"The other side of piracy, based on the Dutch study, is that downloaders are reported to be more frequent visitors to concerts, and game downloaders actually bo

"The other side of piracy, based on the Dutch study, is that downloaders are reported to be more frequent visitors to concerts, and game downloaders actually bought more games than those who didn’t. And in the music industry, lesser-know bands profit most from the sampling effect of file-sharing." Hate to burst the bubble, but this is a pretty stupid conclusion if you're trying to advocate for piracy. People who download more tend to buy more. Why is this surprising? Obviously, the people who download more are the same people who care more about entertainment, so of course these are also the people who'll pay more. That is absolutely irrelevant to the discussion of whether piracy is a net benefit. It's mixing up causation with correlation. Download more pirate content is not causing people to go to more concerts - the people who would "naturally" go to more concerts are the same people who would "naturally" buy more music, but are now simply downloading more music. Note: Or at least, that's another theory, which is also the correct one in my opinion. My point is that this fact doesn't prove in any way that piracy is good.