Slashdot Mirror


A Look Inside the BSA

die_jack_die writes: "SFGate is running this article about the Business Software Alliance. I'm sure the BSA loves when they get scary stories of their tactics into the press, but this piece does quote the EFF's Fred Von Lohman making the point that companies who don't want to deal with the BSA can always use Open Source software. Most telling quote: 'every cent of those massive settlements stays within the BSA -- member software organizations receive only the licensing fees.'"

368 comments

  1. About Fred von Lohmann... by bob@dB.org · · Score: 0, Redundant
    from http://www.eff.org/homes/fred_von_lohmann.html

    Fred von Lohmannis a Senior Staff Attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, specializing in intellectual property law. Before joining EFF, Fred was a visiting researcher with the Berkeley Center for Law and Technology. His research focused on the impact of peer-to-peer technologies on the future of copyright. Prior to his research fellowship, Fred was an associate with the international law firm Morrison & Foerster LLP, concentrating on transactions and counseling involving the Internet and intellectual property. He comments frequently on copyright law and the Internet, including issues related to online music distribution and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and has advised a variety of Internet clients, including Yahoo, Verio, Myplay, and NBCi. Fred has an A.B. from Stanford University and a J.D. from Stanford Law School.

    --
    Acts@core.mailboks.com Acrux@core.mailboks.com Adam@core.mailboks.com Adar@core.mailboks.com Ada@core.mailboks.com
  2. Or, vice-versa... by ekrout · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...making the point that companies who don't want to deal with the BSA [suing them for pirating software] can always use Open Source software

    Well, sure, you can use open source or free software whenever you'd like.

    You could also simply pay for the proprietary software that you need to use rather than stealing it. If I had my own company, I would make certain that we ran things properly, which would involve, among other things, not pirating software.

    --

    If you celebrate Xmas, befriend me (538
    1. Re:Or, vice-versa... by cmowire · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's not the big problem here. The big problem is when the BSA goes after a company who is careful about their software licensing, but who didn't keep good enough records.

      Do you keep every single receipt? Remember what the article said, the box is not enough. The license often gets tossed out and only the manuals and maybe the box kept. And the receipt gets thrown out after some time.

      Does Fry's or Radio Shack visit my house on occasion to make sure that I can prove to them that every little piece of electronics in my house hasn't been stollen? Do the grocery stores inspect my fridge to make sure I didn't some sausages down my pants last time I shopped?

    2. Re:Or, vice-versa... by The+Man · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Well, sure, you can use open source or free software whenever you'd like. You could also simply pay for the proprietary software that you need to use rather than stealing it.

      If you do s/need/choose/ I'd tell you I couldn't have said it better myself. Stealing is wrong. So is wasting the investors' money on the Bill Gates and Larry Ellison Retirement Fund. Therefore, you should choose not to use proprietary software. Of course, if you do choose to use it, you should pay for it and follow all terms of the license.

      Seriously, the FSF should join the BSA in licensing crackdowns. It's called "product differentiation."

    3. Re:Or, vice-versa... by dvdeug · · Score: 2

      ...making the point that companies who don't want to deal with the BSA [suing them for pirating software] can always use Open Source software [Comments in brackets his]

      The issue is always not dealing with a BSA suit. What about dealing with BSA threats? What if they want to investiage you because of rumors or lies? What happens if you own 12 copies of Windows and 12 machines, but due to admin carelessness, two machines use the same serial number?

      You could also simply pay for the proprietary software that you need to use rather than stealing it.

      That won't stop their threats. That won't nessecarily stop them from investigating you. Even if all your software is legal, they can still waste your time going through your records on the matter.

    4. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Well, sure, you can use open source or free software whenever you'd like. "

      They are paying for open source software. The cost is downloading it...because it is *gasp* free! Are you saying that proprietary software is better because it costs money? Some free products are just as good, and some software-for-profit are just plain BAD. It has little to do with COST. No one is going to use something that absolutely sucks just because it is free, and few will pay for excessivly priced software. But if you want to dump tons of money on crap, then good for you, you are contributing to the economy just like GW says you should. End of story. Just don't expect others to pay for crap.

      P.S. I do use and have PURCHASED for-profit software, but not because I like wasting money on crap. And yes I do use free software, but only when it is good. So there.

    5. Re:Or, vice-versa... by ekrout · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Does Fry's or Radio Shack visit my house on occasion to make sure that I can prove to them that every little piece of electronics in my house hasn't been stollen?

      Listen, buddy. As Richard Stallman points out, software is an entire different entity. It's very easily copied. It's easy to take those copies and transfer them. Therefore, the amount of damage that can be done by pirating software is massive and much larger than other more tangible products.

      And please don't give me the "well software should be free" argument. There are some custom applications that would never have been started (or completed) in the open source / free software world that are necessary for many folks. Using that as an excuse for pirating software is like saying an attractive woman deserves to get raped.

      --

      If you celebrate Xmas, befriend me (538
    6. Re:Or, vice-versa... by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Okay, to put it another way, does Stephen King come to your house to make sure you don't have pirated copies of his books?

      Regarding 'software should be free,' I don't agree that there should be a total lack of copyright, but the value of an _ideal_ copyright scheme does not legitimize all copyright schemes.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    7. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love how any anti-Slashdot (i.e. paying for some software *gasp*) gets modded down into tarnation.

      This is the very reason why people finally stop reading the site, and also why some troll it.

      Think about it (UID of 90% of posts these days are from 400,000+ users).

    8. Re:Or, vice-versa... by geekoid · · Score: 4, Interesting

      except when some yahoo employ installs something he has at home.
      But tnats not really the point is it? Its about someone being ably to put you and your company ion a position of having to proe your innocents, as opposed to defend it. The worse part is The BSA will audit anybody, even based n anonymous tips, without substantiation. so could call up, and the next thing you know, your being audited. Then I let your share holders no, now your business could take a dip, and not recover.
      \Not to mention, the BSA billboards give me that "If your good, you'd tell on your parents" kind of creepiness.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    9. Re:Or, vice-versa... by cmowire · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Oh, don't get me wrong. I wholeheartedly believe that it should be possible and encouraged for companies to charge for their software. You have spent too much time with Stallman wanabees that you are confusing that with my general distaste for strong-arm tactics.

      My point is, there are three categories that we can break companies down into. There are the companies who are anal and legal, where they make sure that every software license is recorded and accounted for. There are the companies who figure that it's their god-given right to pirate software. And then there are the companies who are, in fact, legal, but don't have the necessary documentation to convince the BSA, nor the money to fight them in court.

      The problem is that the BSA has done a knockout job of convincing corporations, especially large ones, to stay legal. Which leaves them the small companies, individuals, and strong-arm tactics to milk money from companies who don't necessarily keep good records.

      I mean, the biggest problem that most companies face with respect to software licenses right now is not any malicious effort on the part of the management, but instead the employee who installs Photoshop off of the network drive just because it hasn't been locked up properly and he/she doesn't quite understand that the company doesn't have a site license for everything.

    10. Re:Or, vice-versa... by GreyPoopon · · Score: 1

      Get a clue, dude. Cmowire made no comments about supporting piracy or "software should be free." The major point here, in case your head has been too dense to absorb it, is that these guys are going after people who have legimately paid for their software licenses, but no longer have all the paperwork to back up their purchase. Almost nobody keeps receipts for too long. And the license sometimes finds its way into the garbage accidentally. On top of that, changes in licensing requirements have left some businesses who didn't understand the change in a questionable status. But here's the most disturbing thing. These jerks are intruding into peoples' businesses without what I'd consider probable cause and using other questionable scare tactics. My opinion is that unless they have an "inside tip" from a company, they have no authority or business auditing you. Mere failure on one's part to dignify their questioning with a response should not be considered grounds for a search warrant.

      --

      GreyPoopon
      --
      Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?

    11. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      I know someone that was audited by the BSA and decided to fight it. Basically they countered by stating they wanted full disclosure of who reported them so as to determine the validity of the claim prior to wasting internal resources and dollars. They also argued that the reporting tools are a violation of privacy. Yes, they expected them to place some software on their network which scans their entire network not to mention each machine's registry. Third, they also argued that even if they were in violation of license, the license is between them and the vendor (after all, the license does not allow for the BSA as having legal proxy interests) and unless the vendor in questions decides that they'd like to personally persue the issue, the BSA does not have legal authority or the legal grounds to persue the action. Furthermore, they argued that even if something odd was discovered and they lost, only the government has the right to impose fines on legal matters as such and they would be within their legal rights to simply purchase any outstanding licenses or settle directly with the vendor in question and completely dismiss the BSA altogether thereby eliminating the need to pay any fines or added fees.

      Last I heard, even though two ex-employees had turned them in, the BSA simply walked from the issue as, from what I gathered, they really don't have a legal leg to stand on.

    12. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Listen, buddy. As Richard Stallman points out, software is an entire different entity.

      I'm sorry you're so confused, but there really is no difference. I walk into a store. I hand them some money. I walk out with a product. Period. I don't care if it's a TV, pair of shoes, can of soda, copy of Windows or a new car. I take that product home, the company who made it can fuck off.

      The only difference is that software companies have put absurd and unenforcable licensing agreements in place of the standard copyright notices. Are they legal? Probably not. Has anyone devoted the time and $$$$ to taking the matter to court? Don't know, but I doubt it. Instead, everyone's scared of big companies.

      BSA or Microsoft comes to me with a "violating" or "audit" notice? Piss off. You got enough evidence, you take me to court. And I'll sue your ass into the days of yore.

    13. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, the point of the article (reread it) is that the tactics of the BSA, for instance threatening letters, are threatening in and of themselves. Whether they catch you doing something wrong or not doesn't matter. It still sucks to have them knocking at your door and asking to "see your papers".

    14. Re:Or, vice-versa... by RickHunter · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Logical fallacy #1: Copyright infringement is a HELL of a lot less severe than rape or piracy. (The later of which used to result in a death penalty without trial. The only reason it still does not is because we've killed all the pirates.)

      Logical fallacy #2: Using RMS' philosophy to support one part of your argument, while directing another part towards knocking out the foundations of said argument. Software should be free to redistribute because making an additional copy has zero marginal cost.

      Logical fallacy #3: Exactly what damage is done by copyright infringement of software? My having a copy doesn't mean that you have fewer copies. Does my having a copy of your software do more damage to you than my stealing a truckful of electronics from Radio Shack does to them?

      Logical fallacy #4: If said applications did not exist, and there was a need felt for them, someone would provide them. (Under contract, if necessary) If they did not exist and no need was felt for them, they are unnecessary.

    15. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Therefore, you should choose not to use proprietary software.

      Yeah, but not proprietary software sucks.

      I mean just take a look at linux, compared to Win2k it's a peice of shit.

    16. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It's no good to show me a software box," says Blank. "We need proof of ownership, and that's a dated invoice." "It's a good idea to have a document-retention policy for your company," says Kruger. "If you don't keep documentation and you don't have any ability to show you own your software, it's a problem -- there's a point at which sloppiness can get you into trouble!"

      Isn't the point of a software license to prove your ownership?
      I work for a government agency and we have to turn in all our receipts. Yes I could have made copies but I always assumed that the physical CD, and or license was proof of ownership. Otherwise, what is the point of keeping that stuff.

    17. Re:Or, vice-versa... by fobbman · · Score: 1

      Hey dude, you mind if I copy that huge set of Optimus speakers you have over there? How many CD-R's you think it'll take?

    18. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't what planet you live on but on mine there are thousands of pirates operating right out in the open in the south asian seas. They have definitely not all been killed.

    19. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You could also simply pay for the proprietary software that you need to use rather than stealing it . If I had my own company, I would make certain that we ran things properly, which would involve, among other things, not pirating software.

      We pay for all our software in our office.

      Every audit actually turns up excess licenses.

      But we're still pinged periodically and told we need to do expensive audits to avoid legal action, which costs tens of thousands of dollars each year.

      The BSA are fucking nazis.

    20. Re:Or, vice-versa... by indiigo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes... we keep excellent records. Were we to be audited, I could say with 100% certainty that we are 100% compliant. We keep track of all software before and after it is purchased. Users do not have permissions to load software on their own machines, from partners down to clerks.

      Games are not allowed on the network not because they screw with company time, but because in most cases we don't have the accompanying license to ensure it's legal.

      User's home machines that connect to our network are under a policy that states that we have not supplied them with any unlicensed software.

      Yes we pay for the closed-source software.

      No we don't spend a lot of money. We skip lots of versions and upgrade for truly functional reasons.

      We are evaluating open source software--as the MS "upgrade advantage" is not a route we want to be going.

      But it's very easy to stay compliant...

      Can you tell what kind of company we are?

      An intellectual property/patent law firm.

      Love us or hate us... we practice what we preach.

      --
      fslg503-985-8686503-985-8686503-985-8686503-985-86 8650 3-985-fdsg8686503-985-8686503-985-8686503-9
    21. Re:Or, vice-versa... by John+Miles · · Score: 2, Funny

      Stephen King couldn't come to his house. Didn't you read the news? He's dead!

      You think that's gonna stop The Kingster?

      --
      Dahlmann tightly grips the knife, which he may have no idea how to use, and steps out into the plain.
    22. Re:Or, vice-versa... by maxpublic · · Score: 1

      Even so, if Microsoft or any software company showed up at my door demanding to prove that I'd purchased their product, they'd get a double-barrel shoved up their ass as they were escorted off the property.

      No company has the right to audit me. They aren't a legal arm of the government. If they have a complaint they can file it with the attorney-general and then *he* can try to prove I'm guilty - which he *has* to since in the legal system I'm innocent until he does.

      Max

      --
      My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
    23. Re:Or, vice-versa... by majcher · · Score: 2

      What I don't understand is what gives the BSA the right to come in and audit your software. Like the above poster says, why is it assumed that my business has pirated software? What ever happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? Seriously, maybe I'm just not familiar enough with how the BSA and related agencies work, but don't they need a warrant or something to come into a place of business and start shaking the IS department down for receipts?

    24. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Ogerman · · Score: 2

      If I had my own company, I would make certain that we ran things properly, which would involve, among other things, not pirating software.

      You're obviously not familiar with the hastle and expense of keeping track of client licenses for all of M$'s nonsense. And by the way, not paying for proprietary software is not stealing, it's non-compliance with a license agreement on copyrighted software. For it to be stealing, someone would have to be missing that which you took. Perhaps you could call it cheating, but not stealing.

    25. Re:Or, vice-versa... by morbid · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The depressing thing is, that here in the UK they do similar things (to the BSA) with television licenses. Since I grew up and left home, I have never posessed a TV, yet they still insist on sending threatening letters every few months and someone to "inspect" my premises for an illegal television, or TV receiving equipment.

      --
      I'm out of my tree just now but please feel free to leave a banana.
    26. Re:Or, vice-versa... by kz45 · · Score: 1

      The only difference is that software companies have put absurd and unenforcable licensing agreements in place of the standard copyright notices. Are they legal? Probably not. Has anyone devoted the time and $$$$ to taking the matter to court? Don't know, but I doubt it. Instead, everyone's scared of big companies.

      Unlike like a television or a radio, software can be infinitely copied. I agree with the notion that what the BSA are doing is bullshit, but the people that say that software licenses are "absurd" just want something for nothing. (free as in beer). If you don't like the license, don't USE it. Stop Bitching...PLEASE...

      I take that product home, the company who made it can fuck off.

