Category: Piracy

Abstract

Piracy is one of the biggest threats that is currently faced by the business in this digital era where everything is available online. It is not very hard for anyone to get almost anything as everything is very easily accessible. In this time of digital world, businesses are losing billions of dollars due to piracy only and with each year passing, losses are increasing with increase in piracy. Due to piracy, not only businesses are facing huge losses but end consumers too as forging and counterfeiting any product is very easy, most consumers are getting fake and substandard products even after paying for the original product as it is very hard for a normal to figure out the difference between real and fake. If someone uses a pirated software, that person can face several legal issues along with high risks of exposing their system to multiple malwares and viruses. Piracy is a major threat to software, music, book, and film industry. The significance of this research report is to contribute in assessing how piracy effects business profitability and to what extent.

Keywords: piracy, business profitability, substandard, counterfeiting, forgery

Implications of Piracy on Business Profitability

Piracy has been a serious threat to businesses since many years. In old days, pirates used to loot and steal from ships while they were delivering the products via sea because it was and still is one among the most effective ways to move their products. But during this era of digitalization, piracy via sea is greatly reduced due to strict national and international laws but businesses are losing millions and billions of dollars to digital piracy in modern world. during this time, people are making and using illegal, fake, substandard and non-licensed products. Piracy is specifically an enormous threat to software and entertainment industry. most the softwares are available on the net, some are free to use and a few are paid there are many websites that gives people with the pirated version of these paid softwares and people think it is their right to use those softwares without paying for them simply because they will find a pirated version of that software online. What those people fail to grasp is that irrespective of how good that pirated software is, it is still illegal to use someone else’s property without their consent. this is not very different from stealing someone’s car because like those things, this too belong to somebody else. According to Business Software Alliance (BSA), it had been reported that in 2009, over four out of 10 software programs installed on personal computers around the world were pirated. Most of this unauthorized software use occurs in otherwise legal businesses which will, for instance, buy licenses to put in a program on 10 PCs on the other hand install it on 100 or 1,000. In other cases, software piracy involves more overt criminal enterprises selling counterfeit copies of software programs at cut-rate prices, online or offline. In entertainment industry, piracy is greatly reducing revenue and profits of individuals and companies who are part of industry. According to a report in 2017, in US alone, piracy reduced almost 11% – 24% of the overall revenue of this industry. ‘Digital video piracy leads to significant losses to the US economy, harming businesses ranging from content production firms to the innovative technology companies that are driving the digital distribution revolution,’ David Hirschmann, CEO of GIPC, said in the study. ‘While there is no single solution, global collaboration among industries and governments to educate consumers of the dangers of piracy, coupled with the expansion of legal options in cases of infringement, is necessary to curb these negative effects.’ The idea that piracy may benefit producers in certain situations has been explored extensively within the theoretical literature. But the alternate concept that piracy may harm consumers, does not seem to receive much public attention. for instance, in a study of the public’s attitude toward piracy, Simone Aliprandi surveyed 1,300 Italian Internet users. A majority agreed that the phenomenon of online piracy damages the publishers of media content, though they were more divided over whether it harms the creators of the content.4 But in the best translation of the Italian study that could be found, the respondents overwhelmingly failed to agree that piracy causes damage to the “socioeconomic fabric.” Because of piracy, sales of DVD’s and CD’s was reduced greatly as people preferred to watch movies and listen to music illegally as opposed to paying for them to support their creator. Piracy does not only effects business but also the economy of the countries where those businesses and companies are located. Companies pay their taxes as per their revenues generated through their sales, if they are losing money to piracy, they are getting less sales which means they are paying less taxes. Companies use their revenues to create and innovate different products. If they are getting less revenue, they are forced to create less and innovate less. Piracy also effects the pricing of the products as companies are losing revenue to pirates, they need to increase the price of their product to match their expenses and get profit. The significance of this research report is to contribute in assessing how piracy effects business profitability and to what extent.

Literature Review

In the 6th Century AD when St Columba made an illegal copy of St. Jerome’s Psalter, by hand, he was caught and a judgement was passed against him by King Diarmait of Ireland. ‘To every cow her calf,’ reasoned the king during this early copyright case, ‘and to every book its son-book. Therefore, the copy you made, O Colum Cille [Columba], belongs to Finnian.’ it has been 1,500 years since but even today piracy is flourishing. Readers have moved from manuscripts to e-books but the pirates have kept up, they now make pirated e-books as well, despite various piracy laws in place. In 2008, the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) reported that its six major member companies lost US$6.1 billion to piracy. A 2009 Los Angeles Daily newspaper article then cited a loss figure of ‘roughly $20 billion a year’ for Hollywood studios. As per a 2013 Wall Street Journal article, industry estimates within the United States range between $6.1B to $18.5B per annum. In an early May 2014 Guardian article, an annual loss figure of US$20.5 billion was cited for the film industry. Psion Software claimed in 1983 that software piracy cost it £2.9 million a year, 30% of its revenue. U.S. government was also reported to suffer from music piracy, losing $422 million in revenue. Piracy leads to major losses of revenue to the industry which (for business applications) the SIIA has estimated at around $12.2 billion worldwide (1999 Data). With regard to the gaming industry ‘up to 109,000 jobs, $4.5 billion in wages and $1 billion in tax revenues’ were estimated to be lost during 1999. Global digital piracy costs the US film and television industry a minimum of an estimated $29.2 billion and the maximum as $71 billion annually, As per a new study from the US Chamber of Commerce’s Global Innovation Policy Centre on Tuesday. That represents a revenue reduction of 11% to 24%. The study also says 230,000 to 560,000 jobs were lost due to piracy, which in turn resulted within the US GDP taking a hit of $47.5 billion to the maximum as $115.3 billion in 2017. On July 26, 2014, a DVD quality copy of The Expendables 3 was leaked online, three weeks before its scheduled release. the best estimates are that it had been downloaded over 2.1 million times, which threatened to take a hefty bite out of the profits of the film. This left Lionsgate scrambling to induce a preliminary injunction against various BitTorrent sites. With the advent of Napster in June of 1999, the fortunes of the music industry have plummeted. In 1995 and 1996, global music sales were near to 40 billion dollars annually. Last year, global music sales limped in at 15 billion, an overall decrease of 62%. The obvious reason would be that this is all because of piracy. Certainly, that’s what the Recording Industry Association of America will tell you, and points study from the Institute for Policy Innovation. As per this somewhat dated study (2007), as a consequence of worldwide and U.S.-based piracy of sound recordings, the U.S. economy loses $12.5 billion in total output annually. Output includes revenue and related measures of economic performance. As a results of sound recording piracy, the U.S. economy loses 71,060 jobs. Of this amount, 26,860 jobs would have been added within the audio recording industry or in downstream retail industries, while 44,200 jobs would have been added in other U.S. industries. As a result of sound recording piracy, U.S. workers lose $2.7 billion in earnings annually. Of this total, $1.1 billion would have been earned by workers within the sound recording industry or in downstream retail industries, while $1.6 billion would have been earned by workers in other U.S. industries. In Pakistan, Oil and lubricants industry leads to losses worth Rs1600 million for the government, cigarette companies were estimated at approximately Rs500 million, books and publishing industry at Rs40 million. 60 per cent of the consumer goods are sub-standard and Pakistan stands amongst the top 13 countries which sell counterfeit medicines. Every year, companies and businesses are losing a great deal of their profit as a result of piracy but piracy does not only effect the companies but end consumers too. Pirated softwares, movies and music also are an enormous threat to consumers as those products comes without any kind of warranty and guarantees. These pirated versions expose their systems to malwares and viruses. It is also a significant security risk to people as most of these softwares gather user’s personal data. A company that made that product is accountable for their data on condition that the user is using that software legally and is not accountable for pirated versions. The data that has been gathered by those pirated softwares can be used by those people that made that pirated versions and therefore the company would not be answerable for misuse of that data. This exposes people to multiple threats beside legal threats that comes from using pirated softwares.

Methodology

The research done to complete this article is the secondary research which mainly includes newspapers, surveys, magazines, research papers, articles, news reports and academic journals. The main source of data related to software piracy are the BSA reports, which is an international organization that represents several of the major software companies worldwide. To estimate the impact of piracy on entertainment industry data on sales of individual products, movies, music and measures of piracy levels for those movies and music.

Analysis.

