Slashdot Mirror


Misleading Data Undermines Counterfeiting Claims

An anonymous reader writes "Canada has been the home to a growing debate on counterfeiting with politicians, law enforcement, and copyright lobby groups all pushing for stronger copyright and anti-counterfeiting laws. Writing in the Toronto Star, Michael Geist reports that the claims are based on fatally flawed data. The RCMP, Canada's national police force, has been claiming that counterfeiting costs Canadians $30 billion per year. When pressed on the issue, last week they admitted that the estimate was not based on any original research but rather on 'open source documents found on the Internet.'"

13 of 91 comments (clear)

  1. Wikipedia? by PaintyThePirate · · Score: 4, Funny

    open source documents found on the Internet.
    So... what are the chances they just browsed Wikipedia for it?
  2. Re:Michael Liberal Geist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Yep.

    Yawn.


    Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

  3. just in case... by __aasmho4525 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    some readers might not realize that the phrase "open source" has a number of common uses.

    besides the one most slashdot readers are familiar with, another is possibly equally interesting to slashdot readers:

    click here for an alternative definition.

    cheers.

  4. Oh, come on.... by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is it that big a surprise that government and reporting agencies bloat numbers .... or even just lie to get their agenda covered?

    It's not just Canada. It's the USA, all the countries in Europe, Asia..

    Any peoples with a government body lie.

    --
  5. Great news for the U.S. by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 5, Funny

    As the Canadian dollar appreciates relative to the U.S. dollar, counterfeiters will make the transition from U.S. to Canadian money and Americans will save $30 billion per year. Not to mention that it's good for the Earth when counterfeiters find ways to cut down on their use of paper.

  6. Obviously by Original+Replica · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Canada's national police force, has been claiming that counterfeiting costs Canadians $30 billion per year.

    Umm no it doesn't cost Canadians anything, they're getting all that counterfeit stuff for free, that's kinda the whole point of piracy. It might be more accurate to say that $30 billion per year worth of wealth is more evenly distributed in Canada, thanks to counterfeiting. (I'm only being partially sarcastic)

    --
    We are all just people.
    1. Re:Obviously by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Consider, though, that much of piracy (both in terms of counterfeit branded goods and software) involves unwitting consumers (the man who gets suckered into a Rolex deal that's too good to be true, for example). Ummm... I'm going to have to disagree with you there, at least about the Rolex.

      People in the market for a 10~100 dollar (fake) Rolex are not the same people who are in the market for a 5,000~10,000 dollar Rolex.
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    2. Re:Obviously by pla · · Score: 5, Insightful

      People in the market for a 10~100 dollar (fake) Rolex are not the same people who are in the market for a 5,000~10,000 dollar Rolex

      Bingo. I think only you, in this entire discussion so far, even read the FP, much less TFA.

      Counterfeiting != Piracy, people.

      The RIAA has a pretty good argument (even if they use massively inflated numbers) when they say that the average person who pirated popular-song-X might have bought it instead. That doesn't scale up to tens of thousands of songs, but as a one-off, they have a valid point.

      When the IACC tries to make the same argument, it falls completely flat. These jokers make the RIAA look reasonable by comparison. The average person simply will not ever buy a $1500 handbag or a $5000 watch. This organization doesn't protect the average Joe (they even admit the counterfeit goods usually have comparable quality to the real thing, making them harder to spot); They don't protect the manufacturers (since counterfeiting results in no lost sales); They don't help anyone but the mega-rich.

      They make sure Paris Hilton doesn't need to run home and change because her cellmate wore the same (if $10k cheaper) shoes to the press conference.

  7. I hope not. Re:Wikipedia? by Erris · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So... what are the chances they just browsed Wikipedia for it?

    If they are browsing Wikipedia, it's to insert their own BS into it. They pulled "articles" from "news" sites and ignored their own GAO estimates based on random sampling of real markets. In other words, they pulled it out of some industry (International Anti-Counterfeiting Coalition) press release and an "estimate" by the Chief Economist for the Canadian Manufacturing and Exporters.

