[LINK] BSA Piracy Study

[James Pearce]

I just got back from this release, and what can I say? Nice lunch.

On the jobs front, the report makes the assumption that higher revenues will
equate to more jobs. Ie, if revenues increase by 7 percent, then jobs will
increase by 7 percent (although the IDC guy did clarify that it wasn't a
one-to-one ration). The figures are hard to understand, because different
figures refer to different things. For instance:

"In Australia, reducing the rate of business software piracy by 10 percent
(and by this they mean from 27 percent to 17 percent) by 2006 could...boost
local industry revenues by AU$5billion"

compared to:

"Cutting Australian software piracy by 5 percent from its current level
would add over AU$5billion to the local economy"

The "local economy" being different from the "IT industry".

These sorts of miscomparisons are all through the information we were given.

Hm.

James



----- Original Message -----
From: "Chirgwin, Richard" <Richard.Chirgwin at informa.com.au>
To: <link at anu.edu.au>
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 9:41 AM
Subject: [LINK] BSA Piracy Study


> >From cNet:
>
http://rss.com.com/2100-1028-995011.html?type=pt&part=rss&tag=feed&subj=news
>
> The reason I mention this is that the study is getting its Sydney release
> today, complete with long lunch - I couldn't make it because I'm flying to
> the UK tomorrow and am as busy as a cut cat (but hey, Linkers get a rest
> from me!).
>
> The study draws one of those "Trousers kill you!" conclusions (ie,
everybody
> who ever wore trousers has died, so trousers are the problem). The
> conclusion this study reaches is that "Countries with the lowest rate of
> piracy have the fastest growth in their IT sectors". Thus a correlation is
> turned into causality.
>
> Now: cause may be demonstrable. I don't know - and I can't see that the
BSA
> has tried to demonstrate cause. All that's happening with this study is
that
> the correlation is being *reported* as cause. Then, by assuming that the
> correlation is causal, the study concludes:
> >a 10-point reduction in the rate of piracy over four years
> >could generate 1.5 million jobs and $64 billion taxes worldwide,
> >and double the IT sector in countries such as Russia.
>
> Given that the incremental cost of selling another CD is very small, and
its
> labour input near-zero, I'd love to know where the "1.5 million jobs" come
> from. Warehousing?
>
> Another point likely to be missed is more complex, so bear with me. The
size
> of the IT sector at retail is not the same thing as the "size of the local
> IT industry".
>
> Reducing piracy in Australia would, admittedly, cause a measurable
increase
> in how much IT spending was recorded by the ABS. But that doesn't equate
to
> local IT employment or, more importantly, local software production. It
> would mostly be a growth in imports, with a small growth in retail
> employment (and no, I don't count working behind the counter in Harvey
> Norman as an IT job).
>
> However, this is a story likely to come from the press release, because
you
> can bet that flaws in the methodology will get the following response:
> "Well, this was an international study, so I would have to consult the
> authors." By the time the answer arrives, the story is dead. It's an old
> tactic in IT PR.
>
> - As a professional courtesy, so to speak, I had not mentioned the
upcoming
> press conference to Link. But since the BSA doesn't mind "scooping" the
> press in outpots countries like Australia, I don't think I've done anyone
a
> disservice in this post. Maybe Linkers could toss up some ideas for the
> journalists to take to the press conference?
>
> RC
> _______________________________________________
> Link mailing list
> Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link