From this research, it has been analyzed that;

• Impact of piracy on IT industry: As per the research conducted and after careful review of stats from IT industry, companies are losing billions of dollars because of piracy. Loss because of piracy is not only monetary but it harms the end consumers too. It exposes people to risk of getting their personal data leaked and getting their systems infected by multiple malwares. Although no direct relation between piracy and innovation/creativity is found but it is safe to say that due to huge losses faced by businesses, it lowers the morale and creativity of those companies. They will lack incentive as they have less money to invest in new projects. Piracy also causes companies to increase their prices for those consumers who are buying the product legally to compensate the losses they have to face because of piracy.
• Impact of piracy on music industry: By this research, it has been analyzed that piracy is also a major threat to music industry. Music producing companies have to post all their new releases and projects online in order to earn from it. Due to piracy, artists and producers lose a lot of revenue. This directly effects them as their main source of revenue is the main target of pirates.
• Impact of piracy on Motion Pictures: From the research that was conducted it is found that every year, millions of dollars are lost to piracy in illegal downloads of movies. This directly effects the creativity in movies and quality of them as the producers are not getting the profit that they expect to get. Due to this, movies that are produced by small production companies are of very low quality and lack innovation.

Conclusion.

As it is discussed in this report, piracy is a huge threat to the businesses and to everyone who uses that product. Due to piracy, consumers are getting substandard products and the businesses are losing millions and billions of dollars. Piracy is also a huge cause behind lack of innovation in products due to the losses they have to face because of it. Piracy also makes businesses to increase their prices to cater to their losses. Because of this reasons, most artists get their careers ended before they even start as they lose a lot of revenue due to illegal download of their movies and music. If this was not the case, they would be getting more profits which can help them grow and work on new projects.

Recommendations.

1. Piracy in entertainment industry, in my opinion, can be reduced to a minimum if not end it completely if international law making community makes laws that helps ban all the torrent websites and spread awareness on the consequences of piracy on businesses and economy.
2. Laws that are currently in place should be made stricter and should be implemented so that people will think twice before doing piracy.
3. Software companies should make keys that can be used only once to activate that product and should be unique for everyone.
4. Piracy in music and film industry can only be stopped by educating people the risks of piracy from a very young age so when they grow up, they know this is something that is harmful to them and to those who makes those products.
5. Educational institutes should only use either genuine product or better yet, a software that is free and should encourage their students to do the same. By doing this, students will know the importance of this.

References

1. NaBai, J., and J. Waldfogel. 2012. “Movie Piracy and Sales Displacement in Two Samples of Chinese Consumers.” Information Economics and Policy
2. Erchart, Tae Angela, 2019. The Impact of Piracy on Business Profitability
3. Danaher, B., S. Dhanasobhon, M. D. Smith, and R. Telang. 2010. “Converting Pirates without Cannibalizing Purchasers: The Impact of Digital Distribution on Physical Sales and Internet Piracy.” Marketing Science
4. Danaher, B., M. D. Smith, R. Telang, and S. Chen. Forthcoming. “The Effect of Graduated Response Anti- Piracy Laws on Music Sales: Evidence from an Event Study in France.” Journal of Industrial Economics.
5. Smith, M. D., and E. Brynjolfsson. 2001. “Customer Decision Making at an Internet Shopbot: Brand Still Matters.” Journal of Industrial Economics
6. Brett, D., M. D. Smith and R. Telang. 2014. “Piracy and Copyright Enforcement Mechanisms” Journal of Industrial Economics
7. De Vany AS, Walls W. D., 2007. Estimating the effects of movie piracy on box-office revenue. Rev. Indust. Organ.
8. Ma, Liye., Alan L. M., P. V. Singh. and M. D. Smith. 2014. “An Empirical Analysis of the Impact of Pre-Release Movie Piracy on Box Office Revenue”
9. Abdurab, A. 2018. “Pakistan is a piracy heavy country, is that so bad?”
10. https://www.bsa.org/files/reports/piracyimpactstudy2010.pdf
11. https://www.bsa.org/reports/software-piracy-on-the-internet-a-threat-to-your-security
12. https://www.bsa.org/files/reports/Global_Piracy_Study_2002.pdf
13. Fernandez, R. N., F. G. Ribeiro and Jean M. D. Ponte Duarte., 2018. “Effects of Software Piracy on Economic Growth”
14. https://www.cnet.com/news/digital-video-piracy-costs-the-movie-and-tv-industry-at-least-29-billion-study-says/
15. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/definition/piracy
16. http://copyright.nova.edu/copyright-piracy-entertainment-industries/
17. Ali. Ammad. 2018. “The pirates of Pakistan”

The internet, informally known as the net, is a global network of computers and other electronic devices used to access information, communicate with anyone in the world, and do much more. The internet has revolutionized the entire world. From the way we think, conduct day-to-day activities, and communicate, to how we entertain ourselves and even shopping, banking, and personal relationships are now governed by the internet.

The internet has become an integral part of our lives, thanks to its easy availability and accessibility. Not many years back, the internet was available in India at certain designated places (also known as cyber cafes) and was not only erratic but also expensive. Over the past few years, with the introduction of reasonably priced smartphones, tablets, and laptops along with affordable plans by service providers, the internet has percolated to more or less every household as explained in the table below: [image: cid:image002.png@01D6011C.36858380]

1. Source: https://dot.gov.in/reportsstatistics/telecom-statistics-india-2019

However, convenience comes at a cost! One of the unintended consequences of the internet has been its misuse for illegal activities. The ease of information has resulted in crimes being committed both offline and online. One such crime is online piracy.

Online Piracy and its impact

Online piracy is the downloading or distributing of copyrighted content, such as movies or music, digitally without permission from the owner. In this technology driven era, very few of us can escape from online piracy. Intentionally or unintentionally, most of us aid the online piracy market in one way or the other. It is possibly the most committed crime today because most of us do not view it as a problem.

Downloading/streaming/hosting or even viewing copyrighted content without the permission from the owner is no less than crimes committed offline such as stealing, trespassing or committing breach of trust. The increase in instances of online piracy is directly proportional to the increase in the number of internet users. While most of us are aware of crimes committed offline, lack of knowledge and ignorance is the root cause of online piracy.

In 2018, there were over 190 billion visits to pirate sites, with India taking the third position.[footnoteRef:1] Visits per country are represented in the graph below: [1: https://dataprot.net/statistics/piracy-statistics/ Source: https://dataprot.net/statistics/piracy-statistics/

Online piracy purports to be a victimless crime as we do not face any repercussion or witness the harm being inflicted by downloading such pirated content. In reality, piracy not only effects the right holder but also every single person directly or indirectly and the economy at large. A lot of skill, labour and judgment is involved in creating a work and when the same is pirated and made illegally available to public neither can the right holder monetize his investment nor does it assist the economy in any manner. According to an industry study, piracy causes the Indian film industry alone an annual financial loss of around US$ 1 billion along with 600,000 jobs.[footnoteRef:2] [2: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-981-13-8102-7_8]

Given the grave impact digital piracy has on the interests and rights of the stakeholder, it is only justified to deal with digital crimes as any other crime taking place in the physical world.

Dynamic Injunction

In November 2019, the Walt Disney Company entered the world of streaming by launching their own platform for providing original as well as critically acclaimed and commercially successful shows and movies by the biggest mass media and entertainment conglomerate in the world. One of the biggest successes that came early on after the launch of Disney’s streaming platform was a spin-off of the Star Wars Saga, called The Mandalorian. The show gained huge popularity and media buzz within hours of its release on the streaming platform due to the presence of a popular character “Baby Yoda” amongst the fans of the show. However, with the success of the show, piracy caught speed and within a mere span of two months of release, The Mandalorian became one of the most pirated show of 2019.

This is an example that technology is advancing at a fast pace and with technology, is piracy. Thus, it is imperative to have laws and regulations to keep pace with the new forms of piracy resulting from the advancing technology.

For quite some time now, mass media conglomerates and rights owners have continuously tried and failed to stop the rise of piracy and distribution of pirated content around the world. Website blocking has emerged as one of the most successful, cost effective and proportionate means to address this issue. However, one of the biggest problems faced was to ensure a continuous implementation of the website blocking orders orders secured against the online piracy websites. As soon as one website was taken down by the operators after securing injunction from the Courts, multiple mirror websites would emerge containing the same infringing content.

Thus, merely granting injunction against a particular domain name or website shall not serve the purpose since as soon as the injunction is granted there exists a likelihood that the infringer commences operating under a different domain name. In order to ensure the effectiveness of the injunction, it became pertinent to come up with a remedy that supplements the main injunction. Hence, dynamic injunctions were introduced which obliterates the need to report each and every instance of injunction and is limited to such mirror websites. Comment by Jessica Kaur Sahni: Sir, should it be infringement instead of injunction?

Tabulated below is a bird’s eye view on the regulations/ legislations applicable for website blocking in various countries:

1. Country
2. Act/ Statute
3. Relief

• Australia
• Section 115A of the Copyright Act

Allows rightsholders to apply to the Federal Court for an injunction directing ISPs to block access to websites that infringe copyright content.

