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 have a pirated version of a linux distribution and other FOSS, I share the torrent only with you: http://www.slackware.com/torrents/slackware-12.2-install-dvd.torrent
Fortune Rota Volvitur
>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.
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.
Yeah, but Australia got their criminals and the US got their religious nuts. Australia got the better deal!
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!