John Heidemann was skeptical about what the movie industry was saying about campus piracy.
A researcher in the Information Sciences Institute at the University of Southern California, Heidemann had heard the film studios' claim that college students downloading movies on campus were responsible for 44 percent of the industry's domestic losses to piracy.
That added up to about $572 million. So, working with a team of researchers last summer--the famous Hollywood sign on the mountain clearly visible from his workplace--Heidemann and the group came up with a way to track file-sharing use on USC's network. Following a 14-hour monitoring of the system, the team concluded that between 3 and 13 percent of those on the school's network (PDF) were using peer-sharing technology and accounted for between 21 and 33 percent of overall traffic, he said.
There was no way for Heidemann to discern whether the information being transferred was pirated. But even in a worst case scenario, 13 percent indicated that only a small minority of USC students were engaged in illegal file sharing. Heidemann's research flew in the face of the MPAA's claims.
This was an example of a university not relying on the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) to tell it what was happening on its network. But USC is the exception rather than the rule.
For two years, the film industry has relied on an erroneous figure to persuade the public that college students are thieves. The MPAA acknowledged Tuesday that a survey it released in 2005 overstated the damage caused by piracy at the nation's universities. The MPAA now says that instead of 44 percent, students account for 15 percent of domestic losses, or about $195 million.
But how did the error go unchallenged for so long? Why weren't network managers from UCLA to Harvard the ones to sound the alarm? Observers say that many schools were probably afraid to do their own studies.
"Look at them, the universities were running scared," said Eric Garland, CEO of BigChampagne, a company that tracks peer-to-peer traffic. "They probably didn't do the research because they were afraid about what they would find. (Colleges) have been singled out as the enclave of the most egregious piracy."
If Tuesday's revelation from the MPAA did nothing else, it should serve to teach college presidents that they shouldn't rely on the word of a third-party to say what its students are up to--especially one that has spent the past two years telling Congress that college students are responsible for almost half of all movie piracy in the U.S.
Mark Luker, vice president Educause, an organization representing college information technology departments, said plenty of people were skeptical and asked to see the data. But the schools "did not run their own surveys," Luker acknowledged. He added that college administrators should have at least "insisted that we see the study."
The MPAA has backed proposed legislation that would require universities participating in federal student financial-aid programs to consider offering "alternatives" to illegal downloading or "technology-based deterrents" to piracy.
MPAA Washington general counsel Fritz Attaway told reporters last November: "I think it's perfectly legitimate for Congress to say, 'Wait a minute. If we're giving you money, we don't want it to be used to help college kids infringe copyright.' "
Just what impact the MPAA's goof will have on the proposed legislation remains unclear. A spokeswoman for the House of Representatives Committee on Education and Labor, which has already passed the higher-education bill backed by the MPAA, said Wednesday that the committee has asked the MPAA for more information and "we plan to review it."
In the meantime, perhaps college presidents should chat with their IT chiefs to see what's going on.
Had anyone at the University of California at Berkeley ever asked Vanessa DeGuzman, a technology support manager for a 7,000-person campus dorm, about the MPAA's estimates, she would have told them, "It definitely seemed like their numbers were high."
DeGuzman acknowledges that all she has is anecdotal information, but she's noticed that the number of "takedown" notices she has received from entertainment companies has been falling significantly. The notices are legal documents that typically notify the school that someone on their network is pirating content.
She credits a greater emphasis on educating incoming students about copyright infringement. UC Berkeley has programs called "Learn Before You Burn," and "Think Before You Click." Students who receive a takedown notice are immediately booted from the network for a week. A second notice and the student must appear before a peer-review board before getting their Web privileges back.
In the future, perhaps the universities can add their own notice: learn the truth before you cower.
CNET News.com's Anne Broache contributed to this story.
Quickly filling up Netflix's rearview mirror is a sight that no tech company wants to see: Apple.
Apple announced on Tuesday that the company has cut licensing deals with every top film studio--deals that will enable iTunes to offer first-run movies a month after they are released on DVD.
This means that Apple has won a major advantage in the Web movie-rental business. One of the biggest complaints customers have with online movie services is that none offer first-run features. The same is true with some of the video-on-demand services operated by the cable companies.
Moreover, Netflix offerings don't work on anything but computers running Microsoft's operating system.
Apple CEO Steve Jobs told the audience during his Macworld 2008 keynote address on Tuesday that movies offered by the service, iTunes Movie Rentals, will play on PCs, Macs, iPods, and iPhones.
Apple also one-upped most competitors by offering films in high definition (HD). Jobs told the Macworld audience that customers can watch the streaming movies instantly. They will have 30 days to start watching the moves and once they begin streaming the film and will then be allowed 24 hours to finish viewing.
Apple will charge $3.99 for newer releases and $2.99 for older titles. Customers can pay $1 extra to obtain movies in HD. The company expects to offer 1,000 films by the end of February.
"The big surprise is that they're doing HD," said James McQuivey, an analyst with Forrester Research. "Apple nailed this because HD is what consumers want."
Apple's new rental service isn't likely to threaten Netflix's core mail-order business, according to McQuivey. Apple is charging on a per-film basis while Netflix business allows users to watch what they want for a monthly fee.
But the future of movie rentals is supposed to be providing customers access to any film with a push of a button. Nobody offers that--yet. But in the race to deliver instant gratification, Apple just zoomed past Netflix.
Still, the Web rental business as a whole has many shortcomings. Some are technological and some are the annoying restrictions imposed by the studios.
Transmitting movies over the Web, especially in massive HD-quality files, is known for taking multiple hours. The viewing experience, meanwhile, is often marked by stalling and jerky video.
Among Apple's competitors is Microsoft's Xbox. The company launched a movie and TV download store for Net-connected Xbox 360s in November and some users have complained about hours-long delays in getting their films. What Apple fans will be interested to see is what kind of viewing experience Apple can deliver.
One thing that is bound to annoy them is the viewing deadline. That isn't Apple's fault, according to McQuivey.
The reason for the deadline, he said, is that the studios insist on it because they don't want movies sitting on people's hard drives for too long.
"Their worry is that this would discourage people from picking up the DVD at Wal-Mart," McQuivey said. "The DVD market is $23 billion a year, twice as big as the annual box office revenue. The studios don't want to mess with that if they can help it. At least for now."
- prev
- 1
- next





