Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Determinants of music copyright violations on the university campus

Journal of Cultural Economics volume 31, pages 187–204 (2007)Cite this article

Abstract

The protection of copyrights in the music industry has been of paramount concern as the popularity of digital music players, personal websites, and file-sharing continues to grow, each of which subsequently contributes to the persistence of Internet music piracy. While the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) links file-sharing to copyright piracy, others argue that file-sharing allows maximum exposure of artists’ music which in turn increases its value. While this debate continues, little empirical research has specifically addressed the behavioral aspects of the consumer. In this paper, we use survey data on university students to study how attitudes toward copyright law along with economic and demographic factors affect the extent of music copyright violations. We find that while students are responsive to economic incentives and perceptions of risk, the extent of these incentives has not reversed the overall propensity to engage in file-sharing.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Notes

  1. An abridged version of the survey containing all questions relating to this article is found in Appendix 2.

  2. Though we collected information on students’ majors, initial regression estimates showed that the type of major did not influence patterns of music consumption or how music is acquired. Thus, we do not include this variable in the regression analysis, though we present summary statistics for the purpose of describing the distribution of students surveyed.

  3. Although we ask questions based on file-sharing, CD duplication (music ripping) is also a very common way of “sharing” music. In general, the survey seemed to capture the use of both methods, since the alternative to file-sharing are the legal alternatives. Thus, CD duplication would fall under the same category as file-sharing.

  4. The 2.5% finding was during the 2003–2004 year, when fee-based music services were just starting to develop. This figure is likely to be significantly higher today, though based on industry analysts, not likely to exceed the file-sharing percentage.

  5. The Fairness variable does not appear in Table 2, because Fairness is used in the selection equation for identification purposes. But the effect of Fairness on file-sharing can be observed in the results in Appendix 1. Indeed the coefficient has a negative sign as expected, and is statistically significant at conventional levels for the Probit and Tobit specifications.

  6. The elasticities are readily computed in STATA with the Heckman and MFX procedures.

  7. Since the questions measuring the importance of cost, time, and song selection were only asked of students that admit to file-sharing, we are unable to include these variables in the full regression model estimating the determinants of file-sharing. However, we ran the full model again using the sub-sample of students that answered the question and including the cost, time, and song selection variables. The coefficients for New (percentage of recent music acquired via file-sharing) as follows: Cost: 17.39*** (T-statistic: 3.77); Time: 14.18*** (T-statistic: 3.59); Song Selection: 1.03 (T-statistic: 0.26).

References

  • Amemiya, T. (1984). Tobit models: A survey. Journal of Econometrics, 24, 3–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Apple, Inc, http://www.apple.com/itunes, accessed Jan. 30, 2007.

  • Becker, G. (1968). Crime and punishment: An economic approach. Journal of Political Economy, 76, 169–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Shahar, D., & Jacob, A. (2004). Selective enforcement of copyright as an optimal monopolistic behavior. Contributions to Economic Analysis and Policy, 3, 1–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Besley, D. A., Kuh, E., & Welsch, R. E. (1980). Regression diagnostic: Identifying influential data and sources of collinearity. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharjee, S., Gopal, R. D., Lertwachara, K., & Marsden, J. R. (2006). Impact of legal threats on online music sharing activity: An analysis of music industry legal actions. Journal of Law and Economics, 49, 91–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boldrin, M., & Levine, D. (2002). The case against intellectual property. American Economic Review, 92, 209–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, A. H. (2000). The doctrine of universal jurisdiction: A review of the literature. Criminal Law Forum, 11, 353–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, S. (1988). The economics of crime deterrence: A survey of theory and evidence. Kyklos, 41, 301–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, H. K., Sims, R. R., & Teegen, H. (1997). To purchase or pirate software: An empirical study. Journal of Management Information Systems, 13, 49–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiang, E. P., & Assane, D. (2002). Software copyright infringement among college students. Applied Economics, 34, 157–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, D., & Jappelli, T. (1990). Credit rationing and private transfers: Evidence from survey data. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 72, 445–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dudley, L., & Montmarquette, C. (1976). A model of the supply of bilateral foreign aid. American Economic Review, 66, 132–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gayer, A., & Shy, Oz (2005). Publishers, artists, and copyright enforcement. University of Haifa Working Paper.

