BSA Piracy Study Deeply Flawed 437
zbik writes "Corante reports that The Economist has blown the lid off the BSA's recent report on software piracy (covered by Slashdot), referring to their methods as 'BS'.
'They dubiously presume that each piece of software pirated equals a direct loss of revenue to software firms.' The BSA has complained that the article is offensive but does not dispute their analysis. Score one for common sense."
And this is a surprise because? (Score:5, Interesting)
Wow, that is shocking.. (Score:2, Interesting)
Not that I in any way condone piracy
Boy Scouts of Hong Kong... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:1, Interesting)
The second your hobby/tinkering/curiousity results in income greater than the cost of the software, you've got a point.
Not a strong one, because a copy still isn't theft, but a point.
*To draw a distinction between Photoshop and World of Warcraft, for example.
Time for a separate "copyright" section (Score:2, Interesting)
It's kind of weird that all copyright/piracy/P2P articles show up in the "patents" section,
How odd... (Score:5, Interesting)
So, if there's 3,000,000 people with an operating system, but our members have only sold 2,000,000, that's 1,000,000 pirated copies of our member's operating systems! Call the police/FBI/attack-squads!!!
Surely that can't be how they work it out. Anyone ever had one of these IDC surveys? How specific are they, would they allow them to filter out software by publisher/developer so that for instance GIMP and Photoshop don't both show up as "Graphics Tools"? If not, that means every copy of GIMP would be a loss to Adobe!
(Note - it wouldn't surprise me if that is exactly how it works, and that it was entirely deliberate, but that's a different matter...)
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:2, Interesting)
It's funny how this is never included in any industry estimates of "losses" due to piracy. About 90% of my video game library is a direct result of the software piracy I and my friends engaged in. I also noticed this law at work: when I don't pirate games, I don't buy any.
Once in a while... (Score:5, Interesting)
It's not a full or heavy press at the moment, but I believe there will be a day...
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:3, Interesting)
Firsthand Experience (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:OTHER HEADLINES TODAY (Score:3, Interesting)
I share your disappointment with most of our elected officials, but there are exceptions [senate.gov]. Russ Feingold was the only senator to vote against [archipelago.org] the PATRIOT Act in 2001. He's truly an admirable leader.
Comment removed (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:How odd... (Score:2, Interesting)
Well, in a way, it is. Someone had a need, they might have looked at both Photoshop and GIMP. In the end they opted for GIMP (whatever reason). So Adobe did lose a sale.
Mind you, if the same person had installed a different commercial editor, that would still be a loss, but would be counted a legitimate purchase?
Drat this free stuff, throws the calculations off.....
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:4, Interesting)
The threshold is found at the high-point of the graph of piracy vs. social benefit.
When measures to prevent piracy are more damaging to us then the allowance of piracy then we stop and accept a level of piracy. I'm thinking of obvious things like DRM, but also less obvious things such as a company getting too powerful and restricting choice.
Where the line is drawn is open to fine dispute, but that is the principle. Someone could discover a universal cure for cancer tomorrow and decide not to sell it at all, or only to their friends. Some people here on
You could also look at setting this threshold according to need. If you regard MS Office as a luxury item, then there is no threshold. But if you regard understanding of how to use it as a need in the modern world, then maybe you would say that those who can't afford it do have a right to pirate it. Losing out on an education because you're poor is not a good statement about society.
Just illustrating ideas about where you would define the threshold.
piracy = increased SW market later. Duh! (Score:1, Interesting)
SW piracy has contributed tremendously to the growth of the SW industry, video game development, movie FX, and countless other industries.
Comapnies like Adobe OWE a LOT to piracy, as I've never met a PS user who didn't owe some part of his/her PS skills to pirated copies, and who would have been as likly to support a PS purchase without piracy.
F'ing sick of these greedy, hypocritical, A-holes.
The reality is that the BSA just bitches and cries wolf because they're trying to have it both ways.
Nothing new under the sun.
Re:BSA Lies, Film at 11 (Score:3, Interesting)
Really it has little to do with software piracy. It has more to do with getting the power of LAW to help raise the cost of software, or atleast maintain it.
I'm still a firm beleiver that if Microsoft sold Office (the full version, bells whistles and all) for $50. Office would HARDLY ever be pirated. It would only perhaps be pirated by younger people such as teens.
Same thing with Photoshop. There are so many pirated copies of Photoshop installed accross the country. If Adobe wants to truly bring in money they would sell it for a fair price such as $50 and they would get so much money in return. They would profit more than they are now. They would not be losing sales to Piracy etc.
Look at videogames. Yes Kids tend to pirate games because they run through them like cheap cookies... But the game industry is very successful with their $50 price for software.
They make a lot of money.
Really the trick is getting people to pony up $50 each year or 2 for a new version of the software. Frankly i dont see that as a problem because people do it now for $300, to $8000 software.
Give people a fair price, and Piracy will deminish. The software companies will sell more units, at a fair price, and benefit from greater profit.
The BSA has so little to do with piracy, other than busting and auditing people. And I see nothing wrong with that, as long as they're fair and honest with their numbers, their penalties and so forth. But clearly they're not because they have an agenda like all lobbiests.
