A few days back, we highlighted a new study out of France that found piracy actually going up after the country passed a strict Internet disconnection law. Though the law won't be implemented until later in the year, les internautes are already moving away from P2P networks; the thing is, even more of them are moving to other forms of piracy not dealt with by the new law, like online streaming and one-click downloads.

The recording industry's international trade group, IFPI, didn't think much of this research from the University of Rennes. IFPI CEO John Kennedy blasted the study: "It is nonsense to suggest that a study conducted before the [new] HADOPI authority has sent a letter to a single infringing user is somehow a definitive judgment on the success or otherwise of France's digital piracy laws."

Data source: M@rsouin; CREM; Universite de Rennes 1

Neither the original research paper nor our article claimed that this was "somehow a definitive judgment." Quite the opposite; the second-to-last sentence of the research paper (which we're sure that someone of Kennedy's stature would have actually read before blasting in public... right?) says clearly, "Cette évaluation est bien évidemment partielle et devra être renouvelée dans quelques mois pour tenir compte des effets des premiers courriels d’avertissements." ("This study is quite obviously limited and should be repeated in several months in order to measure the effects of the first warning letters.")

This is about as far from "definitive judgment" as one can get; think of it more like a preliminary data point that suggests something intriguing for future research.

IFPI does have a few more substantive concerns about the piece: "The survey was only based on a sample of 2,000 people from Brittany, not a nationally representative cross-section of online users, and its conclusions are only based on self-reported behaviour of illegal activities. It is not a meaningful study of current or future online behaviour in France."

This is, at least, more accurate. The sample size was indeed 2,000 people, and the sample was limited to Brittany (where Rennes is located); it is entirely possible that the good citizens of Paris and Aix-en-Provence are packing up their P2P practices in huge numbers and staying away from the darker Internet streaming destinations.

But the suggestion that it was "only" based on a sample of 2,000 people suggests doubt where none should exist. A 2,000-person sample could actually be used quite accurately to measure the entire US population on an issue; when limited to Brittany, 2,000 people is a large sample. Of course, this only helps if the sample was "representative." According to the report, the survey was "effectuée par téléphone entre le 16 novembre et le 23 décembre 2009 auprès de 2,000 individus représentatifs de la population de la Région Bretagne" ("done by telephone between November 16 and December 23 2009 to 2,000 individuals representative of the population of the Brittany region").

On the issue of self-reporting bias, it's quite true that asking people about illegal or socially undesirable behavior may result in underreporting. But the basic result of this survey was that people were reporting more total piratical activity—not a typical self-reporting bias issue. In fact, piracy rates are likely to be higher than reported. However, it's certainly true that self-reporting is not the best way to deal with this issue, and we look forward to future research into the new law's effects on France—exactly what the original paper suggested.

Certainly, these kinds of results would (if true) be unsettling for IFPI and for the movie industry. Both have staked huge amounts of effort and capital on "three strikes" laws around the world; if those laws only push people to other forms of piracy, and piracy that is harder for third parties to detect, Internet disconnection might not be the panacea that has been claimed.