Slashdot Mirror
Business Software Alliance "Grace Period"
The BSA is running (until January 31) a "Grace Period" for "voluntary compliance" in the cities of San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose, Houston,Norfolk/Richmond, Nashville, Indianapolis, Bozeman, and Orlando. Small businesses recieve a card in the mail, having been assigned a tracking number, so you know you're in their files. In previous press releases they state that they send out up to 700,000 of these cards simultaneously. Scanning their reported settlement victories, they then seem to pick 2-4 business to destroy. If the businesses don't go along, the BSA hires the Federal Marshals as mercenaries to help ensure compliance with their extortion. Microsoft, unsurprisngly, is a big supporter of this and pushes it to vendors as a chance to strengthen customer relations. (this is a powerpoint document, but thankfully you can also have it: translated via google). CD: Here is a link to the press release on this matter.
OK, let's say you steal $50,000 from the bank, and the police come to your house and say "Give us the $50,000 or we'll throw you in jail." Is that extortion? Hardly.
Why do people think that illegally copying software is a right? If you don't want to pay for software, use open-source software instead. Isn't that why we're all here -- to promote open source software solutions? Why are we hell bent on also trying to legitamize bootlegged software, when doing so does nothing but make "free software advocates" look like a bunch of freeloaders?
I wish people would understand that free software is exactly the opposite of freeloading -- it's giving your work away for the public good. Articles like this one put me in the same group of people that are on the side of the illegal theft of intellectual property that someone has chosen not to make public. It's someone else's right to ask me to pay for software, just as it's my right to give it away for free.
Go write free software. Go use free software. Go evangelize free software. But please, don't be so fucking petty as to complain about someone enforcing the fact that their software isn't free.
Or in other words making people pay what they agreed to pay when they started using the software. Its not like they didn't have a choice.
Emotive words like "mercenaries" and "extortion" don't help, any more than words like "piracy" and "software theft".
Meantime this is an excellent time to stop preaching to the choir and start telling those businesses about open source software. Issue press releases. Get interviewed by radio and TV.
Paul.
You are lost in a twisty maze of little standards, all different.
..the BSA hires the Federal Marshals as mercenaries to help ensure compliance with their extortion..
Well, thanks for that nicely impartial journalist attitude there. Its amazing what a simple line can do to affect the inflection of a story.
Instead, how about..
'the BSA hires Federal Marshals to ensure the hard work and effort by its members is not stolen by parasitic scum who steal like common thieves.'
I develop software for a small company. I'm quite lucky to be where I am now, doing what I want to. I also work on OSS as a hobby.. (Such as a perl port of PG+ that runs Uberworld.) Trust me, if ever I meet someone offering me a 'warez' copy of something I wrote I certianly won't be giving them a big cheery grin..
http://twitter.com/onion2k
And let me explain why.
:-)
(moderators: this is not a troll.)
The harder the BSA come down on companies like a ton of bricks, the more attractive open source alternatives will be.
The microsoft licensing schemes are so convoluted that even if you buy stuff from legit resellers bundled with your PCs, you still may be technically in violation of m$ licensing, depending on how your software is being used.
It's almost impossible for large corporations to be 100% sure of total compliance, even if all their software is purchased legitimately. And the BSA knows this. It's exactly like the mafia's "protection" racket.
Fortunately corporations now have a legit means of escape. Replace NT servers with Linux ones. The cost of switching to Linux might be high, but often the cost of having to "get compliant" is higher. And Linux is a one time cost, whereas you can be assured the BSA will be knocking on your door regularly if they think they can get away with it.
So I say bring on the BSA gestapo! They will be inadvertently helping promote open source alternatives, it's better promotion than Linux could ever buy (though we can exploit the situation if we choose
Imagine if the RIAA sent a card to every person in America asking them to sign a statement saying they don't own any pirated music, and if they don't sign, you can be raided by federal marshalls for suspicion of piracy. A long time ago, I thought 2002 would be a good year. Finally peace on Earth, regular space missions, a moon base, etc. Instead we have endless bickering over a few dollars worth of binary digits that somehow do something that is expected to be traded for money or something else of value. A few dollars worth of binary digits that, if you refuse to Opt Out of a legal battle by signing a statement, will mean you are subject to illegal search and seizure. This would be like the Government sending a card for everyone to sign stating they "don't have any illegal weapons" and if you don't sign, you are immediately suspected of owning illegal weapons. Whatever happened to the 5th Amendment? Whatever happened to being innocent until PROVEN guilty? Are they going to take that right away now?
Cool! Amazing Toys.
No.
