There exists an already established and effective mode of digital distribution in the form of free illegal torrenting or peer-to-peer sharing. The concern is the path in which a legal mode of distribution can hope to compete. Historically however there exist examples of more expensive products dominating the market. Apples first iPod - introduced in 2001 was considered a certain failure, its excessive price at the time of 399 U.S. dollars, the assumed deterrent, in a market was filled with cheap mp3 players. However it quickly became clear that the product would dominate the market despite the monetary disadvantages.

Apple’s iPod was not developed toward filling a void in the publics demand, for cheap mp3 players had already done so. Apple’s iPod was developed through “identified and solved the major problems with existing MP3 players” problems such as “size, storage capacity, user interface” (Abel 2008, p. 263). The iPod sold by simply being better, simpler to use and nicer to look at, Apple understood that to succeed they were required to “fulfill these emerging customer needs” to “persuade customers away from established procedures and even question deeply-rooted values” (p.242).



Despite the original demand that allowed for the early MP3 players to “define industry standards including the salient product features and complementary services” (Abel, 2008, p.266) the product quickly falls from maturity and into decline. It is here that the early entrepreneurs of MP3 devises failed to establish “organizational competencies, market power with access to broad distribution, mass manufacturing capabilities, and the ability to continuously improve the product” (2008, p.271).

As Reppel, Szmigin and Gruber point out in their 2006 study ‘The iPod Phenomenon’ “In the case of the iPod…Apple is regularly updating existing models and introducing new ones distinct from existing models. For example, the “iPod shuffle” introduced in January 2005 was the first digital music player in years that did not have a display, something which is now generally considered essential; from a purely technological perspective, this “innovation” might be perceived as a step backwards.”



However innovation is not only about technological competencies, innovation is about reminding the public that you are consistently adapting for them. The iPod shuffle was small, compact, comparatively cheap and simple. It seemingly targeted both the lower/middle class, as well as businessmen, students and joggers. The iPod shuffle was marketing innovation, as was Apples most important decision addressing the “shortage of legally downloadable music” (2008, p.263).

It was no coincidence that Apple launched the iPod mid 2001, a few months after Napster was closed. Apple became both the provider of hardware and of music itself. As a provider, like Google is now synonymous with ‘search’, Facebook synonymous to ‘socialize’, Ipod is now the word for music player, unlike other brands that were types of mp3 players, the “iPod’s name became synonymous with the product category” (Abel 2008, p. 266).



The case of the iPod reveals that opportunity, superiority and the ability to evolve a given product will always trump any monetary gain. It is a revelation that corresponds to those established in the DOWNLOAD NATION, that the motivations behind download culture has less to do with saving money and more to do with the lifestyle downloading affords its user. Already the main wall that stood between illegal and legal downloading/streaming has been shown to be less influential than previously supposed. Therefore with consideration to lifestyle how can a legal digital distributor shift consumers away from an illegal one?



Steve Jobs claimed prior to his death: “digital distribution channels, such as Apple’s iTunes video store, offer studios the best opportunity to compete with piracy channels by mimicking the ease and convenience of pirated channels at a competitive price point” (Danahar 2010, p.1). Whilst mimicking is key, legal digital distribution has the ability to evolve, an affordance no illegal torrenting space has. Being ‘illegal’ in nature, or it least in part, torrenting or P2P sharing has remained basically the same since its advent, the main improvements merely toward avoiding legal ramifications rather than to customer service in itself.



The only drastic improvement in Illegal Downloading was the advent of BitTorrent, where the new “technology forces users to share the parts of files that they already own while they download the remaining bits” a change that “reduces download times” (Oberholzer-Gee and Koleman Strumpf 2010, p.27). Improvements for users in the illegal sector are unilateral, only pertaining to improving download speed.



Illegal torrenting is stagnated; already at the peak of its capability to please the user and because of this there is an opportunity to take advantage of “emerging customer needs” (Abel 2008, p. 242). The legal sector has the ability to adopt a “proactive market orientation” and through the “gathering of anticipatory intelligence” be able to “figure out future latent needs” (Chuling, Hua, Chee 2012, p.400).



What can a legal model of distribution offer that an illegal one cannot?
1. A higher quality content in true HD video.
2. Faster download speeds. Removing the reliance of peers.
3. An end to “staggered release schedules”.
4. An end to moral qualms.
5. Mobile content.
6. A direct link to larger television screens.
7. Devise Integration in the form of a range of ‘second screen’ content that reflects the chosen TV show or film.
8. Content specifically tailored to an online service (Arrested Development)
9. Complex algorithms for suggesting content.

“With future technological developments coupled with a slew of new players entering the game, brands should keep one thing at the forefront of their minds: Simple is best. Though marketers have the opportunity across devices to expand and deepen the content experience for consumers, the barrier to entry must be low and the ease of use high to entice consumers to engage and interact. Now is the time to innovate and experiment. The space is wide open for the taking” (Greenberg, 2010)

Netflix CEO and Chief content supervisor Ted Sarandos said on the subject, “the best way to combat piracy isn’t legislatively or criminally but by giving good options”.
Netflix is definitely giving good options and taking advantage of the space, innovating and experimenting. They are utilizing all of the above affordances given to a legal online distribution model.

​

Focusing in on one example: by simply releasing all of their original content in one go, the hype, the intrigue, the media attention that move has created is, like Apple, like Google and Facebook, making Netflix’s name synonymous with online distribution. Netflix will forever be known for that move.

With the monetary advantage of Illegal Torrenting and P2P sharing shown to be less influential than previously supposed, the door is open for legal modes of online distribution of high production content. Organizations need only to mimic the illegal modes in order to tap into the already established users practices, and then to consider the new, emerging customer desires to entice and intrigue.