Perzanowski and Hoofnagle (2017)
Contents
Source Details
| Perzanowski and Hoofnagle (2017) | |
| Title: | What We Buy When We Buy Now |
| Author(s): | Perzanowski, A., Hoofnagle, C. |
| Year: | 2017 |
| Citation: | Perzanowski, A., & Hoofnagle, C. J. (2017). What we buy when we buy now. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 165(2), 315-378. |
| Link(s): | Definitive , Open Access |
| Key Related Studies: | |
| Discipline: | |
| Linked by: | |
| About the Data | |
| Data Description: | The authors conducted a web-based survey in 2016 with 1,299 internet users to evaluate their comprehension of media rights. This sample represented the U.S. population in terms of sex, age, and income, based on 2010 census data. The researchers also gathered demographic data on race, geography, and education level. The respondents were drawn from an initial pool of 7,150 internet users, with 2,325 starting the survey, and 1,299 successfully completing it. The researchers employed screening questions to target those interested in digital books, music, or movies. A fictional online commerce site is used to test respondents’ understanding to four product page variations, to assess respondents’ understanding of rights, whether rights matter to consumers. |
| Data Type: | Primary data |
| Secondary Data Sources: | |
| Data Collection Methods: | |
| Data Analysis Methods: | |
| Industry(ies): | |
| Country(ies): | |
| Cross Country Study?: | No |
| Comparative Study?: | No |
| Literature review?: | No |
| Government or policy study?: | No |
| Time Period(s) of Collection: |
|
| Funder(s): |
|
Abstract
This study examines the widespread misunderstanding among consumers of digital media regarding the rights they acquire when purchasing digital goods. It demonstrates how consumers often erroneously assume that they possess the same ownership rights as they do with physical media, including the ability to resell, lend, or gift digital products. This confusion is exacerbated by intricate and lengthy license agreements. The study highlights the deceptive nature of marketing language, such as the "Buy Now" button, which capitalizes on consumer expectations rooted in the tangible goods economy, conflicting with the constraints of digital media licenses. The study proposes an effective solution in the form of a concise notice, significantly enhancing consumer comprehension of their digital rights. This approach has the potential to empower consumers to make more informed decisions and stimulate competition among retailers based on the rights they offer to consumers in the digital media market.
Main Results of the Study
“The MediaShop survey reveals a number of insights about how consumers understand—or misunderstand—digital transactions. A surprisingly high percentage of consumers believe that when they Buy Now, they acquire the same sort of rights to use and transfer digital media goods that they acquire in physical goods. The survey also strongly suggests that these rights matter to consumers. They are willing to pay more for those rights, and they are more likely to acquire media through other means, both lawful and unlawful, in the absence of those rights. Finally, our study suggests that a relatively simple and inexpensive intervention, adding a short notice to a digital product page that outlines consumer rights in straightforward language, is an effective means of significantly reducing consumer misperceptions.” “The MediaShop study establishes that a sizable number of digital media consumers misunderstand the rights they acquire when they Buy Now. Those misperceptions are in large part a function of the ubiquitous use of language borrowed from familiar transactions involving tangible goods, but our study strongly suggests those misperceptions can be corrected through clear and conspicuous short notices. Finally, the study supports the conclusion that the rights to lend, resell, and use media goods on a consumer’s device of choice are important to their purchasing decisions.”
Policy Implications as Stated By Author
The policy implication of the study can be reasonably summarised as the use of the "Buy Now" button, as commonly employed in digital transactions, may be regarded as false and deceptive advertising. Therefore, the study suggests a viable alternative solution: the inclusion of a concise notice that substantially enhances consumers' understanding of their rights regarding digital goods. These additional disclosures serve to convey critical information that is presently concealed within lengthy and unreadable license terms. In the meantime, the study suggests that the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) could play a crucial role in addressing the disparities between consumer perceptions and the actualities of digital goods in the marketplace. It proposes that the FTC can act as a remedy by convening key stakeholders to create improved disclosures and regulations related to digital products. Furthermore, the FTC could utilize its enforcement authority to monitor and penalize those who persist in using deceptive marketing practices for such goods.
Coverage of Study
Datasets
{{{Dataset}}}
