Slashdot Mirror
BSA Says 41% of Software On Personal Computers Is Pirated
An anonymous reader writes "Individuals are turning to P2P networks and auction sites in staggering numbers to acquire or transfer illegal software and in doing so are harming the economy whilst exposing themselves to malware, identity theft and criminal prosecution, according to a report from the Business Software Alliance. Beyond P2P and auction site piracy, the report also draws correlations between Internet piracy and the spread of malware such as viruses, trojans and spyware, which often exploit vulnerabilities in illegal software that does not benefit from security updates provided by manufacturers. Although the correlation is not universal, geographies with high instances of software piracy suffer from high instances of malware."
While you're guessing with such precision, why not choose 42% and grab more nerd eyes?
are true. We'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to decide which.
Karma: Chameleon - mostly influenced by bad '80s New Wave music
Their first graph (which is in percentages, but they don't label the scale LOL) shows remarkably low rates of malware, and an alleged piracy rate (whatever that is) that is 4-10x higher.
Maybe they should check out http://garwarner.blogspot.com/
BSA+RIAA+MPAA=organizations that make up stories and wait for their fake "facts" to be reused by their legislative bought henchmen.
E
Then far be it from me to not meet their expectations.
"Hey kids! Remember that new game you wanted? Well, I need to get us up to quota!"
Because malware never comes with legal software...
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
Speaking as an MBA, their unsubstantiated numbers and pretty graphs is good enough for me. I'm going to delete 41% of the software on my machines to make sure I'm not a crook!
It's NOT me! It's the meds! I'm on 1000mg of Fukitol.
If the BSA was genuinely concerned about software piracy, they'd be actively promoting free and open alternatives.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
What a lousy article - all puff and no content:
- The FA discusses online auction sites as a "hotbed" of trading illegal software. But it doesn't say whether the BSA distinguish between online auctions offering cracked copies for download, pirated installation media or perfectly legitimate resale of software which the seller has no further use for.
- There's no real explanation of how they reached this figure - do they assume a single person using a torrent installs the software once? Twice? Never? Once then decides they don't really need it so uninstalls it?
- Even if the BSA did explain how they reached this figure, how do we know that their methodology is sound and gives reasonably accurate answers? AFAIK there is no methodology that is generally known to give accurate answers to the question of "how many PCs have application X installed, where X may or may not phone home and there may or may not be cracked versions of X in the wild which modify any existing phone-home functionality?"
Thing is, the BSA must know that these numbers are not reliable and that they can't get reliable numbers. I think the reason this article exists is the BSA are seeding the news wires. Who wants to bet that the next thing they'll do is lobby representatives in governments around the world using these bullshit figures and that's the only reason the figures exist?
Since the BSA is only concerned with business software, what they probably mean is that 41% of copies of MS Office on home computers are not legitimate copies, mostly copied from work. If those people didn't have a pirate copy of Office, that would probably be using OO.org or some other free equivalent, they wouldn't be paying for it.
(I guess a lot of people have academic versions of Office, and other app;ications like Adobe's suite, and they no longer are students so I guess that makes them pirates too.
Maybe one reason for such a poor correlation between alleged copyright infringement and malware rates is that most who engage in and enable copyright infringement actually do have higher ethics than some companies which deliberately add creepy spyware and malware-like features to their applications in the name of controlling what user's do. Indeed, I wonder if some even explicitly choose copyright infringement sources simply to get spy and malware disabled versions of certain applications.
Maybe they have never considered the fact that there is a correlation between the state of the economy and the amount of pirated software. Maybe they should consider that their prices are far too high to be able to afford. As for harming the economy, my money tends to go towards food rather than software. It isn't like I am saving the money and pirating software, I don't have any money to save.
Oh, but wait... it's a BSA report, which means anyone with a brain already KNOWS it's bullshit. Unfortunately, that means most members of Congress thinking it's true, and I suspect that's their intended audience. It's certainly a not "report" aimed at us. Their goal is to get more laws passed to make them and their masters money, extracted by law from everyone whether they have ever used any of the software in question or not. Another tax on blank media, anyone? How about one on hard drives, CPUs and other components? Pay by the megabyte for connectivity, because obviously we're stealing software? All they have to do is convince Congress-critters it's a good idea, which seems to be shockingly easy to do if you supply enough cash.
The other 59% of disk space occupied by legal software consists entirely of Adobe Reader.
MMO Vampire Role Playing
I think it depends on the user. You have users who call their friend/family member/etc when they have a question, and clearly are not the ones pirating. Then you have the people who know what they are doing (and from my personal experience) quite often do. The reasons everyone gives are different, but there is often a good bit of it. And they are just as likely to install it on that friend/familiy member's computer when they call needing help with Office or whatever ('Oh, this is an old verson, let me upgrade you).