      Just like the GPL, when you buy software, you do not "own" it.(with non-GPLd code You are merely renting it for a one time fee.).

      when you rent an apartment, can the owner "fuck off"?

    27. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I still remember the day that someone actually modded me +1 Informative.

      Must have been an accident... it's sooo close to Offtopic.

    28. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      BSA doesn't assume anything. They act on tips, which is their justificaction. Now because they can reasonably believe a crime has taken place, they have the law on their side.

    29. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Technician · · Score: 2

      I agree.. The day I get a threatening letter is the day I close shop and send the emplyees home. I don't need the overhead to use a shark cage to swim in the ocean. When the threat of sharks is too great, I stay out! I'll write my vendors and say why they are no longer my vendors. There is no way I can afford to loose my retirement to the sharks. I also am not going to throw out all the software I bought just because I can't find the reciept. I do have the original disks. Needing a reciept in addition to the Certificate of Authenticity, original packaging and disks is too much. I don't meet the requirements. I'll close shop before buying extra copies just for the file cabinet. I am not buying extra floor space and cabinets just to store this. It raises the cost of doing business too much.

      --
      The truth shall set you free!
    30. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Anthony+Boyd · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I would build on your post, and add one more problem with BSA's methods. That is, the company I work for was threatened with an audit, and, although we had licenses and came out unscathed, management was freaked out enough that they had to move two employees off their current tasks and onto documenting & proving our innocence. Aside from the fact that we had to spend money to prove we were good, there is the fundamental constitutional issue. In a US court of law, the burden is on the accuser to prove our guilt. I hate that the BSA's strong-arm tactics have cowed not just companies, but the US citizens working at those companies, who apparently don't understand their own rights. The burden of proof should be on the accuser.

    31. Re:Or, vice-versa... by nexthec · · Score: 1

      yes, the owner can fuck off. Unless he has proof, he can not force me out early, enter my appartment without warning, or tell me who can visit me, and at what times of day I can do what. so he can pretty much fuck off...thats why hes a "landlord" not an owner.

    32. Re:Or, vice-versa... by donutello · · Score: 2

      except when some yahoo employ installs something he has at home

      It's established precedent that companies are liable for the actions of their employees that were performed while they were on the job.

      So if a Ford manager maliciously makes sure that every tire is damaged, the customers can always sue Ford for damages, not just the manager.

      Ditto if a developer (or group of developers) at Microsoft intentionally put in code that makes Netscape not run on Windows, then Microsoft is liable, not just the individual employees.

      That is why companies send out memos to their employees saying "don't install unauthorized software" and that's why they fire employees when they learn that they have.

      --
      Mmmm.. Donuts
    33. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2, Flamebait
      Aside from the fact that we had to spend money to prove we were good, there is the fundamental constitutional issue. In a US court of law, the burden is on the accuser to prove our guilt. I hate that the BSA's strong-arm tactics have cowed not just companies, but the US citizens working at those companies, who apparently don't understand their own rights. The burden of proof should be on the accuser.
      Since when does the Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution apply to croporations?

      You yankees are so much suckers to the idea that the State is bad simply forgot to take constitutional and legal safeguards against abuse by nongovernmemental entities.

      You only get what you deserve.

    34. Re:Or, vice-versa... by RedWizzard · · Score: 2
      Unlike like a television or a radio, software can be infinitely copied. I agree with the notion that what the BSA are doing is bullshit, but the people that say that software licenses are "absurd" just want something for nothing. (free as in beer).
      That's no justification for software licenses. There is already adequate legal protection for software. It's called copyright.
    35. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
      Yes... we keep excellent records.
      ...
      But it's very easy to stay compliant... Can you tell what kind of company we are? An intellectual property/patent law firm. Love us or hate us... we practice what we preach.
      I thought that cobblers had the worst shoes*... :) :) :)

      * French proverb.

    36. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Anthony+Boyd · · Score: 2
      Since when does the Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution apply to croporations?

      Corporations are given legal status as persons in the USA. Any corporation brought to trial is afforded the same protections as a citizen. This also has negative impact -- in some cases, the executives of a company cannot be sued, even if you really want to. For instance, the Enron execs will not have their personal bank accounts seized (unless they were involved in extortion or something) and their life savings drained away. The only "person" that can be sued is the Enron entity, which has its own bank accounts.

    37. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Doctor+Memory · · Score: 1

      does Stephen King come to your house to make sure you don't have pirated copies of his books?

      Shhhh! Don't give Harlan Ellison any ideas!

      --
      Just junk food for thought...
    38. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      plz do not insult our yankee laws if you do not even know what they are.

    39. Re:Or, vice-versa... by DavidJA · · Score: 2

      Do you keep every single receipt? Remember what the article said, the box is not enough. The license often gets tossed out and only the manuals and maybe the box kept. And the receipt gets thrown out after some time.

      Do _I_ keep every recept, no, I'm actually quite bad at that, BUT - my company keeps every receipt for everything they purchase.

      It has to! Software purchases can be used to offset a companies tax obligations, and do to that I am required to keep every receipt.

      Do you think the tax office would accept a box as proof that I purchased the software?

    40. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Arandir · · Score: 2

      Legally, the box is enough. If you don't have the box then it is possible that you have a pirated copy of the software. But if you do have the box then the probability that you have a legal copy of the software is extraordinarily high.

      Copyright violation is a felony. The onus is on the BSA to demonstrate to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt I have an illegal copy of the software. The lack of a receipt is not proof of that.

      I have great respect for the law. I have no respect for lawyers who selectively ignore points in the law that they don't like, and no respect for the corporations that hire them as their bullies.

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
    41. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work for a hardware company. We conduct audits on all our hardware suppliers to qualify them There are also contract in place for protect both sides.

      Can't companies follow this models auditing the software vender's conducts with respect to BSA ? Can't they make sure there are contracts in place to make sure that the software vendors who harrase them are disqualified as suppliers and get su for damages ? This is like a prematural (sp?) before companies goes to bed.

      A licence is a business agreement so why would you agree to it if it is one sided ?

    42. Re:Or, vice-versa... by nehril · · Score: 2

      um, when the Corporations have US Marshalls knock down your door and confiscate all your hard disks, you bet the Constitution applies.

    43. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Publicus · · Score: 3, Informative

      This is probably pointed out somewhere else, I didn't take the time to look...

      You gentlemen are confusing criminal law with civil law. A criminal in US court enjoys the presumption of innocence. The burden of proof is on the prosecutor. In civil court, a simple proponderence of evidence is neccessary. If the plaintiff can make it look like the defendent did them wrong, then they win. They don't have to prove it by dusting for prints or anything.

      A company accused of pirating software is taken to civil court. The plaintiff, in many cases the BSA I would imagine, must represent themselves. In criminal court however, the state (city, county, state, federal, whatever) prosecutes the case, and the victim of the crime is not required to pay the fees associated with going to court.

      Unless you're defending a drug cartel or something like that, criminal court is usually not very lucritive for a lawyer. Civil court, however, is very lucritive, and lawyers who practice in civil law are usually the ones who create the scumbag image.

      --

      My Karma was at 49, then they switched to words. All that work for nothing!

    44. Re:Or, vice-versa... by WNight · · Score: 2

      He wouldn't just search for books, he'd piss on your rug and insult your mother while he was at it.

      Lord help you if he didn't like you!

    45. Re:Or, vice-versa... by WNight · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree with the other poster. Post the name of your company and we'll get the BSA to audit you. We'll tell them you think their mothers are ugly, just to warm them up a bit.

      I'm sure that somewhere, on some old computer, is something they'll take offense to. Don't forget that if you ghost a drive onto a larger one, you're infringing. MS doesn't permit that. And even if they did, you'd need an extra license because for a while two copies exist.

      And have you really bought a new license when you change hardware? Don't forget that OEM Win 95 isn't allowed to be used as an upgrade unless you run it on the same hardware. It's really a clever way of making upgrades useless. Sure, upgrade to XP, but you won't be able to run it on your old hardware and you're not authorized to run it on the new stuff...

      I'm sure you intend to stay 100% within the law, and if intent mattered, you'd be safe. But there are so many provisions in EULAs that if you were to try to follow them all you basically wouldn't be able to compute.

      So come on, post your name, your company name, and preferably your boss's name, it'll save time in setting this up. Oh, a telephone number would save me the directory charges.

    46. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "As Richard Stallman points out, software is an entire different entity. It's very easily copied. It's easy to take those copies and transfer them. Therefore, the amount of damage that can be done by pirating software is massive and much larger than other more tangible products. "

      Wow. You're quite an expert on RMS. Except this isn't what he said. I'll point you to http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-free.html to highlight that you're implying Stallman wrote something that he specifically rejects.

      As for you, with your "damage" statement, you're talking out of your ass. Go to the above link because you seem to be ignorant about copyrights and what and why RMS says about software and copyrights.

      You're either a tool or a troll. Either way, you're wrong, and so far wrong that you're a joke.

    47. Re:Or, vice-versa... by WNight · · Score: 2

      Yes. They would.

      They accept a car as proof that you own a car all the time. Just ask tax dodgers who get caught for spending outside their reported income.

      They would likely assess it at the lowest value it could be found for, for write-off purposed, but it's pretty well a given that if you have it, you bought it.

    48. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      Do the grocery stores inspect my fridge to make sure I didn't some sausages down my pants last time I shopped?

      Does Natalie Portman come to your house to make sure you didn't pour hot grits down your pants?

    49. Re:Or, vice-versa... by WNight · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There's an advanced trolling technique. It involves saying "I know this is an unpopular opinion on Slashdot, home of the (software thieves/democratic babies/libertarian freak) but it needs saying ..."

      No matter the value of the message they'll get modded up for "being brave enough to be unpopular" and modded down for saying whatever it is they say, in such an inflamatory way. Thus they get their little shitstorm they wanted.

      You left out the "unpopular opinion here of Slashdot" part of your message, but it was otherwise exactly the same.

      People are rightly offended at having jack-booted thugs come with armed US marshals and force them to prove the ownership of all their software. You make it sound like only a thief would mind it, so of course you get called a troll.

      Imagine if the police raided your business and forced you to prove the ownership of all their furniture. It'd be just as ridiculous, but you wouldn't get trolls mouthing off about how if you're not a chair thief you obviously wouldn't mind a extra month or two of employee time tracking down receipts and matching them to furniture. So why do you feel the need to troll just because the topic is software?

    50. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "This is the very reason why people finally stop reading the site, and also why some troll it. "

      Actually its people who can't think past the end of their noses that that are boring and not worth the read.

      You fall into that category, but I'm doing you a favor by pointing out how stupid you are.

      That gives you something to work on.

    51. Re:Or, vice-versa... by h0mi · · Score: 1

      The amount of "damage" done due to piracy has been grossly overstated for a very long time, and continues to be.

      But that's not particularly relevant to the BSA's strongarm actions. This is about gestapo-like actions in order to catch pirates. If it isn't justifiable in order to "save lives", it can't be justifiable in order to save some money.

    52. Re:Or, vice-versa... by mangu · · Score: 2, Informative
      A criminal in US court enjoys the presumption of innocence

      Right.


      In civil court, a simple proponderence of evidence is neccessary

      I don't know what a "proponderence" is, so I don't know if this is wrong or right.


      If the plaintiff can make it look like the defendent did them wrong, then they win.

      Assuming that by "defendent" you mean "defendant", you are wrong. A defendant is right by default, no matter where you try the case -- civil or criminal court. It's always the duty of the accuser to prove the defendant wrong.


      Civil court, however, is very lucritive

      if, by "lucritive" you mean "lucrative", you may be right or wrong, depending on the case. There are "ambulance chasers" who are happy to get a few meager dollars on each case, and then there are the Ralph Naders.

    53. Re:Or, vice-versa... by BlowCat · · Score: 2
      Points 1 and 2 are fine.

      3: The damage is indirect, but it can be proven given enough well-paid lawyers - if you make a copy without my permission, I could argue that if you didn't have that opportunity, you would buy another copy from me, rather than e.g. use free software.

      4: If there are N and more potential users who want to pay for 1/Nth cost of the development, it may be impractical for them to cooperate if N is 100 and more. Even in case of two companies they may have reasons not to cooperate, yet the software they need may be too expensive if only one company pays for its development.

    54. Re:Or, vice-versa... by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

      Not intended as a flame or snide remark, but a genuine question: Since corporations in their modern form, at least, did not exist at the time that the US Constitution was written, can you explain how, exactly, the constitutions applies to the relationships between people and corporations in the USA? I'm neither a citizen or a resident of the USA so I didn't get educated or "indoctrinated" (depending on your point of view) by your education system and don't understand this.

      --
      If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
    55. Re:Or, vice-versa... by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

      I don't know what a "proponderence" is, so I don't know if this is wrong or right.

      The burden in criminal court is "beyond a reasonable doubt". The burden in civil court is "more likely than not."

      This, I am familiar with.

      --
      If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
    56. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Xenographic · · Score: 1

      Bullies usually back down when someone stands up to them. OTOH, they're quite good at encouraging the use of open source :] If they're not threatening enough [they are] they won't get anyone to comply. If they're too threatening [they are] they'll drive people from those vendors... probably to free licenses, which don't have these sorts of entanglements... :]

    57. Re:Or, vice-versa... by armb · · Score: 2

      > rape or piracy. (The later of which used to result in a death penalty without trial. The only reason it still does not is because we've killed all the pirates.)

      Many pirates were tried (and being killed in combat or lynched hardly counts as "a death penalty"), and there are still parts of the world where piracy is a problem.

      --
      rant
    58. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Miragejp · · Score: 0
      Your argument breaks down simply because software isn't worth as much as a tangible product. Let's face it - most software isn't worth the cost of the media it is published on.

      --
      In general, modern problems have medieval solutions...
    59. Re:Or, vice-versa... by mpe · · Score: 2

      Since when does the Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution apply to croporations?

      Since the USSC decided that US corporations are legally "people". The 4th, 5th (and quite possibly 2nd) ammendments would appear to be quite relevent here.

    60. Re:Or, vice-versa... by mpe · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You gentlemen are confusing criminal law with civil law. A criminal in US court enjoys the presumption of innocence. The burden of proof is on the prosecutor. In civil court, a simple proponderence of evidence is neccessary. If the plaintiff can make it look like the defendent did them wrong, then they win. They don't have to prove it by dusting for prints or anything.

      There is also the matter that in a civil case the "defendant" can counter sue the "plaintiff".

    61. Re:Or, vice-versa... by mpe · · Score: 2

      The major point here, in case your head has been too dense to absorb it, is that these guys are going after people who have legimately paid for their software licenses, but no longer have all the paperwork to back up their purchase.

      Because these are the easy targets. Easy to find and afraid of being accursed of being "pirates". Someone who actually really is pirating software as a commercial enterprice is going to be harder to find and knows enough about the law (and relevent legal loopholes) not to be easily intimidated

      On top of that, changes in licensing requirements have left some businesses who didn't understand the change in a questionable status.

      Or possibly the licence is so complicated that complying with it is a matter of subjective opinion.

    62. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Be careful that your PC does not have any hardware capable of tuning into UHF signals I.E a TV card. Those are covered under the TV Licencse too.

    63. Re:Or, vice-versa... by The+Smith · · Score: 1
      Before I gave up Microsoft products altogether, I used to have a pirated copy of Visual C++ on my computer. Given that I was a penniless high-school student at the time, is there any chance that I would have gone out and bought VC++ from a shop at its full price? None at all. Result: Microsoft lost nothing, and I gained a knowledge of C.

