Presentation given by Pauline Blassel, research director of HADOPI, at Copyright and Technology London 2013, October 17, 2013.

1. Copyright and Technology Conference
Observation protocol & impact analysis
London – October 2013

2. Hadopi’s missions
An independent public authority :
Protecting works from copyright infringements (graduated
response) ;
Encouraging the development of online legal offers ;
Regulating the use of technical protection measures ;
Observing legal and illegal consumption and use of cultural
contents on the Internet.
 Raising awareness on copyright and creation issues (ex:
educational
workshops
towards
the
educative
community)
23/10/2013 - 2

3. The graduated response
procedure in a nutshell
An awareness-raising mechanism, designed to convert
illicit practices into legal consumption
Impose penalties only as a last resort
23/10/2013 - 3

4. The current debates in France regarding
our missions and institution
The “Lescure report” (on France’s cultural
policies to the digital age)
The
suppression
of
the
one-month
suspension of internet access additional
penalty
A recent attempt to transfer the institution’s
missions via an act on public broadcasters
A bill to be examined in 2014
23/10/2013 - 4
23/10/2013 - 4

5. Observation protocol

6. Observing legal and illegal uses on the
Internet
Lack of data
Technical & legal constraints
Definition of a work schedule (contents, circulation,
user)
Gathering :
Qualitative methodologies
Quantitative methodologies
Computer science research
23/10/2013 - 6

7. Application case : YouTube status
Qualitative methodologies « Digital Natives »
Various perception of illegality depending on the practice
« Well you know, I mean I don’t know, I think it is illegal sometimes on
YouTube as well. I can listen to unlimited music for free » (22-24)
« When you get full recent movies, you can wonder whether it is
actually legal » (19-21)
23/10/2013 - 7

8. Application case : YouTube status
Computer science research
« Streaming platforms contents taxonomy »
Selected on the basis of their popularity in France (YouTube and
Dailymotion)
Representative sample (3000 videos) obtained by random walk
Disclaimers
Suggested and public videos
No localisation
Manual categorization of the content
23/10/2013 - 8

9. Application case : YouTube status
Computer science research
« Streaming platforms contents taxonomy »
Music videos are by far
the most popular. 25% of
them are « official ».
Next in popularity come
the movies (full or
organized in sequences)
(2,6%)
23/10/2013 - 9

10. Application case : YouTube status
Quantitative methodologies
Consumption diaries
On average, music consumers have listened to 17.4 titles on streaming websites
and downloaded 6.4 titles.
Weekly individual average consumption for each cultural good, in France
(nombre de biens culturels
sur une semaine)
Consommateurs**
(53761)
17,1 (morceaux de
musique/vidéo clips)
Streaming
2,3
(3171)
2,8
(6134)
2,3
(1242)
-
**Consommateurs de biens culturels de la catégorie concernée au moins une fois au cours de la semaine de référence
23/10/2013 - 10

11. Application case : YouTube status
Quantitative methodologies
Consumption diaries
YouTube is widely used among respondents to access digital cultural contents :
Streaming
Download
Music
54%
25%
Movies
18%
3%
TV shows
7%
2%
Books
2%
1%
54% of the respondents who stream music are using
music in streaming.
to access
23/10/2013 - 11

12. Impact analysis

13. Bias
Representativeness and significance
 The use of samples
 For the results to be relevant, the sample used
must satisfy two requisites:
To be representative of the “system” studied
To be “large enough” (n) to be significant
( 2 × 𝑒𝑟𝑓 −1 (1 − 𝑒))2 × 𝑝(1 − 𝑝)
𝑛=
𝑒2
23/10/2013 - 13

14. Bias
Correlation and causality
Correlation between X and Y is computed as follows:
𝐶𝑜𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛(𝑋, 𝑌) =
𝑥− 𝑥
𝑥− 𝑥
2
𝑦− 𝑦
𝑦− 𝑦
2
Correlation means that X and Y evolve:
in the same way (if the correlation is positive)
or in the inverse way (if the correlation is negative)
in different ways (if correlation is near to zero)
Possibilities
X causes Y
Y causes X
Y causes X and X causes Y
A third factor causes X and Y
Coincidence
23/10/2013 - 14

15. Correlation and causality
• Those two variables are
clearly correlated
• But surely no cause to
effect link between them
4 P2P apps (non BT) Audience UV
4 P2P apps (non BT)
Australian coal metric ton price
Correlation = 0.763
Source : comScore MMX, France, sample of French internet users aged 6+, oct. 2012 – sept. 2013. P2P apps category as
custom-defined by Hadopi (BearShare (App), Shareaza (App), eMule (App), Ares Galaxy - P2P (App)).
Source : http://www.indexmundi.com
23/10/2013 - 15

16. Misinterpretation and
extrapolation
Attributing more sense to a measure than it actually has.
Can’t be mathematically modeled.
Example on one Torrent directory portal : no relation proven between
global piracy and sites UV audience
Pages Viewed (MM)
Unique Visitors (M)
3 600
240
3 400
220
3 200
200
3 000
180
2 800
160
2 600
140
2 400
120
2 200
100
Source : comScore MMX, France, sample of French internet users aged 6+, oct. 2012 – sept. 2013 One Torrent
Directory portal.
23/10/2013 - 16
23/10/2013 - 16

