Quote:...but a figure of between 20 and 40% would be a reasonable consensus value (i.e. that file-sharing accounted for 20-40% of the decline in sales not a 20-40% decline in sales)
That is from a 2005 summary so it can be argued it's on the dated side, but lets complete the quote with the next paragraph, bold added by me:
Quote:Beyond this basic result several other very interesting facts have emerged. First is the differential impact of file-sharing on an artist depending on their existing popularity. According to Blackburn who investigates this issue the ‘bottom’ 3/4 of artists sell more as a consequence of file-sharing while the top 1/4 sell less. Second is the first tentative estimates (by Waldfogel and Rob) of the welfare consequences of file-sharing. Waldfogel and Rob’s dramatic result is that file-sharing on average yields a gain to society three times the loss to the music industry in lost sales. While, as they emphasize, this result is preliminary and based on limited data it indicates the urgent need for more research on this issue as well as the possibility to have a win-win situation in which both creators and the public get a better deal via a change to alternative compensation system such as a levy.
Quote:Of course, there is, as usual, no good reason given by the file-sharing apologists as to what exactly that other 60-80% of decline in sales comes from;
You seem to have problems with reading comprehension, but several of the papers address those facts, AND THEY HAVE RESEARCH AND EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE TO BACK UP THEIR CLAIMS!
The rest of your post is the same sort of bullshit. You claim statistical fact but you still havn't given me any papers to support that. Put up or shut up.
E: "Did they... did they just endorse the combination of the JSDF and US Army by showing them as two lesbian lolicons moving in together and holding hands and talking about how 'intimate' they were?"
B: "Have you forgotten so soon? They're phasing out Don't Ask, Don't Tell."