I've mentioned it before. I have a friend that almost refuses to buy music when they can use whatever the current flavor of P2P is to get it. I had a different friend that gladly would download the newest games from torrents and play them. Not to mention the various other indiscretions I or other friends have done. Several people still will email me with a 'hey, do you happen to have a serial number for...' These aren't college students or poor workers from some low-end job. They are often well paid professionals (often in IT). They just don't want to spend the money. It's not some sense of 'information should be free!' or 'software shouldn't be patented!'. They just don't want to spend the money, so while these reports may not have numbers that everyone believes, I certainly have seen it day to day. Just without a metric that I can quote.
I will shred my adversaries. Pull their eyes out just enough to turn them towards their mewing, mutilated faces. Illyria
Correlation does not imply causation.
As a Ubuntu user, I can say precisely 0% of the software on my PC is pirated AND I have no issues with malware, viruses, trojans, etc. (according to ClamAV anyway). In fact, probably 99% of the software I run is free & open source. The only proprietary software I use for the time being is Adobe Flash and the ATI Radeon driver, both legally obtained.
I know we'd all like to say that there is no link between illegally copied software (I refuse to use the word "pirated") and malware, but I'm sure we've all seen instances where relatives' PCs got infected by software downloaded from Kazaa, etc.
What really surprises me is that, when given the choice between maybe catching viruses or getting prosecuted for downloading/installing illegal software and using the free and legal open source equivalent, so many people still choose to download their software illegally. I have to say, as a full-time user and software developer, Ubuntu's offering is really, really well put-together and a pleasure to use.
Well:
1. Is simply not true. Adware and spyware are common in commercial software.
2. Also not true - the first thing a pirate does is strip out the crap.
3. If you *have* paid for it, it could be infected. That's why you scan everything.
This article is BS. There are probabilistic elements in software piracy and malware, but those statistics came from /dev/random
If you know where to get your pirated software, then it's more than the distributors honor is worth, to let anything dodgy get into their release.
The bit about "geographies with high instances of software piracy suffer from high instances of malware"; Ok that is probably true, and in S.Korea I don't think you can call legally sell it as a "computer" if it isn't full to the brim with malware.
- If you've paid for the software, it's highly unlikely that it will contain malware or adware.
Unless it comes from Sony or Microsoft...
1) Can't measure it - you can't measure how many people downloaded your software through illicit channels because, by definition, those channels are usually unmonitored, don't keep logs, and aren't subject to easy investigation. You might be able to measure a particular computer at a particular point in time but any measurement being done on "behalf of" the BSA is going to be worthless. You'd have to randomly monitor thousands of PC's in dozens of categories (home, business, mobile, poweruser, etc.) and get permission to report on any "unlicensed" software there, and then chase it up with the company concerned to see if it was actually unlicensed (rather than just using the wrong VLK or similar for convenience).
2) Can't compare it - the chances of those metrics being stable across such countries as Turkey and the US are unlikely.
3) Can't correlate it - Just because malware goes up with pirated installations doesn't mean anything - it just means that the pirates prefer to download porn which may or may not introduce malware... it doesn't mean the malware is in the pirate software.
Statistics are worthless quoted out of context. We have no idea what was measured, how, why, what bias was introduced by the measures, or anything else.
To be honest, I imagine the percentage to be *higher*... I've seen dozens of people with Winzip on their computers who haven't actually bought it but they heard they needed it to open ZIP files. I've seen dozens of work laptops come back with full installations of football games, office, etc.... technically that's copyright infringement ("software piracy") because it's a breach of the license. I expect the true figure to be nearer 80 or 90%.
But then you have the reasoning that it's somehow linked to malware in any way other than "people get malware too"... almost 100% of the home PC's I see have items of malware on them (again, depending on your definition).
If you want to say "copyright infringement is bad and puts £5 on the cost of every game you buy, or £50 on the price of Office", people would listen. Making up bollocks statistics about nonsense correlations just makes me switch off and let's me know that, actually, you're just trying to scare me into buying things because you can't think any other way would work (and thus don't understand software "piracy" at all). I don't pirate, either at work or at home. I just move things to open-source if I can't afford the real package, and I never buy anything without a demo. No demo, no trial version, no purchase. I also don't buy anything with DRM that interferes with my usage of the product. I'm not alone.
Stop spending your time analysing vague correlations and look at those statistics about why people pirate in the first place. Almost always it's cost, convenience and because a certain percentage of those "pirate" downloads are actually your own customers just trying to get the bloody thing working (I've had to break DRM schemes in work in order to be able to install compliant to our licensing - it was tons easier than our negotiating with the company in question to do the same thing). Be open with those stats and then things get interesting: How many pirates, on average, end up revealing upon further investigation that they *already* own the software in question, but the DRM got in the way? Or that they lost the install disk? Or that they needed original media to recover their PC's and it wasn't supplied by the manufacturer? I've seen all three of those and even done the second myself - I needed a particular install disk and it was an emergency and the person I was working for didn't have the original disk to hand. After I ensured that they were entitled to the licences, I just downloaded one and used that instead (after checksum verification). Does that contribute as being "another" PC with pirate software?