• Singapore
• Copyright Act, Section 193A, DDA, DDB, and DDC

Singapore amended its Copyright Act to enable Courts to make an order that would require ISPs whose services have been or are being used to access an online location to infringe copyright of rightholders, to block access to a “flagrantly infringing online location”; thereby, giving rightholders a more effective tool to disable access to pirate websites Section 193DDA gives the High Court the power to disable access to flagrantly infringing online location.. In a recent judgement in Disney Enterprises, Inc. and others v. M1 Ltd and Ors [footnoteRef:3], the High Court supported the issuing of the dynamic injunction on the basis that it was ‘necessary to ensure that the main injunction operated effectively to reduce further harm to the right holders, especially in light of the ‘ease and speed at which circumventive measures may be taken by owners and operators of the blatantly infringing online locations to evade the main injunction’. The judge noted that a dynamic injunction ‘provides a practical means of ensuring the continued effectiveness of the original injunction since it provides an expedited process for the blocking of additional domain names which resolve to the same infringing websites’. [3: [2018] SGHC 206]

• UK
• Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, Section 97A

Grants power to grant an injunction against a service provider, where that service provider has actual knowledge of another person using their service to infringe copyright.

• France
• Article L.336-2 of the French Intellectual Property Code.

Gives power to a regional first instance criminal Court, to order any measure to prevent an infringement of copyright or related rights against any person that can contribute to remedying the situation, on receiving an application for such order by the holders of the rights in the copyrighted works and subject-matters the USA.

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is a U.S. law against domestic infringement. The DMCA includes two particularly relevant provisions- The Digital Rights Management (DRM) encryption protection provision makes it illegal to remove DRM technology meant to prevent infringers from copying their works. This also prevents legitimate copying by non-infringers. The other important provision in the DMCA is the Notice-and-Take-Down Provision, which allows copyright owners to give notice to a host website and requires the site to take down or block access to the infringing work. These laws strictly prevent most copying of technological works within the United States. Section 512 of the DMCA provides a streamlined method for copyright owners to have infringing material taken down without first having to go to court.[footnoteRef:4] [4: COMBATING MEDIA PIRACY BY FOREIGN ROGUE WEBSITES WITHOUT RATTLING THE INTERNET, 67 Consumer Fin. L.Q. Rep. 420]

Position in India

The High Court of Delhi in its landmark judgment in UTV Software Communication Ltd. vs. 1337X.TO and Ors [CS(COMM) 724/2017] set a precedent by issuing India’s first-ever ‘dynamic injunction’ against multiple websites found to be infringing upon the rights of copyright holders. UTV filed as many as eight lawsuits against various defendants including identifiable websites; unknown parties such as registrants of websites, uploaders, creators of redirect/mirror/alphanumeric websites; ISPs; as well as Government Department/Agency (‘defendant’). The reliefs sought included permanent injunction; order directing ISPs to block access to the websites of the defendant; and order directing Registrar of the defendant-websites to disclose the details of the registrants.

UTV contended that the defendant websites hosted as well as provided access to their copyrighted works, in a manner that infringed their statutory rights under the (Indian) Copyright Act, which was supported by access to samples provided by UTV.

The court made a significant contribution to the copyright infringement jurisprudence by introducing the remedy of ‘dynamic injunction’, whereby right-holders need not go through the ‘cumbersome’ process of identifying and obtaining judicial order in order to issue blocking orders against all infringing ISPs. It was held that UTV is allowed to approach the Joint Registrar of the High Court to have the injunction extended against any similar ‘mirror/redirect/alphanumeric’ website which contains the same content as the original website.

The court stated that one of the key issues around digital piracy is the importance of distinguishing between accidental and intentional piracy. The court summarized that some of the factors to be considered for determining whether the website complained of is a FIOL (Flagrantly Infringing Online Locations)/Rogue Website are:

1. whether the primary purpose of the website is to commit or facilitate copyright infringement;
2. the flagrancy of the infringement, or the flagrancy of the facilitation of the infringement;
3. whether the detail of the registrant is masked and no personal or traceable detail is available either of the Registrant or of the user.
4. whether there is silence or inaction by such website after receipt of take down notices pertaining to copyright infringement.
5. whether the online location makes available or contains directories, indexes or categories of the means to infringe, or facilitate an infringement of, copyright;
6. whether the owner or operator of the online location demonstrates a disregard for copyright generally;
7. whether access to the online location has been disabled by orders from any court of another country or territory on the ground of or related to copyright infringement;
8. whether the website contains guides or instructions to circumvent measures, or any order of any court, that disables access to the website on the ground of or related to copyright infringement; and
9. the volume of traffic at or frequency of access to the website;
10. any other relevant matter.

The court clarified that the aforementioned factors are illustrative and not exhaustive and do not apply to intermediaries as they are governed by the (Indian) Information Technology Act, 2002 having statutory immunity and function in wholly different manner.

The court was also of the opinion that if the test to declare a website as a Rogue Website is that it should contain only illicit or infringing material, then each and every rogue website would add a small percentage of legitimate content and pray that it be not declared an infringing website!

A question that arose for consideration was how courts should deal with ‘hydra headed websites’, which after being blocked, multiply and resurface as alphanumeric or mirror websites. In order to meet the ends of justice and to address the menace of piracy, the court in the exercise of its inherent power under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (‘CPC’) permitted UTV to implead the mirror/redirect/alphanumeric websites under Order 1 Rule 10 as these websites provide access to the same content/websites which were the subject of the main injunction.

The court stated that as per Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC, UTV shall file an affidavit confirming that the newly impleaded website is a mirror/redirect/alphanumeric website with sufficient supporting evidence. Such application shall be listed before the Joint Registrar, who on being satisfied with the material placed on record, shall issue directions to the ISPs to disable access in India to such mirror/redirect/alphanumeric websites.

The Court also offered its suggestion that MEITY/DOT (Ministry of Electronics & Information Technology / Department of Telecommunication) should explore the possibility of framing a policy under which a warning is issued to the viewers of the infringing content, if technologically feasible in the form of e-mails, or pop-ups or such other modes cautioning the viewers to cease viewing/downloading the infringing material.

Conclusion

It would be safe to say that the judgement is ground breaking and is indicative that the judiciary is adept and exploring measures to deal with the new hurdles imposed by technology. In the absence of any prescribed statute, the judgment has laid down the concept of dynamic injunctions in the Indian jurisprudence as an efficient tool to curb online piracy.

The court has laid the foundation for dynamic injunctions to be granted wherein right-holders do not need to go through the ‘cumbersome’ process of judicial order in order to issue blocking orders to ISPs when mirror websites become available.

The court has endeavoured to maintain a balance in approach and policies to avoid unnecessary cost or impact on other party’s rights and interests. Consequently, the onus is put on the right holder to prove to the satisfaction of the court that each website they want to block is primarily facilitating wide spread copyright infringement. Expecting a plaintiff to identify each and every individual infringing URL would not be proportionate or practical as it would require the plaintiff to expend considerable effort and cost in notifying long lists of URLs to ISPs on a daily basis. Having said that, it was noted that while passing a website blocking injunction order, courts would have to consider whether disabling access to the online location is in public interest, its proportionate response and the impact on any person or class of persons likely to be affected by the grant of injunction. The order granted by the Court must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive, but not lead to creating barriers to legitimate trade.

The judgment signifies that combating online piracy is a multi-faceted approach that cannot be solved only by judicial intervention but action by other bodies shall also be required.

As they say, ‘well begun is half done’, dynamic injunctions can be a reasonable and efficient tool in curbing online piracy and encouraging use of copyrighted content through legal means. Its enforceability, however, should be transparent, cautious, efficient, accountable, and cost effective so that misuse and overreach be prevented.

1.0 Introduction or Problem Setting

1.1 Background

Piracy can be traced back since ancient time about 800 BC where attack took place near the Adriatic Sea and the Aegean Sea. Since 20 century piracy became a global problem which occurring in every sea that affecting the security of the entire maritime transportation in the world in various aspects. Maritime crime conducted in gulf of Guinea is rising security threat along the area and making the region current piracy hotspot in the world which need the world attention.

The piracy of Hone of Africa has back history from 1960s where Somalia got her independence from Britain and later passed different period of leadership where on 1969 a coup led by Mohamed Siad Barre who established a dictatorial government. When his regime collapsed in 1991 after being overthrown by the opposing clan then country changed to unstable and the situation quickly devolved into lawlessness and clan warfare which resulted to uncontrollable famines, poverty hence high of Unemployment.

