Anti-Piracy PI Talks About Building Cases Against File-Sharers 109
An anonymous reader writes "Torrent Freak has an interesting interview with a former private investigator who was hired to track people who pirated software and movies. He relates some of the tactics used to make evidence more appealing to police, the media and lawmakers. He said, 'We discussed the formula for extrapolating the potential street value earnings of "laboratories" and we were instructed to count all blank discs in our seizure figures as if they were potential product. Mr. Gane also explained that the increased loss approximation figures were derived from all forms of impacts on decreasing cinema patronage right through to the farmer who grows the corn for popping.' Regarding the head of AFACT, the article notes, 'Gane understood that the media was an essential tool towards AFACT's goal of getting tougher copyright legislation in place. And for this purpose, it was a good idea to bend the truth a bit.'"
Re:lies and exaggeration (Score:4, Informative)
I see some pretty ludicrous claims on the other side too. Ask anyone who's tried to make a living on donations how that "pay if you like it" model is working out for them.
Show me a single person who has claimed artists could completely support themselves with a "pay if you like it model". People opposing the the industry point out that you have to find a new way of monetizing music, because charging X$ for a "copy" of the music won't work anymore when that copy can be made for essentially nothing. They need to add value in some other form.
The whole "pay if you like it" exercise is to demonstrate that the claim of the RIAA that "non one will pay for music if they can get it for free" is false, that many still will pay. Most of the bands trying this exercise also have other purchase options, like including signed physical copies, access to limited concert tickets, or other things that a fan will care about.
Poor attempt to make the two sides out as equally unreasonable.