Slashdot Mirror
Calling BS On the BSA Global Piracy Report
An anonymous reader writes "The Business Software Alliance released their annual global piracy report earlier this week. In addition to the usual claims of
software piracy (PDF) and the grudging acknowledgment of open source software, Michael Geist noted that the report ultimately undermined one of the BSA's core arguments — that countries which enact DMCA-style legislation experience significantly reduced piracy rates. Questions have also been raised over the BSA's methodology, as has happened in the past."
If a report said, for example, that people prefer digital distribution over physical media, or vice versa, they'd simply make sure that their distribution model was optimised for the market. They wouldn't continue to commit resources to the distribution method that doesn't work.
Logically they should look at this report, realise that DMCA like legislation doesn't work and divert resources elsewhere. Why do I think they're not going to do this?
I used a megaphone to yell "HA, WE USE LINUX!"
Then I back-flipped onto a motorbike and sprayed them with sand.
Actually that might have been a dream.
>Questions have also been raised over the BSA's methodology
BSA has a methodology?
Apple has "Mac vs PC", Microsoft has "Laptop Hunters", Linux has recession
Earlier in the week BSA representatives here in Sweden all but admitted that the figures for Sweden were made up.
http://www.idg.se/2.1085/1.229795/bsa-hoftade-sverigesiffror (sorry, link in Swedish only)
They used a combination of general estimates and figures for other countries. No Swedish businesses were involved in the study at all...
Don't you guys get tired of being wrong all the time? We get it-you don't believe facts carry much weight, and any group of people that points this out must have ulterior motives. You don't care about personal freedom, blah blah blah. Do we really need a "consume and conform" response to every article every single day?
You see what I did there?
Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
or maybe even "cultural similarity", though that's not the case here
Correct. For cultural similarity, you'd lump Australia with the United States. Two colonies to witch the British exported their criminals and other undesirables.
Have gnu, will travel.
The study found seven countries with piracy rates of 90 percent or higher: Georgia, Bangladesh, Armenia, Zimbabwe, Sri Landa, Azerbaijan and Moldova.
Why is the BSA even surveying countries which recently had a major war, are having battles with rebels or are suffering hyper inflation to the point their economy is broken? Is a surprise that people pirate in such conditions? Shouldn't there be some acceptance that in a country where physical property is hard to come by/keep that people ignore intangible property?
Roughly speaking the firm takes an estimate of the amount of computers shipped to individual companies, takes a further estimate of what software should be on those machines, and compares that, not to exact software sales, but to interviews with software vendors.
I don't see how such data gathering methods can give a legitimate support either, I don't think such sloppy researching would pass any scientific rigour, combine that with a test group of 6000 out of a supposed 6 billion and you8 don't have anything actually useful to go by. Its like setting up a small niche website and then estimating world web browser usage based on adding up the monthly percentages of visits from each browser.
Supporting organizations and laws that take away the rights from both artists and consumers does not make you "pro-artist", it just makes you gullible if you think it does.
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
You don't "get it". Artist's rights are one thing - what the *iaa's are doing is quite another thing. If the various enforcement gestapos could be controlled, and set on a CONSTRUCTIVE PATH, then we might actually be able to address what an artist's rights might be. Today, copyright and patent laws are being abused, twisted into unrecognizable abortions, and the PEOPLE'S RIGHTS are being trampled.
You're an artist? Great. How much money has your "label" made, and how much have you made from your art? Is the ratio something like 1000/1, or 10,000/1, or maybe even more?
The mafiaa people don't give jack shit about you, any more than they care about the customers. You are an asset, nothing more, and nothing less, and you are as expendable as an office chair.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
A pirated copy is not necessarily a lost sale. If you look at the highest rate list compared to the lowest rate list for countries you'll see that the countries with the highest rates of piracy generally have the lowest per capita GDP. This shows a link between ability to pay for software and actually paying for it.
To put a face on this, the recent college grad with a job at 7-11 and $50k in student loan debt is going to need tools to make the money needed to buy tools.
Another factor is the fact that the BSA still counts an install of Adobe's $2500 Master Suite on Mom's computer as being a lost sale. Trust me when I say that Mom only has that because she thought it was neat to paste pictures of her and Dad standing on top of the Eiffel tower. She does not use it commercially and therefore cannot justify spending $2500 on an idle amusement. If Adobe managed to make a DRM scheme that couldn't be cracked they still wouldn't get a sale from her. Instead she'd just go back to scissors and rubber cement.
In fact according to the BSA PDF.
Consumers generally install more software on their
computers, both new and old, than businesses. Hence,
while consumers account for 45 percent of PCs shipped,
they account for 55 percent of PC software deployed.
This fits well with the idea that consumers are installing professional software that is never used commercially.
Cost and ability to pay are the biggest factors of piracy. The BSA needs to segregate their report into two sections for consumer piracy and commercial piracy. Consumer piracy is less likely to be a lost sale than commercial piracy.
