A letter to the Guardian, sent on the 10th of April 2006, in response to the article 'Music industry counts the cost of online piracy' (4th April 2006).

Dear Sir or Madam,

We were saddened to see the Guardian's report of the BPI's claim to have sustained losses of £414m due to internet file-sharing over the course of the last year (Music industry counts the cost of online piracy, Tuesday April 4, 2006).

While on previous occasions the Guardian has provided commendably balanced reportage of these issues, in this instance the article amounted to little more than a paraphrase of the BPI's press release and we would therefore like to put some of their claims in perspective.

The BPI's assertion that "those downloading music illegally are the individuals expected to spend the most on music", directly contradicts research carried out by music research firm 'The Leading Question' (and reported by yourselves - "Online file sharers 'buy more music' - July 27, 2005") that "music fans who illegally share tracks over the internet also spend four and a half times as much on digital music as those who do not". This, along with a growing body of other research, demonstrates that online file-sharing is doing little to harm the music industry and may even be helping it. Any informed reader should therefore be highly sceptical of the BPI's wildly inflated claims which have no basis given the available evidence.

Peter Jamieson, the BPI chairman, asserts that "when people share music files illegally, they are stealing the future of British musicians and the people who invest in them". We would like to remind Mr Jamieson that despite the best efforts of the BPI's member companies, the future of music (and the livelihood of musicians) is in no way dependant on the existence of a 'music industry' in its current form.

Yours Faithfully,

[bullet point list just for clarity]

None: guardianLetter (last edited 2006-09-09 11:35:31 by RickMoynihan)