      The BSA's estimate of $4G lost through piracy is absolute BS(tm). They have only lost any money if the `pirates' would have bought the software legally, given no other choice. Their real losses are probably less than $1G, because most piracy happens in places (Russia, Bulgaria, China, India) where very few individuals earn enough to buy MS products at Western market prices.

    64. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Archanagor · · Score: 1

      yes, the owner can fuck off. Unless he has proof, he can not force me out early, enter my appartment without warning (generally, they have a good reason, like maintenece, pest control, etc...) , or tell me who can visit me, and at what times of day I can do what. so he can pretty much fuck off...thats why hes a "landlord" not an owner.

      You didn't read your lease agreement very carefully, did you? While it is true, they cannot force you out early, unless you're violating the terms of the lease. They can enter your apartment without warning. They do (to an extent) tell you what you can do and when. And (to an extent) can tell you who can visit.

      However, I'd like to know how in the hell rental relates to software? No. I did not just go down and sign a lease for Microsoft Windows XP. I purchased it from a retail outlet. I have a physical, tangable object in my possesion (a silvery, slightly refractory disc-shaped object that contains instructions for my computer to provide tools to work with it in a graphical manner). I sure as shit didn't rent it. I don't have to relinquish it after a certain period of time. It's mine. I bought it and paid for it. And, yet, they tell me I cannot do what I please with what I own. Pfft.

    65. Re:Or, vice-versa... by suicidal · · Score: 1

      croporations? Oh, I get it....those corporations that sell grain and other crops to nongovernmemental entities. (although I have NO IDEA what nongovernmemental is supposed to be).

    66. Re:Or, vice-versa... by ReidMaynard · · Score: 1

      not entirely true...if enron execs knew they were doing bad, they can be sued (civilly) and if violate criminal law thrown in jail. It's called white-collar crime. These laws have been on the books awhile, but rarely used by judges.

      My friends dad, back in the mid/early 70's, was convicted of white-collar crime and did 4 months in a minimum security NJ facility; but there was no civil suit to speak of, so he was able to keep all his off-shore monies; but he lost the 30 meter yatch which was in the corporations name...hehe that was some party boat....

      --
      -- www.globaltics.net

      Political discussion for a new world

    67. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Rupert · · Score: 2

      A friend of mine also has this situation. He doesn't help himself by having several computer monitors in his front room, giving a TV-like glow clearly visible from the street.

      However, every time the BBC's jackbooted thugs show up, he politely tells them that he'll be happy to let them come in and check for unlicenced TVs as soon as they come back with a warrant. So far, they haven't.

      --

      --
      E_NOSIG
    68. Re:Or, vice-versa... by ReidMaynard · · Score: 1

      which shows the Corporate West for what they are...a bunch of cover-yer-ass-lets-not-affect-my-stock-options pussies.

      hmmm ... what would Tony Soprano do ...?

      --
      -- www.globaltics.net

      Political discussion for a new world

    69. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This post is obviously flamebait. Someone please mod him to below my +4 threshhold

    70. Re:Or, vice-versa... by GreyPoopon · · Score: 1

      Wholeheartedly agreed.

      --

      GreyPoopon
      --
      Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?

    71. Re:Or, vice-versa... by jmccay · · Score: 2

      I have one big question. Under what aithority does this comapny have ANY power to audit anyone? They are not a government agencies. They have no official power. What they are doing is just the same as racketeering. They just don't have the power to do it. IANAL, but I would suggest companies counter sue the BSA and related companies for illegal racketeering. We as people, and companies, should not give up our rights so easily withiout a fight. The BSA is really a dog that's all bark and very little bite!

      --
      At the next eco-hypocrisy-meeting, count the private jets used to get to the meeting. Should be interesting to see that
    72. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Sentry21 · · Score: 2

      Assuming that by "defendent" you mean "defendant", you are wrong. A defendant is right by default, no matter where you try the case -- civil or criminal court. It's always the duty of the accuser to prove the defendant wrong.

      In Canadian court, and, I expect, in US courts as well, civil suits are measured on a 'balance of probabilities'. If you can convince the judge/jury that you were probably pirating software, then you lose. This would be easy to do. 'X-Company is a small, low-budget operation that cannot afford to spend any more money than it needs to. They have twelve computers running Windows 2000, yet can only show four licenses for them. Where are the licenses kept? Would any manager really buy a $500 operating system and then throw out the license?'

      Bam, guilty.

      --Dan

    73. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Dwonis · · Score: 2
      I'm sure you intend to stay 100% within the law, and if intent mattered, you'd be safe. But there are so many provisions in EULAs that if you were to try to follow them all you basically wouldn't be able to compute.

      There are also many provisions in EULAs that are unenforceable. Oh. What? DMCA? WELL FIX IT!

    74. Re:Or, vice-versa... by WNight · · Score: 2

      Well the poster seemed to suggest that his company wasn't only legal, but also was legal in a way that the BSA would recognize, which means being EULA compliant.

      I agree though that EULAs aren't enforceable and say things they wouldn't be, even if they were valid contracts. Except as you say, for the new laws like the DMCA and UCITA which serve to make more of that crap allowable.

      But the BSA doesn't care about that, they'll still threaten you like crazy.

    75. Re:Or, vice-versa... by nexthec · · Score: 1

      you didn't read your lease agreement very carefully, did you? While it is true, they cannot force you out early, unless you're violating the terms of the lease. They can enter your apartment without warning

      But I did read my aggreament, it specificaly states that the landlord must give me 24 hours notice.

      I wouldnt have signed it otherwise.

      They do (to an extent) tell you what you can do and when. And (to an extent) can tell you who can visit.

      No they dont. the only clause is how long they vist, ie aslong as they dont become unpaig tennants which is defined by law as one week in this state(or county).

      However, I'd like to know how in the hell rental relates to software? No.

      Now here I will not argue with you one iota, they can suck my sweaty nut sack if they think they can tell me what to do. thats kinda what I was saying earlier.

    76. Re:Or, vice-versa... by morbid · · Score: 0

      Good. That's exactly what I'll do. I don't even have a TV card in any of my machines. A friend of mine said, "a lot of people do not posess MOT certificates, but they don't send people round to check if they're operating a car illegally."

      --
      I'm out of my tree just now but please feel free to leave a banana.
    77. Re:Or, vice-versa... by Archanagor · · Score: 1

      But I did read my aggreament, it specificaly states that the landlord must give me 24 hours notice.

      I wouldnt have signed it otherwise.

      Things must be different in the state I'm in, because that's how our lease agreement is. Basically, services like pest control, maintenence ( if something is bad wrong ), etc may enter your apartment unannounced.

      No they dont. the only clause is how long they vist, ie aslong as they dont become unpaig tennants which is defined by law as one week in this state(or county).

      You're right. I got that kind of screwed up. I remember reading something along the lines of people with criminal backgrounds cannot stay in the apartment. (i.e. take up residency)

      Now here I will not argue with you one iota, they can suck my sweaty nut sack if they think they can tell me what to do. thats kinda what I was saying earlier.

      Yep. I kind of got the gist that was the idea behind the post.

  3. I'm sorry... by jgerman · · Score: 2

    ...I've never quite understood why the BSA has any power, I'm not sure why companies don't tell them to go fuck off and take their McCarthy hunt elsewhere.

    --
    I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
    1. Re:I'm sorry... by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2

      Because they're authorized by a bunch of major software companies to look for such things.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    2. Re:I'm sorry... by Sabalon · · Score: 2

      Authorized? I'm not sure if that is the word. Microsoft can't authorize someone to come into my office and poke around. I believe only the government can do that, and only with proper documentation (ie. A warrant)

      They are paid by the companies to ferret out illegal uses. They get a tip, and I guess they use the as the basis for getting a warrant for a raid, since it is violating federal laws. (does the original company - like MS - need to be involved in the warrant process, cause I can't see how the BSA could have any stake in the infringment - kinda like the argument of NetPD for sony - they are not the copyright holder)

      I guess like the article said, the only reason companies put up with this and go along is that it is better than having Federal Marhsalls come in and take all your equipment.

      Still...it seems like a terrible abuse of power, but I wonder which is worse - trying to satisfy the BSA that it's all legal, or showing the feds that it is all legal, as I would think once the feds came in, the BSA would have nothing to do with it anymore.

      I wonder what happens if the BSA gets the feds to raid someone and can't find any infractions? Plant a CD-R?

      I think probably the first thing to do if contacted by the BSA would be to get to a lawyer. As others have said, a big audit just to satisfy some company who has no real knowledge other than an anonymous tip/tips is outrageous.

      Suite Sister Mary - great song!

    3. Re:I'm sorry... by Klox · · Score: 1

      Their only power is cash and lawyers, but they don't tend to need them. Mostly what they do is give honest companies a wake-up call, working with companies to make sure they're legal. Most companies aren't trying to rip other companies off, they just don't keep good enough records. The BSA's size just means companies take them seriously and then all they have to ask is "are you legal?" and the company jumps. Even though the BSA can't do anything (without evidence) if you blow them off, big companies would look pretty stupid if they did blow them off (what have they got to hide?), so they give in.

      It's not the BSA's goal to drag everyone to court. They'd rather work things out and _help_ the company resolve their violations.

    4. Re:I'm sorry... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they're backed by huge, wealthy companies. Money greases the wheels to, as the story says, get a search warrant issued and the cooperation of federal Marshals to execute that search.

    5. Re:I'm sorry... by billcopc · · Score: 2

      The big problem is that the BSA is a third party. Let's make a simplified example :

      I, Billco, jump into the blooming business of busting software pirates. I sign written agreements with local software houses and go on a witch hunt. I have no legal right to walk into anyone's offices and demand licenses. Not even the lead programmer of the infriged-upon software can do that. Just like you can't (legally) go to a thief's house and reclaim your goods. You have to let the cops do it.

      If I were to receive a threat from the BSA, I'd have my lawyer send them a hasty answer: "Fuck Off and Die." Even if it were Microsoft signing that letter, I'd tell them the same. Until they send an RCMP agent with a legal warrant (not just a fake like they often use in scare-tactics), then I will comply to no one and I will present receipts to no one.

      The law is to be handled by law enforcement entities and no one else.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    6. Re:I'm sorry... by rgmoore · · Score: 2
      Authorized? I'm not sure if that is the word. Microsoft can't authorize someone to come into my office and poke around. I believe only the government can do that, and only with proper documentation (ie. A warrant)

      That depends on your view of the legal status of EULAs. Double check that Microsoft EULA some time, and I'm sure that you'll find wording that requires you to turn around and assume the position if they want to audit your software useage for license violations. I have no idea if that clause of the EULA would stand up in court, but in theory at least by installing their software you have given them the right to come into your office and check around.

      --

      There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    7. Re:I'm sorry... by jgerman · · Score: 2

      See there's my problem with the whole thing, I'm pretty certain that they CANNOT get a warrant. So basically what I'm hearing they're basically using scare tactics. Does anyone know whether or not any legal action has resulted from threats from the BSA? Every once and awhile I hear the commercials on the radio I'm sure others have heard them. Thinly veiled threats as if their on a mission from God to root out piracy. My company doesn't use any pirated software, though I half wish I could start my own company, phone in a tip to the BSA and tell them to fuck off back to Salem when they threaten me.

      --
      I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
    8. Re:I'm sorry... by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 2
      Double check that Microsoft EULA some time, and I'm sure that you'll find wording that requires you to turn around and assume the position if they want to audit your software useage for license violations.
      What if I don't have a Micro$oft EULA to check because I don't use any Micro$oft crap? What if some asshole calls the BSA and tips them off about me because they think it's an easy way to fuck up my business? How does the BSA convince a judge to issue a warrant if they can't prove you have pirated software in the first place? Or has posession of a computer become defacto proof that you must be using Micro$oft software, due to their monopoly, and thus possesion of a computer is proof that you must therefore be bound by their EULA?

      I'd love to have that happen to me, because I'm pig-headed enough to fight them, and I'm such small potatoes that I'd be able to fight them in small-claims court, where all their lawyers don't mean jack :-)

      --
      If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
    9. Re:I'm sorry... by gregwbrooks · · Score: 1
      They can get a warrant and act as a third party because they have power-of-attorney agreements in place with each of the major software vendors that they represent.

      Basically, if you're getting poked by the BSA, you're getting poked by Microsoft/Adobe/whoever from the point of view of the courts.

      --


      "It was a summer's tale: Just a boy, his Linux, and a head full of dreams..."
    10. Re:I'm sorry... by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2
      I, Billco, jump into the blooming business of busting software pirates. I sign written agreements with local software houses and go on a witch hunt. I have no legal right to walk into anyone's offices and demand licenses. Not even the lead programmer of the infriged-upon software can do that. Just like you can't (legally) go to a thief's house and reclaim your goods. You have to let the cops do it.
      BillCo writes a letter to CompCorp USA saying "We believe that you have Microsoft products for which you haven't paid, and Microsoft has authorized us to act on their behalf in this manner. Give us an audit, please." CompCorp writes back 'Go stuff yourselves.' BillCo goes to a judge, and says 'Your honor, Microsoft has authorized us to handle license compliance checks for them, as shown by these documents. We have reason to believe that CompCorp USA isn't in license compliance in regards to their Microsoft products; we got an 'anonymous' tip. We have reason to believe that if we show up at their door and ask politely to look around, not only will they erase all the evidence, they might hurt us, and we're scrawny.' The judge says 'Ok, I'm authorizing a copyright infringement search raid. You'll be accompanied by US Marshalls, to prevent any attempt to destroy evidence. BillCo shows up at CompCorp the next day. A US Marshall puts his hand on the butt of his holstered revolver, a big ivory-handled .357 magnum, and says "Everybody get up, walk away from your computers, and don't bother coming back for three days." Meanwhile, BillCo people are severing (literally) your phone, internet, and internal network connections "to prevent destruction of evidence by a remote user." CompCorp guy says 'But we only use Open Source software!' BillCo rep says 'We won't know that until we check, now will we.' He then points to an old Sun E250 and says 'Now how do I get that thing to a windows desktop?'
      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    11. Re:I'm sorry... by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2

      I believe it's called 'power of attorney' and allows them to, in fact, act as first-party.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    12. Re:I'm sorry... by letxa2000 · · Score: 1
      It's not the BSA's goal to drag everyone to court. They'd rather work things out and _help_ the company resolve their violations.

      What planet do you live on? The BSA is a poor little organization doing a community service of resolving license violations.

      Yeah, right... They'll avoid dragging you to court if you purchase the licenses from the companies and pay the pimp (BSA).

      I'm a software author and I'm against software piracy. But there's something about a group of multi-billion dollar corporations that post earnings every quarters getting up and bitching that they're not making enough money.

      While it is true they should earn money from every copy of their software in use, from a strictly PR standpoint they sure look like ugly fat-cat bullies trying to stick it to the little guy because they can.

      As far as I'm concerned, BSA can FOAD. If they ask me to prove that I've purchased licenses for all of their software, I'll ask them to prove they've bought licenses for all of mine. If they can't show me their licenses for my software, well, we'll just call it a draw.

      Arrogant...

  4. Something about the BSA... by mystery_bowler · · Score: 2

    reminds more of the EU than, say, the RIAA.

    Where the RIAA is pretty damned ruthlessly effective, the EU has far too much internal squabbling (due to pride, years of political conflict, whatever) to be really effective. Give the EU ten more years of so before they become really, really strong.

    Likewise, when I think about the BSA, I think about a bunch of tech companies that often have conflicting agendas. Sure, they want a common set of defenses and legal standards (like the RIAA), but each company individually will look to make the most advantageous moves for itself, which will often undermine the strength of the group. Unless, said company is compensated by the entire group to keep the company from undermining the group.

    The BSA doesn't scare me just yet. I'll give them a shorter time than the EU - say 5 years - to become really, really powerful. Until then, the BSA is only as strong as the strongest company within the BSA. As soon as members of the BSA want to make a decision that conflicts with the larger, more powerful companies in the BSA, the big companies will leave the BSA. Or ignore it altogether.

    --

    My sigs always suck.
  5. Use Dual Boots by perlchimp · · Score: 2, Funny

    When they come to raid your company, just reboot into linux, bsd, or whatever. Then ask, "What software?"

    1. Re:Use Dual Boots by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2

      Then weep as they reformat your boxes, install Windows, and run their network software finders.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    2. Re:Use Dual Boots by LWolenczak · · Score: 2

      I don't think that woudl cut it, they would most likely start taking your computer apart at that point.

    3. Re:Use Dual Boots by kin_korn_karn · · Score: 2

      at which point I call my local PD and let them sort out details of search warrants and the like.

      The BSA is not a law-enforcement organization sanctioned by any government and as such has no power over me.

    4. Re:Use Dual Boots by LWolenczak · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The BSA has the pratice of getting an injunction against you before they go knocking at your door. With that, they get to have the cops there, and the cops are forced to be on their side.

    5. Re:Use Dual Boots by Tackhead · · Score: 4, Funny
      > When they come to raid your company, just reboot into linux, bsd, or whatever. Then ask, "What software?"
      >
      > Then weep as they reformat your boxes, install Windows, and run their network software finders.

      "Yes, Your Honor. When we came in, all 20 FOOCORP employees were running Linux on their workstations. Our agents had to reformat their hard drives and install Windows on them to run our Windows-based network software finders. The software-finders discovered 20 copies of Windows in the office. FOOCORP admit to having no Windows licenses. Please find FOOCORP guilty of 20 counts of infringment."

    6. Re:Use Dual Boots by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 2, Insightful
      How do they get a warrant without proof that you're using pirated software? What's the level of probable cause needed, or is possesion of a computer defacto "proof" that you must be using Micro$soft software, due to their monopoly?

      --
      If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
    7. Re:Use Dual Boots by LWolenczak · · Score: 2

      they claim that an disgruntled former coworker snitched to them, and most of the time, judges say ok, and give them the warrent.

    8. Re:Use Dual Boots by Shimbo · · Score: 1
      How do they get a warrant without proof that you're using pirated software? What's the level of probable cause needed


      "Your honour, we believe this company is using pirated software. Here is a sworn statement from Mr. Pissed Off ex-employee to that effect, and a letter from the company declining our request to co-operate with a voluntary audit."

    9. Re:Use Dual Boots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, what you don't understand is that the BSA shows up with the local Sherrif's dept. I know this from experience. They already have a warrant and it's usually obtained because of info from an informant (ex employee).

  6. Cost of pirating by murphj · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From the article:

    The BSA estimates that pirated software was responsible for about $3 billion in lost revenues to software publishers in the U.S. in 2000 -- although, to be strictly fair, that number assumes that every copy of stolen software would have been bought if it weren't stolen, which inflates the number somewhat.

    It's good to see someone in the press finally taking those numbers with a grain of salt. Somehow I don't think evry kid who downloads Photoshop and Illustrator would have purchased a copy.

    --
    SONY. Because caucasians are just too damn tall.
    1. Re:Cost of pirating by guttentag · · Score: 2
      Perhaps I'm just a troll, but doesn't Microsoft claim that when it steals ideas from other companies, it's not really stealing because it costs Microsoft so much to develop their own version of the technology? It's innovating.

      If that's the measuring stick, couldn't one argue that pirating Office isn't stealing because he had to tie up his phone line for a week to download the installer?

      Disclaimer: I think piracy is wrong, but Devil's Advocate is an important role to play.

    2. Re:Cost of pirating by AVee · · Score: 1

      Besides that, I think MS needs their software to be copied. Just think of how many people whould at the very least consider using somthing else then Windows if it wasn't for the fact they have a free (as in beer) copy of it. This is even more true for Office, because of the file format 'everybody' uses.
      Thats why OEM contracts are so important, if people were to pay seperatly for having Windows on their PC's they would think again, but since it's an all in price they pay it's not directly clear what the OS costs them.

  7. The Disgruntled employee by crotherm · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How hard would it be for a disgruntled employee to knowingly install software without proper licenses, then call BSA? No where is it mentioned that individuals will suffer, only the company. Of course the company can then take action against the employee if they can find them.

    Even if your comapny does pay for all its software, being forced to audit yourself costs money. Unless people making false reports are held liable, this system can and probably will be abused.

    --
    "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable" - JFK
  8. Burden of Proof by HBergeron · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Trying to draw on group expertise here - can someone tell me what provisions of which law(s) lay the burden of proof on the the businessman, and not on the accusor?

    This sounds like a provision that got slipped through when no one was looking, and the BSA has managed to keep it off the agenda ever since. I imagine the US Chamber of Commerce would get some support from their members to make this law a little more balanced. It's not that I support IP abuse, but the sheer arrogance of a guilty until proven innocent presumption in any piece of legislation is too galling to let pass .

    If someone can get me the information (preferably original bill and USC reference) I will happily see it to a place where it can do some good.

    --
    THE YEAR WAS 2081, and everybody was finally equal...
    1. Re:Burden of Proof by mindstrm · · Score: 2

      The burden of proof IS on the accuser.

      "Unless you prove to us that you have not pirated our software, we will turn it into a court proceeding"

      THe burden of proof is still on the accusor.

    2. Re:Burden of Proof by HBergeron · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's not the point. The reason it doesn't get to court, it appears, is that even in court the defendant is forced to prove that every copy of its' software is properly licensed, no allowances for flighty employees, bad record-keeping, or loss of records in flood/fire/weasel mishap. The accuser should have to prove that a unlicensed piece of software was being used - particularly given the incredibly intrusive access they have to the defendants operations.

      The only body generally allowed to hold you responsible for lost paperwork is the IRS, and we regularly knock them about the head to the point where they've become a bit timid about abusing this power. Delegating this kind of power to a NGO was never Congressional intent, that I can promise you.

      --
      THE YEAR WAS 2081, and everybody was finally equal...
    3. Re:Burden of Proof by cgleba · · Score: 2

      Very very good point. Mod up parent!

      I would love to hear an anser to this.

    4. Re:Burden of Proof by Merry_B.Buck · · Score: 2
      The burden may shift to the defendant in copyright cases, depending on which of the accusor's facts they dispute, and how.
      " ...when a negation of a fact lies peculiarly within the knowledge of the defendant[,] it is incumbent on him to establish that fact." State v. Williamson, 206 N.W.2d 613, 618 (Wis. 1973).)
      The common-law argument is that it's impossible to prove that someone didn't do something. Microsoft can't track every single moment of Joe Businessman's life; therefore, no matter how hard they try, they can't prove that Joe never acquired 50 copies of XP legally.

      Congress mentioned this (though they got the exact phrase wrong) as their intent during deliberations on Title 17 in these notes. (Congressional intent can be referenced in court, even if the law doesn't fully express that intent.)
    5. Re:Burden of Proof by jerdenn · · Score: 2
      Actually, the FDA is pretty brutal about lost paperwork, too - if you ever have the misfortune to work for a company that falls under FDA regulation.

      -jerdenn

    6. Re:Burden of Proof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trying to draw on group expertise here - can someone tell me what provisions of which law(s) lay the burden of proof on the the businessman, and not on the accusor?

      I think this is considered a civil case, so the burden of proof is not quite as clear-cut as in a criminal case (where "innocent until proven guilty [by a DA]" is the case). The judgment in a civil case is not by a unanimous jury, but a majority of the jury members.

    7. Re:Burden of Proof by Amazing+Quantum+Man · · Score: 2

      Not to mention the DoD, if you do any classified work!

      --
      Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
    8. Re:Burden of Proof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The difference, of course, is that the FDA is a public agency subject to oversight by elected officials.

    9. Re:Burden of Proof by HBergeron · · Score: 1

      This I realize, without getting too deeply into it, I am occasionally in the middle of creating that intent. In this situation, much of the case law applies to pre-digital IP cases. Thank you for the case cites though, research resources are a little tied up these days. Under current application of the law, the potential jeopardy to businesspeople far outweighs the potential harm to the IP holders. Poor paperwork procedures, disaster, or malice result not just in loss of value of a software license, but substantial financial liability.

      Microsoft (to use an example) has numerous ways to identify individual copies of its' software, including coding a unique ID number into each copy. In addition, boxes or discs server a prima facia evidence of a license (yes, original disks can be shifted from business to business but that doesn't present enough of a danger to place the additional burden on the businessperson.)

      The law must assume honesty on the part of businesspeople. To place a legal burden of proof on (often) very small businesses when contending with a few very large corporations lends credence to those who claim that the deck is stacked against the businessperson. Come to think of it, that's pretty good rhetoric to move this thing along......

      --
      THE YEAR WAS 2081, and everybody was finally equal...
    10. Re:Burden of Proof by HBergeron · · Score: 1

      Good point on both, but in each case you have entered into a regulatory regime - with a government agency - that provides your company with benefits (a safe, trusted drug market) or (defense contracts), in return for operating in such a way that supports government oversight and accountability standards. In other words, it's one thing for the gov't to require paperwork controls when the situation involves public health or national defense, it's quite another to hand that power over to an NGO so they can squeeze every last buck out of the marketplace.

      --
      THE YEAR WAS 2081, and everybody was finally equal...
    11. Re:Burden of Proof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      are you a freaking moron, you make everybody your foe, when they got mod points they will come over and mod the shit out of you so you post at 0, clear your foe list a$$hole

    12. Re:Burden of Proof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      my, that was... cough... eloquent. I've been posting on /. since you were in diapers kiddee. Not that it matters but I designate as foes people who make demonstrably false statements in their posts, that way the little red dot reminds me to take them with a grain of salt when I they post on another subject down the road. And I'm not real worried about my Karma, M2 takes care of it pretty well.

  9. BSA? by MalcalypseTheYounger · · Score: 2, Funny

    How did the Boy Scouts of America get wrapped up in all this?

    1. Re:BSA? by ejasons · · Score: 1

      You know, even though someone posts this exact same joke everytime the Business Software Alliance comes up, the joke never gets old. I just can't stop laughing...

    2. Re:BSA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The needed a new source of funding since United Way got ticked at them standing up for their principals.

  10. mad at the BSA by supernova87a · · Score: 5, Offtopic

    I'm not pissed off that the BSA can sue a company for using unlicensed software. That's fine. Go after them on your own time, with all the legal resources you can afford.

    What pisses me off is that they can get the assistance of the US government (in the form of US Marshals) to "raid" companies suspected of using that software.

    Why doesn't it work the other way? Why don't we have the US Marshals raid Microsoft when they produce security-hole-ridden software that causes a small business to lose millions? Why should our government always be on the side of the big business?

    1. Re:mad at the BSA by SweetAndSourJesus · · Score: 0, Insightful

      "Why should our government always be on the side of the big business?"

      because big business owns your government.

      --

      --
      the strongest word is still the word "free"
    2. Re:mad at the BSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't believe this POS comment got modded up. Essentially a non-comment, writing all the sensationalism that could be written... Its like a Jon Katz article in brief!

    3. Re:mad at the BSA by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 5, Interesting

      By no means just in the US. The BSA has garnered the support of dozens of governments, often in questionable circumstances. In Latin America, there's cases of collusion between government officials and the BSA, in which the government brings the fury of the BSA on companies which are politically unpopular or threatening, or even onto non-governmental and non-profit organizations that are doing work the governments don't like.

    4. Re:mad at the BSA by e40 · · Score: 0

      The fact that the parent was moderated down to 0 shows how naive people are. Have we forgotten Enron already? Just look at how many former Enron (millionaires) work in the Bush administration. Until campaign finance reform is passed, big business will own the government.

    5. Re:mad at the BSA by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 2

      What pisses me off is that they can get the assistance of the US government (in the form of US Marshals) to "raid" companies suspected of using that software.

      They do it because there is a law against using unlicensed software. It's called "stealing".

      Why don't we have the US Marshals raid Microsoft when they produce security-hole-ridden software that causes a small business to lose millions?

      Because there is no law against producing security-hole-ridden software. That's called "caveat emptor".

      Why should our government always be on the side of the big business?

      Because people who work at "big businesses" are citizens, too.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    6. Re:mad at the BSA by haruharaharu · · Score: 2

      They do it because there is a law against using unlicensed software. It's called stealing.

      No, it's called copyright infringement, which is a civil offense. Stealing is a criminal offense

      --
      Reboot macht Frei.
    7. Re:mad at the BSA by TheAwfulTruth · · Score: 2

      They're BOTH against the law!

      --
      Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!
    8. Re:mad at the BSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently owning them doesn't do them any good...

    9. Re:mad at the BSA by kz45 · · Score: 1

      Why doesn't it work the other way? Why don't we have the US Marshals raid Microsoft when they produce security-hole-ridden software that causes a small business to lose millions? Why should our government always be on the side of the big business

      Because then, unfortunately, we would have to go after GPLd software that suffered the same fate.

    10. Re:mad at the BSA by Cyno · · Score: 0, Flamebait


      But but but... when I break the law I have to break it in front of a cop before they'll ticket me. Does the BSA have to get a court order to "raid" a legitimate business or do they already have the full support of my government to "raid" anyone they choose based on their secret evidence? Secret evidence is good enough for the US government. It doesn't make sense to me that software companies breaking the law get fined instead of completely shutdown. If breaking the law is really so bad then shouldn't the punishment fit the crime? Why should stealing lying corporations be allowed to exist? Why, then, when Microsoft is called a Monopoly and Monopolies are illegal, does Microsoft get to use services like the BSA and US Marshalls to punish other businesses breaking laws that are just as illegal?
      Why?
      Can you answer me that?
      Why?
      Fuck! Everything's against the law, as long as its YOUR law, isn't it?!?!. I hate Americans! God gave them a brain but they just don't think.

    11. Re:mad at the BSA by cgleba · · Score: 2

      "Because there is no law against producing security-hole-ridden software. That's called "caveat emptor"."

      Wrong. If an engineering firm designs a bridge and it collapses killing people because it was poorly designed the engineering firm can be sued.

      It's the EULA, not "caveat emptor", that stops MS from being sued for buggy software.

      Imagine if all the bridges in the US had a EULA like that? We would have a lot of dead people.

    12. Re:mad at the BSA by cgleba · · Score: 1

      "Why, then, when Microsoft is called a Monopoly and Monopolies are illegal, does Microsoft get to use services like the BSA and US Marshalls to punish other businesses breaking laws that are just as illegal? "

      LOL. . .sounds like the cry from the book of Job for the software engineer!

    13. Re:mad at the BSA by mikestro · · Score: 1

      you my friend, are a moron. Do you believe everything mommy and daddy tells you? How about what your union tells you. I will pick personal responsibility aka Republicans over the Socialist Communist "Democratic" Party, which frankly looks like a bunch of silly little kids bitching and moaning because the Bush administration did nothing with Enron. i.e. they WEREN'T involved with Enron going down, nor were they involved with bailing out the execs at Enron. The execs don't need republicans to give them golden parachutes, they only need to be execs. I think that the Enron "scandal" that Carville the alien as stated is crap. So who's be "partisan" now? Bash the Republicans, bash Bush. Bash him for doing nothing. Bash him for helping, Bash Bash Bash,

      I liken Democrats being nothing more than the hippie 60's generation that never grew up - bitch about everything, take responsibility for nothing, and then sit on your ass and do nothing.

      Of course, Clinton is the perfect personification of the 60's generation.

      Yet he is idolized by the mindless, borg-like left. Like a bunch of lemmings following him around believing whatever the liar says. No individualism at all, just a bunch mindless lemming-like drones running around repeating whatever their political party says.

      But hey, the Democrats are after the the "intelligent" educated party. HA.

    14. Re:mad at the BSA by bananapeel17 · · Score: 1
      Imagine if all the bridges in the US had a EULA like that? We would have a lot of dead people.
      And imagine how many lives would be saved if we got rid of EULAs.
      --
      Somebody please tell this machine I'm not a machine -
    15. Re:mad at the BSA by I_redwolf · · Score: 1

      You don't know what you're talking about.. Read the fucking licenses or STFU. I've read this comment and another comment of yours and both of them are bullshit

    16. Re:mad at the BSA by WNight · · Score: 2

      You're saying there are only two solutions? Either democrat, or republican? I could handle either one, as long as they weren't crooks.

      Your turning this into a Bush/Clinton thing shows who's really childish.

      If this Enron thing had come to light during Clinton's era we'd be calling him a crook too, this time it's a republican (Bush) who needs to toss a bunch of execs in jail or be seen to be part of it all.

      A little campaign finance reform would do good. For starters, make it a crime to offer money or property of value to a politician. Then make it treason to accept it. That'll take care of it.

    17. Re:mad at the BSA by SweetAndSourJesus · · Score: 0

      Finer words have never been spoken. Or typed, as the case may be. But I digress.

      Wouldn't it be fantastic to see officials who were elected because they were truly the best person for the job? Under the current system, the candidate who meets the needs of corporate america stands the best chance, while one who meets the needs of the people stands the worst.

      Choosing between two people who were bred to be corporate puppets just seems silly.

      Anyone who has to resort to Clinton bashing to make his point probably doesn't have a very good one.

      --

      --
      the strongest word is still the word "free"
    18. Re:mad at the BSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "They do it because there is a law against using unlicensed software. It's called "stealing"."

      Nice try troll, but its not stealing, its a copyright infringement.

      The fact that you don't recognize the difference is proof that human evoluation favors cluefucks.

      Did you get the cluelessness from your mom or your dad?

    19. Re:mad at the BSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "They're BOTH against the law!"

      So is parking on yellow lines, spitting, and not keeping your dog unleashed.

      Are you saying that ll violations are equal morally and legally?

      In otherwords, the guy who throw a piece of paper out his car window is about the same as the guy who murders 4000 people in a a brutal attack on NYC?

      Just trying to test you boundaries, because you seem to lack a sense of proportion.

      You must have french ancestry.

    20. Re:mad at the BSA by mpe · · Score: 2

      They do it because there is a law against using unlicensed software. It's called "stealing".

      However there are plenty of other illegal things involving software where, including failure to comply with open source licences (which is just much "copyright infringment" as the kind of thing the BSA makes a fuss about) such "law enforcement" is never applied. The issue is that of double standards.

    21. Re:mad at the BSA by mpe · · Score: 2

      Imagine if all the bridges in the US had a EULA like that? We would have a lot of dead people.

      More likely you'd have some dead people, a ruling from the USSC voiding the EULA and a pile of bankrupt bridge builders.
      It's only in software which such EULA agreements appear to be tollerated.

    22. Re:mad at the BSA by mpe · · Score: 2

      You're saying there are only two solutions? Either democrat, or republican? I could handle either one, as long as they weren't crooks.

      Sounds like an accurate summation of current US politics. Domination by two political parties with mainstream press ignoring even where there are other political parties.

      If this Enron thing had come to light during Clinton's era we'd be calling him a crook too, this time it's a republican (Bush) who needs to toss a bunch of execs in jail or be seen to be part of it all.

      From the lobbiests' POV having only two political parties taken seriously is a good thing. Means they only have to lobby (and pay off) two groups of people.

    23. Re:mad at the BSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually the answer to that is easy. Congresscritters and Senators cannot use tax money to pay their staffs, so a junior congressman must earn $10,000/day to keep their jobs. Are you giving them this money? Businesses lobbied very hard during the 70's to get this passed for this specific reason.

  11. Man... by athakur999 · · Score: 3, Funny

    I didn't realize the Boy Scouts of America were so evil.

    --
    "People that quote themselves in their signatures bother me" - athakur999
    1. Re:Man... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hell, their motto is "Be prepared"; what did you expect?

    2. Re:Man... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Redundant

      This comment has been made in every /. article about the Business Software Alliance, and it still isn't funny.

    3. Re:Man... by PovRayMan · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Back in high school several years ago I over heard a conversation that went something like this:

      Guy One: Hey man I heard this IRC channel got raided by the BSA!

      Guy Two: What the hell? NO WAY!

      Guy One: Yeah totally, like 10 boxes were taken away.

      Guy Two: WTF, How can the boy scouts do that?

      I couldn't help but laugh histerically at those 9th graders. I was a mean guy :)

    4. Re:Man... by abe+ferlman · · Score: 2, Funny

      How do you think they enforce their "no gay scoutmasters" rule without scanning their members hard drives to see what kind of porn they look at?

      so naive, so naive....

      --
      microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
    5. Re:Man... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The girl scouts only try to sell cookies to yor browser...

    6. Re:Man... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what a fucking asshat moderator. stupid shit head wouldn't know a funny comment when they saw one. Right? Am I right? Go mod down the real trolls, shithead mod.

  12. Well well well now. by phoenix_orb · · Score: 1

    From the article:

    And just where does the BSA get most of its leads on whom to bust? That's right -- from pissed-off ex-employees.

    I have printed this thing up, and I am going to show it to my boss.

    Fire me, I don't think so... (manical little chuckle)

    --
    Blah Blah Blah.
  13. I'm sure YOU might, but... by mikey504 · · Score: 3, Informative

    when you have 100 or so employees milling about, you would be amazed what kind of stuff they will drag in and install when you aren't looking.

    And yes, I know all about policy editors and drive imaging and a lot of other things you can do to try to keep them from messing around with the systems or clean up after them when they leave for the day.

    The bottom line is, like a lot of other companies, we spend a measurable amount of time and money on compliance issues every year even though we have never pirated software. If it weren't for the BSA, or more precisely our ties to products made by their member companies (thanks AutoDesk), this would be much less of an issue for us.

  14. Good sell for open source by gillbates · · Score: 4, Insightful
    receiving such a letter can cause both stress and monetary losses as the company attempts to chase down software-purchase information.

    Which is a reason enough for most companies to switch vendors. Once this starts happening on a widespread basis, open source software will be a much easier sell to business.

    Trust me, if the BSA contacted my company on behalf of a software vendor, that vendor would lose his account with my company. Though I do as much as I can to ensure license compliance, I will not do business with a company that has an adversarial attitude toward me. If a vendor believes that I am running unlicensed or underlicensed copies of software, it would be better for them to ask if they can perform an audit at their own expense rather than sending the BSA after me.

    On a lighter note, it is the mere existence of the BSA which encourages me to use and recommend open source software as much as possible. I believe the BSA is hurting vendors more than helping them.

    --
    The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
    1. Re:Good sell for open source by vekotin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I've got some first hand experience and comparisons from around here. Especially a few years back, Microsoft over here in Finland made it their policy to talk about licensing instead of letting BSA do the work. They'd ask people from your company to come over, they offer a meal, demonstrate some programs and do some usual advertisement tricks. Then they talk about licenses, licensing methods and they've usually done some background work on your company, helping to find a licensing solution. After a little talk, they'll get back to you and you'll usually find some good way to arrange licenses. "But I don't have all licenses in order now" you might tell them, and they'll respond kindly and suggest that maybe you should check them out now.

      In comes BSA - everyone's doomed, everyone goes to hell and nobody passes go, but BSA certainly collects more than $200. You show them licenses, they'll claim you're hiding something. You show them invoices, they ask you are they forged. In the end, they're never saying it's okay, they're never wanting to solve things - they're just SO certain that every company is an evil pirate, or perhaps at least a place to turn into an incident.

      I don't like a LOT of things about microsoft, including their customer service most of the time, their programs and their 72 million IIS bugs, but I won't lie to myself here - they want to make solutions, BSA wants to make war. BSA uses aggression, fear and often, VERY rude and offensive language. Of course they have nice people there too but it seems they're a minority. I -really- hope this is all just me seeing a number of bad days for them.

      So, who do you want talk to about licenses today?

      --
      /v\
    2. Re:Good sell for open source by rgmoore · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I suspect that a big chunk of this is the difference between being a software vendor and a gobetween. Microsoft believes that they're going to keep doing business with you in the future. Screwing up their relationship with you will cost them more in lost business than the immediate benefit of the increased licensing money, so they play reasonably nice. The scariest thing they can imagine is somebody looking for good alternatives to their software, and obnoxious licensing audits are one such thing.

      The BSA, OTOH, is not in the business of selling software themselves. They don't have to worry about doing business with you in the future, so they have no incentive to be nice about things. They just want to beat you upside the head and extract money out of you, so predatory and obnoxious behavior that makes you hate them is no problem. In many ways, a reputation for ruthlessness is beneficial for their business, since it means they can extort money from future victims even more easily.

      --

      There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    3. Re:Good sell for open source by Slashamatic · · Score: 1
      Could you do that with MS?

      If your company has no dependancy on a single vendor then this is easy, otherwise it would be hard.

    4. Re:Good sell for open source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's when they nail your head to the floor thats a problem.

  15. Regulation by jaxon6 · · Score: 1

    I've got a question? Who regulates the BSA's practices? What kind of rules does it have to abide by? I mean, even creditors have rules that say you can't be harassed and such. So, are there any that will keep the BSA in line? It really sounds to me like a bounty organization.

    --
    Do you see the sig? Do you have it in your sights? Why yes, Miss Moneypenny...
    1. Re:Regulation by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 2
      Welcome to the Future. Regulation does not apply if you sign a contract. Rent-a-Cops are everywhere. Survelance cameras and service agreements that take away your privacy rights are common. Congress's refusal to federalize airport security is another indicator. You will sign a binding contract for everything -- or better still, using the product is tacit agreement with the contract -- thus allowing the private cops to do with you as they wish. The rich will always be able to buy a buffer from this nonsense, the poor are too small to go after, but if you're middle class (i.e., most /. readers) watch out!

      --
      If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
  16. What a wonderful organization by rbeattie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't think there's any other group in the world that can promote free software as well as the BSA can. I mean, the more BSA extortional "warning letters" that are sent or jack-booted thugs that come raiding into offices, the more that IT organizations are going to look for alternatives.

    It's been argued on Slashdot before that more people would take free software seriously if they had to pay for all the stuff they use already. I agree. I say, good, make them pay up (plus penalties!), then they'll get a clue and stop using M$.

    I don't think there should be anyone on Slashdot that's one bit against the BSA. Go BSA, go!

    -Russ

    --
    Me
    1. Re:What a wonderful organization by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2

      Running OSS won't stop them. Running obviously non-intel hardware won't stop them. They don't care, and due to the wonderful aegis of the 'anonymous tipster,' they don't need a legitimate reason.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    2. Re:What a wonderful organization by mikethegeek · · Score: 2

      " Running OSS won't stop them. Running obviously non-intel hardware won't stop them. They don't care, and due to the wonderful aegis of the 'anonymous tipster,' they don't need a legitimate reason."

      Running OSS software is the ONLY solution.

      The BSA's teeth is provided by the byzantine EULA's that you agree to by using most proprietary software. The EULA's usually force YOU to agree to BSA "audits" at YOUR expense.

      You are agreeing to private police.

      The only way you can legally tell the BSA to "fuck off" is to not play the proprietary software game.

      --
      === The price of freedom is eternal vigilance
    3. Re:What a wonderful organization by Carter+Butts · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Running OSS won't stop them. Running obviously non-intel hardware won't stop them. They don't care, and due to the wonderful aegis of the 'anonymous tipster,' they don't need a legitimate reason.

      Yes, but they still need "weight of evidence" to make the accusation stick in court. I'd guess that simply not helping them, letting them run up costs in a battle they cannot win, and then filing a massive counter-suit for harrassment (with additional punative damages, of course) could be a very effective deterrent to future action. (Then again, IANAL, and perhaps this would be too expensive to be a reasonable strategy (even given the high probability of a payoff in the end).)


      One almost envisions OSS firms acting like little tar pits...every one the BSA crosses could cost it vast sums of money, in addition to undermining its credibility. How many of these could the BSA afford to attack, I wonder?


      -Carter

    4. Re:What a wonderful organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I were redhat, I'd start sending out "tired of the BSA breathing down your neck? try linux!" CD's. I'd get those CD's out there like AOL does!

    5. Re:What a wonderful organization by kz45 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Running OSS software is the ONLY solution.

      The BSA's teeth is provided by the byzantine EULA's that you agree to by using most proprietary software. The EULA's usually force YOU to agree to BSA "audits" at YOUR expense.

      You are agreeing to private police.


      What about richard stallman?

      If he feels that a company is using the GPL in a way he doesn't like, he confronts them as well. Most companies just give in, but I would imagine if they didn't, a court battle would insue.

      Although not as violent or agressive, this isn't much different than what the BSA does.

    6. Re:What a wonderful organization by kz45 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      disagree - The GPL is there for your, protection. Stallman is protecting the general public when he goes after infringers.

      The BSA is out for the company's best interest


      One political agenda over another. Neither is in the right.

    7. Re:What a wonderful organization by haystor · · Score: 1

      The GPL doesn't authorize RMS to come into your place of business and make you pay for an audit. Also, he would have the burden of proof put upon him in a civil trial, where you'd have the burden of proof in defending yourself against the BSA (hey, you agreed to the license).

      Of course you could pirate everything and never sign a contract binding you to the BSA's contacts. Then they'd have to gather evidence in a more normal fashion and prove that you don't possess licenses for all the software you are running.

      --
      t
    8. Re:What a wonderful organization by ejasons · · Score: 1

      Please don't waste our time commenting about the GPL until you understand it...

      The GPL places absolutely no limits on use of the software. It only controls redistribution (which is a right that you definitely don't have with commercial software anyway). So comparing it to an "End User Licensing Agreement" makes no sense.

    9. Re:What a wonderful organization by WNight · · Score: 2

      The problem is that they're as rich as all the member companies combined and they realize that a single failure in court would hurt them forever. They'd simply rack the court costs up for years, then drop the charges and if you survived you'd have to fight them again to prove malicious and baseless prosecution.

    10. Re:What a wonderful organization by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2

      Remember the aegis of the 'anonymous tip-off.' "Your honor, we have reason to believe that this company isn't in compliance, and want to check." Even though they won't be able to charge you with anything, your business is down for several days while they satisfy themselves of it, with a US Marshall to keep people away from their computers, lest they 'destroy evidence.' Or, put another way, assuming you're male, all it takes is one woman accusing you of rape to completely ruin your life. Who cares if she makes it up? It's all in the accusation.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    11. Re:What a wonderful organization by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2

      Ah, but they claim to be a 'non profit' organization. And know all the tricks to tie a company up in court for years.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    12. Re:What a wonderful organization by mpe · · Score: 2

      Yes, but they still need "weight of evidence" to make the accusation stick in court.

      Probably why it isn't their method to simply fight people in court.

      I'd guess that simply not helping them, letting them run up costs in a battle they cannot win, and then filing a massive counter-suit for harrassment (with additional punative damages, of course) could be a very effective deterrent to future action.

      If you had deep enough pockets to do this then they probably wouldn't bother you in the first place.

      One almost envisions OSS firms acting like little tar pits...every one the BSA crosses could cost it vast sums of money, in addition to undermining its credibility. How many of these could the BSA afford to attack, I wonder?

      Only if they have sufficent resources to cover having their business disrupted and possibly their computers vandalised.

  17. Guilty until proven innocent? by sid_vicious · · Score: 5, Insightful

    According to Blank and Kruger, the burden of proof is on the targeted company.

    When did I stop living in America?

    --
    If it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features yet.
    1. Re:Guilty until proven innocent? by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 2

      The moment you first clicked your approval of an EULA.

    2. Re:Guilty until proven innocent? by curunir · · Score: 2

      According to Blank and Kruger, the burden of proof is on the targeted company.

      When did I stop living in America?

      Not that this makes what they do any less dispicable, but the burden of proof to avoid a lawsuit is on the target company (as it would be in a motion to dismiss the lawsuit). If there is actual litigation, the burden would fall to the BSA.

      --
      "Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!"
    3. Re:Guilty until proven innocent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      When did I stop living in America?

      Same day as everybody else: 22 November 1963.

    4. Re:Guilty until proven innocent? by KingKire64 · · Score: 1

      So by that argument i can give someone $100,000 and have the right to infringe on any of his constitutional rights if he signs a waiver??

      --
      "All I can tell the "lesser of two evils" folks is that if they keep voting for evil, they'll keep getting evil."-Lp.org
    5. Re:Guilty until proven innocent? by Trekologer · · Score: 2

      According the the article, the BSA sends warning letters demanding the company to prove to them that they're entirely legit. What's preventing a targeted company from just deleting any pirated software and responding to the BSA with a big "Go fuck youself?" If they bring in the US Marshalls to raid the company, they wouldn't find anything.

    6. Re:Guilty until proven innocent? by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 2

      Not all of them, but some of them, apparently. Have you heard of a non-disclosure agreement? That infringes on one's right of free speech, after all.

    7. Re:Guilty until proven innocent? by anonymous_wombat · · Score: 1

      When Micr@s@ft bought the Justice Department.

    8. Re:Guilty until proven innocent? by sid_vicious · · Score: 1

      What's preventing a targeted company from just deleting any pirated software and responding to the BSA with a big "Go fuck youself?"

      I don't think anything's stopping them from doing that - although the GFY letter will result in a rather unpleasant raid from the sounds of things. Since the burden is on the company to prove that they're not pirating, a GFY to the BSA is like rolling out the red carpet for a butt-whuppin'.

      --
      If it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features yet.
    9. Re:Guilty until proven innocent? by Anonymous+DWord · · Score: 2

      Nonono, the way this works is he gives you $100,000, and you infringe on his constitutional rights when he clicks on the waiver.

      --
      "If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
    10. Re:Guilty until proven innocent? by praedor · · Score: 2

      I'd LOVE to do it. Go. Fuck. Yourself. When they finished their facsist nonsense I'd sue for cost. Nail 'em for lost time and money.

      SUE SUE SUE

      --
      In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
    11. Re:Guilty until proven innocent? by G00F · · Score: 1

      What does that have to do with anything? The only thing I remember about that date is the assassination of jfk.

      If your talking about the corruption of government, that happened when political parties was created.

      --
      The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive
    12. Re:Guilty until proven innocent? by Arandir · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Clicking acceptance of an EULA is not an explicit agreement to a contract. That EULAs say differently is irrelevant. There are many points in the law that demonstrate the EULA's are not contracts. Here's just one:

      Consideration. You get the software and the company doesn't get anything, so there's no consideration. Remember, you purchased the software *before* you clicked the "I Agree" button. No exchange has taken place. These companies CANNOT tell you that you can't use the software after you have legally acquired it. If they need some damn contract to keep their lawyers happy, then they damn well had better be there at Fry's with with a contract for me to sign at the time of my purchase.

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
    13. Re:Guilty until proven innocent? by rhizome · · Score: 1

      Oookay, and what insulates them against a trespassing charge when they show up and won't leave?

      --
      When I was a kid, we only had one Darth.
    14. Re:Guilty until proven innocent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless you left one of the continents you're still in America. Perhaps you meant the United States?

    15. Re:Guilty until proven innocent? by sid_vicious · · Score: 1

      Oookay, and what insulates them against a trespassing charge when they show up and won't leave?

      It sounds like they go and get a court order before they do the gestapo-thing.

      --
      If it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features yet.
    16. Re:Guilty until proven innocent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Much earlier. Lincoln did it, the bastard.

    17. Re:Guilty until proven innocent? by crystal+dragon · · Score: 1

      "When did I stop living in America?"

      You are really taking about two areas of law here. In criminal matters you are innocent until proven guilty. Under civil law it is your responsibility to prove your innocence. Civil law is really a I said/they said type of argument.

    18. Re:Guilty until proven innocent? by arkanes · · Score: 2

      I find that hacking installers to make the EULA magically disappear works just fine. Or replacing it with one of your own. Then I'm only bound by normal copyright law, none of this silly EULA crap.

    19. Re:Guilty until proven innocent? by Tarpan · · Score: 1

      >"Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!"

      Hahaha, thank you for that wonderful sig. Sure made my day, especially after reading the thread about a two-party system

    20. Re:Guilty until proven innocent? by Just+Jim · · Score: 1

      That's 'According to Blank and Kruger'
      The law says different.
      http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/504.html
      In a case where the copyright owner sustains
      the burden of proving, and the court finds,

      that infringement was committed willfully, the court in its discretion may
      increase the award of statutory damages to a sum of not more than $150,000.

  18. bah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    use a real search engine
    www.google.co.nz

  19. Sounds like extortion to me by da_Den_man · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most companies come back with a different settlement number, and we negotiate," says Jenny Blank, the BSA's director of enforcement. "I'm not going to say they're cheerful about it, but they recognize that this is probably easier and less expensive than taking the case to court."

    This is just amazing that they can organize a settlement without even investigating the actual accounting of the licenses. If I have a license and no receipt, does that mean I stole the software? I would think just the opposite. It means I legally purchased the software and did not keep the receipt.

    My question has to be, if they are judging the settlement on how long the software has been in use, who's to say it was loaded and EVER used? I have a ton of software that I NEVER use, but it is still loaded on the system. Mostly because I am waiting on an update, or patch, or Service Pack for it before I devote any type of time to running it.

    BSA = Extortion, plain & simple.

    --
    You keep going until you die..."Me".
    1. Re:Sounds like extortion to me by klui · · Score: 1

      That's very true. When you call company X to get tech support, do they get your serial #, aka your license, or a copy of your dated receipt before they help you out?

    2. Re:Sounds like extortion to me by herbierobinson · · Score: 1

      You didn't read the scenario carefully enough. They do it like this:

      1. They send the self-audit application to the company.

      2. The company runs the self-audit application.

      3. They then ask the company to pay the license fees on any unlicensed applications the self-audit program finds. Undoubtely implying that's all they need to do.

      4. The company pays the fees (i.e., provides proof of guilt).

      5. Then the BSA calls back to demand a settlement for the copyright infringement. At that point, the company has provided the legal evidence to hang itself for up to $150,000 per copy.

      --
      An engineer who ran for Congress. http://herbrobinson.us
    3. Re:Sounds like extortion to me by da_Den_man · · Score: 1
      Umm...like I said...Extortion.

      The article stated that if the company returns back a report of "No, we did not find anything" then the BSA will go in and LOOK for stuff. If they find it, then that company/business is fined an exhorbant amount and none of it goes to the software company. They never said what they would do if they DON'T find anything.

      More than likely because they ALWAYS find something.

      If my LICENSE to run the software, which was received when the software was purchased, isn't convincing enough to them, they will fine the company.

      Sounds to me like a nice way to cover the bills, when all you have to do is find ONE unlicensed or unproven (not unlicensed...Wheres the receipt>?!?!?) piece of software to get $150,000

      --
      You keep going until you die..."Me".
  20. I'm not sure who to feel sorry for? by Dr_Marvin_Monroe · · Score: 1

    I mean....I ALWAYS like to see some greedy company get destroyed after they lay off a bunch of employees so they can make more money for the boss......that's just good clean fun....

    But then....I ALSO have a significent ammount of contempt for the "axis of evil" that is the MS/Adobe/etc. cartel too.

    And the BSA's making it's money off the fees is a little like the government making money off of current drug forfeiture laws...self perpetuating and expanding....

    Thinking about this, they're all crooks....

    What's a guy to do? Who should I root for?

    1. Re:I'm not sure who to feel sorry for? by kin_korn_karn · · Score: 2

      France. They never win anything :)

    2. Re:I'm not sure who to feel sorry for? by spauldo · · Score: 1
      Same thing I wonder at every election...

      --
      Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
  21. A Look Inside the BSA? by Dolly_Llama · · Score: 1, Funny

    I just had to read at -1 to see if anyone would postulate that the Goatse.cx man was a boyscout.

    --

    Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known. -- Carl Sagan

  22. Computer Stew by t_allardyce · · Score: 2, Funny

    I just remember the Computer Stew episode when he tried to turn himseft in for a pirate copy of MS Office. - He tried the BSA, Police, Mayor, Attorey General, and Microsoft. At the end of the program they said something like "And what have we learned today? - If you pirate software, you might just go to jail - yeah, if you have the patience."

    --
    This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
  23. My turn to feed the trolls, I guess.... by Carter+Butts · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Listen, buddy. As Richard Stallman points out, software is an entire different entity. It's very easily copied. It's easy to take those copies and transfer them. Therefore, the amount of damage that can be done by pirating software is massive and much larger than other more tangible products.

    Actually, your argument implies precisely the opposite: since the act of unauthorized copying does not remove the initial item being copied, such an act clearly does less damage in any conventional sense of the term than theft (i.e., the illegal removal of tangible goods). Indeed, unauthorized copying (in the context being discussed) can do only hypothetical damage to anyone, since the "damage" claim rests entirely on the hypothetical counterfactual that the copier would have purchased a copy if he/she had not instead resorted to unauthorized means.

    In any event, this is a non-sequiteur: the amount of "damage" which could, in principle, be done by unauthorized copying does not legitimately motivate the pre-emptive search of businesses or individuals for which there is not already reasonable grounds to suspect unauthorized copying. One does not have the authority to arbitrarily search others on the grounds that they may have committed some infraction against you; that firms have allowed the BSA to get away with such behavior is IMHO quite scandalous.

    -Carter

    1. Re:My turn to feed the trolls, I guess.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Indeed, unauthorized copying (in the context
      >being discussed) can do only hypothetical damage
      >to anyone, since the "damage" claim rests
      >entirely on the hypothetical counterfactual
      >that the copier would have purchased a copy
      >if he/she had not instead resorted to
      >unauthorized means.

      The exact opposite can also be the the case. I have an illegal copy of Red Alert 2, which I may buy, if I find a shop where I can buy it (no computer shops around here).

      However, if I didn't have the copy, I would definitely not buy the game, because I normally don't like strategy games.

    2. Re:My turn to feed the trolls, I guess.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >I have an illegal copy of Red Alert 2, which I may buy, if I find a shop where I can buy it (no computer shops around here).

      Well, buy it on the internet and feel fine knowing your once pirated copy is now legal.

      You don't even have to wait for the product to arrive, since you already have it.

  24. BSA and Scientology by Telastyn · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ever notice how both "organizations" hide behind that term usually reserved for not-for-profit aid groups, or otherwise innoxious group?

    Ever notice how both groups generally exist for the seemingly sole purpose of badgering people with an army of lawyers behind a veil of "good"?

    Ever notice the striking similarity between L Ron and Bill Gates?

    Coincidence? I think not.

    The previous post was meant as humor, and in no way meant liabel towards the BSA, The Church of Scientology, the ghost of L Ron, or Bill Gates' stupid grin (tm). All of my software is legitimate Microsoft(tm) software!

  25. I know! I'll report google by Convergence · · Score: 2

    I've heard that google takes a CD, that has something called 'linux' on it, and they install it on, like thousands of computers, without like paying any money..

    So, whats my reward for this hot tip?

    1. Re:I know! I'll report google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hot grits.

  26. Why ISN'T the box enough? by Restil · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If you want to find out if I own the software, fine. YOU find out. Am I really obligated to show you evidence that I purchased software?

    I know a police raiding looking for stolen equipment runs checks on the serial numbers. If the serial numbers come back clean, I'm not obligated to prove to them that I legally purchased it. They have to prove that it was stolen property to begin with or they have no case. Granted, having a box of receipts for everything gets them out the door faster as well as making your life a whole lot easier in the case of a mistake.

    But for the BSA, who by the way is not a law enforcement agency, to require evidence of ownership does not extend to being provided with purchasing records. The certificate of ownership should be sufficient. Of course, I could stockpile those in case I fear they're coming, but I could just as easily format the harddrives.

    In fact, that might not be a bad idea. Force all data, and I mean ALL data to be stored on network servers running free software, and only use proprietary boxes as workstations. Ghost those machines and nuke them every night. Receiving a command from the network completely wipes all machines on the network (except the fileservers).

    I don't condone piracy, but I also don't endorse nazi style tactics. There is NO reason that a company that acts in good faith in purchasing software licenses who makes an honest mistake should be raked over the coals because some errant employee installed an extra copy of office in the wrong place.

    -Restil

    --
    Play with my webcams and lights here
    1. Re:Why ISN'T the box enough? by Seej · · Score: 1

      As long as you don't ghost an OEM MS OS.. That is illegal. You have to purchase a full license if you want to Ghost. I wonder if it is okay to use the restore CD supplied by the vendor. ;)

  27. Protect Open Source licenses? If not, Die. by Zeio · · Score: 2

    I hate the BSA, the only protect large companies intellectual property rights and don't fight for what Is right, they strong arm for the highest bidders, name, Microcrap. I hate the BSA, I have enforcers and chastisers and people who help to create monopolies. I don't know how these animals sleep at night. I'm a conservative, freedom loving capitalist, but the Monopoly and Oligopoly crap and all the B2B commerce associated with such is crap.

    Imagine this, a pissed off jerk employee (who was probably fired because he stunk, and losers always whine the most), reports to the BSA false information, just to get back. Who pays for the time it takes to perform the audit if there were no infraction?

    Also, the BSA sucks because the don't help enforce violators of GNU/GPL/LGPL/Free licenses from Open Source companies and intellectual property holders.

    I think the BSA is a crock of shit. I think they make money off of terrorizing businesses. Why don't these fold go to China and do some real work on piracy, because when the numbers come in, American companies barely steal compared to the rest of the world.

    Recently Adobe stopped localizing to the Chinese language. No BSA over there to stop real hard cope IP theft. No, they have to harass innocent businesses who are FORCED to buy licenses for Microsoft crap when the buy a computer from any major vendor.

    Death to BSA. They like a roving band of out of control lawyers working for monopolies. I think it should be legal to shoot a BSA auditor dead if he trespasses on your business's property.

    --
    Legalize the constitution. Think for yourself question authority.
    1. Re:Protect Open Source licenses? If not, Die. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The BSA helps member companies. It is not their responsibility to enforce silly kidsplay like the GPL.

    2. Re:Protect Open Source licenses? If not, Die. by Zeio · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'd hardly call the linux kernel kid's play. It may not be the best kernel ever conceived or written, but it would be foolish to think that there is nothing meritorious about it. Also, Apache - again, hardly kid's play. Oh, and Mozilla? Sendmail, BIND, gcc, MYSQL? TCP/IP? I certainly think that the intellectual property holders of these things are entitled to have their usage licenses and property right protected.

      Most innovation seems to be done in academia first, then stolen by dishonest corporations (not all are dishonest) and touted as their own creations.

      --
      Legalize the constitution. Think for yourself question authority.
    3. Re:Protect Open Source licenses? If not, Die. by Twisted+Mind · · Score: 1

      If GNU or any other organisation would be to the BSA, they would enforce GPL to and chase after companies that violate GPL.

      --
      (-% TwistedMind %-)
    4. Re:Protect Open Source licenses? If not, Die. by spauldo · · Score: 1
      Hmm... lemme think about that one...

      Really, the only major way to violate the GPL is to distribute programs containing GPL'd code without releasing the source as GPL.

      How many companies do this? Not many. It's happened in the past, usually with companies releasing modified versions of linux without the source code. Usually it's only been done for beta testing, but people (and the FSF) have thrown fits about it. But in none of these cases would a raid help, and in all of them the FSF had proof of the infraction before they started the stink about it.

      Besides, if someone wants to take free code from somewhere, they usually take it from BSD. It's good code (for the most part) and the license allows for this. The BSD TCP/IP stack is a good example of this.

      The FSF would not benefit from using strong-arm tactics. They don't try to extract "fines" from companies - they just demand that the GPL violation be fixed. They are there to protect the little guy who wants his code to be free, not to goad companies into paying exhorbant fees for software.

      --
      Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
    5. Re:Protect Open Source licenses? If not, Die. by kz45 · · Score: 1

      The FSF would not benefit from using strong-arm tactics. They don't try to extract "fines" from companies - they just demand that the GPL violation be fixed. They are there to protect the little guy who wants his code to be free, not to goad companies into paying exhorbant fees for software

      Here is the thing, though. Money is just as important to companies as code is to a programmer (using the GPL). Why should it be alright to bother one group of violators over another?

    6. Re:Protect Open Source licenses? If not, Die. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The software is not kid's play. The license is.

    7. Re:Protect Open Source licenses? If not, Die. by spauldo · · Score: 1
      I don't see where you're going with this.

      If you're saying what I think you're saying (that why would it be OK for the FSF to bother companies and not the BSA), then I think you're misunderstanding my point.

      I don't have a problem with the BSA wanting companies to pay for their software. I do have a problem with the way they're going about it. Strong-arm tactics and threats are an abuse of power.

      The FSF wouldn't benifit from such a thing. For one, they don't have that much power, and for two even if they did, it would be a rare occasion they would need to use it. Not too many companies violate the GPL - usually because there's little to no reason to. Usually when they do it's because the suits don't understand how the GPL works. The FSF certainly doesn't (and doesn't need to) have US marshalls bust in and ransack a place.

      Sometimes legal action is the only recourse, but the BSA takes it too far. A BSA inspection causes companies to lose money, whether or not they have to pay fees. It costs money to do an audit. Have you ever worked in IT with a large corporation? It's nigh impossible to keep track of licenses when you have thousands of computers around. So companies who are completely compliant end up paying anyway. The BSA has found a nice legal form of extortion and are using it for their own gains - but even if it's legal, it doesn't make it right.

      --
      Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
  28. One of these days, Alice... by isaac · · Score: 3

    Ah, the BSA. I love these guys - their tactics help free (libre) software more than they may realize.

    In my former life as a contract sysadmin I had several clients who specifically requested free software be used to build new systems or to replace licensed commmercial software with equivalent functionality. One major reason I got, especially in the latter case, was the desire to be rid of licensing hassles. The lower upfront cost helped, but this was usually less significant as they were already paying $$$ to contract me to implement whatever.

    License compliance creates not just paperwork hassles but can shut down a business when, e.g. a license server fails/license key is accidentally deleted by clueless admin/clueless admin forgets to renew licenses/vendor goes under without a way to extend licenses or purchase additional keys. And this doesn't even cover security problems - did you hear the one about MS Office for Mac OS X? By spoofing product keys one can shut down every copy on the network, blocking use and causing unsaved work to be lost.

    Now I'm a law student who salivates at the thought of the BSA getting its comeuppance - one of these days, I would not be surprised to learn that the BSA had organized a raid that shut down business at a company that turned out to be fully compliant. (Yes, I know full compliance with commercial licenses is virtually impossible in a large organization, but let me dream!) I can imagine hefty lawsuits arising... actually, this might have already happened. The BSA could have settled such a case with a settlement agreement that required confidentiality. I wonder, though, if one day a BSA raid will cause sufficient monetary damages (or a sufficiently cranky CEO) to make settlement impossible and allow a messy and public trial to go forward.

    God, that would be sweet!

    And yes, I have proof of valid license/purchase for every shred of commercial software on my machines. (Which is not much - just Win98SE, MS Office 2000, and Half-life/CS on my windows partition.)

    -Isaac

    --
    I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. For Entertainment Purposes Only.
    1. Re:One of these days, Alice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if hundreds of companies file an equivalent to class action suit against BAS asking for the thousdands of dollars lost due to the harassment ?

      Would that work ?

  29. Software Licensed Not Sold by Joe+U · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Last time I checked, everything you "buy" when it comes to software says "This software is licensed, not sold".

    Doesn't this mean, if you have paid for at least one copy of the software, then it's not piracy, but instead a contract disagreement?

  30. Re:I apologize by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just make a post telling how bad linux sucks, how good microsoft is, why open source is for communists, and how slashdot moderators suck. Oh yeah throw in a goatse.cx link and declare it a first post!

  31. Displeased by JWSmythe · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I'm very displeased with the BSA's tactics.. I've known several business owners who were threatened by them.. One completely freaked out. He asked me to come to his business and look everything over. Everything that was installed on his computers were OEM installs by the manufacturer (Dell, Compaq, and HP), and licensed Point Of Sale software.

    Why did the BSA send him a threatening letter? Because he's a business owner.

    This has been discussed on here before, where some private individuals have received the same letters at their homes.

    <Rant>

    I know companies with OEM installed everything. They don't have the "proof of purchase" for Windows, that came as an OEM install in 1998.. 5 years after the purchase don't even know where the stack of sales papers are for my car. I just keep track of my title and registration, just like Windows users usually have that stupid book with the hologram on it... My $35k car is worth a lot more than a Win98 install. The DMV will reprint my lost title for $15 . Why does the BSA think they are entitled to collect $150,000 for a missing "proof of purchase"!?

    I hope the BSA comes after my home based business. I'll refuse them entry to my property. When the Federal Marshals come, I'll refuse them too. When they bust down my door and arrest me, they'll be very upset to find that I have a Win98 book w/ hologram, but it's not installed (I lost the CD years ago), and my machines have Linux on them.

    </Rant>

    --
    Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    1. Re:Displeased by dyskordus · · Score: 0

      A few years ago I signed up for a free trade magazine called "Server and Workstation Expert". When prompted for a company name I replied "Diversified Bodily Wastes" For what type of buisiness, I selected "Other" and filled in "feces and urine distributor".

      After that, I moved twice. Then a few months ago I recieved one of those BSA truce letters asking that I make sure all of my software was legitimate, and warning me of the risk of a BSA audit.

      Humor at it's best.

      --
      "Reality is less than television."-Brian Oblivion
  32. Re:The Disgruntled employee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How easy would it be for a disgruntled employee to do something else stupid and illegal to fuck over their former employer? Like, plant crack and call the cops?

  33. Non-Disclosure? by BrynM · · Score: 1

    "People come to us with very detailed information that they gathered through their access to company systems."
    Doesn't that violate some non-disclosure agreements? Talk about backstabbing!

    --
    US Democracy:The best person for the job (among These pre-selected choices...)
    1. Re:Non-Disclosure? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't it be inadmissable as evidence as it is illegal obtained company propriety info ? I can smell the damages in $$$ that this will cost.

    2. Re:Non-Disclosure? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could non-disclosure cover an illegal act? If the company does have non-licensed software then they are doing something illegal, and no court would (should) ever find you liable for breaking a non-disclosure clause when you disclose information about violations of the law.

  34. What a puff piece by SFgate... by StevenMaurer · · Score: 4, Informative

    This has got to be the biggest puff piece I've seen in quite some time.

    The BSA doesn't launch frivolous investigations, of course.

    Oh, of course they don't. Only absolutely non-frivolous investigations costing perfectly innocent companies time and lost profits.

    So how do we know it isn't frivolous?

    When a lead comes in, the organization compares it with information from software publishers and credit-rating corporations like Dunn & Bradstreet.

    In other words... they only want to target companies with a good credit rating. Remember the first rule of lawsuits: only sue people with money!

    1. Re:What a puff piece by SFgate... by TheTick · · Score: 1

      Oh, of course they don't. Only absolutely non-frivolous investigations costing perfectly innocent companies time and lost profits.

      All suspects are guilty. Period.

      If they weren't guilty, they wouldn't be suspect, would they?

      --

      --
      bachiatari na torisetsu o yome!

  35. Great hidden quote by rgmoore · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's amazing how it takes them several pages before the article stops looking like a press release from the BSA, but there are actually some interesting comments when you get a bit deeper into the article. I thought that the following was very interesting:

    The BSA estimates that pirated software was responsible for about $3 billion in lost revenues to software publishers in the U.S. in 2000 -- although, to be strictly fair, that number assumes that every copy of stolen software would have been bought if it weren't stolen, which inflates the number somewhat.

    That's the first time I can ever remember a news outlet that didn't buy the "every copy would have been paid for" line of crap from the BSA. Even here, though, it's pretty weak. Assuming that every copy would have been paid for inflates the numbers more than "somewhat". If the BSA isn't careful, though, the news is going to stop telling just their side of the story soon.

    --

    There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    1. Re:Great hidden quote by WNight · · Score: 2

      I wrote a letter to the "reporter" of this story, and the business editor, about this. I complained that they basically published an unpaid ad for the BSA and didn't tell the other side of the story, that jack-booted thugs are ruining businesses in a modern-day witch hunt.

    2. Re:Great hidden quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just wait until after the BSA pays a certain SF area newspaper office a "friendly, compliance-checking" visit... Their tone just might change a tad.

  36. Re:Stephen Hawking, author, dead at 55 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sir (or madam), I believe that I am speaking for untold legions of people when I say to you, "w00t!"

    Thanks.

  37. non profits by hyperstation · · Score: 1

    what about non profits? how does the BSA treat them, or is it no different that corps

    (anon to protect myself)

    1. Re:non profits by hyperstation · · Score: 1

      well, fuck anonymity....dumbass

  38. Laughable tactics to a large company by Archfeld · · Score: 5, Informative

    We received a BSA audit notice. We replied, yeah good luck, and told them they could go climb a tree. We received a note saying that the BSA was authorized by our software suppliers to perform this audit and refusal was a violation of our software license. We called several software suppliers and informed them that we were changing companies due to BSA interference, M$ was one of the companies contacted. Within 48 hours the BSA went away and we've not heard back. Their tactics are low and barely legal, you have all kinds of recourse in regards to this kind of issue.

    --
    errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
    1. Re:Laughable tactics to a large company by VValdo · · Score: 2

      We received a note saying that the BSA was authorized by our software suppliers to perform this audit and refusal was a violation of our software license.

      I'm not sure I get this. If you pirated the software, you didn't sign a license with anyone, did you? And if you signed the license, then that means you bought it, right?

      Unless I guess maybe they're assuming you made more than the limited number of copies or whatever. Hmm. I dunno, something there seems wrong.

      In any event, if you didn't sign any EULA but they think you're pirating something, how can they justify a raid?

      W

      --
      -------------------
      This is my SIG. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    2. Re:Laughable tactics to a large company by soap.xml · · Score: 1

      They can simply justify it because by installing the software you agree to the EULA. It doesn't mean that they are right in raiding your company, but it does mean that they are simply doing the bidding of the software company who "hired" them.

    3. Re:Laughable tactics to a large company by Dwonis · · Score: 2
      They can simply justify it because by installing the software you agree to the EULA.

      Since when do Windows sysadmins have the authority to agree to these things on behalf of the company?

  39. Missed point by JordoCrouse · · Score: 2

    There is a point that I think generally has been missed - The BSA gets a whole boat load of money for each "successful investigation", and it gets to keep every penny. Is this scary to anyone else? Its obvious that at some point, income will be more important than actually catching legitimate pirated software.

    It seems to me that in the interest of making everybody's salary, they would be like Ken Starr - they would just keep going and going until they found some questionable software. There are a million ways to attack.

    What if they started going back to Windows 3.1 and beyond? Many businesses still run these old systems (we do for testing). Do *you* know where your DOS 3.1 reciept is?

    And imagine this: They start offering rewards for successful tips. Hey, there would be no end to the money.

    Very, very scary.

    --
    Do you have Linux and a DotPal? Click here now!
  40. Re:The Disgruntled employee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting
    How hard would it be for a disgruntled employee to knowingly install software without proper licenses, then call BSA?


    (posting anon for obvious reasons)


    Well, that's exactly what happened to us. I was asked to to a software inventory by my employer. I sent out an email warning employees to remove any personal applications or software that didn't belong to the company. When I went around and did the inventory I determined we were compliant with our licensing.


    Next thing I know my boss tells me the BSA is demanding either a $25,000 payment. They totally discounted our software inventory that we did because of a tip from an ex-employee. So even though we were totally compliant, they refused to let our company off. Either pay the $25,000 now, or go to court and risk paying all legal fees plus $150,000 for each piece of software the BSA manages to "prove" we stole.


    My boss didn't want to go through all that. He succumbed to the intimidation, and cut the BSA a $25,000 check. FOR NOTHING.


    This is a true story. I wish I was making this up, but sadly, its reality.

  41. The BSA has paralells with OSHA by satsuke · · Score: 2, Interesting

    At least if your familiar with OSHA. That's the american quasi-governmental group responsible for making sure employers provide a safe working environment. Thinks like making sure there are no open pits to fall in without signage or railings, certified persons for work in hazardous places, down to the office chairs we cube farmers work in have some baseline in terms of back support and stability.

    The paralell is that up until OSHA was spun off from the governments payroll the fines doled out would be a few thousand bucks or so for some major mishaps / industrial accidents. Businesses in some cases considered the fines a cost of doing business.

    Now that the organization is self funded. All of a sudden we saw companies getting fined $100,000+ for cronic problems and $1,000,000+ if someone dies on the job. All of a sudden it's painful and they fix stuff rather than continue to pay X $$ per day something isn't fixed or work has stopped.

    The BSA has similar, but more underhanded reasons for doing that they do. They use the threat of fines and bad publicity to get money to validate they're own existance rather than seeking real change in licensing agreements to something that allows licensing after the fact and such.

    Good argument for open source / free software - though as pointed out elsewhere for a great deal of niche markets the software just doesn't exist.

