Comments on: Those weirdly persistent counterfeiting statistics http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/12/06/those-weirdly-persistent-counterfeiting-statistics/ A slice of lime in the soda Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:05:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: OnTheTimes http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/12/06/those-weirdly-persistent-counterfeiting-statistics/comment-page-1/#comment-9652 Mon, 07 Dec 2009 16:09:46 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/12/06/those-weirdly-persistent-counterfeiting-statistics/#comment-9652 “Counterfeiting costs U.S. businesses as much as $250 billion a year, according to the Washington-based International AntiCounterfeiting Coalition.”

Beyond the fact that numbers like this and the ones that the record industry claims they lose to piracy are completly inflated is that a) the “lost” money is in revenues, not profits, and b) most people who bought the knock-off or downloaded the song wouldn’t have bought the real thing in the first place. In the case of the luxury item, people buy the fake stuff because they can’t afford the authentic product. And lots of people download every song they see, just because they want to have every song they hear of. Extreme downloaders may not ever listen to 90% of the songs they steal, so they would never buy them. As a result, the impact on profits is negligible, if unfair.

Counterfeiting and piracy are not nice things to do, and should be discouraged, but on the list of things the government desperately needs to address, they’re not even in the top 100.

]]>
By: Uncle_Billy http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/12/06/those-weirdly-persistent-counterfeiting-statistics/comment-page-1/#comment-9639 Sun, 06 Dec 2009 22:45:27 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/12/06/those-weirdly-persistent-counterfeiting-statistics/#comment-9639 Yes, it would be nice to see this paper.

Speaking of brands… Renee Richardson Gosline used to work for Leo Burnett and other snake oil salesmen. Leo Burnett, you know, the company that gave us the Marlboro Man?

But when MIT sells snake oil, it’s got cachet! A shame the “best and the brightest” are being used to generate soulless profits.

So… is she related to the Balloon project?

http://balloon.mit.edu/eweinst/

cf.: http://gawker.com/comment/16084422/

Who funds her “research”?

Here’s an interesting link. Puts her at a conference with Yochai Benkler who also has some things to say about information, social networks, etc.

http://www.convergenceculture.org/future sofentertainment/2008/speakers/index.htm l

She was also out at the Sunbelt Social Network Conference last year. Talking as if she had completed her study.

http://nersp.nerdc.ufl.edu/~ufruss/docum ents/Sunbelt%20XXVIII%20final.pdf

So why is just now getting pumped out from Bloomberg and the MIT News hacks?

]]>