Crying Foul At the BSA's "Nauseating" Anti-Piracy Tactics 235
Barence writes "The Business Software Alliance (BSA) has been accused of heavy-handed tactics that could drive small companies to incriminate themselves. The Microsoft-backed piracy watchdog generates a quarter of its cases by offering employees cash rewards for informing on their own employer. 'It is basically harvesting allegations from disgruntled employees and farming them out to expensive law firms,' one small business owner told PC Pro, who said he was 'nauseated' by the tactics. The BSA then sends out a letter demanding the business owner fill out a software audit, or potentially face court action — even though the BSA has no power to demand such an audit and hasn't pursued a court case in five years. 'It's designed to scare the recipient into thinking that they're obliged to provide certain information when, in fact, it's difficult to see that they are,' said a leading IT lawyer."
Use Linux (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Use Linux (Score:5, Interesting)
And open-source software in general. Yeah, this kind of scaring will just scare organizations right into the lap of OSS. Keep it, suits! You are doing an outstanding job!
correction: "Keep it up" (Score:2)
correction: "Keep it up". Sorry about that. I read it 3 times, but my mind saw what it expected instead of what was already there.
Re:correction: "Keep it up" (Score:4, Funny)
BSA is a total fuck up, period (Score:5, Informative)
Ever since its inception, BSA is nothing but crap
Back in the 1990's, they have sent me threatening emails and letters - without even haven't proven that I have pirated anything
Back then I attended some CAD/CAM seminars offered by Audodesk - and in those events they handed out forms in which we filled in our names, company names, email address, snailmail address and so on
Before I attended those seminars, I got no threatening email nor letters filled with legalese jargons, threatening to take me to court for "using unauthorized software"
I mean, it's a total fuck
I attended those seminars to learn more about CAD/CAM, it does not mean I own any CAD/CAM software, but of course, BSA doesn't care
They just took the name list from the seminar organizers and mass-mailing the threatening letters
After those encounters, I stopped attending any Autocad seminar and in a few years, those threatening letters also stopped coming
BSA's way of handling their customers, even potential customers, is totally ridiculous
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Back in the day, I worked for a subsidiary of Waldenbooks (remember them?), known as Waldensoftware. The head honcho, at the time, was a real asshole named Glenn Ochsenreiter. Under him, guess what was allowed policy?
- Employees could "check out" software (this was considered "product knowledge training")
- Software returns were allowed, checked, and re-shrinkwrapped for resale! (See above^)
- Non-demo programs were often loaded on in-store computers. They were also re-shrunk.
- "Spiffs" were awarded to employ
Re:BSA is a total fuck up, period (Score:4, Insightful)
BSA's way of handling their customers, even potential customers, is totally ridiculous
Customer? Where did you get the idea you are their customer? Autodesk, and Adobe, and Microsoft... THOSE are their customers. You? You are the product they sell.
Re:Use Linux (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Use Linux (Score:5, Informative)
Windows is not free.. Its built into the price... Saying Windows comes free with your pc for free is like saying the CPU and memory are also come free with your PC..
Re:Use Linux (Score:5, Informative)
Most times a PC with windows is cheaper than a PC without, because of the adware subsidizing the PC. I'm not going to buy a PC w/o windows if it actually cost 50-100 dollars more.
Re: (Score:2)
No, it's a cost. Even if it's ten bucks, it's a cost.
If the adware could run on Linux and you removed Windows from the equation, the PC would be even cheaper to put together.
I really wish you idiots would stop arguing this point, because it's false.
--
BMO
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Use Linux (Score:5, Informative)
Is that the same guitar guy who has been raided twice, because he's using imported wood (all of which is legal, but they still shut him down)? If it's not RIAA or the BSA, then it's your own government. The owner believes he's being harassed because he gave multi-million dollar donations to the Republicans, but not one penny to Obama in 2008.
The best I can tell, you are talking about the Gibson raid. It was Fox News that baselessly speculated CEO Henry Juszkiewicz was being targeted for his political leanings. From FEC records, Juszkiewicz contributed $52K to Republicans and $39K to Democrats over 10 years. That's quite a different story from the one you are telling.
Re:Use Linux (Score:5, Informative)
Thanks for the info. I researched it and it wasn't just FOX news saying it. Quote: Henry Juszkiewicz, the chief executive officer of Gibson Guitar Corp., tells National Review Online that President Obama, a "big liberal," has done "untold damage to business" and should not be applauded for his jobs speech. "He's a government fan," he says. "He has a problem with successful businesses. He thinks they're the problem, that they shouldn't be quite as successful."
