Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieBird
If currently outsized penalties are not proportionate.....
|
Read rather than presume.
The IFPI specifically says this is a question of economics, not moral necessity. Their recommendations include a graduated response (e.g. have the ISP's warn the excessive piraters multiple times, with increasing penalties that would still be much lower than civil lawsuits); consumer education; targeting specific infringing services like Mininova and Pirate Bay; pressuring Google and other search engines to cooperate more (e.g. respond better to take-down requests, cull piracy links from searches); and target pre-release leaks.
I will agree that skepticism is definitely warranted. However there is a big difference between "critical review" and "presuming fanatical bias."
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MovieBird
I ask again for peer reviewed studies.
|
I may be missing critical details, but as far as I know, there are no "peer-reviewed" studies on the subject. If you're familiar with any, please feel free to link them.
Possibly the closest thing is the GAO study from last April (
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d10423.pdf). So, do you plan to blast a report by the United States Government Accounting Office (the independent non-partisan research department of Congress) as biased, before or after you read it?
As to the original Nielsen and other research reports: Most are only available on a paid basis. I'm an inquisitive person, but not
that inquisitive.
