Hollywood Ups Three Strikes Propaganda Campaign In Australia With Misleading Stats
from the but-of-course dept
But, the MPAA is nothing if not persistent in their global desire to blame everyone else for their member studios' unwillingness to adapt. Even after the loss, the MPAA has been threatening more ISPs, and has now released a highly questionable study, laundered through a few organizations of course, from a company that doesn't appear to exist other than to push out MPAA propaganda. The study attempts to show that a three strikes regime would decrease infringement by over 70%. The only problem? The actual data doesn't seem to support that at all, because it includes asking people who don't file share at all how they would react to receiving a "strike." If you don't file share and someone says you'll receive a strike and potentially lose your broadband, you're pretty likely to say you won't keep file sharing. No sweat off your back, since you weren't already. And, even then, the numbers don't really support the MPAA, because a higher percentage of people said they'd keep file sharing than said they were file sharing in the first place! From TorrentFreak:
If 72 percent say they would stop sharing after a warning, then 28 percent didnít agree with this statement. And since only 22 percent of the people said they used file-sharing software in 2011 (the only people who would be affected by a three strikes system), this means that warnings from ISPs wouldnít even deter people who arenít the target of this system in the first place.Hell, if you wanted to be silly, it would be entirely possible to read this study to suggest that sending a strike encourages more people to file share...
Or put differently, it could very well be that none of the 22 percent file-sharers indicated that they would stop doing so when notified by their ISP.