Slashdot Mirror
EU Piracy Estimates — Just How Inaccurate?
Last week we discussed news that a US government report questioned the reliability of piracy statistics from the media industry. Reader superapecommando sends in a follow-up written by Glyn Moody that examines a similar problem in Europe. Quoting:
"As far as I know, no similar analysis has been carried out for European reports. So I thought it might be interesting to look at one particular European report on the subject — not least because I've heard that its findings influenced some of the MPs voting on the Digital Economy Act. ... the net result of this 68-page report, with all of its tables and detailed methodology, is that four out of the top five markets used for calculating the overall piracy loss in Europe draw on figures supplied by the recording industry itself. Those apparently terrifying new figures detailing the supposed loss of money and jobs due to piracy in Europe turn out to be little more than a re-statement of the industry's previous claims in a slightly different form. As a result, as little credence can be placed in the report as in those criticised by the US GAO."
I still blame Metallica. When Load didn't sell jack because it was the worst album they ever put out they started screaming that the reason that Load of crap did not sell was due to piracy.
They are Janet Jackson's nipple of the piracy world.
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
There's no way to make any kind of meaningful estimate as to how much piracy there is, let alone how much or if any of that results in lost sales or gained sales. No data == no meaningful guesses.
Free Martian Whores!
calculating the overall piracy loss in Europe draw on figures supplied by the recording industry itself
Seriously? You know, there was a time when we believed the cigarette companies that smoking was fine based on the stats they gave us - and look how well that turned out.
This kind of self policing industry crap has got to stop.
The "substitution rate" is probably the worst figure in all these papers, mainly because it is far from constant. Perhaps, with enough study, you could find the substitution rate for one specific product in one region, but trying to get a national average by product category is ludicrous.
Since people like blaming Metallica, I'll use them as an example. Note that all these numbers were pulled out of my ass, same as all numbers.
You may get a substitution rate of 50% for Master of Puppets in Southwestern US. You may get a 2% substitution rate for St. Anger in Finland. You may get a 20% substitution rate for "S&M", and you'd be lucky to get a 1% rate for "Acoustic Metal". That's a massive change just for one band. How would you compare the rates between The Black Mages and Justin Bieber? Trying to lump target audiences like that will give you numbers about as meaningful as the ones I just made up.
Listen up, MAFIAA. We care about three things: quality, price, and usability. We will pay for the good stuff, and tell you where to shove your crap. We don't want to pay 30$ for a music album, $20 for movie tickets, or $70 for a game. Finally, we want to get stuff easily, that works with everything, and doesn't come with legal crap that shouldn't have a chance of standing up in court.
And if you can't give us those three things, you need a new economic model. How many bands are giving out the music for free and making money from concerts and merchandise? It's nearly impossible to pirate a t-shirt or an experience. How much money are "free-to-play" games making?
Stop trying to legislate a profit, and start spending as much on those three things as you do on legal fees. Maybe you'll actually make money by, *gasp*, making a desirable product.
Copyright is an entitlement system...
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
"Since I have made something (or have been explicitly granted the specific rights to something), I feel I am entitled to use lobbyists and excessive laws to force you to pay more than you are willing to pay. I will also product lower quality, unoriginal remakes and make minimal changes just to artificially extend the time I can charge these crazy amounts."
That is what the MPAA/RIAA is actually saying.
Just because other people don't get it isn't any excuse to walk over their wishes
How about the fact that they have many times in the past used their combined power to raise prices, rip off customers and force out the little independent competition.
People wish to have culture at a fair price. In a free market we wouldn't have to pay as much but they have repeatedly changed laws and destroyed any hope of it changing back.
No, "they started it!" isn't an excuse, either.
It is an excuse, its just one you dont agree with.
They extend copyright and make attempts to slowly erode rights like fair use and then claim idiotic rubbish like "you license the music not own it" to stop you listening to something you've bought in the way you want.
I consider culture a basic human right. Granted it might not be as important as some others but my morals allow me to fight an unjust system in any way I decide no matter how many politicians they bribe into passing laws.