WIPR survey: 50/50 split on David Guetta’s piracy claim

David Guetta’s claim that piracy can be beneficial has split readers’ evenly, with 50% of respondents to WIPR’s latest survey agreeing with the DJ and the other half rejecting his view.

Following comments made by Guetta to BBC World, WIPR asked whether piracy can benefit intellectual property owners.

Guetta told the broadcaster earlier this month that unauthorised file-sharing has helped to increase awareness of his music and bring people to his concerts.

The Frenchman suggested that piracy has helped him to sell out a stadium of “20,000 people in Brazil”.

“Is it because of how many records we sold in the shops?” he said, referencing the 20,000 figure.

“Of course not. I wish that every person who is listening to my music would send me a little cheque. That would make me a very rich person. But at the same time this is impossible.

“You can’t fight progress so it’s better to embrace it [piracy],” he added.

In response to our question on his views, one reader said that piracy could help initially, for example to sell out shows, but that “in the long run” piracy will hurt him.

Others had a more cynical view and implied that Guetta does not necessarily need to rely on selling records due to the nature of his music.

“He [Guetta] only said that because he is a performer and his music is club music. The difference is buying his music would be like a taking picture of a bottle of alcohol. His music needs a party like a bottle needs drinking.”

Another respondent said that if the creator said it is “OK to copy”, it could not be classed as piracy.

This week WIPR asks: “ Last week the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that standard-essential patent owners must present a specific licensing offer outlining fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms to an alleged infringer before seeking an injunction against that party. Do you think the EU rules on FRAND licensing are now sufficiently clear?”