Foreigners ship dumped chemicals and waste product from their industries in the Somali water, for the reasoning of environmental factor those ships were captured by Somali Boys who brought it to the coast who met with head of clan to pay for ransom, they do the same to ship fishing to Somali water. Later became aware that fuel tanker could pays much that fishing ship and hence started to attacking fuel tanker and cargo ship so as to get the means of surviving their lives . The emerging of pirates raise maritime transportation’s cost, cargo lost or delay, political instability due to corruption, problem to safety of vessel and security to passengers and crews while 90% of the world transport are depending from sea traffic, hence shows the necessity to combat piracy.

According to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) under the article 101, only one ship or the occupant of a ship commit an act piracy against another ship or the occupants of the other ships are called the pirates. It is clear in this article that if the crew of the ship or the passenger of the ship takes some kind of action against to control and change the way of their own ship would not be called as pirates it would be an act o “Hijacking”.

UNCLOS provides powers for the universal jurisdiction against the pirates given to all the states to take action against the piracy everywhere in the high seas. It does not matter whether the pirates take action against the ships of a particular state or not and State are allowed to trial those arrested pirates under its local laws and to punish them.

To combat piracy various measures has been conducted to include the use of Army Naval from different Nations to conduct patrol in various area in sea in order to protect the Sea Line of Communication (SLOC) . The use of Armed guard has proved positively to combat piracy since they area in ocean are so large to the extent that the Naval military cannot be able to patrol it all . Through Review conducted; I’m going to find to what extent the piracy affect the maritime transportation and to find out whether the training on pirates and Means of eradicating the poverty to the affected can reduce piracy.

1.2: Statement of Problem

According to data collected by the researchers for 11 years from 2008 up to 2018 the Number of piracy attack in Somali water fluctuate, starting from 19 in 2008, 80 in 2009, 139 in 2010 and maximized in 2011 which was 160 attack. Due to cooperation between different countries the number of attacks drops up to 49 in 2012 and 7, 3 in next two years, whereby in 2015 there was no attack in Somali water. But the problem started again the number of attack was 1, 5, 2 in three consecutive coming years.

Piracy they do not live in water there is an occasional port where the population imposes an unofficial tax on visiting vessels. Chronic Unemployment and poverty in developing countries are the main causes of pirates. The World wide Somalia Students and Professionals (WSSP) planning to recruit an estimated 1,000 Somali volunteers, including professionals such as doctors, lawyers, and scientists to travel to Somalia in order to offer skill-training regarding the effect, general awareness and combating pirates (Jackson H.M, 2012).

This idea of conducting land training was the best option, but no strategy/policy to select the trainees and touch each village, and fine enough there no author suggested training on combating poverty as the means of eradicating the pirates. Local government Authorities/clan chiefs of affected costal countries like Somalia should be evolved to ensure the targeted people are the poor from the villages and the program should be continuous to cover the large number population. Hence this study is going to find out whether the training on pirates and Means of eradicating the poverty to the affected people can be the means of combating pirates to enable facilitating smoothly maritime transportation.

1.3: Significance of the Study

• Important the Study

From the Literature review number of pirate occurred in different area

Who will benefit from the research?

How will they benefit?

Importance of the study when complete

For example:

• Once the study is accomplished, it will be of much value to a number of people:

1. It will help the management and decision makers of the organization to know…….
2. It will help researchers to identify areas for further research
3. The study will enable the researcher to fulfill the requirements for the degree of the masters of…

1.3: General Objectives

To access the impact of Piracy in Maritime Transportation in East Africa, a case study of Tanzania.

1.4: Specific Objectives

1. To access the sources of piracy in East Africa Coast
2. To access the to what extent sea transportation are affected by piracy
3. To access the way forward to eradicate the impact of piracy in maritime transportation.

1.5: Research General Question

What are the impact of Piracy in Maritime Transportation in East Africa and particularly in Tanzania?

1.6: Research Specific Questions

1. What are the sources of piracy in East Africa Coast?
2. To what extent sea transportation are affected by piracy?
3. What are ways forward to eradicate the impact of piracy in maritime transportation?

1.7: Scope, significance, rationale, and/or justification of the study

The following are the significance of the research:

• Source of Piracy in Indian Ocean
• Type of Cargo transported/shipping companies in Tanzania
• How shipping industry affected by piracy in Tanzania
• International policy/law on Piracy
• Policies of Tanzania Government on Combating Piracy

2.0 Literature Review

2.1: Theoretical Part

The International Maritime Bureau (IMB) defines piracy as an act of boarding or attempting to board any ship with the apparent intent to commit theft or any other crime and with the apparent intent or capability to use force towards the act. IMB considered that, the intent, specification, extent and the use of force are principal to be an elements in what constitute piracy and not normally necessarily where or location of occurrence.

According to United Nations Conventions on Laws of the sea “Piracy consists of any of the following acts:

• a. Any illegal acts of violence or detention, or any act with negative effects, committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed:

1. “On the high seas, against another ship or aircraft, or against persons or property on board such ship or aircraft;
2. Against a ship, aircraft, persons, or property in a place outside the jurisdiction of any State.

• b. Any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts making it a pirate ship or aircraft.
• c Any act of inciting or of intentionally facilitating an act described in sub paragraph (a) or (b).”

The Source of piracy in East Africa Coast

Lack of government in Somalia after overthrown of Mohamed Siad Barre regime in 1991 by the opposing clan then country changed to unstable and the situation quickly devolved into lawlessness and clan warfare which resulted to uncontrollable famines, poverty hence high of Unemployment . Ship from developed countries dumped chemicals and waste product and fishing in the Somali water, whereby were captured by Somali Boys who brought it to the coast to pay for ransom to the clan chief, they did the same to ship fishing to Somali water, later started to capture fuel tanker and cargo ship for more payment. Illegal fishing causes instability in Somalia as were poor coastal nations who depend on fishery.

Social acceptance of piracy in costal population is among of the sources of pirates. Pirates are not living in the sea, but their basic need is from the land and there is an occasional port where the population imposes unofficial tax on any visiting ship/vessels. Million of ransoms paid for the demand of the release of captured ship/vessel; this motivates much and accelerates piracy activities. In the Somalia whereby is the source of pirates in East Africa Coast and horn of Africa; there is public acceptance of these activities because the country suffer from economically depressed, these crimes being additional funds into the economy. The majority of the money will go to the bank but many pirates living nearby will spend with local population .

Chronic unemployment in Somalia after undergone long period of clan conflict areas which resulted to hunger, diseases, death and chronic un employment, so some people may only have occasional informal work and there is little or no opportunity in the future, which result to poverty. Hence Somali boys looked forward to find means of combating unemployment in order to reduce the poverty level, the life of a pirate is difficult and often ends in death. Hence poverty caused by chronic unemployment is a significant motivator for pirates

Legal strategies should change often as pirates charges their techniques of hijacking ships, the legal system will eventually develop to the point where international law is able to impose strong sentences on pirates but right now there are many loopholes. The policies have the potential to undo the careful balances between the rights of coastal states and maritime states that have been established under the UNCLOS. The Terrorist and pirates at sea they can find protection under a false flag state where by false flags create safe ground for criminal activity.

The Extent Sea Transportation are Affected by Pirates

• According to IBM annual report 2013, 2014 and 2918 which shows the number of attack in different areas in the world.
• Piracy 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total
• In world 209 410 445 439 297 264 245 246 191 180 201 3127
• Tanzania 14 5 1 2 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 27

Kenya 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 2 2 1 0 10

The way Forward to Eradicate the Piracy

According Menkhaus K. (2009) who suggested different ways forward on stopping the piracy activities; backing up and reinforces the Somalia government will eliminate piracy as a matter of on-shore law enforcement. Everyone agrees that this is the only viable long-term solution to be adopted. Most also concur, however, that it will be a slow, gradual process in a country that has had no functioning central government for many years. This option is seen to be cheap and easier methods of stopping the pirates and will not be as difficult as it sounds as compared to other means. But question to be asked why AU and UN failed to build a strong Government in Somali Land?

To prevent or deter piracy with naval force patrols; this should be policy for every coast State, patrolling the waters. Cargo ships passing through the Gulf of Aden can even avail themselves of naval convoys for some protection. Though patrolling has a minimal effect on reducing pirate in the sea because water environment in the sea are too vast and many cargo sheep. It’s able just a minimal effect different from what has been planned to achieve. There are also continuing complications revolving around the legal privilege of suspects once captured. It is clear that everyone agrees that naval interdiction alone cannot stop Somali piracy, and may not even be able to reduce incidents of piracy.