I'm speaking here as someone who, a couple years ago, was working in the IS department of a company which was hit by one of these threatening letters.
Generally, they instruct the target company to run their auditing software to "prove" that they are in compliance with all software licenses on site. Such letters of instruction usually include a threat of legal action if the company does not comply. The threat is their standard operating procedure - it doesn't matter if you are 100% legal.
Since most companies would rather not pay to defend against a frivolous lawsuit, or risk an oversight of some software than Joe Employee may have installed, they end up performing the audit. The BSA doesn't offer any compensation for IS hours lost due to this audit.
They also arrange penalties for any discovered "violations". Some of these can quickly get out of hand. For example, in my case, a copy of WordPerfect 5.1 (yes, in 1997!) was lying around on a Netware server which 350 people had access to. Nobody even knew it was there. Guess how many times that violation stacked up, even though no one was using the software.
Although Slashdot's writeup sounds biased, it really IS extortion taking place.
- SEAL
Jesus christ, they aren't sending Federal Marshalls storming into a business for no reason. That could not happen without some sort of precident. I don't believe that the BSA has ever done this and not uncovered mountains of software license violations.
Did you read in the article that the BSA were sending like 700.000 of these threats at a time?
Obviously, all the evidence they need for sending someone a letter is that they run a business.
OK, now suppose your business has a clear policy of never using pirated software. So what can you do?
1. You run the self-audit software. It is closed-source spyware, you have no idea what it will report, and you cannot expect any compensation if it breaks your mission-critical machine. This is an ugly option and there is no good reason why a honest businessman should be subjected to it. And nobody, guilty or innocent, would subject themselves to this voluntarily.
2. You "refuse to cooperate". Then you will get a visit from law enforcement, probably greatly disrupting your operation. Moreover, if they find anything wrong - your sysadmin made a mistake, or some stupid employee downloaded a serial number for Winzip - then you will have to pay for the exercise. Even if everything is actually perfect, something may be construed against you and you will face further expenses defending yourself.
Now tell me again that this is only fair.
Someone like Red Hat need to run an ad in the business section of each towns local news paper with a copy of the threating letter and let people know there is a better way...
They are fools if they don't use MS marketing when they can.
Let's start this off here:
"We know that we are being illegally deprived of millions of dollars annually..."
Wrong. You are guilty of assuming that the people who pirate software would otherwise pay your company for that software. I can guarantee you that the guy who steals cars would not otherwise pay GM, Ford, Toyota, etc. the value of those cars. The millions that you and the BSA and others like to flaunt as damages or deprivations are a bunch of crap, only touted to try to win sympathy for a bastard cause.
Next:
"The key words here are wrongful use. Is it wrong, when someone has stolen something from you, to offer them a conditional amnesty?"
Uh, yes. It is wrong. It is indicative of the fact that the BSA knows that what they're doing does constitute extortion under any legal or other definition of the term. The BSA has no legitimate power of their own. None. Zilch. Nada. They are not a law enforcement agency. Tbey are not a court of law. The only thing they are is a kangaroo court full of fools. When they attempt to use their illegitimate power to threaten me, "under color of official right," they commit extortion. Plain and simple. They have no right to interfere in any matter pertaining to me or my business. I do not have any contract with the BSA whereby I grant them license to extort my money/property. Perhaps they would like it if I investigated them for something animal poaching. I have no right to do so, nor any proof that they are actually illegally killing animals, but I'll surely grant them amnesty (conditionally, of course) if they will pay me a few hundred thousand dollars!
And finally:
"Calling this extortion is akin to the robbery victim who pleads on the news for the return of his wallet - no questions asked - and all will be forgiven: is the victim then the extortionist?"
There's a big difference. A robbery victim can usually offer pretty good evidence that he/she has actually been deprived of property. The BSA cannot. Instead, the BSA sends out hundreds of thousands of notices telling people/businesses that they are probably guilty of stealing, but they can be forgiven -provided they are willing to break out the checkbook. Isn't that what Jim Baker and the other televangelists used to do -- selling forgiveness? To further your analogy, the BSA is not pleading on the news for the return of their property. Rather, what the BSA is doing would be akin to rounding up a group of thousands of potential suspects, even though only a few may have actually committed the robbery, and telling them all that they could purchase amnesty for the low low price of $$$bling-bling. It doesn't mattter that the overwhelming majority are not guilty. All that matters to the BSA is that they collect enough money to remain solvent until next year's extortions begin. The BSA acts as though you are guilty until proven innocent, there's no way are you gonna sell me that vaporware.
Windows is going the way of phlogiston...