Re:And this is a surprise because? (Score:3, Interesting)
In other words, pirating those early games that I never would have purchased has resulted in actual income for the industry. They should have encouraged it. Some did, by providing good quality demos and shareware.
I purchased UT2004 solely based on my experience with the demo. Had there been no demo, as is the case for many games, I would never have purchased it. Take Warcraft 3 for example. I pirated it shortly before it's release, and loved it. As a result, I purchased it. Had I not initially pirated it, I would NOT have purchased it several days later.
Software Piracy (Score:3, Interesting)
When someone downloads a piece of software they didn't pay for using something like bittorrent, there is absolutely no direct cost to the software company. Consider for comparison stealing a tool from a hardware store and driving away from an auto-shop without paying for the repair service. In the first case, the company that made the tool and all the people that formed the transportation bridge to get that tool to the store suffer a direct loss. They had to physically create something and physically transport it, and that requires resources. In the case of the auto repair, you've just cost some poor smuck an hour or so of his time - he was repairing your car. If he doesn't get anything back from his efforts because you cheated him, you've stolen his time.
Now for the software company. They researched and designed something, and in the end engineered a piece of software that acts as a tool on your computer to produce something you want. But when you download the tool from someone illegally over something like bittorrent, what are you taking from the software company? You duplicated the code for a total cost of $0. They didn't expend effort creating a CD and shipping it into a store - you haven't even stolen the transport cost. There's no physical object being stolen - they don't require anything to create more copies of the code. In fact, you could continue pirating the software from them left right and center, and outnumber their actual product sales by 10 to 1, and it wouldn't hurt their product sales at all. It makes no difference to Adobe if I download one illegal copy of PhotoShop or twenty million illegal copies of PhotoShop. Twenty million times zero is still zero. The only argument they can pose for my actions costing them something is that they have a legal right to demand any sum of money they choose from you when you use their software, and because you bypassed their right you cost them the money you would otherwise have been forced to spend.
In a capitalist society we need to reimburse people reasonably for the time and effort it takes to think up new ideas, and for the time the software companies spend creating their software - otherwise one could argue that we wouldn't get any new ideas or software developed. Because of this, we created copyright law. Copyright law is designed to allow people to profit from their ideas by giving them rights over how people use that idea, and the right to take money from people who use their idea.
Reasonably, however, if a mathematician designs a new formula that revolutionizes computers and allows circuits built using his idea to operate 500 times faster than they do today, it seems a little unreasonable for the mathematician to demand that every single computer made using his idea pay him a royalty of US $5,000,000. In a similar way, is it reasonable to permit software companies to charge whatever sum they feel for a piece of code that in the end is nothing more than an idea? The code is well thought out, and complicated, and took time to make. Yes, society should compensate them for that. Yes, people who spend their time working this way should be well compensated for their efforts and be made wealthy. But there should be a limit as to what they can demand, and that limit is set by unspoken public consensus if not in our legal system. That unspoken limit being surpassed is what results in software piracy. When the average person who w
Re:Too bad.. (Score:2, Interesting)
Fact is, this is one of the many symptoms of trying to make the software industry fit into the mold of a regular industrial industry. It's like shoving a square peg into a round hole. But that's what happens when you let old people, with old ideas, using old systems run the world. Perhaps we should enforce mandatory retirement by 40?
Re:Brazil's Response (Score:3, Interesting)
BSA? We don't need no stinkin' BSA! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:OTHER HEADLINES TODAY (Score:3, Interesting)
I just got a letter from him today about his views on the DMCRA (Digital Millennium Consumers' Rights Act), and it included the choice paragraph
Re:BSA? We don't need no stinkin' BSA! (Score:4, Interesting)
That's why I have to wonder where the real value of an organization like the BSA comes from, if any. Seems to me it's more like the RIAA lawsuit game
They don't really have to have any hard evidence of piracy to get a court order and a few federal officers to raid your business.
And that, I think, is the crux of the matter. I have a problem with private organizations being able to take punitive measures against companies and individuals without hard evidence, or for that matter without any real due process. In effect, this gives them the power of a private police force. So what happens when they screw up your business for a few days and find out that, gee, their disgruntled-employee "informant" was lying and the target is in full compliance with the law. Do they reimburse you for all the lost productivity? Ask your forgiveness? Buy you a chocolate sundae? What?
Corporate vigilantism, I guess you could call it. If it's not already illegal it most certainly should be.
Re:Brazil's Response (Score:3, Interesting)
So as a Brit, visiting Brazil is pretty easy (no visa required in fact)
Re:BSA? We don't need no stinkin' BSA! (Score:2, Interesting)
If you don't use any software with an EULA like that, then they can't come in without a police escort and warrant.
Unfortunately, all they'll need to get a warrant most places is an 'annonymous tip'.
Fortunately, if you really *don't* use any unlicensed software, (especially if you don't use any software produced by one of their partners, you can sue them for the damages caused.
Re:BSA? We don't need no stinkin' BSA! (Score:1, Interesting)
Except, then they show up with real law enforcement and a warrent and give you no choice.