A draft government report prepared by the Australian Institute of Criminology has lashed out at the music and software sectors for their piracy statistics. The confidential briefing for the Attorney-General's Department labels the statistics "self-serving hyperbole" and says that copyright owners "failed to explain" how they reached financial loss statistics used for great influence in lobbying and at court cases.
The report specifically says that figures for 2005 provided by the Business Software Association (BSA), which amounts to $361 million a year of lost sales in Australia are "unverified and epistemologically unreliable". However, senior researchers have disagreed with its conclusions so it is to be redrafted.
Researcher Alex Malik was particularly critical of the use of the questionable statistics in court. "Of greatest concern is the potentially unqualified use of these statistics in courts of law," the draft reads. Institute principal criminologist Russell Smith has described the report as an early draft and said that is currently being edited by the agency.
"We wouldn't use language like that because it's not accurate, it's hyperbolic and overblown," he said. "It was a very early draft written by a consultant, and we would want a chance to revise it. We have an extensive quality control system in the institute, so that drafts are read by most senior staff. The report hasn't been finalized. It's still being edited and revised."
The report is also critical of the Australian Recording Industry Association's piracy arm, Music Industry Piracy Investigations (MIPI) because it did not even know how the estimates are calculated. MIPI manager Sabiene Heindl explained that the work was done by the International Federation of Phonographic Industries (IFPI) in the United Kingdom.
The report also is critical of how some estimates are calculated by counting all pirated goods sold by their street value, as it assumes that any person who buys a pirated item would have otherwise bought a legitimate copy.
Source:
Australian IT
Researcher Alex Malik was particularly critical of the use of the questionable statistics in court. "Of greatest concern is the potentially unqualified use of these statistics in courts of law," the draft reads. Institute principal criminologist Russell Smith has described the report as an early draft and said that is currently being edited by the agency.
"We wouldn't use language like that because it's not accurate, it's hyperbolic and overblown," he said. "It was a very early draft written by a consultant, and we would want a chance to revise it. We have an extensive quality control system in the institute, so that drafts are read by most senior staff. The report hasn't been finalized. It's still being edited and revised."
The report is also critical of the Australian Recording Industry Association's piracy arm, Music Industry Piracy Investigations (MIPI) because it did not even know how the estimates are calculated. MIPI manager Sabiene Heindl explained that the work was done by the International Federation of Phonographic Industries (IFPI) in the United Kingdom.
The report also is critical of how some estimates are calculated by counting all pirated goods sold by their street value, as it assumes that any person who buys a pirated item would have otherwise bought a legitimate copy.
Source:
Australian IT