17. Bias
Misinterpretation and extrapolation
26 DDL platforms
Total pages viewed
With or without Mega
« possible curiosity effect »
Summer period
« Possible circumstances effect »
Source : comScore MMX, France, sample of French internet users aged 6+, june 2012 – august. 2013 DDL plateforms category as
custom-defined by Hadopi, including : 1FICHIER.COM, UPLOADED.NET, TURBOBIT.NET, PUTLOCKER.COM,RAPIDGATOR.NET,
UPTOBOX.COM, MEDIAFIRE.COM, MEGA.CO.NZ, UPLOADING.COM, HOTFILE.COM, MEGASHARES.COM, etc.
23/10/2013 - 17

18. Impact analysis - Big picture
Decline in P2P use in France after Hadopi implementation
according to IFPI’s data
7 000
000 users
6 500
6 000
5 500
Deeper observations are needed to
analyze this recent trend.
5 000
4 500
4 000
3 500
According to these IFPI’s data, with no comments on the methodology – considering
we are talking about gathered data – we observe 3 trends, the less significative of
which needs a deeper analysis :
Strong decrease the first year
Inflexion in September 2011
Remains limited
Source : IFPI (Nielsen Data)
23/10/2013 - 18

19. Impact analysis – Focus 2012-2013
Torrent & other P2P Apps (Unduplicated UV)
8 200
000
8 000
7 800
7 600
4 BT apps
7 400
1 UV = the app starts
running at least once
(including passive
uses) for an individual
in a month.
7 200
P2P apps audience since July
2012
4 600
4 400
000
4 200
4 000
3 800
3 600
4 P2P apps
3 400
3 200
Source : comScore MMX, France, sample of French internet users aged 6+, juil. 2012 – sept. 2013 BT apps (uTorrent (App),
Azureus (App), BitComet (App), BitTorrent(App)) and P2P apps (BearShare (App), Shareaza (App), eMule (App), Ares Galaxy P2P (App)) categories as custom-defined by Hadopi
23/10/2013 - 19

20. Impact analysis – Focus 2012-2013
Torrent directory portal (UV) (1/3)
5 600
5 400
000
5 200
5 000
What could this trend observed
specifically on torrent directory
portals mean ?
4 800
4 600
4 400
More details are needed
for a straight conclusion
Unduplicated UV
8 Torrent directory portals
4 200
It shows a raise in the number of unique visitors on torrent directory portals
But doesn’t inform on their uses when visiting those portals (quitting or
downloading)
Considering the biases listed, it does need more details to conclude (Case by
case basis and pages viewed).
Source : comScore MMX, France, sample of French Internet users aged 6+, juil. 2012 – sept. 2013 Torrent directory portal
category as custom-defined by Hadopi (T411.me, CPasBien.com, TorrentFrancais.com, SmarTorrent.com, IsoHunt.com,
OmgTorrent.Com, TorrentReactor.net, Mininova.org)
23/10/2013 - 20

21. Impact analysis – Focus 2012-2013
Torrent directory portal (ADV) (2/3)
600
500
Average Daily Visitors
Case by case basis
000
400
300
200
100
0
Actually :
On a case by case basis (on the 8 major torrent directory portals)
the number of average daily visitors remains pretty stable
Source : comScore MMX, France, sample of French internet users aged 6+, june 2012– sept. 2013 Torrent directory portal
category as custom-defined by Hadopi
23/10/2013 - 21

22. Impact analysis – Focus 2012-2013
Torrent directory portal - Pages viewed (3/3)
400
350
000
300
250
200
150
100
50
Pages viewed
8 Torrent directory portals
Global piracy may be
different from UV audience
0
Moreover, the number of pages viewed remains stable as well
Pages viewed could be the most relevant indicator about a volume
of piracy. A visitor is not a downloader, and one visit can find
various explanations.
It highlights the need of relevant data to analyze piracy and
the impact of public policies
Source : comScore MMX, France, sample of French internet users aged 6+, june 2012– sept. 2013 Torrent directory portal category as custom23/10/2013 - 22
defined by Hadopi (T411.me, CPasBien.com, TorrentFrancais.com, SmarTorrent.com, IsoHunt.com, OmgTorrent.Com, TorrentReactor.net,
Mininova.org)
23/10/2013 - 22

23. Stability is not enough
Hadopi’s current projects
Meanwhile, in addition to the observation task, the institution as a
whole is working on « Outside the box » possibilities :
Strengthening the fight against commercial counterfeiting ?
 illegal streaming and direct download websites (& Bit Torrent sharing
protocol)
 websites themselves
 technical and financial intermediaries
Assessing the ability to model a system of proportional
remuneration of sharing ?
Websites generating incomes with the content shared (not end
consumers)
 Different from a « voluntary collective licensing » or a « global license » (a
proportional amount versus a flat-fee)
 In partnership with a French public research body fully dedicated to
computational sciences (INRIA)
 Need to address technical, financial and legal issues.

23/10/2013 - 23