Fairly obvious observations!

I'm always bothered by expressions like "35% of the packaged software installed on personal computers (PC) worldwide in 2005 was illegal, amounting to $34 bln in global losses due to software piracy." [Over here! No, over here!]

I can think of two things about it that get my goat. The first is the obvious fact that it's not the case that, if it weren't for this piracy, anyone in particular would be $34 billion dollars richer. If it weren't for this piracy, and so if the computers in question were more expensive, there would most definitely be quite a few less people buying them, and so to say that the piracy has caused $34 billion in losses is a bit odd.

The other objection is the way they say "in global losses." By not saying exactly who has taken those losses, it suggests that everyone in worse off, like if there was $34 billion in losses from an earthquake or something (Though, of course, that would be reported as $34 billion in damage.) And that's just obviously not true, the recipients of the pirated software have got something for free. To them collectively, there were $34 billion in gains. To the world as a whole, which is what I'd naturally take the words "Global Losses" to refer to, there has been roughly a $0 net loss, and that's assuming the not-universally-accepted idea that a company actually loses something when its intellectual property is violated.

It seems kinda like me saying "I gave some cash to a beggar today, resulting in $5 of loss." I mean, sure, if I added the words "to me," that'd be better, but as is it seems really weird.

Anyway... Just a peeve.