Europe is now the world leader in broadband internet, according to the European Commission's Digital Competitiveness report, published today.
It's also a leader in piracy, with only five per cent of Europeans saying that they have paid for music or movies online in the past three months (rising to ten per cent among tech-happy teens).
Of those who didn't pay for content, nearly half said that nothing could persuade them to pay for online music and movies.
Euros won't pay to file share
Around a third said that lower prices compared to offline content might loosen their purse-strings. More choice and better quality would tempt 20 per cent of people to cough up for media, but the right to share their purchases legally isn't much of a draw - just 16 per cent of users would pay for the privilege.
Unsurprisingly, people aged 16 to 24 are the most active internet users overall, with nearly three quarters regularly creating and share online content, twice the EU population average. Two thirds of all Europeans under 24 use the internet every day, compared to the EU average of 43 per cent.
The report found that the percentage of internet users with a high-speed broadband connection has more than doubled since 2004, to 80 per cent. However, one in three Euros has still never composed an email, visited a web page or Tweeted.
Viviane Reding, EU Commissioner for Information Society and Media said, "We should seize the opportunity of a new generation of Europeans who will soon be calling the shots in the European market place. These young people are intensive internet users and are also highly demanding consumers. To release the economic potential of these 'digital natives', we must make access to digital content an easy and fair game."
Your comments (9) Click to add a new comment
lovlid
August 7th
9. @xmldoc.
You truly are dinosaur. You can buy a USB record deck, with software to clean up and digitise tracks, from a lot of places on the net. So you can stop laughing, go back to your Gramophone and stop hogging your grandkids computer.
Alert a moderator
sl_a_sh
August 6th
8. @truxter:
When I read an article at BBC.co.uk, _every_ article provides a list of related links including references to the most prominent documents discussed or referenced in the article. Every article on a serious news site should be that way, so interested readers can easily get more information on a topic that interests them and help to build your own PoV.
The author of this article however didn't bother, drawing wild conclusions and accusations out of thin air. This leaves the reader to either believe these statements at face value or go to some effort googling up what all this fuzz it about.
Tell you what: most people are simply too lazy to do just that - hey it would require thinking of some proper search terms and skimming a list of results for the ones that actually fit the topic you're searching for.
I am used to scientific investigation, this kind of cross referencing is no problem to me, and I often do that when I feel an article is somehow weird or incomplete, missing facts and whatnot. But the average internet user is not neccessarily that interested and might consider it too much of an effort.
The above article provides some very fuzzy and generalized information, almost no clear numbers, and basically only one clear statement - that turns out to be wrong! Any critical reader should immediately realize there are facts missing from the story.
Why does the author not provide the actual facts, why doesn't he even quote the text he is referring to? He doesn't even hint at where to find the document he's talking about.
And it doesn't need to be a link, no. But that would be the most convenient way for the readers, so that's what I suggested. Not because I'm a teen who doesn't know how to look up real books through reference cards at a library (which I very well know how to do if there were any library still working that way), but because I'm moving with the times and have 20+ years of professional IT experience behind my back.
Bottom line: The article left a real bad aftertaste in my mouth, making me think the author delibarately left out the references, _because_ he didn't want anyone to look up the facts and blow his lies! Maybe I'm wrong, but if so, it doesn't put a much better light on the author IMO. I'd definitely take any other article by this author with a bucket of salt! Or more probably not at all...
Alert a moderator
xmldoc
August 5th
7. The amazing thing about this music sharing|piracy fiasco is that no one dredges up the superiority of that most ancient of legacy media, the vinyl Lp. So let me just say, the *still* sound great, look far better AND they address piracy and artist compensation issues! I even *like* the fact that they cannot be downloaded. So I laugh when I read articles bemoaning piracy in the digital age -- with technology you get what you pay for. But hey, I'm just a dinasaur that nobody pays any attention to, so I can laugh as much as I want. Hahahahahaha!
Alert a moderator
truxter
August 5th
6. Wow, the way people think you can almost tell their age group, not meaning imature, just lived a larger percentage of your life with the internet available.(in response to a previous response) The guy wants a link to the original, what if this is the original and there would soon be more to follow?
The post does leave a few details short though, as in saying that if you do not buy media online you are a pirate. I haven't bought a car three years, does not mean that I have been stealing cars for three years.
http://truxter.org
Alert a moderator
f32p
August 5th
5. The article, and especially the headline, seem to equate people who don't pay for online music or movies with pirates.
It would surprise me if most people downloaded music and movies. Renting a DVD is just so much more comfortable, and the picture is better.
I don't download music or movies. So I don't pay for them. Is there something wrong with that?
I use the internet every day, at work. I don't want to be stuck in front of a computer for hours at home as well. And the sofa in front of the TV is more sociable than the swivel chair in front of the PC. I'd rent the odd DVD - but that's NOT online.
I do download radio programmes (so-called podcasts), for when I'm commuting; they are paid for from the TV license, which you can't (easily) avoid paying. Talk radio, though: music would interfere with my driving.
Alert a moderator
sl_a_sh
August 5th
4. P.S.: (there seems to be no way to edit previous postings, no?)
I might sound harsh in my previous posting, and after rereading the original paragraph I myself quoted I have to admit it could be interpreted in the way the author did. I still maintain that when looking at the rest of the article I linked to there is little evidence it was indead meant as a statement on piracy, rather in the way that I indicated.
The author really should have based his misguided headline on something less fuzzy! And there's still no excuse to not even provide a link
Alert a moderator
Tell us what you think
You need to Log in or register to post comments