Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

BSA Piracy Study Deeply Flawed

Posted by Zonk on from the losing-money dept.

zbik writes "Corante reports that The Economist has blown the lid off the BSA's recent report on software piracy (covered by Slashdot), referring to their methods as 'BS'. 'They dubiously presume that each piece of software pirated equals a direct loss of revenue to software firms.' The BSA has complained that the article is offensive but does not dispute their analysis. Score one for common sense."

6 of 437 comments (clear)

  1. BSA PSed off by Bedouin+X · · Score: 4, Informative
    SIR - Your article on software piracy was extreme, misleading and irresponsible ("BSA or just BS?", May 21st). The headline was particularly offensive. The implication that an industry would purposely inflate the rate of piracy and its impact to suit its political aims is ridiculous. The problem is real and needs no exaggeration.
    Beth Scott
    Business Software Alliance
    London


    Boy these people's heads are stuck so far up their asses that they can see through their mouths... you just can't make this stuff up.
    --
    Dissolve... Resolve... Evolve...
  2. Referer blocked by alexhs · · Score: 4, Informative

    The economist is refusing connexion with Slashdot as referer. Simply copy/paste the link in a new tab.

    --
    I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of killer sig, which this margin is too narrow to contain.
  3. Re:And this is a surprise because? by m50d · · Score: 4, Informative

    We know it's true, what's news is that The Economist has said so. Normal people and perhaps lawmakers are more likely to listen.

    --
    I am trolling
  4. Brazil's Response by Trinition · · Score: 5, Informative

    You've just gotta love Brazil's response:

    "We're against software piracy. We believe Microsoft's rights should be respected. And the simplest way to respect their rights is for Brazilians everywhere to switch to free software."

  5. Re:And this is a surprise because? by WhiteWolf666 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I hope so.

    The Economist is great. However, they have say many things (That I agree with) that will *never* come to pass.

    For example, the Economist staff openly advocates the legalization of Cocaine in the U.S.
    Why?
    Because this would be a more *effective* policy for reducing drug use in the U.S., let alone reducing the harms of the Cocaine economy.

    Can you imagine the U.S. *ever* legalizing Cocaine?
    I think not. Look for lawmakers to continue parroting the BSA (BS) line.

    --
    WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
  6. Re:And this is a surprise because? by StikyPad · · Score: 4, Informative
    And no, it was not in coca-cola.
    http://www.snopes.com/cokelore/cocaine.asp

    You know, this is waaaay off topic, and it's probably immoral of me to even be laughing at you instead of donating to a charitable organization that might be able to help your condition, but on the off chance that you didn't bother to read any of the article you linked to, here's the sumamry:
    Claim: Coca-Cola used to contain cocaine.
    Status: True.

    --
    https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere