Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Government Patents News

Commerce Department Pushing For New "Copyright Czar" 294

Posted by ScuttleMonkey
from the bogus-stats dept.
TechDirt is reporting that those all-too-familiar "stats" surrounding the cost of piracy are being trotted out in an attempt to push through a new "Copyright Czar" position. "In urging President Bush to sign into law the ProIP bill, which would give him a copyright czar (something the Justice Department had said it doesn't want), the US Chamber of Commerce is claiming that 750,000 American jobs have been lost to piracy. Yet, it doesn't cite where that number comes from."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Commerce Department Pushing For New "Copyright Czar"

Comments Filter:
  • Easy (Score:5, Funny)

    by Eponymous Crowbar (974055) on Monday October 06, 2008 @01:25PM (#25275059)
    If we just hire 750,000 copyright czars, well there ya go. That would be mavericky, you betcha.
    • Re:Easy (Score:5, Funny)

      by Jimmyisikura (1274808) on Monday October 06, 2008 @01:36PM (#25275219)
      Yes but then we have created a problem by removing 10,000,000,000 pirates from the market. Pirates need to eat too. Studies also show that 12/15 of those 750,000 are part-time ax-murderers. I think the statistics show the real victims here.
      • Re:Easy (Score:5, Insightful)

        by ShieldW0lf (601553) on Monday October 06, 2008 @02:15PM (#25275691) Journal

        Average Americans used to be restricted to a very small subset of the information and culture that exists. The average person just couldn't afford any more than that.

        Now, thanks to piracy, they have access to most of it.

        In addition to having access to more, percentage-wise, it is a fact that despite current conditions, there are more creative works being made than ever before in recorded history. And they get access to most of that too.

        Therefore, rampant piracy has improved the average persons quality of life.

        If it came to pass that there was an end to piracy, and an extra 250 billion a year was divided amongst all Americans, that amount of money wouldn't be anywhere close to enough to pay for what the average person currently has access to because of piracy.

        Therefore, the average Americans quality of life would be significantly diminished should effective copyright enforcement become available and common.

        In conclusion, the victims of the American War on Piracy are... the American people.

        • Re:Easy (Score:5, Insightful)

          by OVDoobie (887621) on Monday October 06, 2008 @02:27PM (#25275785)
          Oddly enough, the same goes for the American War on Drugs. 80% of arrests are for simple possession. Before you mod me off topic think about this: if they pass this, and are equally efficient with enforcement how may millions, if not billions, will this cost average Americans (assuming there is no jail time, just fines).
          • Yeah these wars make the war on terra look positively intelligent, if you examine them closely.

        • Re:Easy (Score:5, Insightful)

          by gnick (1211984) on Monday October 06, 2008 @02:57PM (#25276091) Homepage

          That's an interesting way to phrase that - And you're not actually wrong. Piracy spreads culture to a much wider audience than could appreciate it otherwise.

          However, there are a number of activities that people can undertake that improve their quality of life without any cost to other individuals or society as a whole. But some of these we've decided to outlaw because of various problems. For example:
          * Jumping over subway turnstiles rather than walking to your destination or buying a ticket.
          * Sneaking into private museums/movie theaters/plays to observe the goings-on rather than buying a ticket.
          * Peeking into your sexy neighbor's window while she's changing for a cheap thrill rather than going to a strip club.
          * Breaking into a house that's are nicer than your own and living there when the normal tenants are known to be away on vacation before cleaning up after yourself and leaving the house as you found it.

          I could go on, but hopefully you see my point. All of those activities improve one person's quality of life without any noticeable cost to any other person or society overall (assuming that nobody gets noticed - then society suffers due to law-enforcement.) The first couple of examples are outlawed because, if everyone did them, the business model would fall apart and we (society) would lose things that we value - The same logic used for copyright enforcement. The latter couple of examples are outlawed because they offend our popularly accepted morals, although they are still examples of one person benefiting with no cost to others (assuming again that nobody gets caught or causes damage).

          So do you jump subway turnstiles and sneak into museums/movies/plays/concerts? If not, why not? I see very little difference assuming that you would not have ridden or attended if you would have had to pay.

          As a side note, I really need to learn to post A/C when countering somebody here who advocates rampant piracy. For some reason I just can't bring myself to do it... I must mention this to my analyst.

          • Re:Easy (Score:4, Interesting)

            by ShieldW0lf (601553) on Monday October 06, 2008 @03:20PM (#25276361) Journal

            Clearly, the business model is flawed and needs to be replaced with one that meets the social goal of providing for those who are valued creators without requiring artificial scarcity to implement it.

            History is full of such models. The BBC and the CBC are both good examples. And if you compare the quality of such with Fox News and CNN, you find that they also produce superior programming.

        • Re:Easy (Score:5, Insightful)

          by nine-times (778537) <nine.times@gmail.com> on Monday October 06, 2008 @03:03PM (#25276173) Homepage

          If it came to pass that there was an end to piracy, and an extra 250 billion a year was divided amongst all Americans, that amount of money wouldn't be anywhere close to enough to pay for what the average person currently has access to because of piracy.

          What if we added in an extra $700 billion? Because I've heard that if you throw in an additional $150 in pork projects, Congress will pass anything.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by mcgrew (92797) *

      Yet, it doesn't cite where that number comes from

      Cue the goatse trolls in 3...2...

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        It is odd. Whenever goatse would actually be on topic, the goatse guy is never around. Psychological reverse trolling, perhaps?
        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by discord5 (798235)

          Whenever goatse would actually be on topic, the goatse guy is never around. Psychological reverse trolling, perhaps?

          Great, now I've got the expression "Pulling those facts out of his ass" associated with that image. Thanks... Really... Thanks

          Another one to scratch off of the "frequently used expressions" list.

    • I support this plan. After all, seeing how well "czars" have done on other problems like terrorism and drugs, I imagine that 750,000 copyright czars would be the single swiftest path to restoring pro-consumer balance to copyright.

      "I'm helping!"

    • Just hire 750000 kids to sell CDs on street corners. If they average about zero sales they will be somewhere around the revenue lost due to piracy.

  • Piracy (Score:4, Funny)

    by arizwebfoot (1228544) on Monday October 06, 2008 @01:26PM (#25275067)
    We know where those lost jobs went, India and Pakistan all pirated our IT jobs.

    --
    Oh Well, Bad Karma and all . . .
  • by lecithin (745575) on Monday October 06, 2008 @01:26PM (#25275075)

    The Commerce Department is not the US Chamber of Commerce.

    Chamber of Commerce = non-for-profit business federation.

    Commerce Department = Federal Government Entity.

    As a matter of fact, the Commerce Department OBJECTS to a "Copyright Czar"

  • by whisper_jeff (680366) on Monday October 06, 2008 @01:28PM (#25275107)
    They got that number from Henry Paulson - he's so good at pulling out random large numbers that sound plausible while being founded on nothing of substance, after all.
    • by n0dna (939092) on Monday October 06, 2008 @01:41PM (#25275263)

      Dammit.

      I was going to say exactly the same thing, only I would have probably guessed where I think he pulled them out of.

      Good show.

    • Re:Henry Paulson (Score:5, Interesting)

      by mcgrew (92797) * on Monday October 06, 2008 @02:12PM (#25275647) Homepage Journal

      Thanks for not linking his wikipedia entry. Unfortunately for me, I looked him [wikipedia.org] up. Do not click that link! Jesus Christ but that's one freaky looking fuckweed! In order to save you the horror of seeing that man's face (makes goatse look like it came from a children's book) I'll quote wikipedia's entry on who he is:

      Henry Merritt "Hank" Paulson Jr. (born March 28, 1946) is the United States Treasury Secretary and member of the International Monetary Fund Board of Governors. He previously served as the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Goldman Sachs.

      Born in Palm Beach, Florida, to Marianna Gallaeur and Henry Merritt Paulson, a wholesale jeweler,[1] he was raised in Barrington Hills, Illinois. He was raised as a Christian Scientist.[2] Paulson attained the rank of Eagle Scout in the Boy Scouts of America.[3][4]

      A star athlete at Barrington High School, Paulson was a champion wrestler and stand out football player, graduating in 1964. Paulson received his Bachelor of Arts in English from Dartmouth College in 1968;[5] at Dartmouth he was a member of Phi Beta Kappa and was an All Ivy, All East, and honorable mention All American as an offensive lineman.

      He met his wife Wendy during his senior year. The couple have two adult children, Henry Merritt III and Amanda Clark, and became grandparents in June 2007. They maintain homes in Washington, DC and Barrington Hills, Illinois.

      In 1970 Paulson received a Master of Business Administration degree from Harvard Business School.[6]

      He is, in short, an anti-nerd. He is the complete and polar opposite of you and me.

      I think it's obvious now why the banking industry crashed and the stock market is crashing. It's because of people like Henry Merritt "Hank" Paulson Jr. who will not lose their jobs and homes and who will NOT go hungry as a direct result of their actions, as you and I may. Not as a result of our actions, but as a result of HIS and the actions of people (and I use that term loosely) just like him.

      If you fear people like Osama Bin Laden more than you fear people like Henry Merritt "Hank" Paulson Jr., IMO you're brain dead stupid.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by maxume (22995)

        This is ridiculously reactionary. Up until this point, the vast majority of people who have lost their homes in this crisis have lost their homes because they took on loans that they could not afford (there are people in Detroit who lost their homes because Michigan is imploding, and so forth). Sure, they were offered teaser rates and things probably weren't always made real clear, but it seems pretty reasonable to hold each and every buyer of a home somewhere around 50% responsible for the loan that they a

        • true in some sense (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Trepidity (597) <delirium-slashdo ... g ['ish' in gap]> on Monday October 06, 2008 @03:07PM (#25276221)

          Sure, you could say that the lender and lendee are each about half responsible. But the difference is that the lender is supposed to have known better: their job is finance. By contrast, the average homeowner has no financial expertise.

          Thus two sides mutually entered a stupid contract, but one of the sides was actually staffed by full-time professionals whose supposed expertise lay precisely in evaluating contracts for non-stupidity.

        • Re:Henry Paulson (Score:5, Insightful)

          by mcgrew (92797) * on Monday October 06, 2008 @03:11PM (#25276259) Homepage Journal

          I'm not talking about those who have lost their homes, I'm talking about those who WILL lose their homes. Prepare for a really really bad recession; perhaps even a depression. I'm not the first to say "Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it" but nobody listens to them, either.

          If you want the crap scared out of you, I have three uncaracteristally SFW mcgrew journals to chew on:
          Hoover for President [slashdot.org]
          More Hoover (DAMN!) [slashdot.org] and
          I hate it when I'm right [slashdot.org]

          I already lost one house. It was back in '04 after my marriage went south. I'd bought my ex-wife a brand new PT Cruiser two months before she and her income left. She'd not paid the bills in order to save up for an apartment. She left me with months worth of bills, a broken van that I was still paying for, a mortgage, and two teenaged daughters to feed.

          After declaring bankrupcy I gradually got my credit good enough to buy another house (after throwing my money away in a basement apartment for three years).

          My house payments tripled this month. Yeah, it's MY fault.

          I'll be able to make my payments, barely, but I won't have much if any left over to buy anything with. My lack of money caused by the mortgage company's greed will hurt all the people I normally do business with, who will all have a hell of a lot less of my money, because I have a hell of a lot less of my money.

          You'd better hope you're not one of the millions that will lose their jobs in the next year. Can you afford your mortgage payments on unemployment insurance?

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by CodeBuster (516420)

          Irresponsible behavior on Wall Street has exacerbated the mess

          Wall Street took advantage of the way that the government altered the rules of the mortgage game in the only sensible way that they could in an attempt to protect their investments and savings from inflation. They invested in the best thing going (erroneously as it turns out) which was the super hot housing market. The whole thing began in the last decade of the twentieth century (1990s) with the Community Reinvestment Act [wikipedia.org], which essentially required Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to extend credit to borrowers

      • If you fear people like Osama Bin Laden more than you fear people like Henry Merritt "Hank" Paulson Jr., IMO you're brain dead stupid.

        In other words, you're either with us, or one of them, type of thinking. Thankfully, you can count on me, I fear every stereotype. Muslims, terrorists, jocks, bankers, or you, you guys are all pretty much the same to me.

    • Nah, they got it from his brother bob [youtube.com]
  • 750,000?? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jgtg32a (1173373) on Monday October 06, 2008 @01:29PM (#25275119)
    Are there even that many people working in the music and movies/tv industry in this country?
  • by ivandavidoff (969036) on Monday October 06, 2008 @01:34PM (#25275173)
    The numbers came from The U.S. Department of the Posterior.
    • by ari_j (90255)
      Only after extensive prodding by the U.S. Department of the Anterior.
  • Uh huh (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Xeth (614132) on Monday October 06, 2008 @01:35PM (#25275189) Journal

    According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were 383,000 people employed [bls.gov] in the Motion picture and sound recording industries in September 2008.

    My money is on the idea that they took the amount the industries estimate they lose from piracy and then divided that by some moderate wage.

    • Re:Uh huh (Score:5, Interesting)

      by halcyon1234 (834388) <halcyon1234@hotmail.com> on Monday October 06, 2008 @01:55PM (#25275441) Journal

      Heck, think about it this way:

      There are about 300 million (thousand thousand) people in the States

      According to All Knowledge Ever [wikipedia.org], 24.6% are minors, and 12.7% are of retired age. That means there are only 188 million "employable" citizens.

      The same BLS says the unemployment rate is 6%. That means there are 11.3 million unemployed citizens

      If every single one of those lost jobs resulted in a currently unemployed person, then 6.65% of all unemployed persons were from the entertainment industry.

      Now, assuming that their number isn't complete and utter bullshatistics-- nah, I think I'll just call BS and be done with this one.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by LordNimon (85072)
        The same BLS says the unemployment rate is 6%. That means there are 11.3 million unemployed citizens

        Bzzz.... wrong. Thanks for playing.

        The 6% unemployment rate refers to people who are actively seeking work but haven't found it. That is a small percentage of the total number of adults.
        • by ByOhTek (1181381)

          > The 6% unemployment rate refers to people who are actively seeking work but haven't found it. That is a small percentage of the total number of adults.

          I thought it was the number of people who lost their jobs within the last [timeframe]? I think [timeframe] is two or six months?

          Regardless, in which case, they could be looking for a job and still not be counted (or not looking for a job, and be counted).

    • by ari_j (90255)
      Actually, your properly-cited statistic shows that the most likely math isn't dividing estimated losses by any wage figures, but rather as follows:
      1. Give a survey to the motion picture and sound recording industry employees, or a sufficient sample thereof
      2. Ask one question: How many people do you know who lost their job within your industry?
      3. The average response is "two"
      4. Multiply 2 x 383,000 = 766,000
      5. Publicly claim the rounded-to-media-friendly-terms figure of 750,000 jobs lost
    • by Znork (31774)

      ... and then they forget to deduct the jobs that wouldn't exist in other industries because money is spent on MAFIAA monopoly rights.

  • Too bad (Score:4, Funny)

    by Corpuscavernosa (996139) on Monday October 06, 2008 @01:36PM (#25275199)
    It's too bad that one of the jobs lost wasn't Uwe Boll's. I'm just sayin'. [petitiononline.com]
  • Quickly! (Score:5, Funny)

    by tgd (2822) on Monday October 06, 2008 @01:36PM (#25275207)

    We need a content producer bailout!!!

  • Progress (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Hey, don't manufacture anything, litigate instead. Sure, that will get you out of a recession!

  • by Snarfangel (203258) on Monday October 06, 2008 @01:43PM (#25275285) Homepage

    Easy. It comes from the set of real numbers.

  • by 192939495969798999 (58312) <info@devinm o o r e .com> on Monday October 06, 2008 @01:51PM (#25275379) Homepage Journal

    That 750,000 jobs number comes a very reliable source, the bird. Haven't you heard, about the bird?

  • Inefficency (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Wildclaw (15718) on Monday October 06, 2008 @01:57PM (#25275457)

    claiming that 750,000 American jobs have been lost to piracy

    Overexaggerated number for sure, but jobs may very well have been lost because of piracy. But, so what? Let me formulate the matters in another light.

    750,000 American jobs would have been wasted if piracy hadn't existed to combat the inherent inefficencies in the copyright and IP systems.

    Jobs are good if they actually produce something useful to society. Otherwise they are just a big waste, and do little more than shuffle resources around because the current system don't have a better way to allocate it.

    Even if more actual intellectual property were produced with stronger IP laws, it still isn't sure that it would be a better idea. The real value of IP isn't how much is produced, but how much is produced times how well spread it is among the population. Also, that total value has to be balanced against the cost of producing it.

    Say that 700,000 more jobs would be created. That is a multi billion cost. And what would be the gain. More tv? More music? More movies? It isn't like there is a lack of choice right now.

    • Re:Inefficency (Score:5, Insightful)

      by mcgrew (92797) * on Monday October 06, 2008 @02:50PM (#25276013) Homepage Journal

      More like 75000 jobs GAINED. I would like to Quote Cory Doctorow from the forward to Little Brother [craphound.com] (emphasis mine):

      I recently saw Neil Gaiman give a talk at which someone asked him how he felt about piracy of his books. He said, "Hands up in the audience if you discovered your favorite writer for free -- because someone loaned you a copy, or because someone gave it to you? Now, hands up if you found your favorite writer by walking into a store and plunking down cash." Overwhelmingly, the audience said that they'd discovered their favorite writers for free, on a loan or as a gift. When it comes to my favorite writers, there's no boundaries: I'll buy every book they publish, just to own it (sometimes I buy two or three, to give away to friends who must read those books). I pay to see them live. I buy t-shirts with their book-covers on them. I'm a customer for life.

      Neil went on to say that he was part of the tribe of readers, the tiny minority of people in the world who read for pleasure, buying books because they love them. One thing he knows about everyone who downloads his books on the Internet without permission is that they're readers, they're people who love books.

      People who study the habits of music-buyers have discovered something curious: the biggest pirates are also the biggest spenders. If you pirate music all night long, chances are you're one of the few people left who also goes to the record store (remember those?) during the day. You probably go to concerts on the weekend, and you probably check music out of the library too. If you're a member of the red-hot music-fan tribe, you do lots of everything that has to do with music, from singing in the shower to paying for black-market vinyl bootlegs of rare Eastern European covers of your favorite death-metal band.

      No artist ever starved because of copyright infringement. Many artists have starved because of obscurity.

  • Yes, great (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Nimey (114278) on Monday October 06, 2008 @01:59PM (#25275483) Homepage Journal

    because America needs another powerful, unaccountable functionary in the government.

    Suppose, instead, that Congress does its job and shits out a decent copyright law.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by oldhack (1037484)
      Hey, our economy is hollowing out, and Hollywood is one of the few things left now that still "produce" things others would buy. But then, our copyright laws can't do squat to piracy in other countries. Genius.
  • Incitement Czar (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Doc Ruby (173196) on Monday October 06, 2008 @01:59PM (#25275489) Homepage Journal

    Has any of these "czars" the US government has been fond of appointing the past decade or so actually accomplished anything except creating more serfs?

    Why does the US government have people modeled on the most hated monarchs, who drove Russians so nuts that they went "Communist" on us for 3/4 of a century, and nearly helped us blast the world back to microscopic life?

    How about Congress just returns copyright to its Constitutional basis: at most 17 years (a human "generation") of private monopoly on any content, but only when that monopoly will "promote progress in science and the useful arts". That regime doesn't need a czar, it needs a searchable content registry archive and an antitrust watchdog.

    • by Belial6 (794905)
      I'm with you.

      I still can't figure out why people are not pissed off about the very idea of declaring royalty in the US government.
  • by Khisanth Magus (1090101) on Monday October 06, 2008 @02:04PM (#25275557)
    Although it is more in the thousands, possibly as high as ten thousand, it is true that there has been a significant amount of job loss due to piracy in the companies that bring japanese anime over to the US. I've talked with voice actors as well as people who run those companies, and piracy really has hurt them. Some companies are closing up shop, others are just having to severely cut back to make ends meet. This was never a large profit business in the first place, and with people downloading it so much as opposed to buying the DVDs they can't manage to squeak by.

    The irony of this is that the "copyright czar" would probably just ignore this as the MPAA and RIAA aren't involved. Not that I'm advocating law suits against people who do pirate it, as I think that is way over the top, just pointing out that people HAVE lost their jobs due to piracy.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      The anime industry in the US might not exist at all were it not for people who were violating copyright and giving away fan subtitled work -- when I first saw anime ('93) it was all fansubs.