Arm the cargo ships; the use of private guard on board could better improve the situation, but this would face major resistance from shipping companies, who don’t want to deal with the added security risks, costs, and legal liability that all follow from having armed security on board of the cargo ships. Adding people on board it mean you add cost security risk, paying salary hence insurance costs would escalate considerably if armed guards were placed on ships, which in turn create large cost which might not be affordable

Take the war against pirates on shore; pirate is not living in sea, there some time come to the land for social needs and to employ security measures become easier since the vastness of the area has been reduced much to the ability to be affordable area. Took over the control all the coastal villages in northeastern Somalia, where they generate more pirates and accept visiting of illegal ship

Attack the commanding structure of piracy by going after the financiers, not the pirates. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced U.S. intent to track the flow of the pirate ransoms and freeze the accounts of Somali financiers. The pirates are, as Clinton suggested, funded by powerful financial backers who earn a huge share of the ransoms, and it would be ideal to squeeze them until they cease their involvement to piracy activities. Many Somalis also indirectly or directly see a cut of the ransom money flow through their hands in the residual coastal economy.

Stop paying ransom to the pirates. By preventing pirates from the financial gains accruing from their crime, the criminal behavior will stop. The trouble with this option is that the shipping industry and ships owners want their crew, ships, and cargo returned safely. Shipping companies compelled not to pay ransom would face huge losses and possible complaint. By adopting this measure of combating piracy, much problem could be at first time where pirates still thought of having huge amount of ransoms, but later after having received nothing they will change to other business. That combination of ransom refusal should be conducted parallel with military rescue in order to have an effect. The questions arise who will be willing to expose himself, his/her ship, his/her crews so that others they can benefit forever? It needs courage and strong decision for the purpose of the Nation and the world in general.

Menkhaus K. (2009) ended by suggesting that live with piracy as an unavoidable nuisance. Approaching piracy as a chronic problem to be managed rather than a war to be won is a deeply unsatisfying position, and is easy to attack politically. Most shipping companies prefer to live with the current piracy to reduce the risk of ship being pirated and the ransom fees are manageable.

Abstract

Digital Piracy is steadily growing issue due to the rapid advancement of technology. The Indian film industry is plagued by this issue for many years. This study strives to understand the intention of people who indulge in digital piracy of movies.

1. Introduction

India is the second most populated country in the world with the second largest online market. The advent of digitized products and increase in use of smartphones, tablets, computers etc have also increased the chances of illegal duplication of products such as music, movies, and software. India is country where people consider movies to be a part of their life. So, Indian motion picture is one of the largest movie producers in the world. Most states in India have their own movie industry. So, with the production of this large number movies comes the issue of its illegal duplication or piracy. The Indian film industry has been plagued by piracy for so many years.

2. Background Indian film industry and Digital piracy and Cinema Piracy

2.1 Indian Film Industry and Malyalam Film Industry

The Indian film industry releases more than thousand movies worldwide and is one of the largest entertainment sectors in the world. This industry consists of Bollywood and other regional film industries. It generates annual revenue of more than $2 billion from theatre releases, TV distribution rights, and DVD releases. According to the FICCI-EY report, ‘Re-imagining India’s M&E sector’ Bollywood comprises of 17% of the films made in the country, but it annually contributes almost 40% towards the net box office collections. Approximately 75% of the films released are accounted by the other 29 Film from other Indian languages but they contribute approximately 50% to the annual domestic box office collections.

One major regional Industry in the Indian film industry is the Malayalam film industry. It is film industry based out of the southern state of Kerala. It is considered to be the third largest film industry in the south after the Tamil and Telugu film industry. It is known for its content driven cinema. Within the regional space Malayalam films registered a 38% rise in online transactions the year 2017. According to IMDB report, the top 10 grossing Malayalam films made an average of 31.15crores in revenue for the year 2018.

2.2 Digital Piracy and Piracy in movies

In today’s world, technology has been advancing society and businesses; yet, as it does so, it has also its drawbacks. The increase in speed of internet connection, the increase in high capacity storage, the easy accessibility of peer-peer networks sharing pirated movies on the internet have made it easier for the increasing penetration of piracy in India .Danaher and Smith (2014) in their study done during the shutdown of Megaupload a major peer-peer site noted that consumers tended choose legal channels when the said shutdown took place. Their study was done across countries and it was noted that those countries with more pre-shutdown usage seemed to have a larger increase in digital sale and rentals of movies than countries with less pre-shutdown usage. This in turn gave them the conclusion that illegal file sharing displaces digital movie sales

2.3 Piracy in Indian Film Industry

Indian film industry is a vulnerable victim of piracy. As per a recent survey, India ranks at No. 4 globally for online movie piracy and various reports show that the industry loses at least 10%-30% of its overall revenue to piracy. Nowadays, films are available for download within 24 hours of their release. Even worse, movies are leaked online even before their official theatrical release. Major source of these files are cam-recordings in cinemas (FICCI,2018).

In Kerala in 2012, the Kerala police arrested 1010 people involved in the digital piracy of the movie Bachelor Party. This was the first time in the history of India wherein a large scale arrest was recorded against movie pirates. Inspite of legal actions against piracy of movies its still rampant in Kerala. In recent years many movies were released in the sites on the day of their theatrical release while others come within a few weeks time.

Research Objectives

1. To study the antecedents that affects the behavior of individuals to engage in digital piracy of movies using Theory of Planned Behavior.
2. To determine whether intention to engage in digital piracy leads to actual behavior
3. Theoretical Frame work, Literature Review and hypotheses development

Theory of planned behavior is an expansion of theory of reasoned action, which was made to study and understand behavior in various different situations and contexts (Ajzen, 1991). It proposes that a person’s intention to perform a behavior leads to his actual behavior. It says that these intentions are influenced by their attitude towards a behavior, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control (Ajzen, 1991). In this study self-efficacy is used to measure perceived behavioral control.

(Attitude towards the behavior) (Final Behavior) (Intention) (Subjective Norms) (Perceived Behavioral Control)

Attitude

Attitude is one of the major factors in predicting behavioural intentions (Ajzen, 2002: Cronan & Al-rafee, 2008). Ajzen (1985) define Attitude as ‘a person’s feeling of favorableness or unfavorableness for that behavior’. Attitude towards digital piracy is one of the major factors affecting the same. According to a study done by Cronan and Al-Rafee (2008), there was a positive relationship between attitude towards piracy and intention. It was concluded that respondents with higher favorable attitude towards piracy tended to have higher intention towards piracy of digital material.

• H1a: Attitude towards piracy positively influences intention to engage in illegal download of movies

Subjective norms

Subjective Norms is defined as ‘a person’s perceptions of that most people who are important to him think he should or should not perform the behavior in question’ (Ajzen, 1985). Social habits seems to have a positive influence on the intention to engage in movie piracy, which in turn means that social factors such as peer pressure affects a person’s intention to pirate.(Phau et al, 2013). Males tend to be more exposed to pirating peers who expose them to pirating attitudes in case of software (Higgins, 2006). Significant others didn’t believe that the pirating act was wrong and in fact encouraged it ( Cronan & Al-rafee, 2008).

• H1b: Subjective norms positively influences intention to engage in illegal download of movies

Percieved behavioural Control (Self-efficacy)

Percieved behavioural control and intention in case of piracy has a positive relationship which concludes that people with ability and resources to do piracy have a greater chance of pirating digital material (Cronan & Al-rafee, 2008). It can be measured through self-efficacy.In case of this study, self –efficacy basically means the consumer’s perceived ability to download movies efficiently. Self-efficacy is an appropriate antecedent when we evaluate a person’s intention to take on piracy of movies. But in case of the social cognitive theory self- efficacy seems not to have an effect on downloading perhaps because downloading movies requires lesser skill (Jacobs et al, 2012). In other cases self –efficacy has a positive bearing on the intention of an individual to engage in digital piracy of movies (Phau et al, 2013). Krueger and Dickenson (1994) in their research have surmised that there is an increase in perception of opportunity when there is an increase in self – efficacy, this leads to a decrease in perception of risk in turn leading to higher risk-taking. Thus it can be said that an individual with higher self-efficacy will be involved in the illegal downloading of movies..

• H1c: Self-efficacy positively influences intention to engage in illegal download of movies

Self-Control

In a study Higgins (2006) found that low self-control was directly linked to piracy. It was seen that males tended to have lower self-control than females. In another study it was noted that there was a heightening towards tendency for impulsive and self-gratifying acts when there is an intention to pirate movies. It was seen that individuals with low self-control join others with low self control.In such groups there tend to be favourable attitude towards piracy of movies (Higgins et al , 2007).

