The growth of illegal file-sharing could cost European countries 1.2m jobs and 240bn euros (£215bn) by 2015, an industry report claims.

一份行业报告称，不断增长的非法文件共享可能会在2015年前造成欧洲国家损失120万个工作岗位和2400亿欧元。

The figures are a 'worst case scenario¹'

The study, commissioned（委任） by an industry body and endorsed²（支持，赞同） by trade unions, studied the impact of web piracy³ in Germany, UK, France, Italy and Spain.

It claims that without measures to curb⁴ piracy, the UK alone could lose up a quarter of a million jobs by 2015.

But campaigners described the report as "corporate⁵ propaganda（宣传，传道总会） ".

'Need for action'

The study, conducted by economics firm TERA Consultants⁶ on behalf of the International Chamber⁷ of Commerce, said that the UK's creative industries experienced losses of 1.4bn euros in 2008 because of piracy.

Brendan Barber, General Secretary of the TUC, said that the results showed piracy was a "major threat to the creative industries in terms of（在……方面，依据） loss of employment and revenues（收入，税收） ".

"If there was ever the proof needed to demonstrate why the Digital Economy Bill is imperative⁸（必要的，紧急的） for the protection of our creative industries, this report is it," he said.

The Digital Economy Bill was outlined in the Queen's speech in November 2009.

It includes various proposals to tackle（处理） illegal file-sharing including a so-called "three strikes" element, which would see persistent⁹ pirates cut off from the net.

It also includes element that would give courts the power to block websites that facilitate（促进，帮助） copyright infringement¹¹（版权侵犯） .

The bill has been passed by the Lords and is now expected to be rushed through the Commons before the general election.

There has been a groundswell（海啸，地隆） of opposition¹² to the Bill from firms such as British Telecom, Google and Facebook, which say that elements of the bill could undermine free speech on the net without reducing copyright infringement.

A campaign has also started on the internet encouraging people to write to their MP to stop the government rushing the bill through "without proper debate"

Jim Killock of the Open Rights Group (ORG) is a vocal¹³ opponent of the Digital Economy Bill and the new research.

"I am fed up of hearing corporate propaganda being deployed¹⁴ in order to justify¹⁵ intrusions on our rights to freedom of speech, privacy and to a fair trial," he said.

"We have no truck with（不同……打交道） infringement of copyright, but it is shameful¹⁶ that anyone from the Labour movement can attempt to justify removal of vital services such as the internet as a punishment."

The ORG recently revealed that certain amendments¹⁷（修正案） to the bill proposed in the House of Lords - but not passed - had been drafted by music industry group the BPI.

"Members of the Labour movement spent decades fighting for people's rights to basic services, education, and political organisation¹⁸: they need to ask themselves where their true values lie," said Mr Killock.

"Are they with Gordon Brown's call to recognise the internet as just as vital for the today's citizens as water, gas and electricity; or are they with music industry lobbyists（游说者） , calling on Parliament to infringe¹⁰ people's human rights?"