A friend in China is taking the GMAT, and was confused about a question, and asked me to word it differently for her. When she typed out the "critical reasoning" example (Given A and B, deduce which of the following is true,) it was something to the effect of:
"The computer industry's estimate that it loses millions of dollars when users illegally copy programs without paying for them is greatly exaggerated. Most of the illegal copying is done by people with no serious interest in the programs. Thus, the loss to the industry is quite small, because__________"
The answer being "most people who illegally copy programs would not purchase them even if purchasing them were the only way to obtain them."
Kinda blew my mind that this was on a test. I mean, sure, it's true, but still.
Hey, this coin has two sides.
Most of the illegal copying is done by people with no serious interest in the programs. Most people who illegally copy programs would not purchase them, when it means for considerable sum of money and lengthy sign-up and payment process. Therefore, if there is a way to sell programs with easy price tag and via authomatic painless process, it's possible to sell N times as much.
Where N is the "old" ratio between piracy and purchases.
When I started saying it, I was thinking more in terms of technological control.
Although (extra-)legal developments in the U.S. are making the legal aspects in some ways more similar. Increasingly, "everything" is illegal (or, at least, verboten), depending upon the government's interest in pursuing/prosecuting/punishing a particular case -- or not.
(I know the two environments aren't at anything like parity, but the trends worry me.)