Bull. Shit. Artists.
In. William. Shatner's. Voice.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
harming the economy
Right, like they would have bought it if they couldn't pirate it.
I love this bullshit. As you say, there's no way of telling how many percent of those who pirated would actually buy the software at hand. In my experience often people pirate because they're lazy, meaning they know some program from a while back and instead of looking for a free alternative they just pirate it because they're used to it. But also sometimes they actually need that program, however more often they don't.
Also it's very easy to throw expressions such as "harming the economy" around. But let's think about what this means. If, and we have to remember the big if here, there would be a significant increase in such sales -- instead of people looking for free and/or open source alternatives (which by the way is already happening, anyway let's continue with the hypothesis) -- then in an international aspect this would harm the economy as the national currency would be weakened due to less trade. HOWEVER (one of those important caps moments) -- don't forget that piracy is also an international phenomenon, meaning if all countries have 10% piracy it would be -- in terms of economic balance, exactly the same as if we had 0% -- or 80%.
What about national level? Well at national level the currency would merely shift towards those selling the software, as they collect the fees.
What about the personal economy? Well you would have a slightly stronger currency (given that other countries ignore piracy) yet you would still, at a personal level, make a loss.
Now let's ignore the moral aspects here, you can yell theft all you want but that's another discussion. This discussion was about the economy and how someone tries to bullshit you from this angle to change your mind. Change your mind for the right reasons, if you consider it theft then fine, but don't eat whatever crap that's thrown at you. By using the expressions such as "economy", a very big machine which can be difficult to understand, you can persuade somebody into a lot of things, since ultimately they will tend to feel stupid because they cannot break down the concept and understand how this hurts the economy -- you see no explanation is given, and that's the point of the argument. So if you feel stupid, that's even more of a reason to ask the question: why?
I am the lawn!
BSA Says 41% Software On Personal Computers Is Pirated
Well customers choose linux because Apps are easier to pirate. Steve Winfield of Microsoft's anti-FOSS Partner Technology Team (a.k.a. Delta Force) says so. It must be true.
In other news, sources not partnered with Microsoft announce that Microsoft's desktop market share has dipped down to 59%. Between Conficker and Internet banking exploits, it could happen.
Seriously, better check the BSA's definition of 'pirated'. Previous announcements like this turned out to classify any non-MS software as 'pirated'.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
Or Electronic Arts.
"Did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage?"
Are you really surprised when most people justify their choices this way? Would you also be surprised to know that most people feel this way? Most people, when faced with the fact that the law isn't serving them, will start to ignore it.
The RIAA doesn't deserve protection under the law anymore. And as much as I'll get flamed for that statement, we're all thinking it, and we're all acting on it.
But if you want a non-inflammatory morally relevant statement - I've been paying taxes on blank media for years, paid directly to the RIAA, and THAT has bought me any free copies I want, of whatever I want. Because I've already paid for it. And so have you.
Their Calculation goes like this:
as you can see, they just have to raise their estimates of "how much software a PC needs" a little bit to skyrocket the piracy... also they don't consider people using free software or 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
So they are counting "Used Software" as Pirated Software? Most software sold by auctions were used once and then sold via an auction to the lowest bidder. If one sold a book via an auction, it would not be considered pirated, but selling software via an auction is considered pirated? Some software sold via auction is still new and never used, is that pirated software as well? If so how is that different from a friend of mine buying the software new and then giving the copy to me to use as he bought two copies one for him and one for me to use. Is it pirated software then?
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
As always, it is unclear just what they consider "pirated". For example, if your company purchases 100% legitimate software via eBay, the BSA will not accept this as your software during an audit. They refuse to accept any and all eBay receipts. Hence, it is quite likely that they have counted all purchases via auction sites as pirated, even though this is clearly not true.
This is only one of many "rules" they apply that make little or no sense. Did you know that possessing the complete packaging of a program, including the original CD/DVD and the enclosed license certificate is, according to the BSA, not proof of ownership? You must have an original receipt, with the company (or individual) name correctly spelled, which explicitly lists the product and version.
The BSA may once have been a way to combat piracy'it has evolved into a monstrosity. Microsoft, Adobe and the other companies should terminate their relationships with it and start over.
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
They go farther. If you buy a used computer with Windows already installed and don't pay anything to Microsoft they classify you as a pirate even though that is entirely legal under US copyright law.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.