      More recently -- I've purchased anime and manga which I wouldn't have know about were it not for people violating copyright laws: specifically because the friends who introduced me showed me fansubs. I'll grant that absent pirating, some of them might have purchased the shows ... but most wouldn't, the initial price tag

      • by SaXisT4LiF (120908) on Monday October 06, 2008 @03:00PM (#25276145)
        I think that parent AC makes a valid point. While fansubs may technically be a violation of copyright law, those viewers that become fans of the series will probably end up purchasing the DVDs, T-Shirts, Video Games, and other merchandise related to the franchise.

        In respect to the Anime market in the US, there are a number of other factors that could be contributing to low sales:
        • Bad voice acting. There are exceptions to this (i.e. Mononoke Hime), but many of the English dubs are terrible. The English actors don't seem to convey the same tone and mood of the original voice-overs. Most anime fans prefer Japanese voice-overs with English sub-titles. The only real reason to include an English dub is if the target audience is very young and can't be expected to read.
        • Price tag. The average cost per disk is about $25-$30 and it contains 3 episodes on average, 4 if you're lucky. It probably works out to about $8 per episode. Considering that many of the series contain upwards of 200 episodes, this becomes a hefty chunk of change. I think the problem here is the cost of producing the English dubs. You can often import the same series without English VOs in a box set for closer to $1 an episode. Why pay 8 times the price for English VOs that you're not going to listen to anyway?
        • Release delays. The DVDs don't hit the US stores until almost 3 years after the original air date. Presumably this is due to the time it takes to record the English VOs. By the time the DVD hits the US market, the buyer has lost interest in the series and moved on to something else.

        In short, Anime publishers should ditch the English VOs and get the product to market sooner and for a lower price.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Wildclaw (15718)

      Well, when you have people who are willing to translate (a.k.a. fansub) for free, and most people (atleast those who watch lots of anime) seems to prefer original japanese voice, then it isn't that strange that it is a tough market.

      Of course, at the same time you have people selling bottled water that basically is no different than the water you can get directly from the tap. So it isn't that easy to predict where there is a market.

  • Why does a free market economy need czars? Aren't they an invention of the same country that adopted communist central planning to such poor effect?

  • Actually... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SerfsUp (839507) on Monday October 06, 2008 @02:13PM (#25275661)
    Great idea. I nominate Lawrence Lessig!
  • there's 750,000 jobs in my ass

    and if you ask me where i got that number, i'll tell you honestly i just pulled it out of my ass

  • Don't get me wrong; I'm still all for replacing Bush & Co. with Obama/Biden,... but this copyright czar thing is one area I might not want Biden's advice on, with his anti-consumer track record in this area,... Then again, McSame/Pain might screw things up even worse,...
  • We should reduce copyright terms instead as long copyright terms have resulted in 7 trillion jobs lost, fifty million babies being carried off by wolves, and terrorists dancing in the streets*. If you love America, hate terrorists, and care about poor, defenseless children, you *must* support shorter copyright terms!

    * All statistics have been obtained from the Institute of Extraction of Random Numbers from Collective Posteriors. Coincidentally, this is the same place that the Commerce Department got their

  • I hear Jack Thompson is looking for a new job...

  • by Dan667 (564390) on Monday October 06, 2008 @02:56PM (#25276083)
    He can start by suing Sony, EMI, Warner Brothers, and Universal (the RIAA) for the unnecessary burden to the tax payers of them trying to make their businesses a government problem.
  • Can't Slashdot do the same?

  • For there to have been 750,000 lost jobs, wouldn't you have to prove that these people have been employed in the industry first?

    Can they show that businesses decided to leave Copyright protected industries because of piracy?

    Or are they trying to show a decrease in production of Copyrighted materials because of production?

    Maybe they are trying to say that Piracy accounted for $XX lost sales and the money from those sales could have employed as many as 750,000 other people.

    It is probably the latter,
  • 750k Jobs Lost (Score:3, Interesting)

    by nurb432 (527695) on Monday October 06, 2008 @04:02PM (#25276865) Homepage Journal

    Sure, its a lie, but since when did the facts ever get in the way of congress trying to pass laws?

Real programmers don't write in BASIC. Actually, no programmers write in BASIC after reaching puberty.

Working...