Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

MPAA Botched Study On College Downloading

Posted by kdawson on from the math-is-hard dept.

An anonymous reader writes "The Associated Press reports that in a 2005 study the MPAA conducted through an outfit called LEK, the movie trade association vastly overestimated how much college students engage in illegal movie downloading. Instead of '44 percent of the industry's domestic losses' owing to their piracy, it's 15 percent — and one expert is quoted as saying even that number is way too high. Dan 'Sammy' Glickman's gang admitted to the mishap, blaming 'human error,' and promised 'immediate action to both investigate the root cause of this problem as well as substantiate the accuracy of the latest report.'"

13 of 215 comments (clear)

  1. Human Error by snl2587 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well, I guess changing the results does constitute "human error"...

    1. Re:Human Error by jd · · Score: 5, Funny

      Only if you accept the hypothesis that the MPAA are comprised of humans. I favour the theory that they are, in fact, a consortium of daleks.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    2. Re:Human Error by Entropius · · Score: 5, Funny

      Nope -- if they were a consortium of Daleks, they'd write better dialogue.

    3. Re:Human Error by Adambomb · · Score: 4, Funny

      I could certainly see it.

      litigate. LITIGATE! LITIGATE! LITIGATE!

      --
      Ice Cream has no bones.
    4. Re:Human Error by peragrin · · Score: 2, Funny

      Real Daleks would just level the building until they could gracefully roll through. Sounds a lot like the MPAA now doesn't it?

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    5. Re:Human Error by mpe · · Score: 2, Funny

      Only if you accept the hypothesis that the MPAA are comprised of humans. I favour the theory that they are, in fact, a consortium of daleks.

      There really is no reason to go insulting Daleks, especially since they can count...

    6. Re:Human Error by Danse · · Score: 2, Funny

      At a relatively small non-tech company I do some support for, the major means of movie sharing goes like this:

      Every other week, an Asian man who speaks little English sells dvd's containing newly released or about to be released movies.

      Those that get purchased are the passed around the employees to be viewed at home.

      Any that turn out to be defective, or too dim to be watched, are returned to the Asian man for acredit against the next dvd's purchased.

      The whole process is off-line and involves no P2P networks, college students or campus networks. Cool. Where can I download one of these little asian guys?
      --
      It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
  2. Re:Any details on the actual study itself? by rob1980 · · Score: 5, Funny

    They just e-mailed the CEOs of Sony, Fox, Warner Brothers, etc., and asked them to pick a number between 1 and 50.

  3. Re:Yeah but... by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 3, Funny
    This article is about the MPAA, not the RIAA. It is understandable how you got them mixed up, though. They seem to be molded from the same cloth.

    There's definitely mold of some sort involved, anyway. Mycology knows better than to give in.

    --
    Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
  4. Another 27% by EEPROMS · · Score: 4, Funny

    Of losses were found up the marketing departments nose.

    1. Re:Another 27% by rubycodez · · Score: 2, Funny

      in point of fact 2% of the 27% was left on the hookers' asses.

  5. Re:Any details on the actual study itself? by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 5, Funny

    So the fact that they picked 44 instead of 42 shows their disharmony with life, the universe and everything?

    Very interesting, sir! VERY interesting!

  6. Re:Any details on the actual study itself? by ehrichweiss · · Score: 5, Funny

    You forgot to mention how the CEOs, upon learning what the number was for, in hindsight wanted to pick a number between 75 and 98.

    --
    0x09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0