IP Crime Annual Report (2015-2016)
|IP Crime Annual Report (2015-2016)|
|Title:||IP Crime Annual Report (2015-2016)|
|Author(s):||IP Crime Group|
|Citation:||IP Crime Group (2016) IP Crime Annual Report (2015-2016)|
|Key Related Studies:|
|Linked by:||IP Crime Annual Report (2016-2017), IP Crime Annual Report (2017-2018)|
|About the Data|
|Data Description:||The report consists of an amalgamation of different reports and information from various organisations, including law enforcement agencies (trading standards, police) and industry bodies (e.g. BPI)|
|Data Type:||Primary and Secondary data|
|Secondary Data Sources:|
|Data Collection Methods:|
|Data Analysis Methods:|
|Cross Country Study?:||No|
|Government or policy study?:||Yes|
|Time Period(s) of Collection:||
“The latest IP crime report 2015 to 2016 was published on 28 September 2016. The report highlights current and emerging threats surrounding counterfeiting and piracy, including those conducted via the internet. The report also contains statistical data and enforcement activities from UK law enforcement agencies such as trading standards, police, border force and a number of industry bodies.”
Main Results of the Study
• The IPO reports that infringement levels remain steady, with 56% of consumers having paid for some content, whilst 44% consumed for free. with music and film infringement having comparative higher levels of infringement from other sectors (26% and 25% of consumers having consumed illegally). It is estimated that 96 million music tracks alone were accessed illegally between March-May 2015, though this in fact represents a drop from a peak figure of 157 million between the same time period in 2013. Illegal TV programme downloads over the same period reveals a 33% increase (from 12 million to 16 million). By contrast, the Federation Against Software Theft (FAST) reports a drop in consumption of unlicensed software by 22%.
• Reasons given for infringement suggest behaviours are primarily driven by cost-concerns (49%), convenience (43%) and ease of access/immediacy (37%). Correspondingly, there is also a suggestion that licensed streaming services, such as Netflix, have deterred infringement by providing cheap, convenient and quick means of accessing content.
• The Federation Against Copyright Theft (FACT) report increasing concerns regarding internet protocol TV boxes (IPTV), with a third of public complaints concerning this, and taking up 50% of ongoing cases.
• China and Hong Kong continue to be the predominant source of IPR infringing goods, noting in particular that online infringements in China are particularly challenging to tackle due to exhaustive requirements in proving ownership.
Policy Implications as Stated By Author
No policy implications are stated by the authors.