So your idea is something technologists would have been well aware of a decade ago, and it never became a forgotten concept.
As I mentioned earlier, I didn't actually think I had solved the problem. My only contention with this part of our discussion is, the fact that RIA abandoned this idea 13 years ago, doesn't mean they made the right decision then, nor does it mean such a model wouldn't be more successful now.
I agree with your earlier point; the industry isn't the group of bumbling fools they're often painted to be. On the flipside, this is not a group whose collective decision making has left me wary of challenging their logic. And just to be clear, I'm not trying to advocate for the model I described. I'm merely trying to suggest that giving up may not be the best strategy.
"How many are downloading illegally" is a useless figure. What we need to know is "how many illegal downloads would be converted to purchases if illegal downloading was not possible?"
While it may be semantics, I would disagree that it's a useless number. If nothing else, it demonstrates just how widespread illegal downloading is.
Downloading is certainly a factor, and it may even be the biggest factor, but it's just hard to make a solid conclusion there from the data available.
A conclusion? Maybe not. An incredibly reasonable assumption? I believe so. As always, I'll remain open-minded. If someone can show me how some other factor or combination of factors, is having a bigger impact on sales than illegal downloads, I'll remain willing to accept that. Until that time, I'll call off the search for more complex answers where I feel none are needed.
As a side note, I did an interview with the guitar player from Hurt. Now granted, individual experiences are anecdotal, and don't represent evidence. That said, the experience he relayed is an interesting one. They sold 180,000 copies of their debut, without the benefit of successful single. Their second disc, contained the track "Ten Ton Brick", for which they shot a video, which went to #5 on the Billboard Rock chart. That album sold 70,000 copies. Despite their plummeting record sales, their crowds reflected the success of the single, not the falling record sales. And depite the falling sales, everyone seemed to know the words to all the new songs, not just the single.
If you're helping yourself to a commercially available product and not paying for it, how is it anything but theft?
In my mind, it all comes down to how the individual uses the download; as a preview or as a final product.
