Illegal File-sharing Pilot

Summary of recommendations:
• To ensure the coverage of internet users, both high and low frequency users, the methodology of combining both face to face and online data collection is the best approach.
• To weigh the tracker data, frequency of internet use and demographics should be used. In the overall data set the frequency of internet users – their likelihood of sharing files and downloading – are to be weighted correctly. From screening the questions for the face to face part of the tracker, the profile of internet usage can be taken.
• It is to be noted that when compared to the admitted levels of file-sharing and illegal downloading, the levels of implied illegal activity will be more accurate. In the pilot, the questions used as to which types of website is visited – commercial, peer to peer or social networking – can be considered as the best way of obtaining accurate information. Anyway, this question needs to be more specific with regard to the downloaded item – video games, music, software, film etc – rather than asking a general question. By asking specific question, it is possible to assess illegal activity in each category. The types of files downloaded and shared could also be included in the pilot questions.
• It was recommended that though the aim of the tracker is to measure illegal file sharing, the questions in this regard are to be camouflaged in such a way that the aim of the tracker is not disclosed. It is possible to disguise the questions in the pilot as the pilot is providing for many things and the questionnaire is only for 5 to 7 minutes.
• It was recommended that the tracker should contain more general questions regarding internet usage, types of websites visited etc. The general point is that consumers may give a more honest response to the use of websites of different types in each category. At the same time questions regarding the illegal activity may not yield an honest response as the downloaders won’t admit it. One of the options in the tracker is that the questionnaire must be a longer one. The questionnaire should ask the consumers about the websites they visited last week and they should also be asked to nominate at least 10 websites they visited in the last week. This question should appear in the early part of the questionnaire, among the other questions regarding the general internet use.

Another alternative tracker worth trying is that, for key questions, use the consumer omnibus surveys and to collect detailed data, use an ad hoc survey parallel to the omnibus survey. The use of omnibus survey will help to camouflage the focus of the questions and it is also necessary to enlarge the omnibus questions, once the key questions are finalized.

It is also recommended to evaluate the commercial web tracking monitors like UKOM in order to assess whether it is possible to measure on a regular basis the downloads from individual peer-to peer sites and also the aggregate data from the top sites.

It is recommended that if the regulator wants to get a complete picture of the illegal file sharing then the survey should include children aged 12 – 15. Two things are to be noted here, the selection of the minimum age as 12 is arbitrary since file sharing and downloading may be there even among younger children. Secondly, if you want to conduct a survey among children, there is every possibility to increase disproportionate cost as these surveys have to be ad hoc surveys.