed  03/05/2011]     THE  BRITISH  PHONOGRAPHIC  INDUSTRY.  (2008).  Reducing  online  copyright  infringement.  [WWW]   Available  from:  http://www.bpi.co.uk/our-­‐work/policy-­‐and-­‐lobbying/article/second-­‐article.aspx   [Accessed  03/05/2011]     INTERNATIONAL  FEDERATION  OF  THE  PHONOGRAPHIC  INDUSTRY.  (2011).  IFPI  Digital  Music  Report   2011.  Available  from:  http://www.ifpi.org/content/library/DMR2011.pdf   [Accessed  04/05/2011]     MP3  NEWSWIRE.  (2000).  Did  Napster  Take  Radiohead’s  New  Album  to  Number  1?.  [WWW]   Available  from:  http://www.mp3newswire.net/stories/2000/radiohead.html   [Accessed  04/05/2011]     TIME  EUROPE.  (2000).  Radioactive.  [WWW]   Available  from:  http://www.time.com/time/europe/magazine/2000/1023/radiohead.html   [Accessed  04/05/2011]     REUTERS.  (2011).  Album  sales  decline  again  in  2010.  [WWW]   Available  from:  http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/01/05/uk-­‐britain-­‐sales-­‐idUKTRE70426K20110105   [Accessed  08/05/2011]     THE  TELEGRAPH.  (2009).  Virgin  Media  and  Universal  Music  launch  unlimited  music  downloads.   [WWW]   Available  from:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/music-­‐news/5541235/Virgin-­‐ Media-­‐and-­‐Universal-­‐Music-­‐launch-­‐unlimited-­‐music-­‐downloads.html   [Accessed  11/05/2011]     THE  TELEGRAPH.  (2011).  Virgin  Media  and  Spotify  music  service  to  go  live  “imminently”.  [WWW]   Available  from:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/8495794/Virgin-­‐Media-­‐and-­‐Spotify-­‐ music-­‐service-­‐to-­‐go-­‐live-­‐imminently.html   [Accessed  11/05/2011]      

Dan  Hess  

10504605  

9  

 

Bibliography  
  GUARDIAN.  (2009).  Was  the  new  Radiohead  song  leaked  by  the  band?.  [WWW]   Available  from:  http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2009/aug/14/new-­‐radiohead-­‐song   [Accessed  04/05/2011]     FEATURED  ARTISTS  COALITION.  (2011).  Who  we  are.  [WWW]   Available  from:  http://www.featuredartistscoalition.com/about/   [Accessed  05/05/2011]     NATIONAL  PUBLIC  RADIO  MUSIC.  (2009).  The  Posies:  How  Do  Bands  Make  Money  Now?.    [WWW]   Available  from:  http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=111172341   [Accessed  05/05/2011]     EMARKETER.  (2010).  2010  Is  Tipping  Point  Between  Physical  and  Digital  Music  Formats.  [WWW]   Available  from:  http://www.emarketer.com/PressRelease.aspx?R=1007472   [Accessed  11/05/2011]  

Dan  Hess  

10504605  

10