Furthermore, companies whose professional software packages may have consumer appeal might want to try performing a trial where they make the latest version of their software package available for free as a beta or time limited trial with semi-anonymous usage tracking to figure out exactly what patterns distinguish a professional user from someone just screwing around. This would allow the company to use this data to offer a mostly functional 'Home' version for dirt cheap that has just the right features disabled to make sure that professional users won't ever touch it. A home user of Photoshop, for example, will probably never work with 100MB images whereas a professional designing a poster or magazine spread will. Careful analysis and planning will allow these companies to actually make a few extra sales off of lower budget consumers without cutting into their customer base for professional users.
My God! It's full of eval()'s.
BSA is killing at least 9 babies every day.
5 our of 10 RIAA employees snort crack.
MPAA responsible for 80% of Global Warming.
In line with the BSA methodology this has all been confirmed through the use of chicken intestines, tea leaves and and an unhealthy amount of LSD.
There is a lot of hot air in claims from the BSA about losing so and so much money.
The reality would be that much of the software that's in use illegally is by people that wouldn't have purchased it in the first case. So if it was completely impossible to pirate the software then it wouldn't be purchased at all.
What BSA members wants is a certain level of "leak" to make people get the taste for the software.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
Michael Geist noted that the report ultimately undermined one of the BSA's core arguments -- that countries which enact DMCA-style legislation experience significantly reduced piracy rates.
Yeah, but you can't fight these guys with logic. All they'll say to that is "See? The problem is so bad in those countries we need *even stronger laws*!
Logic and evidence is pointless when the statistics and facts in this situation are so highly open to interpretation. That makes it problem solvable only by lobbying, not facts. Those of us who are against their draconian measures need to become as politically influential as they are - something that seems unlikely right now.
Yeah, but Australia got their criminals and the US got their religious nuts. Australia got the better deal!
legitimate interests to protect. They are just going about it in a way that delegitimizes themselves and makes heroes out of thieves. It doesn't have to be that way.
as you can see, they just have to raise their estimates of "how much software a PC needs" to skyrocket the piracy... also they don't consider people using older versions of software, so all in all their piracy report means nothing more than "we would have wanted to sell THIS much more software!"
The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
Downloads are not profitable. They have never been profitable. The internet exists to link people and computers together. It is not designed to make money, and it is not going to contort itself into some bizarre shape involving DRM and other nonsense just because you want some cash. If you need the money, make it on concert swag and CDs (yes, people actually do still buy those, if you sell them!) like people used to. You don't need the internet to make money. The only reason you have for using the internet is buzzword-compliance. I'm sorry that you're unable to make money on the internet, but pre-internet indie bands were facing much tougher challenges (more expensive equipment, no internet to sell their mp3s on, etc.) and still did fine.
$ make available
Whilst I gave up touring in a similar gig myself a few years ago, it was always the case that conditions are pretty bad on tour.
Instead of moaning about that why not get another line of work if you dislike the conditions under which you work-thats what I did. I now play mainly for enjoyment, but I still play-face it the music scene is one in which you get involved for the pleasure not the money. If you think you will make a fortune you are probably deluded.
Nearly all the acts I worked and played with made all of their money from live playing. Its a tough life but if you love it you are prepared to accept the downside. In all my time I never bitched about copyright!
The internet exists to link people and computers together. It is not designed to make money,
Tell that to eBay, PayPal, Amazon, Google, and iTunes. If these online companies were not making money and showing a constant stream of profit, they would not still be on the internet to this day.
eBay, PayPal, and Amazon, make money as 'middlemen' to the physical enconomy comprising largely of the buying and selling of 3-dimensional objects. Should 'replicator technology' seen in STAR TREK become a reality, they will become unecessary and will fall by the wayside of history.
Google makes money as an ad agency that happens to own and operate a wildly popular internet search engine and a complete copy of the non-binary portion of USENET via Google Groups. Once somebody comes up with a search engine that is consistently better than Google and mirrors Google Groups in its entirety, they too will fall by the wayside of history as well.
iTunes makes money by selling 'digital downloads' of pieces of popular culture (primarily music). They are proof that it is possible to make money online selling non 3-dimensional objects. Once their entire catalogue of downloads is available for free online elsewhere on the internet, they too will fall by the wayside of history as well.
As the parent poster said, the internet exists to link people and computers together--it also exists to exchange information in the form of computer files. The media cartels realize the internet can distribute (their) content cheaper and faster (and illegally) than they can which will eventually make them fall by the wayside of history as well. There response to this looming threat in the past shows that they are desparate and will do ANYTHING to continue to exist. This is simply self-preservation in action.
However the justifications for piracy are a little tough to bear. It's incomprehensible to us that people should be offended by the notion of paying for every song and/or movie in their collection.
I'm offended by having to buy four copies to play in four different places. If I buy a CD - and I do - I want to be able to listen to it at home, in my car and on my MP3 player. I only download for free those tracks that are offered for free by the artist/vendor. Amazon.com has free tracks from time to time. So does Janis Ian. So do other MP3 sites. Stop pretending that I'm hurting you because you only sold be a CD and couldn't get me to buy all the different formats you can think up.