    These estimate "pirate" product as %20 of the entire Canadian economy and that's insane. When you consider real estate, cars, domestic food product, gasoline and non branded commodities that dominate any economy, you would be lucky if %20 of goods were branded at all much less "pirated". How many fake Rolexes do these people think can be sold in a given year? Does anyone really believe that one in five dollars spent goes to something "fake"?

    --
    DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
  8. I wouldn't frame this as a "debate", exactly ... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Canada has been the home to a growing debate ...

    From dictionary.com:

    Debate: a discussion, as of a public question in an assembly, involving opposing viewpoints

    There's plenty of opposing viewpoints, but really there's no "discussion" here ... the individuals and organizations in favor of these shenanigans have no interest whatsoever in debating anything with anyone. They simply want their way, and they'll do pretty much whatever it takes to get it. Nobody else's perspective but their own is of any consequence to them.

    A couple of more appropriate words might be "rubberstamp", or perhaps "steamroller". But not debate.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  9. $900 per person? by Myria · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So, does anyone really believe that piracy costs Canadians about $900 per person per year?

    --
    "Screw Sun, cross-platform will never work. Let's move on and steal the Java language." - Visual J++ Product Manager
  10. Re:Piracy is not the problem by pokerdad · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I would wager that moves like "Evan Almighty" cost the industry more then piracy.

    I know you were joking, but I thought that its worth pointing out, there is no longer such a thing as a bomb in Hollywood. Between the globalization of the film market(by which I mean that Hollywood is now king almost everywhere), DVD sales, PPV, broadcast rights, and merchandizing it is virtually impossible for a Hollywood film to lose money anymore. "Evan Almighty" made back $100 mil of its $175 mil budget just in domestic box office, and given that Hollywood films now generally make more money abroad than at home, its sure to show a profit before its done with theatres.

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0413099/business

  11. Re:I hope not. Re:Wikipedia? by Technician · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Does anyone really believe that one in five dollars spent goes to something "fake"?


    I think they are counting lost sales based on any fake would have been a real sale. Just considering my daughters 30 gig Zen would lead to that conclusion. The Zen has 2,200 files on it (I know from making a backup). With the back-up copy also being a pirated copy, that at a dollar per song is about 5K dollars worth of pirated stuff. That counts just my daughters Zen, not my son's iPod. In the last year using those figures, they have collected together over 15% of my income for the year. I think this is the figures they are running with.

    What they are failing to figure, is if all that music was paid for for each copy, is they could pocket that money. This is simply wrong. That money isn't there. At full retail with piracy eliminated the reality would be that neither kid would have any use for an iPod or Zen and they would be exposed to less music and would have bought far fewer CD's than they actualy did. With the portable music players and a large exposuere, they have become avid fans of some bands and buy CD's and go to concerts. Without the exposure, this would not have happend.

    I grew up in the 1970s. Through those years, I didn't go to any concerts. The local AM station played country. In high school the next town over got a couple FM stations, one was rock. Piracy was mostly non-existant, but so was my involvement with any music industry product.

    When I went into the Navy and spent time in the barracs, I was exposed to lots of neat music. I invested heavily in a very good stereo system including a linear tracking turntable and 2 cassette decks. I pirated a bunch of stuff and also bought a bunch of stuff. That was my peak music buying years. If Piracy didn't exist, I would have had little reason to get into stereo and invest in quality duplication decks in a big way. This is seldom figured in any anti-piracy study. For the new generation, the cassette decks has been replaced by PC hard drives and portable music players. The cost of duplication has gone down, the quality of copies has gone up and the media compainies still have way overpriced products.

    The biggest roadblock to stopping piracy at the moment is simply overpriced product. This has not changed since I was in the Navy. I would have bought a lot more of my favorite music if it didn't cost so stinking much. I'm glad to see Nine Inch Nails make an issue of that. They are dead right.

    --
    The truth shall set you free!