nice comments everyone,and...
I think there are plenty of comments to cover the absuridity of this so called "study", so I'll only add another context.
I would be interested if you took their "magic wish" figures and instead of making them into "we lost this dough for each download", how about calculating how long it would take to actually *listen*/*watch*/*play* all the stuff they claim we have? And what about DVD's of linux etc.., for which peer2peer (e.g. Bitorrent) is by far the most effect way of sharing *data*?
There is *so* much media stuff ( and most of it is toss), that even sampling a very small amount (Radio1, Virgin, Pandora, Hulu, You tube, etc...), takes a large amount of the very finite amount of time we all have. And every year there is more and more to choose from, since by definition , there is also last years as well. So exactly how much is possible to own, and play on any regular basis? Any guesses on saturation point?
It is very clear that the industry large lost the plot, when they ignored the fact the internet was a global tool, and consumers cold see they were being ripped off both in price fixing (usa vs uk - cd 14$ uk atleast 14 quid.), bogus marketing for crap content, reselling mouldy old stuff, the price of media scam (can I turn in my LP's?;-/ ), really pointless and *expensive* control freak DRM , and so on , and so on.... It did not take long for the "world is flat" to become "we will show you what we want from where you sit, so we can charge you more".
The point is, now the horse had bolted they will punish *everyone* until they can collect as much money as they can from *every* consumer willing or not. Notice how quick "unlimited" broadband became a complete joke, and the shallow attempts to prevent posting links to links (e.g. Pirate Bay) being equated with some sort of nuke threat.
OK, I am going to go back to watching my ad-laced online content....