"He is using the levers of government to not only redistribute, but to penalize," he adds. "I see a difference between what he said and what he's doing."
"Gibson has been under federal investigation in recent months, reportedly for its importation practices. Juskiewicz blames the Obama administration for causing his company, an iconic American brand, to lose money and lawyer up."
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Use Linux (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Use Linux (Score:5, Interesting)
The guys here can live in their perception bubbles and go "herp derp use Linux" which is so completely fantasy island i don't even know where to start,
That is so shortsighted, uninformed, and unfair, I don't know where to begin.
If Linux don't have the software they need to work its pointless, which 99 times out of 100 DOES NOT EVEN EXIST on Linux
Untrue. With the exception of a few specialized applications there are equivalents for nearly everything.
Quickbooks/Quicken, photoshop, vegas, etc. And NOOOO Gimp is NOT a substitute, its a kid's class project. no really, not being snarky, it actually IS a kid's class project, look it up,
First off, not every machine needs to be Linux, and not every machine needs to be Microsoft.
Quickbooks and Quicken have online editions. Considering how it is backed up, and the client can be anything, not such a bad idea to look into. In any case, providing accounting with some Windows PCs is not a big deal.
YOU don't think GIMP is a substitute. It works just fine for a lot of people, including myself. I still have Photoshop and I am used to it, but I can use GIMP just as easily to get something done. It's not black and white. Sure, there are going to be some hardcore people that really do need Photoshop for the stuff they do. Is that representative of everybody? No.
A Linux admin with the skills to troubleshoot all the problems with a couple of dozen desktops or more will cost a MINIMUM of $75,000 IF you can even find one, whereas MCSEs are cheap as dirt and just as plentiful
Later on you rail about how IT is treated like shit and now you advocate hiring MCSEs "cheap as dirt"? Sounds a bit contradictory to me.....
If you are a medium sized business with 50 employees you better damn well be paying somebody $75,000 a year to take care of your business regardless.
MCSEs are not worth a fucking shit. That is the most worthless certification I have seen in my life. It does not mean you are qualified to handle a Microsoft based network and infrastructure by itself. It means, at most, that you can be trained on the job for a year or two with experienced people.
It tells you nothing about that person's real skills.
You can compare an experienced Microsoft admin and a Linux admin and they will cost about the same. In fact, the ones that are really good have overlapping skill sets.
I can work with Linux environments just as handily as I can with Microsoft environments.
Since 99 out of 100 software they need does NOT exist you are talking about hiring a development team to build it, that's a good $60,000+ for each software of any complexity and that is IF you don't get sued for stepping on the patents of company whom you are ripping off.
You're wrong about the 99/100 anyways, but if you are a medium sized company chances are you already have a development team. So you are being disingenuous to say the least. Whether or not your team codes with Microsoft based technologies or platforms or Open Source is not relevant to the risks of software patents. Do you think just because you coded it in .NET and it runs on SQL Server that you are somehow immune to patents?
Furthermore, choosing Microsoft as a platform for your developers can have significant added costs that are not present in Open Source platforms.
Ultimately, it comes down the needs of your project, the vendors and 3rd parties you have to deal with, etc. All of that needs to be factored in when you choose.
Hell you still don't even have a substitute for Access, Excel, Exchange and Sharepoint yet, not that works
Wrong again. Sooooo Wrong. Wrong.
There is no fucking substitute for Access. If you are using it, just kill yourself. Save yourself from the pain. I have
Re:Use Linux (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, this kind of scaring will just scare organizations right into the lap of OSS. Keep it, suits! You are doing an outstanding job!
The BSA has been doing this practice since 1988. It doesn't appear to have scared many organizations to OSS.
I am sure that a few have made the switch to OSS, but I imagine that the number would be insignificant compared to the organizations who change their practices to pay for all the software they use. It is still going to be worth it for the BSA and its member companies.
Besides, it is not much of a threat to say that if you get audited then you will stop pirating commercial software and start using open source.
Re:Use Linux (Score:5, Insightful)
I have been running a small business since 2001 and have only ever used open source software for just this reason. No restrictive licenses equals no legal fees for software piracy.
I think, however, that Microsft and the BSA should be MORE aggressive in their pursuit of these heinous villains of industry. Maybe it will drive more businesses towards using F/OSS tools and ditch their shackles. Something very Marxian about it ....
Re:Use Linux (Score:5, Insightful)
Using linux doesn't protect your business from a disgruntled employee claiming you have stolen software, and the MS-BSA sending you a scary software audit letter "or else we will drag you to a court of law".
BTW these megacorps use government regulations in the same fashion -- to harass small business citizens.
Re:Use Linux (Score:5, Insightful)
Also wouldn't change the outcome any (Score:3)
Since they haven't pursued a court case in 5 years it would seem they simply drop shit if people don't agree to pay them.
Now I'm not saying don't use OSS, but it won't change the outcome of something like this at all between using licensed commercial software.
For that matter if you actually agreed to their bullshit audit (you shouldn't but saying you did) it would probably make life more difficult. If you have all your commercial software boxes n' licenses, they are pretty well stymied. I know a number of s
Re:Also wouldn't change the outcome any (Score:4, Informative)
"If you have all your commercial software boxes n' licenses"
They will do you absolutely no good in a BSA audit. If you don't have original invoices that show where you paid for the software any number of pretty stickers or boxes will not satisfy the audit. Believe me, i know. Been there. Done that.
Re: (Score:3)
It makes finding all your licenses and making sure everything's in order a lot easier though.
Because that's actually what costs you. Not the licenses. I know a lot of businesses that have (to their best knowledge) everything in order but they buy computers "bulk", computer, system, everything rolled into one bill. They don't tend to waste a lot of time making a big inventory of their licenses.
So when this scare letter comes, they spend a fair amount of time collecting bills and filling out forms... it's way
Re:Use Linux (Score:5, Insightful)
Doesn't really help, what with the whole false accusations from disgruntled employees angle. Replying "no thanks, I use Linux" to them isn't going to do you much good. Replying at all isn't going to do you much good. It shows them that you're listening.
A better approach is to simply ignore the BSA on principle. Threatening letters are cheap, subpoenas are expensive, and they do their business in bulk (meaning they can't actually sic their lawyers on most of their targets).
Also, try not to have disgruntled employees. A big company can't avoid a few bad apples, but smaller businesses can vet new hires better and treat existing employees less like disposable resources. If nothing else, the BSA isn't the only recourse for a pissed off ex employee to screw his former boss. I once worked at a restaurant that got hit with a surprise health inspection shortly after a round of layoffs - the people running the place treated employees and health code rules about equally well and almost got shut down as a result (I would have said good riddance if they had, but it would have meant looking for a new job myself).
Re:Use Linux (Score:5, Informative)
No response at all is dangerous. A better response is "We are not in violation of any licenses. Please direct all further correspondence to our attorney. Find his contact information attached."
I have a feeling in most cases it will end there.
Re:Use Linux (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, that's what I was getting at, should have phrased it more clearly. So, refining my original statement:
If you get a threatening letter from the BSA demanding an audit, disregard it.
If you get a subpoena, or anything else official, forward it to your lawyer.
The letter is bait. Don't rise to it, and most likely they won't do anything about it. Actual court documents are too serious to ignore.
Re: (Score:3)
Send an invoice with the letter for the time taken to reply too.
Re: (Score:2)
And don't forget to use the L word. That way they know there's nothing there any any court case will end up with money going the other way.
Re: (Score:2)
> use the L word.
Liger?
Re:Use Linux (Score:4, Insightful)
Having gone through a nasty lawsuit (utterly unrelated to software licenses), the one thing that I learned, if nothing else, is that you do not leave any such letter unreplied. You should respond, because if it ever does end up in a court of law, you will want to show you did your due diligence. Since licensing agreements with guys like Microsoft and Adobe do have language around giving them or their agents the power to check that you are complying with the agreement, simply tossing such a letter in the trash, even if you don't have a spot of their software on the premises, is inviting trouble. If you're a business, you should have a lawyer anyways, and when it comes to legal, or even legal-sounding threats, that's his department.
I imagine BSA will not pursue very many people if they find they're likely going to have to deal with a lawyer right from the start.
Re:Use Linux (Score:5, Insightful)
If I don't have a spot of their software on the premises, I don't give half a shit about how they word their agreements. You want into my company? Why? Oh, you accuse me of copyright infringement? Wait right here while my lawyer finishes that "false accusation" stuff he's writing about. And no, of course you can not come in while you're waiting.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you're treating the BSA as if they were a law firm. They follow a different approach than actual lawyers do.
They don't actually sue, see the line about "hasn't pursued a court case in 5 years". Lawsuits cost money. They threaten to sue if you've got pirated software, then sell you on an audit to prove your innocence. If they find pirated software, they offer to legitimize it by selling you a licence, rather than go to court. It's a revenue generating approach where unleashing the lawyers is a l
Re: (Score:2)
Then they'll be even less likely to want to fuck with you if you state the matter will be dealt with via your attorney.
Re: (Score:3)
If I have none of their software, then their license terms (including permitting them to perform an audit) don't apply to me at all.
Re: (Score:2)
It depends on whether you have any payware or not. If you are running an all-Linux shop, you're safe as long as you do respond to LEGAL communications (such as the summons when they sue you ... the the fun begins where I would immediately be following that up with my own legal service of admissions, interrogatories, and discovery ... and counter claims). But if you do have payware, better be sure you have licenses and receipts for everything payware.
FYI, the more you do respond explaining to them that you
Re: (Score:2)
Also, try not to actually have pirated software. Even companies that claim in policy not to use pirated software sometimes do. Even those that are really serious about only using licensed software (which includes OSS, by the way) sometimes have bad apples who do it anyway. If you don't want to end up on the wrong end of a lawsuit, don't break the law.
This is not in favor or support of the BSA at all, you just left out the point that actually not breaking the rules they're claiming you're breaking is a go
Re: (Score:2)
Also, try not to actually have pirated software. Even companies that claim in policy not to use pirated software sometimes do.
As you say, it can be quite difficult to ensure that a you have no pirated software. It may be easier in the long run for a company just to be nicer to their employees so that don't rat them out to the BSA in the first place!
Let the fools have their tar-tar sauce!
Re: (Score:2)
It's easy to avoid bad apples using "bad" software in your company, the tool for that is called user management.
Aside of that, companies often don't even know they're infringing. Copyright is such a vast and confusing legal matter (and don't start me on the licensing systems MS uses...) that any halfway decently sized company would have to hire a dedicated lawyer just for licensing. Now, how is that in any way sensible? Most simply accept the risk of an audit, it's cheaper.
Re: (Score:2)
This is not in favor or support of the BSA at all, you just left out the point that actually not breaking the rules they're claiming you're breaking is a good idea.
Yeah, I left that out to be polite, since the OP was talking about running a FOSS only business. Wouldn't do to conflate the businesses that don't pay the BSA because they don't use BSA software with the businesses that don't pay the BSA because bittorrent is cheaper. Apples hate being called oranges.
I don't doubt that some businesses do get threatened by the BSA thanks to anon complaints from ex employees, and actually do have pirated software. Even in the case of those companies, I'd tell them to get t
Re: (Score:2)
It could also something else: A BSA letter that caused so much overhead finding all the licenses that the boss eventually threw up his arms and decided it's simply less hassle to switch to FOSS.
so easy (Score:3)
to come up with a nice comparison involving mob protection rackets. truly is a repulsive business practice, right up there with patent trolls and ambulance chasers.
Why call out "Microsoft-backed" and not others? (Score:5, Insightful)
The Microsoft-backed piracy watchdog generates a quarter of its cases by offering employees cash rewards for informing on their own employer.
I don't like the BSA, and I'm pretty neutral about Microsoft, but what is the point of saying the BSA is "Microsoft-backed"? They're also Adobe-, Apple-, and Dell- backed, among many others.
Because Slashdot hates MS (Score:3)
This site has had a lot of MS hating editors for a long time.
Re:Because Slashdot hates MS (Score:4, Insightful)
MS is hated for good reason: much patent trolling with Android being among the most recent victims, OOXML and file format lock in, Windows Genuine Advantage and Vista's DRM, and the Microsoft Tax to name just a few. And of course the BSA. Their entire attitude is about maintaining a monopoly and controlling and milking their users, not serving them. I really think the only thing keeping MS's empire alive these days is DirectX and PC gaming, and inertia and continuing prejudice against products that are not backed by traditional large corporations. MS has merely displaced IBM among conservative computer users.
Or are you going to try to claim there isn't good reason to hate MS?