• H2: Lack of Self-control positively influences intention to engage in illegal download of movies

Moral Judgment

The current generation seems not be affected by their moral obligations when it comes to the piracy of movies. (Jacobs et al,2012). In case of this moral judgment individuals don’t feel a great amount of guilt about pirating digital media. They consider it an acceptable behavior. The guilt towards digital piracy is very low. Moral obligation had a large effect on the intention of individuals to pirate digital material. Those who indicated higher guilt towards piracy tended to less of it (Cronan & Al-rafee, 2008)

• H3: Moral judgement negatively influences intention to engage in illegal download of movies

Proposed Conceptual Model

Methodology

Sample and procedures

Sample of 70 internet users from Kochi city who did digital piracy who were above the age of 18 years were collected through snow ball sampling. This method was used keeping in mind the sensitivity of the topic and also the difficulty in getting replies from respondents with reference to the illegal nature of digital piracy. The E-questionnaire was administered during a week in April among internet users who were also working (employed). Unlike most studies which involve students as sample population this study focuses on those who are employed. This was a major research gap mentioned by many researchers with regards to digital piracy.

The measures in the study were adopted from Phau et al. (2014) and Jacobs et al (2012). The questionnaire consisted of demographics, 6 statements on Self-efficacy, 3 statements on subjective norm, 4 statements on moral judgement, 5 statements on self control, 4 statement on attitude and 4 statements on intention. A 5-point liket scale was used ranging from 1 (extremely agreeable) to 5 (extremely not agreeable)

Analysis and Results

1. A total of 70 reposes were collected and it was analyzed using SPSS 21. The following steps were applied in the analysis of the data:

• a. Descriptive Statistics
• b. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and reliability check
• c. Multiple Regression

Descriptive statistics was used to understand the profile of the respondents (see Table 1).Out of the 70 respondents 35.7% were females while 64.3% were males. 71.5% were employed full time employed, 21.4% were self employed and 7.1% was employed part time. Majority of the respondents ( were in the age group of 23-26 age range followed by 27-30 age range (35.7%) and 31-34 years age range at 18.6%. 28.6% of the respondents were earning an income between 0-Rs.20000, 48.6% were earning an income within the range of Rs20000 –Rs 60000 and the rest 22% were earning above Rs60000.

Table 1. Profile of Respondents

Demographics

Variable

Frequency

Percentage

Gender

Female

25

35.7

Male

45

64.3

Occupation

Self Employed

15

21.4

Full time Employed

50

71.5

Part time employed

5

7.1

Age

18-22

2

2.9

23-26

30

42.9

27-30

25

35.7

31-34

13

18.6

Income in (Rs)

0-20000

20

28.6

20000-40000

16

22.9

40000-60000

18

25.7

60000-80000

8

11.14

80000-100000

5

7.1

>100000

3

4.3

EFA

EFA was conducted to check the unidimensionality of the factors. 5 factors with Eigenvalue >1 were loaded. Reliability was checked using Cronbach Alpha which was seen to be >0.7( see Table 2). Some statements were seen to be cross loading such statements were removed from further analysis. Finally 5 factor were extracted which were Self-efficacy, Moral Judgement, Self Control, Attitude and Subjetive norms. Also Intention being the independent variable was also extracted.

In case of Table 2

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis

Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization

Reliability tested using Cronbach Alpha

Notes; KMO=0.810

Multiple Regression

Findings and Interpretation

Multiple regression was used to establish the relationship between intention and other factors extracted. See Table 3

From the table the following conclusions can be made

Attitude has a highly significant effect on the intention to pirate movies. Thus since the P Value is less than 0.05 the hypothesis H1a: Attitude towards piracy positively influences intention to engage in illegal download of movies is accepted. A highly favorable attitude towards a behavior ultimately leads to one doing the said behavior. This is true also for digital piracy of movies, if you have a highly favorable attitude towards digital piracy that is heightened chance that you will engage in digital piracy.

Subjective norms tended to have significant effect on intention to illegally download movies. Thus the hypothesis H1b: Subjective norms positively influences intention to engage in illegal download of movies is accepted. This shows that friends, family and colleagues seems to have an influence in an individual’s decision to get into digital piracy of movies.

Perceived behavioral control measured in the form of self – efficacy has a highly significant influence on intention to illegally download movies. Thus the hypothesis H1c: Self-efficacy positively influences intention to engage in illegal download of movies is accepted. This results proves various other studies that if you have the capability and materials to do digital piracy ther is a high chance that you will get involved in digital piracy of movies.

Lack of self control has a p value more than 0.05 indicating that it does not have a significant relationship with intention to illegally download movies. Thus the hypothesis H2: Lack of Self-control positively influences intention to engage in illegal download of movies is rejected. Unlike other studies which concentrated on students and adolescents only this study concentrated on the working class with majority being above the age of 22 years. Thus this finding may be related to the fact that adults have more self-control than students.

Table 2 Exploratory Factor Analysis

Variables

Factor Loadings

Cronbach Alpha

SE2: It is not hard for me to avoid spyware and viruses when I am downloading movies

.829

0.900

SE3 : I know how to use downloading software (usenet clients, P2P clients like utorrent)

.725

SE4 : I can find decent versions of movies I want to download

.841

SE5: I can usually can find the movies I’m looking for

.776

SE6 : When I am downloading movies, I do not have to think about how to do this

.780

SC1 : Downloading movies has become a habit for me

.627

MJ1:The act of downloading movies for free from the internet rather than buying the original one is wrong

.723

0.851

MJ2:It is morally wrong to download movies for free from the internet

.789

MJ3:One should always consider the moral implications before downloading movies for free from the internet

.854

MJ4:There are moral reasons against downloading movies for free from the internet

.870

ATT1 :Downloading movies for free from the internet is a wise idea

.883

0.891

ATT2 : Downloading movies for free from the internet is a good idea.

.928

ATT3: I like the idea of downloading movies for free from the internet

.803

SC2:I get upset when circumstances like a bad connection stop me from downloading movies

.849

0.845

SC3:I often download more or less the same amount of movies every week, even when I cannot find movies I really want to see

.774

SC5: Sometimes I download movies without actually considering it

.764

SN1: My family encourages me to download movies for free from the internet.

.798

0.777

SN2: My colleagues encourage me to download movies for free from the internet.

.841

SN3: My friends encourage me to download movies for free from the internet.

.767

Table 3. Multiple Regression

ANOVAa

Model

Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

F

Sig.

1

Regression

45.860

5

9.172

25.368

.000b

Residual

23.140

64

.362

Total

69.000

69

a. Dependent Variable: Intention

b. Predictors: (Constant), Subjective Norms, Attitude, Moral Judgement, Self Efficacy, Self Control

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized Coefficients

t

Sig.

95.0% Confidence Interval for B

B

Std. Error

Beta

1

(Constant)

28.0832

.072

.000

Self Control

.090

.072

.090

1.247

Self Efficacy

.370

.072

.370

5.117

Moral Judgement

168

.072

.168

2.323

Attitude

.679

.072

.679

9.386

Subjective Norms

.171

.072

.171

2.369

a. Dependent Variable: Intention

In this case apparently moral judgment has a significant effect on intention to pirate’s movies. Since the hypothesis H3: Moral judgment negatively influences intention to engage in illegal download of movies is being accepted.

Final Model

Conclusions

The study was conducted due the increasing incidence of digital piracy in Kerala. This study through its model helps to understand why individuals intend to do digital piracy of movies factors like attitude; self-efficacy seems to have a very high significance compared to moral judgment and subjective norms. In this study self control which was one of the variables tended to have no significance towards intention to illegally pirate movies. This study has reinforced the literature already done by many researchers as to the importance of theory of planned behavior in the study of intention to do digital piracy of movies. Moral judgment seems to affect piracy so authorities should make sure to appeal to the morality of people to help decrease piracy of movies. When resources are available people make it a habit to do piracy, so authorities must make sure to make it hard for individuals to access pirated content. Awareness campaigns encouraging different refrence groups to appeal to them to stop pirating may also help this situation.

Research gap noted in most studies were that they used sample of students. In this case the sample consisted mainly of people employed in different industries. And such a study has yet to be done in the Indian context. But this being a pilot study the sample taken in very less and the possibility of generalization is low and also a convenience type sampling method was used which also may affect the results. Research gaps include the non inclusion of various marketing environmental factors such as technology, economic means, and knowledge of laws regarding piracy. Also this study only has looked at the intention to engage in digital piracy of movies, other studies may actually directly study the actual behavior towards piracy of movies.

References

1. Ajzen, I. (1985). From Intentions to Behavior: A Theory of Planned Behavior
2. Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of Planned Behavior.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211.
3. Ajzen, I. (2001). Nature and Operations of Attitudes. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 7-58.
4. Ajzen 2008
5. Cronan, P. T., & Al-Rafee, S.(2008). Factors that Influence the Intention to Pirate Software and Media. Journal of Business Ethics, 78(4), 527–545.
6. Dananher, B. & Smith, M.D.(2014). Gone in 60 Seconds: The impact of the Megaupload Shutdown on Movie Sales. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 33, 1-8.
7. Gopal, R., Sanders, G. L., Bhattacharjee, S., Agrawal, M., & Wagner, S. (2004). A Behavioral Model of Digital Music Piracy. Journal of Organizational Computing & Electronic Commerce, 14, 89-105.
8. Higgins, G. E. (2006). Gender Differences in Software Piracy: The Mediating Roles of Self-Control Theory and Social Learning Theory. Journal of Economic Crime Management, 4(1), 1-24.
9. Higgins, G. E., Fell, B.D. & Wilson, A.L. (2007). Low Self-Control and Social Learning in Understanding Students’ Intentions to Pirate Movies in the United States. Social Science Computer Review, 25(3), 339–357.
10. Jacobs, R. S., Heuvelman, A., Tan, M., and Peters, O.(2012). Digital movie piracy: A perspective on downloading behavior through social cognitive theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(3), 958–967.
11. Krueger, N.F,Jr & Dickson, P. (1994). How Believing in Ourselves Increases Risk Taking: Self-efficacy and Perceptions of Opportunity and Threat. Decision Sciences, 25,385-400.
12. Malin, J. & Fowers, B.J.(2009). Adolescent Self-Control and Music and Movie Piracy .Computers in Human Behavior, 25(3), 718-722.
13. Phau, I. Lim, A., Liang, J. & Lwin M. (2014) .Engaging in digital piracy of movies: a theory of planned behaviour approach. Internet Research, 24 (2), 246-266.
14. Taylor, S. A., Ishida, C. & Wallace, D.W.(2009).Intention to Engage in Digital Piracy: A Conceptual Model and Empirical Test. Journal of Service Research, 11(3), 246-262.
15. Reimagining India’s M&E Sector, FICCI-EY Report 2018

The keywords, however, run the risk of disguising political interests and underlying ideologies and undoubtedly leave much of what is really going on in their name (Cornwall 2007: 472). Basic modern international political terms, such as peace building or human security (Barnett et al., 2007, Graspers 2005), have such properties. Exploiting the safety of navigation as a bulldog allows us to understand the semantics as well as the disagreements about the concept. Keywords, as the literature shows, allow for international coordination of actions without consensus (Barnett et al., 2007; Bueger 2014). The keywords, however, also face the constant risk of disagreements and political clashes. Such disagreements can be dispersed in crisis situations and lead to dead ends and actions when they are most needed. They can also lead to contradictory activities and poor coordination when actors think they are talking about the same things when they are not de facto. If maritime safety is a keyword, then there is little prospect of forming an international consensus on the concept. To put it more bluntly, the spiritual quest for defining a definition that is reasonably superior to the rational criteria and which everyone should therefore agree on is a rather unproductive exercise. Different political interests and regulatory perceptions will always lead to different perceptions of the concept.

In order to find an answer, we need to identify the frameworks through which one can understand the communities and the disagreements that the concept of maritime safety entails. Security studies have been asking similar questions for decades (Baldwin 1997, Smith 2005). The lessons learned from these discussions point to important ways to promote the intellectual and political debate on maritime safety. The frameworks that are particularly useful are: 1) the ‘semantics’ intended to map different concepts by exploring the relationships between maritime safety and other concepts; various threats to maritime safety; and 3) the theory of practical safety aimed at understanding the actions taken in the name of maritime safety.

Maritime piracy

The word ‘pirate’ derives from the Latin word ‘pīrāta’, which coined the concept of ‘sea-keeper’ and from the Greek word ‘peirātés’ meaning ‘attacker’ or ‘marauder’ as being derived from the verb ” It means ‘attempt’ or ‘attack’. Therefore, a pirate is an etymologically a person who undertakes an attack or a real attack on someone (Ayto, 2005). From its origin, the concept of attempt and in fact the commission of the act have already been incorporated into the concept of pirate. The definition of the word ‘piracy’, which is acts committed by pirates, has evolved throughout history depending on the appearance of the act itself and the mode of operation of the offender as well as of time. If, for a long time, the concept of piracy relates only to maritime transport and maritime activities, the use of this word has been extended to air transport, intellectual property and other areas, such as broadcasting. In fact, today we talk a lot about hijacking, software piracy, pirate radios and television, etc. Therefore, the word ‘piracy’ is generally used to refer to illegal acts and unauthorized activity.

However, despite today’s accidental use of the word ‘piracy’ in various fields, it retains its original reference to the maritime arena depicting acts of hostility, encroachment, robbery or violence at sea against a ship, property carried on board or on board a ship, people aboard whether they are crew members or passengers. By codifying customary international piracy law through the 1958 Convention on the High Seas (CHS) and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (1982), known as the Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC), one internationally recognized definition of seafaring piracy was introduced. Later, after becoming aware of issues related to the definition of maritime piracy as an offense on the high seas or outside the jurisdiction of any state, it was necessary to find another meaning to describe similar acts, but committed within the territorial sea, of the archipelagos and inland waters or simply within the jurisdiction of a State. It was then that the International Maritime Organization (IMO) began using the concept of ‘armed robbery against ships’ through its resolutions on maritime piracy. For the purposes of this research document, maritime piracy is defined in Article 101 of the LOSC and consists of the following acts:

• (a) any illegal acts of violence or detention or acts of destruction perpetrated for private purposes by the crew or passengers of a private ship or private aircraft and directed:
  • (i) in the high seas, against another ship or aircraft or against persons or assets on board the ship or aircraft;
  • (ii) against a ship, aircraft, persons or immovable property in a place outside the jurisdiction of any State;
• (b) any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or aircraft with knowledge of events that render it a pirate ship or aircraft;
• (c) any act of incitement or intentional facilitating act described in (a) or (b).

As mentioned earlier, naval piracy and armed robbery against ships have been around the world since antiquity. It has flourished mainly in areas where social and economic problems arise and exist, the lack or impossibility of land enforcement and maritime law and political unrest. Their appearance or appearance varies somewhat from region to region. Once the threat level in a given area for a particular type of maritime piracy and armed robbery is reduced to an acceptable level, other outbreaks occur in other areas presenting the symptomatic criteria that allow the development of crime. Twenty-first Century Naval Piracy and Armed Robbery Areas are located in 10 different regions of the world, namely (1) East Africa, (2) Indian Ocean, (3) West Africa, (4) Arabian Sea, (6) South China, (7) Latin America and the Caribbean, (8) the Mediterranean Sea, (9) the North Atlantic and (10) areas designated ‘Other’ where the incidence of both crimes is very low or even rare (IMO, 2012). Paradoxically, even supposedly the safest marine space in the world can have an impact maritime piracy and armed robbery against ships, as demonstrated by the ‘M / V Arctic Sea’ case in the Baltic Sea in 2009 (Walker, 2009); prone areas are identified, maritime piracy and armed robbery against ships appear to occur parts of the planet and what they tend to attribute to them as a global phenomenon. From 1984 to 2011, 6,260 tried and true attacks were reported (IMO, 2012). In 2011 alone, there were 544 attacks and assaults that were 55 times higher (11.3%) compared to 2010 statistics (IMO, 2012).

Shipping piracy and armed robbery against ships vary in intensity, mode of operation, objectives and motivation in each affected area. In some cases, ships are boarded with the least amount of cash and valuables by the secure ship (Asian case). In some cases, they are attacked by more violent acts of cargo striking (the West African case is an example) and / or the ship itself (as found in the ‘M / V Alondra Raimbow’ case). The last category is kidnapping for ransom, taking the host, crew and cargo hostage and requesting ransom (the Somalian case).

Cost-benefit analysis of the regulations to reduce the maritime piracy threat

The international response to piracy was initially ad hoc, with Canadian, Danish and French vessels responding to a United Nations (UN) request to accompany sensitive World Food Program (WFP) missions along the coast of Somalia. NATO’s first anti-piracy mission, Operation Allied Provider, took over from October to December 2008 and was subsequently replaced by a similar European Union Naval Force (EUNAVFOR) mission, Operation Atalanta, at the end of the year. The Atlantic Alliance returned to operation in April 2009 with the strongest suspension and deterrence order of Allied Protector. NATO’s mission evolved in August and was renamed Operation Ocean Shield. The mission now operates with four key objectives: to prevent and disrupt pirate operations at sea, to coordinate international efforts to combat piracy, to enhance the maritime community’s ability to effectively combat piracy and to develop its regional capability (NATO Parliamentary Assembly, 2012).