  • Gopal, R. D., Sanders, G. L. (1998). International Software Piracy: Analysis of Key Issues and Impacts. Information Systems Research, 9, 380–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heckman, J. (1976). The common structure of statistical models of truncation, sample selection and limited dependent variables and a simple estimators for such models. Annals of Economic and Social Measurement, 5, 475–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heckman, J. (1979). Sample selection bias. Econometrica, 41(1), 153–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinduja, S. (2006). A critical examination of the digital music phenomenon. Critical Criminology, 14, 387–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, D. L., Novak, T. P., & Venkatesh, A. (2004). Has the internet become indispensable? Communications of the ACM, 47, 37–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (2006) The Recording Industry 2006 Piracy Report: Protecting creativity in music, http://www.ifpi.org/content/library/piracy-report2006.pdf, accessed Jan 15, 2007.

  • Lam, C. K., & Tam, B. C. (2001). The internet is changing the music industry. Communications of the ACM, 44, 62–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liebowitz, S. J. (2006). File sharing: Creating destruction of just plain destruction? Journal of Law and Economics, 49, 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leung, S.-F., & Yu, S. (1996). On the choice between sample selection and two-part models. Journal of Econometrics, 72, 107–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marron, D. B., & Steel, D. G. (2000). Which countries protect intellectual property? The case of software piracy. Economic Inquiry, 38, 159–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moores, T. T. (2003). The effect of national culture and economic wealth on global software piracy rates. Communications of the ACM, 46, 207–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oberholzer, F., & Strumpf, K. (2004). The effect of file sharing on record sales: An empirical analysis. Harvard Business School Working Paper.

  • Peitz, M, & Waelbroeck, P. (2003). Piracy of digital products: A critical review of the economics literature, CESifo Working Paper No. 1071.

  • Recording Industry Association of America, http://www.riaa.com, accessed Jan. 30, 2007.

  • Rafael, R., & Waldfogel, J. (2006). Piracy on the high C’s: Music downloading, sales displacement, and social welfare in a sample of college students. Journal of Law and Economics, 49, 29–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silva, F., & Ramello, G. B. (2000). Sound recording market: The ambiguous case of copyright and piracy. Industrial and Corporate Change, 9, 415–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, V. K., & Johnson, F. R. (1988). How do risk perceptions respond to information? The case of radon. Review of Economics and Statistics, 70, 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevans, L., & Sessions, D. (2005). An empirical investigation into the effect of music downloading on the consumer expenditure of recorded music: A time series approach. Journal of Consumer Policy, 28, 311–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vella, F. (1998). Estimating Models with Sample Selection Bias: A Survey. The Journal of Human Resources, 33, 127–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viscusi, K. (1991). Age variations in risk perceptions and smoking decisions. Review of Economics and Statistics, 73, 577–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zentner, A. (2005). File sharing and international sales of copyrighted music: An empirical analysis with a panel of countries. Topics in Economic Analysis & Policy 5, Article, 21, 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zentner, A. (2006). Measuring the effect of file sharing on music purchases. Journal of Law and Economics, 49, 63–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We wish to thank the Editor and two anonymous referees for their valuable comments on an earlier draft of this article. In addition, we thank the following individuals for their input in the development of this article: Xuemei Jiang, Bill Robinson, Brad Wimmer, Lara Gardner, Patrick Cooper, Mark Bymaster, and seminar participants at Florida Atlantic University, California State University Long Beach, New Mexico State University, University of North Florida, and the 2004 Western Economic Association International Meetings. All remaining errors are ours.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics, Florida Atlantic University, BH 137, College of Business, 777 Glades Rd., Boca Raton, FL, 33431, USA

    Eric P. Chiang

  2. Department of Economics, University of Nevada Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV, 89154-6005, USA

    Djeto Assane

Authors
  1. Eric P. Chiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Djeto Assane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eric P. Chiang.

Appendices

Appendices

Appendix 1 Probit and Tobit estimates of the determinants of music file-sharing
Full size table
Appendix 2 Abridged version of the survey on music consumption
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chiang, E.P., Assane, D. Determinants of music copyright violations on the university campus. J Cult Econ 31, 187–204 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10824-007-9042-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10824-007-9042-y

Keywords

JEL classification

search

Navigation