No it is mostly just anti-MS fanboy shit (Score:3)
Your post demonstrates that well with going for the "Vista DRM" shit. That vague argument is composed of nothing more than misunderstanding of how Blu-ray licensing works (as in it requires secure driver paths, or you can't play it, period) combined with complete misinformation repeated from Peter Gutmann (who claimed Vista can't record high def sound, it can, I have used it and 7 to do so on many occasions). Some people on Slashdot, the editors in particular, go looking for reason to hate MS, rather than h
Re:Why call out "Microsoft-backed" and not others? (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't like the BSA, and I'm pretty neutral about Microsoft, but what is the point of saying the BSA is "Microsoft-backed"? They're also Adobe-, Apple-, and Dell- backed, among many others.
The real reason is everybody hates Microsoft. It grabs eyeballs and gets a good debate going.
What people will claim the 'real reason' is is that Microsoft is a high profile target and if you focus on them it'll cause them to change and everybody else will magically fall into line. The same thing happened with Apple and Foxconn. So far it has proven to be an effective way to cause short-term change with one company, but you'll notice that there hasn't been any real hubub on Slashdot about the Chinese workers there. That died down, so the other companies can merrily go about their routine. Looks like there's a downside to focusing all that rage on one target.
So, yes, maybe a little more attention should be directed at everybody backing the BSA.
Re:Why call out "Microsoft-backed" and not others? (Score:5, Insightful)
The answer is simple for many of them:
* Apple doesn't really care (each copy of OSX/iOS runs on Apple-sold hardware, and Apple is mostly consumer-oriented these days anyway, so...) ...now Adobe, Oracle, and those boys? Oh yeah, they'd get hot and bothered about business copying, but how ubiquitous are these apps in the business world? Photoshop is mostly restricted to marketing and graphic arts departments. Oracle is mostly big enterprise-level stuff, where folks use RFP/RFQs to purchase the things. Nearly every other member of the BSA is similarly a niche player.
* What does Dell have software-wise that would get the BSA all hot and bothered? PERC raid card drivers?
On the other hand, Microsoft has their fingers in (nearly) the entire business world, and most cases (IIRC) are instigated over Microsoft software. So it stands to reason that the biggest beneficiary (and most likely the biggest backer) is, well, Microsoft.
List of BSA members (Score:2)
MS is the largest supporter (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Dear BSA (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Dear BSA (Score:5, Funny)
i hired him because he is the type that hates authority figures
That would make you his boss. Are you sure you thought that through properly?
Re: (Score:2)
"That would make you his boss. Are you sure you thought that through properly?"
He may be a very "beta" boss.
Re: (Score:3)
He's the guy that gives the big guy money every week.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Arent you an authority figure to him, if you're his employer?
Re: (Score:3)
Well, you know, he didn't say he hired the HUGE man to like him, did he? I dunno about you, but if I am gaining something I value highly enough, I can put up with a lot of people I hate.
Re: (Score:2)
Everything runs on Linux over here, you are not even allowed in the door, and if you try to enter you will be escorted out by a HUGE man that hates authority figures, (i hired him because he is the type that hates authority figures)
How does he feel about his boss?
Re: (Score:2)
Dear BSA,
Everything here run's Linux and you are not allowed on the property.
Also please take note of the sign: Trespassers will be shot, survivors will be shot again.
Even shorter...
Dear BSA,
Everything here run's Linux and you are not allowed on the property.
Proud supporter of the castle doctrine.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, you should do the opposite. You gain an advantage in court when you actually give them every opportunity to figure out they have no case. You're more likely to get bigger awards in your counter claims if you respond to every letter. Then invite them over for a tour, AND schedule a specific date! Show them how you login to root on every machine and show what distro it runs. Then give them the mandatory presentation on "how to choose the best distro for your needs". Bore them to death.
They should be investigated for racketeering (Score:5, Interesting)
It pretty much fits the definition...
I had a one man consulting company once. In order to appear larger, I often filled out web forms and indicated I had 50 to 100 employees. The BSA sent my company letter with their racketeering scam. I laughed because at the time I was a purely Linux and Mac environment. I wish I had kept that letter.
Re:They should be investigated for racketeering (Score:5, Insightful)
How is this -not- racketeering? If the mob were behind this, instead of a "legitimate" business, wouldn't the FBI investigate it?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
50 employees (claimed). One (or fewer) Windows license. Yeah, makes them wonder.
So BSA acts like RIAA (Score:2)
Sending-out extortionate letters that scare the receiver, for fear they might be drug to court. The only difference is that BSA letters don't demand $5000 bribe.
What scum.
Why is anyone surprised? (Score:5, Insightful)
The BSA then sends out a letter demanding the business owner fill out a software audit, or potentially face court action — even though the BSA has no power to demand such an audit and hasn't pursued a court case in five years. 'It's designed to scare the recipient into thinking that they're obliged to provide certain information when, in fact, it's difficult to see that they are,' said a leading IT lawyer."
We've seen this tactic over and over. Any time someone is trying to make a revenue stream off of anything that can be digitally copied. MPAA, RIAA, BSA. Illegally gather information, pretend you're the police, then extort with the threat of a lawsuit.
It's the system that's broken. That's the bigger problem. The parasites that get fat off the system are a symptom. Fix the system.
Re: (Score:2)
yes, and the audit is, you guessed it, at the company's expense!
Combine that with the fact that Microsoft' licensing terms is so obscure that even Microsoft salesman don't get it right, and you've got a win-win situation (for Microsoft, of course)
Re:Why is anyone surprised? (Score:5, Interesting)
I've told the story here before but about three or four years ago the company I was working for went through a SAM review. So far as we could tell, it was because the company had bought out a previous organization, including software licenses, and then we had decided not to renew the very expensive Software Assurance agreement.
I get this very pleasant email from a Microsoft business partner telling me that they were going to conduct the audit, with a spreadsheet for me to fill out. I did my thing, even working with the reseller who had sold the previous company most of the licenses, got it all tickety-boo, and then the fun began. The guy kept coming back with more requests for clarification, with more issues, and finally, as this dragged on to three weeks, I finally lost my cool and sent the guy an angry email, CCed to the reseller, telling him that as far as I was concerned we were in full compliance, we had shown we had licenses for everything, and that this process was going to wrap up now.
A few days later, the guy sent me an email saying that 5 CALs on one of our Server 2003 installs wasn't a proper match, and to bring us into compliance I would have to convert them from user CALs to device CALs. I sent an email back saying "Sure thing" and that was that. Never did convert them to device CALs either, fucking assholes. So far as I could tell, the whole process was designed to try to trip me up so that I would have to buy more licenses of something... anything. I'm sure the business partner would get a cut from that. My boss felt like sending the company a bill for the time wasted.
Re: (Score:3)
I've been responsible for software licensing myself and I've reached the inescapable conclusion that you are not expected to get it right. Whether by accident or design, the system is set up to make you fail.
Why? Simple. The licensing agreements are so labyrinthine that you practically need a team of lawyers in charge of licensing software.
You've got some licenses that allow for employee personal use at home, some that allow for no more than a single spare copy for backup purposes (Oh that's good. So I can'
Reply letter (Score:5, Insightful)
They were sending out this letter years ago. If I got a letter like that, I would send them the following reply:
Dear Mr./Ms. xxxxxxxx:
I am in receipt of your letter dated yyyymmdd. I have reviewed our software and it is all in compliance with the licensing. I would like to invite you to our office but we are too busy to accommodate visitors. Thank you for your concern.
Sincerely,
nbauman
I'm not sure how they would respond. I expect they would either forget about it, send a threatening but bluffing letter, or send a real threatening letter. I wouldn't let them into my premises unless I thought they could back it up with a court order.
The defense would be, "The only person who installed illegal software was the ratxxx disgruntled employee who rattedxxxxxx informed on us to you."
Of course if I really did have a lot of expensive illegal software, I'd check with my lawyer to figure out the most prudent response.
I wonder how they could legally force you to let them investigate.
They might bring a civil suit and force disclosure. Lawyers are extremely reluctant to commit perjury for their clients in discovery.
Re:Reply letter (Score:4, Informative)
Why not go all the way and just require a court order?
I don't know that they can force you to let them investigate, but some software licenses include a clause requiring you to cooperate with software audits. If you're licensed for such software, you're now in breach and they can probably revoke the license. All they need is evidence you're still using the software after that and that's grounds for a lawsuit, which includes discovery.
What's the benefit for whistleblowers? (Score:2)
Had I realized that I can actually be compensated for narcing on the rat bastards, I'd have done it years ago...
Its all a Business Model (Score:5, Interesting)
BSA "stab in the back" advertisement (Score:2)
I distinctly remember in about 1999 I was walking through O'Hare airport and I saw an advertisement from the BSA posted on the wall. It had the caption, "Stab Your Boss in the Back," and a picture of a guy in a 3-piece suit with a knife in his back. I kick myself for not getting a photo of the sign. I have been hunting for a reliable record of this advertisement in vain.
So, anyone who can find a picture, or other testimony to that nasty BSA ad will be a hero.
There's a small chance that I remember wrong. Lik
Re:BSA "stab in the back" advertisement (Score:4, Funny)
I remember a knife, but ... (Score:2)
You surely deserve the hero award for finding this one. I distinctly remember a knife, and a whole body in a suit, rather than a nail and a tie. My memory may be off, or there may have been variations. They are both pretty nasty, and suggest revenge far more than justice.
Re: (Score:2)
Can you provide a link to the Wired article, too? I should complete my notes and avoid hunting for this again during some other discussion.
Re: (Score:2)
This [catplaysgames.com] is all I can find...
BSA only screws over small/mid sized companies. (Score:2)
Only problem is that BSA only screws small/mid size companies. I'm sure someone can turn this into a conspiracy lawsuit against them - since when have they gone after large companies? Never.
I know of at least two people who reported piracy to BSA, and BSA's response to the person who reported it was "we do not see any evidence of piracy".
Re: (Score:2)
Do you know which companies were accused, or how big they were? On the face of it, such a response could indicate a decent discretion on the part of BSA, not pursuing a frivolous case. Based on other reports of BSA behavior, I tend to suspect the worse interpretation, but testimony is so much better than suspicion ...
Only problem is that BSA only screws small/mid size companies. I'm sure someone can turn this into a conspiracy lawsuit against them - since when have they gone after large companies? Never.
I know of at least two people who reported piracy to BSA, and BSA's response to the person who reported it was "we do not see any evidence of piracy".
Re: (Score:2)
C'mon, when has the schoolyard bully ever tried to take the lunch money from the football jocks?
Re: (Score:2)
We refer you to the reply given in the case of (Score:5, Informative)
"We acknowledge your letter of 29th April referring to Mr J. Arkell. We note that Mr Arkell's attitude to damages will be governed by the nature of our reply and would therefore be grateful if you would inform us what his attitude to damages would be, were he to learn that the nature of our reply is as follows: fuck off."
Re: (Score:2)
Remember that case well. Quoted it often.
Ob. Letter (sent - and responded!) (Score:5, Funny)
Dear BSA,
It has been a subject of much hilarity in this office that we should be sent a threatening letter from yourselves, a self-authority in software licensing with little to no legal authority to follow through on your threat.
However, for your records it should be noted that as a registered company of Legal Advocates (Company #07248227), one of the things we tend to do is ensure that we operate completely legally. As software goes, this means the purchase of license keys as and when necessary. While we are not at liberty to discuss details for reasons of client information security and more to the point, national security, we can assure you and your employers at Microsoft and Adobe that our licenses are copasetic. When you can show the following, we would gladly participate in a full audit, at your expense and on your time:
1. SCI-5 clearance signed by the Minister for Defence and the Home and Foreign Secretaries;
2. Written Royal assent for the potential of disclosure of information which could affect the safety and security of Royal members, Crown properties and/or Subjects;
3. A commitment to Non-Disclosure under Section 4 of the Official Secrets Act 1989, by persons thereto authorised to carry out the audit;
4. Assent by the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales to cover the potential disclosure of information pertaining to live in camera proceedings;
5. Reference to the Authority of Law by which the BSA operate;
6. Reference to the Authority of Law which compels ourselves as individuals and the Company as a Legal entity to co-operate with a private concern whose singular purpose seems to be the extraction of money from legitimate businesses and individuals with zero return.
When (not before) all the above conditions are met, shall we even consider further correspondence.
Good Day to you, Sir.
-
Their response:
Sir,
We acknowledge receipt of your counteroffer, and hereby inform you that no further action shall be taken.
Faithfully,
pp.
Information from a BSA opponent (Score:5, Informative)
While hunting for material on BSA, I found the most concentrated anti-BSA material here: http://www.bsadefense.com/main/index.aspx [bsadefense.com]
This is a law firm that makes money defending businesses against BSA, so you can be as skeptical as you like. As far as I read, their claims agree with what I have learned elsewhere.
Evasion vs Mitigation (Score:5, Informative)
Here is our register - showing the dates that we have regularly internally audited it. Oh, and from a software perspective, here is our policy regarding workstation rebuilds to obliterate non-company software - and our log of workstation rebuilds. Oh, and here is our staff policy that makes employees responsible for any illegal/unlicensed software on their workstations. Feel free to come and audit our register at your own expense.
Any business that is not in a position to make this statement is not serious about being a business. I own a thriving software house and we have such a register, policies, etc. Let's face it folks - we're in IT. This kind of thing is almost trivial to set up - and it is relatively easy to maintain.
