Will's Web Watch: Leave the file sharers alone

Now, I'm not saying I am involved in file-sharing of copyrighted material - because that's the kind of crazy talk which would likely land me in trouble with the record labels, but let's pretend I do.

Why? Because it's a source of free music, it's readily available to download in an instant over broadband and I can find what I want to listen to any time night or day, without having to go down the high street to HMV or wait for orders to arrive from Amazon.

But this is against the law right? Well of course it is. While services such as Kazaa are perfectly legal in principal, their uses are far from above board. The Kazaa website carries occasional requests for users not to trade files which are copyrighted, but its attempts to stop illegal file-swapping are fairly half-hearted.

The Recording Industry Association of America has been clamping down on illegal file-sharing since it first became common practice on original peer-to-peer phenomenon Napster. The record industry drew the apparently sound conclusion that falling revenues, and an increase in the amount of copyrighted music being traded for free online were directly related.

But was this the right conclusion? No. The falling revenues are far from the fault of the file-sharers.

What the record industry is doing by making such protestations is covering up its own inadequacies. After all, what would you rather tell your shareholders: 'our revenues have been hit by illegal file-sharing - and we're really angry about this' or 'our revenues have been hit by the rubbish music we're producing'?

Recent research has revealed that independent record labels - generally those producing the most original music - are still seeing increasing revenues, because quality will always sell. Only the major labels, with their homogenised sounds, and Pop Idol production line are experiencing a fall in revenues - which last year saw an 11 per cent decline.

It's long been believed that Kazaa and its kind are actually complementing record sales in a 'try before you buy' capacity. The demise of Napster was seen in many quarters as a blow to the industry - albeit one the labels would never publicly admit.

Of course the direct impact of downloading music would appear to be a lost sale, but if the music industry could think outside such polarised conclusions it might realise closing down file-sharing services is akin to shooting itself in the foot. Sure, there are those who will abuse a tolerance of illegal file-sharing, but isn't the upside - that sales will still be boosted - enough of a compensation for the industry.

Recently one Kazaa user told us: "I very rarely download something which I don't either already own or subsequently go out and buy. A few times I've downloaded something which I didn't like - so I didn't buy it - but I think that's fair. I don’t listen to the radio, but it's no different to hearing a track on the radio and deciding you want to go out and buy the album."

Which all sounds very reasonable.

If I wanted to buy a CD then I would download some of the tracks from Kazaa and listen to them on my PC, but that wouldn't stop me buying the CD if I liked what I heard. I would simply switch from Kazaa to Amazon and purchase it within seconds.

Are the record labels advocating a system whereby I should be unhappy with my purchase? Surely not.

The other use of download services which I think is wholly justified is the back-up and replacement of music which I already own - and have therefore paid the copyright owner for. There are many CDs in my collection which I want to listen to on a different device - on an MP3 player, or laptop - and it's easier to download the MP3 from Kazaa than it is to copy it from a CD.

Similarly, over the years I've bought and lost CDs (and surrendered some in the name of amicable break-ups), cassettes became obsolete in my home several years ago and as for vinyl - that's all gathering dust in the loft. But I've paid once for these items, I have a right to own them indefinitely, without having to pay again. As such I believe downloading them is entirely justified. Where any digital media is concerned making a back-up should not be against the law - it should just be common sense.

Having chased Napster, Kazaa et al, and hounded the ISPs the RIAA is now making itself even more unpopular by targeting individual users.

Of course, I've not taken into account those people who are downloading music with no intention of buying the CD, or no claim to have already paid for the copyright, which I'm sure goes on. I can't vouch for those people or their actions, I can only speak from my own experiences, which as I said at the start are entirely hypothetical. Honest.