Slashdot Mirror
MPAA Botched Study On College Downloading
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.'"
I guess he is having cowboy buttsex in hell.
Sodomy-eeeeee!
I am Ron Paul, and I agree with the above post. A vote for me is a vote against those damn niggers! Crack whoring baby killing damn niggers, send em all back to darkieland africa where they belong i hate niggers Ron Paul 2008
Can't say I like them, myself.
Barack Obama
Now, have i donated money to my favourite bands? Spread the word, and encouraged others to do the same? Damn right.
But to say "they aren't taking anything from anyone"? Hardly correct sir - you ARE still stealing.
I steal my coffee from my college everyday, yet I still buy one a week. Why? Because i recognize that they ARE still providing something i want, and that it costs something to stock something other than Tim Hortons and Starbucks. (Admittedly, of all the chains, Tim Hortons is far and away the king. But theyre much harder to steal from).
I just wish there was a better way to donate to TV show and movie producers (or whoever). But then again, id be hard pressed to send 5$ to Ben Affleck....
Anyways. You get my point.
-Red
Guns don't kill people, "with glowing hearts" kills people.
I'm married to one, after a fashion. It's not so bad.
Hillary
It's called "stealing" because if you bought/rented the movie, then they would get some money, but since you don't, they don't get anything.
In a broad sense: If you buy the movie, the studio has $10, if you download it illegally, they have $0. You may not call this stealing, but I can certainly see the similarity. If the producer had $10 in his pocket and you picked it, you'd call it stealing - so not buying/renting the movie legitimately is the same.
Just because the people losing out have loads of money is not a valid reason to say it's not wrong. If you think they have too much money, you should protest by not watching their movies - watch indie movies instead.
Personally, I don't download movies, it's just too much hassle. I have an 'unlimited rental for £x per month' subscription to Blockbuster which I use - it's much easier.
I *do* occasionally (maybe 2 or 3 times a year) download TV episodes which I've missed because the DVR messed up or something, and I realise that this is 'wrong' because I'm not watching the adverts which pay for that, but (a) I would happily download it with the adverts if the TV company made it available, (b) I fast-forward past the adverts anyway, (c) if I *didn't* download the missed episodes I often wouldn't bother watching the rest of the series, so the TV company would 'lose out' more that way. (I know the concept of 'losing' advertising revenue by me not watching it is a bit specious, but you know what I mean).
I said I see the similarity between 'stealing' and illegally copying movies. Maybe it's different words, but it has the same effect - you are getting something without paying, and someone else is losing out financially.
If you were a computer consultant, and you worked for someone for 5 hours at an agreed price of $50 an hour, and then your customer refused to pay you at the end, you'd probably say that they'd 'stolen $250' from you, even though they haven't really. They haven't got any of your property.
Also, if they then said, "thank you for that, but I think it was only worth $100, so that's all I'll pay" you'd be upset. If you don't want to pay the full price, don't use the service. Watching a movie is like using a service.
Is it OK to sneak into a theme park without paying, and go on the rides, just because they're running half empty - "no one is losing"?
If you want to use a service, whether it's hiring someone to do something, going on rides at a theme park, visiting a museum, watching a movie, or something else, you have to make the decision "is it worth (to me) the money that's being charged". If not, don't do it, if so, then pay.
(FWIW, I agree that the MPAA/RIAA using the words 'stealing' and 'theft' for illegal copying is wrong, but if they said 'downloading movies is copyright infringment which we will persue in the courts' isn't quite as understandable to most people as 'downloading movies is theft' - their idea is to get across to people that it is 'wrong' and can lead to nasty things happening to you if you are found out).
It *IS* called stealing!
I have proof - it's on that DVD I've got at home, right at the beginning, in the bit I always try and skip, but usually can't, so I go and make a pot of tea instead.
Whether the legal term for it is 'stealing' or not - lots of people call it stealing. So, it "is called stealing".
I said WHY it's "called" stealing. Lower down in my message I said how it *is* "similar to" stealing. I never said the legal term for it was 'stealing'. I never said it IS stealing - because it isn't.