Re:Evasion vs Mitigation (Score:4, Insightful)
It is good to be able to make this statement, but actually make it unless legally required to do so. You would be giving them evidence that they could twist to use against you. Don't give them that (unless advised by a Lawyer).
Ernie Ball left Microsoft (Score:2)
audit software (Score:4, Funny)
Dear BSA:
Your Audit Software failed to install. I had our senior system administrator take a look at it and he said it wasn't compatible with Wine. I asked him if maybe it would work with Beer. He gave be some puzzled look and mumbled something about a "DEB or RPM version". Do you know what he might be talking about?
(signed) Bob, senior PHB.
Re: (Score:2)
That is until you're sued into the poor house for breaking the NDA you signed.
Re: (Score:2)
NDAs that force you to hush up about illegal activities are void (at least in my country, dunno about the US, their laws are sometimes a bit odd...).
Re: (Score:2)
If you go through a needless review because an ex-employee lied, then I'm assuming there are all sorts of delightful civil remedies available to you.
Ok, an honest answer (Score:5, Insightful)
Since you say you're not trolling I'll take you at your word and give you my best answer.
It's not the "what", it's the "how".
The "what" is someone getting fairly paid for their work. Which they have every right to do. Microsoft, the artists represented by the RIAA, everyone. You produce something of value and ask a price for it, you deserve to be paid. Or not be paid if the price is too high. Let the market decide. But either way you deserve to be in that marketplace and not sidestepped illegally.
The "how" is the problem.
What these organizations are doing is criminal. Pretending to be the police is illegal. Threats are illegal. Extortion is illegal. Racketeering is illegal. And lobbying for our rights to be taken away because they diminish their ability to monitor what everyone - guilty and innocent alike - are up to is wrong. The cure is worse than the disease.
To illustrate my point, I'm pretty sure we both would agree that unregistered guns are used in a lot of violent crime. So do you think it would be reasonable to have a local group of concerned citizens search your house looking for some? Hand you some forms demanding you list what weapons you do have, and tell you that if you have any guns that aren't properly registered, you'll be in trouble? Offer bribes to people you know and offer them cash if they can recall seeing you with a gun?
You see, it's not what they are doing but how they are going about it that is the problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Since you say you're not trolling I'll take you at your word and give you my best answer.
It's not the "what", it's the "how".
The "what" is someone getting fairly paid for their work. Which they have every right to do. Microsoft, the artists represented by the RIAA, everyone. You produce something of value and ask a price for it, you deserve to be paid. Or not be paid if the price is too high. Let the market decide. But either way you deserve to be in that marketplace and not sidestepped illegally.
The "how" is the problem.
I can't get too worked up about this. You get a letter from a a business organization that says someone has accused you of not being in compliance. They want you to prove you are in compliance, and if you don't cooperate, they might take you to court.
At its heart, this sounds like virtually every letter written by every attorney - we want you to do X, and if you don't do X, we reserve the right to go to court.
Take the letter seriously or not as you like. But know that just like a plea bargain, you are ro
Re: (Score:3)
It's a terrible analogy. Unregistered guns are a criminal matter. Ordinary citizens have no right to act as police. Unlicensed software is a civil matter. Not only is the copyright holder allowed to pursue infringement cases, he is the only one (or his agent) who can. The only options they really have are to either get the business to voluntarily give up the information, or start an actual lawsuit. Once a lawsuit is started it gets very expensive for everyone.
Re:Just more anti-MS (Score:4, Insightful)
Microsoft should have paid for that audit. How many man hours did the high school spend on it? Why should we, the taxpayers, pay for this? Those workers are our workers, not MS's workers, and we expect their time to be devoted to the work we hired them for. What's next, are we to frisk all the students to make sure they didn't steal any gum from the neighboring convenience store? Maybe anytime so much as a dry erase marker goes missing, we should lock all the students in the building until the thieving criminal scum who stole it fesses up, returns it, and apologizes to the entire school?
I find it very weird you seem to think this audit was okay. You're even grateful at how nice and sweet it was of MS not to penalize you. Wow, just wow. Would you be okay with your employees popping over to a temp agency to do a little extra work on the side while they are on the clock with you? If a former employee turns you in for some petty violation, are you going to admit you screwed up, and "take your medicine" with a smile because you deserved to be punished? Especially if it's not clear you did anything wrong?