The idea of using the world’s most sophisticated warships to fight teenagers stuck in glass skiffs would be ridiculous to NATO’s founding generation, but anti-piracy operations embody the ‘postmodern’ naval policy outlined to the Alliance’s Maritime Strategy in 2011. ‘Maintaining freedom of navigation, maritime trade routes, critical infrastructure, energy flows, marine resources protection and environmental security the security interests of Allie ‘, notes the Marine Strategy and deserves to be protected by naval assets (NATO Parliamentary Assembly, 2012).

Operating Ocean Shield and combating piracy is a prime example of what Geoffrey Till describes as a ‘postmodern’ maritime strategy in which maritime states seek not to win maritime supremacy among themselves but to contribute resources to a cooperative maritime security regime (Smith-Windsor, 2009).

US-led CTF-151 alliance and independent naval development from countries such as China, India, Russia, Iran, Japan and Saudi Arabia have been added to NATO and EU piracy missions. By 2012, there were 20 to 30 international vessels participating in East African rollover operations on any given day. Despite these efforts, the number of pirate attacks continued to rise, hitting a peak of 236 attacks in 2011 (International Maritime Bureau, 2013). Pirate gangs adapted to increased naval presence by shifting their operations away from the heavily patrolled Gulf of Aden and the Red Sea to the north, in the Indian Ocean to the east and the Mozambique Channel to the south. The use of parent ships – hijackers and merchant ships – was key to this expansion, as it allowed pirates to carry more than 2,000km of theft off the coast of Somalia and maintain their activity for weeks at a time. During a July 2011 UN Security Council briefing, Pirate Envoy Jack Lang warned that pirates were ‘clearly winning’ their race with the international community and became ‘masters’ of the Indian Ocean (Rice, 2011).

Within a year of Lang’s warning, piracy in Somalia was on the decline, both in terms of success and the total number of attacks. By 2012, hijackings have fallen by 50% compared to the previous year, while attacks have decreased by 70% (Oceans Beyond Piracy, 2013). Explaining this sharp decline in piracy is multifaceted. From a military point of view, improved coordination between international naval forces and the adoption of stricter rules of engagement have been instrumental.

Following a strategic assessment in March 2012, NATO has amended its engagement rules and is increasingly engaged in surveillance of pirate beach camps and remote attack teams and the destruction of pirate mother ships and raiding boats. In 2011 alone, NATO forces neutralized 96 pirate ships (NATO Parliamentary Assembly, 2012). EUNAVFOR’s mandate was further extended to include air strikes on pirate camps, with such an attack on a pirate offshore camp in central Somalia on 15 May 2012.

While the vague judiciary was once responsible for a ‘capture and release’ policy on alleged pirates, an international strategy has already been put in place to conduct piracy trials in third countries and to transfer convicts to prisons in Somalia. UN funding and bilateral funding have set up missile courts in Kenya, the Seychelles, Mauritius, Tanzania and the construction and refurbishment of prisons in the Somaliland Autonomous Regions of Somaliland. Of an estimated original group of 3,000 active pirates, there are now more than 1,200 behind bars (Oceans Beyond Piracy, 2013). The financial incentive for piracy has not diminished for young Somalis but the fact that those now caught are punished for their crimes is believed by officials to combat piracy have a deterrent effect.

Perhaps most responsible for the decline of piracy were precautionary measures by the shipping industry. Commercial organizations are constantly updating a set of best management practices that provide guidelines on crossing speeds, passive defense measures and the use of capes to combat piracy. The use of private armed guards on board has expanded dramatically, despite initial hesitation. According to Ocean’s Beyond Pirary’s think tank, the number of ships using armed guards rose from 30% in 2011 to over 50% in 2012 (Oceans Beyond Piracy, 2013). A notable source in the maritime safety industry noted to the author that this number is now between 60- 80% and that increased use of armed guards has been the only major contribution to the decline of Somali piracy. As the industry is at a distance, pirates have yet to catch a boat carrying armed guards.

Political and security developments in Somalia have also served to make the country less favorable to piracy than it was in 2008. Offenses initiated by African Union (AU) and Kenyan and US troops Ethiopia pushed its fighters al-controlled, the most important in Mogadishu and the strategic port of Kismayo. Although relations between Islamist militias and pirate gangs are limited, the (relatively) reduced threat of the former has presented local authorities with new opportunities to deal with the latter. Increased security has finally allowed the United Nations and bilateral services to return to the country after 18 years of exile. In Puntland, businesses started by the Puntland Maritime Police Force have denied pirate gangs access to safe havens and moorings (Pelton, 2012). According to local media sources, the former pirate strongholds in Eyl, Garad and Bargal now have ‘destroyed’ pirates in the area captured, fled or reformed (AllAfrica, 2013).

Together, these factors have forced silent piracy into a cycle of decline. Less hunting means less ransom money, which, combined with more frequent arrests, hampers the ability of pirate gangs to fund future operations and replace losses. As of June 4, there have been only seven pirate attacks reported to the International Maritime Bureau this year (International Maritime Bureau, 2013). All of these attacks have taken place in the Gulf of Aden or less than 300nm off the coast of Somalia, indicating that pirate gangs are becoming increasingly numerous and more difficult to launch sophisticated attacks with blue water. For the international community, piracy in Somalia is now out of crisis.

Although the evidence is encouraging, anti-piracy commanders are quickly demonstrating that preventive security is still needed. ‘The underlying causes of piracy still persist,’ said outgoing Ocean Commander Thomas Natale, ‘so we must all be careful’ (NATO Maritime Command, 2013). The question then is whether international maritime patrols are still effective and a sustained response to the reduced threat of piracy.

According to the report ‘The Financial Costs of Somali Piracy 2012’, piracy in Somalia continued to generate about $ 6 billion in global costs in 2012, of which $ 1.09 billion is spent on military operations against piracy. The report further estimates that NATO’s Ocean Shield operation costs the Alliance $ 5.7 million in annual administrative spending (Oceans Beyond Piracy, 2013). The cost sharing of developing vessels borne by contributing states is more controversial, however, as each vessel used and combating piracy would continue maintenance, training, staffing and logistics costs if it were to develop into any other active service in the context of permanent shipping of the group. Without prejudice to this, the annual installation and operating costs for the average of the four vessels destined for Ocean Shield are estimated at approximately $ 75 million using the Oceans Beyond Pirates methodology (Oceans Beyond Piracy, 2013). These costs are undoubtedly unsustainable in a season of decline, piracy and military budget cuts throughout the Alliance. It now appears that there is a diminished need for naval forces to provide a strong response and deterrence capability, as pirates launch fewer attacks and the majority of vulnerable vessels now have armed guards. While international naval forces halted 100 pirate attacks in 2011, that number dropped to 40 in 2012 and so far only three disturbances have occurred (NATO Shipping Center, 2013). As States parties have to bear the costs of their own operations, they are reluctant to deploy nautical assets when they no longer seem necessary. NATO officials note that the Alliance has struggled to meet the requirements of the Ocean Shield force and that it is currently only possible to dedicate data from the two NATO Permanent Maritime Teams (NATO Parliamentary Assembly, 2012).

Mission fatigue and budgetary constraints have also been reported for the shortages of warships in the EU Atalanta operation (Brunnstrom, 2011). While EUNAVFOR deployed 5-10 ships in rotation in 2011, its assets decreased to 4-7 in 2012 (Oceans Beyond Piracy, 2013).

Conclusion

Although cost-free, Ocean Shield has provided NATO with an unprecedented opportunity to improve international maritime cooperation, to define its role in the maritime sector and lay the foundations for a new era of security partnerships. In fact, the development of opposition operations reflects the declarations and goals of the Alliance’s Maritime Strategy for 2011. The sharp decline in piracy in Somalia disputes the reason for the mission, but should not be a cause for complete departure from the region. A functional transition, not an end, will allow the Alliance to consolidate its profits while contributing to a lasting solution to the problem of piracy. As maritime assets are being developed, regional and local capacity building should play a central role. No new institutions and organizations are needed, as NATO can contribute its experience and expertise to existing efforts.

Addressing the absence and collapse of Somalia’s security capacity is the most demanding element of this shift in policy, but it is ultimately the most important. If the conditions that have allowed piracy to remain rooted in Somalia remain, a prudent pirate must only wait for warships to return home and the shippers to leave their guard before returning to terrorize the sea. Likewise, with the Gulf of Guinea in West Africa now poised to overshadow Somalia as the world’s most pirated waters, it is important for NATO and other security actors to incorporate lessons learned from the Horn of Africa, effective policies that they also target the factors that allow crime. Although it requires a proactive approach, preventing piracy today is far more effective than fighting tomorrow.