    1. Re:The BSA has paralells with OSHA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are the fine classified as BSA incomes ? Does BSA file thier taxes correctly ? Can the IRS visit and audit them via anonomyous tips ?

      You know they nailed organized crime by tax faud...

    2. Re:The BSA has paralells with OSHA by SuperLiquidSex · · Score: 0

      Of course people are willing to put up with OSHA because its a supported by the goverment. That and they try to save lives although I still dunno how having a comfortable chair is in violation of osha regs... but the BSA just takes money in exchange for not shutting your buisness down for an audit.

      --
      Oops....you'll know what I'm talkin about in a bit.
  42. Here's an idea by fobbman · · Score: 2

    Personally, I don't think that the DOJ and the Attorneys General are moving quickly enough, nor are they seeming to come down on Microsoft hard enough.

    I need maybe two geeks from every state in America to contact the BSA to report their state's Attorney General office for not being in compliance with their software licensing.

    When the BS of A breaks down their doors with guns drawn, maybe then they will see what kind of monster Microsoft has turned into.

  43. Troll Alert!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I mean just take a look at linux, compared to Win2k it's a peice of shit.

    Beware the trolls...

  44. Entertainment at the expense of the BSA by Restil · · Score: 2

    Only do this if you're legit. Completely.

    Run a successful business and have lots of cash reserves for lawsuits. Run ONLY open source software, no possible way you could be found guilty of IP theft.

    Then hire someone. Have ALL your employees constantly talk about how brazen the company is about copying all the software without paying for ANY of it, it was all downloaded off the internet.
    Set your computers up to LOOK like windows. Get a theme that looks that way and make sure your new hire is sufficiently dufus enough to not figure out the difference. As far as he's concerned, he's using windows, office, photoshop, etc.

    Then one day, get one of those BSA extortion letters and brag loudly (so he hears you) about how messed up they are, how they couldn't do anything to you if they wanted to, how you'll keep copying software and give the BSA the middle finger, etc etc.

    Then piss off that employee and fire him. If all goes right, he'll run to the BSA and paint a pretty picture for them.

    Refuse to cooperate with them in any way, until you get raided. Then sue them back to the stoneage.

    oh well.. I can dream can't I? :)

    -Restil

    --
    Play with my webcams and lights here
    1. Re:Entertainment at the expense of the BSA by rtaylor · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Yeah well... Did you pay Fraunhoffer the money for using the certain opensource mp3 encoders(can't remember which -- my info may be way out of date).

      Can you ensure no-one has modified GPL'd code?

      Anyway, I only touch (modify) BSD stuff for fear of the opensource BSA which is named Slashdot. Although I don't sell or even distribute any software, strictly in house stuff at home -- but who knows when I'll accidentally send someone a compiled binary and get FSFs BSA equivelent pounding at my door.

      --
      Rod Taylor
    2. Re:Entertainment at the expense of the BSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you lose the equipment for a few months and the data permanently, have you really won? I worked for the largest denim producer in the hemisphere, and we were raided by the BSA led by US marshals. They didn't find anything. We used Novell Netware w/ OS/2 clients and all custom software. We had receipts for everything. Don't play games with people bigger, meaner, and dirtier than you are. You'll lose everytime. Yes, it is a dream.z

  45. Am I missing something? by tuxlove · · Score: 1

    The article states: And woe to those who don't keep good records of what they've bought. According to Blank and Kruger, the burden of proof is on the targeted company.

    Am I missing something here, or does this violate "innocent until proven guilty"? How can they get away with this approach? I vaguely recall somewhere in hazy memory that civil law is different in this respect, and that you aren't necessarily innocent until proven guilty in a civil court. Yet, even so, I'm still perplexed how they can get away with this. How can anyone require you to save your receipts or possibly end up paying millions of dollars in penalties? This seems ludicrous.

    I would really love to see the BSA countersued by someone who wrongfully gets their doors kicked in by US Marshall jackboots because they can't prove they bought something that they actually did buy.

    1. Re:Am I missing something? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've seen too darned many of these posts to let this continue to slip by.

      The "burdon of proof" and "innocent until proven guilty" that y'all are citing simply do not apply. Period.

      Those concepts are relevant to *criminal* law.

      The BSA's MO is *not* about prosecuting a company and finding them guilty of any particular crime. It's about law suits in the various *civil* court systems and suing under contractual law for licensing infringement. They then settle their way out because most companies -- entities with a bottom line to protect -- realize that they'll get off much cheaper with a settlement then to actually have the whole pile of BS make it to trial.

      Civil law and process are a completely different world than criminal law. The "burdon of proof" and "innocent until proven guilty" do not work the same way in civil proceedings.

      and BTW -- IANAL

      -- jwp

  46. New BSA commercial by Zen+Mastuh · · Score: 2, Funny

    I saw it during the Super Bowl last Sunday. Something about "Where do terrorists get their money? If you buy pirated software, some of it might come from you.".

    --
    "What is the sound of one belly slapping?"
    1. Re:New BSA commercial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so the BSA fines some how gets into the hands of terrorists. Now everything makes sense. BSA==TERRORISTS.

      BSA = (Bastard Software Assholes)

    2. Re:New BSA commercial by ethereal · · Score: 1

      And if we legalized and taxed pirated software, the whole problem would go away. Just think, no more inner city kids have to die for Adobe Photoshop :)

      --

      Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and

  47. the bsa only works because 90% cave in by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If EVERYONE told the BSA to shove it up their ass and forced the BSA to file court papers, get a judge to issue a search warrent and use police forces to gain access they would cease to exist in less than 12 months.

    but everyone caves instantly and quietly pay's their extortion... this is pure Bullcrap and we all know it. this needs to end and it needs to end now.. Make them pay through the nose like everyone else has to.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  48. MS a software company? by Hooya · · Score: 1
    hell no. i realized that waaay back when. but at that time i thought it was more a marketing company. then later i discovered that it was an accounting company (search on google on the accounting practices of the company and you'll know what i mean. it's essentially a pyramid scheme.) Now, i know it's the digital mafia. the software company in redmond is just the little restaurant that they operate out of. and they got quite a scam going too.. pay off legislators to pass dubious laws then use that law thru BSA to threaten government offices. those offices coughs up tax payers money to avoid auditing hassles. the mob then uses that money to pay off more legislators to pass more dubious laws (the 'no digital equipment without content protection' scam that took place recently comes to mind.) Both the company and the politicians line up their pockets and the little tax-payer ends up coughing up the 'protection' money. if someone (in the form of a business) poses any threat to this nicely organized scheme, well use BSA again to disrupt them and eventually make 'em pay.

    the mafia never existed either right?

  49. Usually a slap on the wrist by ToasterTester · · Score: 1

    I've worked for a couple companies that have been audited and it was a joke. First they called and told us they were going to conduct an audit and usually gave a week or so warning. Needless to say most machine were cleaned up. Then they negotiate the settlement. So even though they found us in violation we didn't have to buy enough copies of the software in question to match the number of users. It was like okay buy a couple more of this and a few more that and pay us n dollars and your cool. The BSA is no different than gangsters charging for protection.

  50. Easy way out by Lokni · · Score: 1

    Ok, has anybody thought to just back up your necessary data, buy any necessary software, and reformat your hard drive? Its pretty tough for the BSA to come after you when you have 200 machines with 200 copies of freshly installed copies of MS Office and 200 licenses. You may have been pirating before but now, because of the format, the registry keys the BSA goes after all show recent dates and are registered under valid keys. While this may take a lot of time in a big company, certainly it would save you some money paid to the BSA in the form of a settlement for piracy.

  51. Re:The Disgruntled employee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and this is why I amd the company I work for love linux desktops and a teminal server. It eliminates all of that. Hell I can eliminate everything. I have minute control over everything the users do and easily.. something you cannot do with windows without buying more software again (got those prrofs of ownership too?)

    sorry, the cost of windows as your OS keeps increasing daily while the cost of linux as your OS continues to drop.

  52. Doubletalk by electroniceric · · Score: 1

    There's a lot of implicit doubletalk in all of this. Business are like people, some are crazy organized - most are not. To require everyone to alphabetize their CDs or face a fine is absurd. I doubt it will actually get that far.

    On the other side of the fence, everybody, businesses especially, likes to represent herself as using her resources to the absolute maximum. Let's just remember that that's a figure of speech. Nobody really maximizes anything - they can do better and worse, more and less productive, but in the end, people manage with what's there.

    I'd like to believe that as the BSA and Microsoft tighten the screws on people that they will one by one drop out and go Open Source.
    Yes, when a business really has to pay for ALL the software anyone has installed the costs will slow that inertia, but there's a lot of juice yet to be squeezed out.

    When the costs go up, I don't think that people will just switch to OSS. If the BSA really does get its thumbscrews nice and tight, businesses will change direction, and there will be opportunity all around at that moment. I think it'd be great if free and Free software got in on that opportunity, mostly because I think that good software can be "naturally" abundant, and that every ought to have some. But I'm trying to resist being naive enough to think OSS will leap to prominence.

  53. Re:If I were Redhat by yintercept · · Score: 1

    Red Hat needs to find a pissed of ex-BSA employee who will steal the list of all the current BSA cases and do a little targetted marketing. he he he...

  54. Bob Kruger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is this the same Bob Kruger that used to work for Microsoft? He used to manage a Windows/Unix interoperability product group back in the early nineties. Maybe he left because he was disgruntled ;-)

    (Sure sounds like him on the radio though...)

  55. How about a Linux commercial by Odinson · · Score: 4, Funny
    que catchy tune

    Pan to coffee shop.

    Geek1: Hey we are having a BSA party this weekend wana come?

    Geek2: Huh, what's a BSA party?

    Geek3: Just remember to act scared at first, it makes it more fun

    Geek1: I'll make the call this time

    Geek1 picks up cell phone and starts dialing.

    Flash to new scene, big server room all three geeks sitting behind Internet terminals. Zoom to door view. A loud bang insues. Voice behind door: "US Martials open up, we have a warrant."

    Geek 1: comming

    Geek 1 walks to door and opens it cops and serious looking guys in black suits run inside and start connecting laptops to hubs and switches.

    BSA Agent: We've got you now scumbag, BSA!

    BSA Agent2: We recieved anonymous tip, we understand you haven't bought a single software licence for any of these computers!

    BSA Agent3: We have you now, there must be hundreds of servers here.

    Geek2:(looking scared) Busted...

    Geek 3:We will cooperate fully.

    clock hands spin around

    zoom back to scene... everyone is standing around a large screen . Geek 1 is playing with some cool themed desktop

    BSA Agent2: I've never seen anthing like it...

    Cop 1:It's so cool

    flash to next scene, all the cops and agents are playing first person shooters and yelling at each other. A big LAN party.

    Flash to next scene, big nurf war some cops are drinking beer in the corner with their shirts open. The drinking cops and geek 3 are singing together...

    Flash to next scene. Things are quiet, Police and men are slowly walking towards the door, heads down.

    BSA Agent2: (looks up)That was great. I'm really sorry, you are such nice guys. I quit!

    BSA Agent 1:(looking very sincere he puts his hand on geek 1's shoulder) Sorry. We were wrong.

    Everybody walks out. Door closes behind him geek 3 turns to geek 2.

    Geek 3: They lose more guys that way.

    pause blinking servers are visible in background

    Geek 2: (confused) OK... How did you do that? play catchy song, fade out...

    write across black screen "Linux"

    1. Re:How about a Linux commercial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This would be funny except that we all know the BSA agents would confiscate all the Win98 machines that the Geeks in the server room use to host LAN parties.

    2. Re:How about a Linux commercial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that would be funny if instead of a lan party the geeks are circle jerking.

  56. BSA's Tactics UnAmerican by dh003i · · Score: 3, Interesting

    (1) Companies should be warned of an audit ahead of time.

    (2) Should a "raid" be conducted on a company, the BSA should not be present. The BSA is not the government and has no business on official law business.

    (3) The closeness of the BSA to federal law agencies is troubling. It seems like they say "Check them out" and the Feds check them out. A money-gribing organization shouldn't have that much influence on federal law enforcement.

    (4) Companies shouldn't have to prove anything. They shouldn't have to prove they have legit software. The BSA should have to prove -- beyond a reasonable doubt -- that the companies don't have legit software. The principle of beyond a reasonable doubt shouldn't be disconsidered just because its a civil suit and not a criminal case. The reason we assume innocence until proven otherwise in a crminal case is because the state has vastly more resources than the individual, and its difficult to "prove" your innocent. The same should be true in lawsuits (where the filing party has vastly more resources, at least).

    (5) Companies found to have pirated software should only have to pay the cost of the software, OR should have the option of forfeiting the software (that is, removing it from their system). Lets face it, in hard money, no software company loses ANYTHING when a someone pirates their software if they weren't going to buy it otherwise.

    (6) I'm not a fan of intellectual property anyways. I think all current types of IP should be scaled back to five years, and their scope should be drastically reduced; but that's another story.

  57. Re:The Disgruntled employee by crotherm · · Score: 2
    How easy would it be for a disgruntled employee to do something else stupid and illegal to fuck over their former employer? Like, plant crack and call the cops?

    But in the case of planting drugs, police actually have to gather the evidence and the DA has to prove it in court. Here the company has to all the work and has to prove innocence. Bassackwards if you ask me.

    --
    "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable" - JFK
  58. Re:The Disgruntled employee by 5KVGhost · · Score: 1

    Bad example. If someone tries to frame you for a criminal offense then you at least have a chance of defending yourself, and, by law, you're presumed innocent until proven guilty. Random tips are viewed with suspicion because they are so easily abused.

    Not so with a private enforcement regime like the BSA. They're likely to get their money whether the accusations are true or not, and that sort of setup will surely lead even the most well-intentioned organization to adopt abusive tactics.

  59. I applaud the work of the BSA by markj02 · · Score: 1, Flamebait
    Not only do they expose the true costs of proprietary software, their annoying and intrusive tactics actually impose an additional cost on users of Microsoft products.

    The BSA should conduct as many audits as possible. If you suspect that someone is using Microsoft products without the proper licenses, I encourage you to report them to the BSA. That's the best thing you can do for open source software. Companies that are 100% base on open source software have a very simple response to the BSA.

  60. Re:The Disgruntled employee by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 2
    How hard would it be for a disgruntled employee to knowingly install software without proper licenses, then call BSA?
    I dunno, how hard would it be for a disgruntled employee to install a pirated copy of M$ Office on a Linux or *BSD box?

    If you're running your business in a reasonable manner (i.e., using open software to minimize your expenses) this should not be a problem. If you're stupid enough to base your business on proprietary software, be prepaired for all the possible downsides of that decision, including a raid by the BSA.

    --
    If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
  61. Re:HAHA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    dn't b frd f vwls. th r yr frnds.

  62. What if you won your software? by marko123 · · Score: 1

    I won a box of software at a programming conference. So I have no proof of purchase. I can't prove I won it, either. I think requiring proof of purchase rather than legitimate media/licence/packaging may not stand up too well legally. If thats the case, then just say you won all your software :)

    --
    http://pcblues.com - Digits and Wood
    1. Re:What if you won your software? by ewhac · · Score: 2

      Ooo, good point. I have a copy of Photoshop 2.5 for the Mac (unused, still in the shrinkwrap to this day) that I won as a doorprize. Adobe's one of the biggest snots around when it comes to "piracy", and one of the founding members of the BSA.

      Does that mean I can expect to get raided? "Hey, Adobe! I have a copy of Photoshop I didn't pay for! Nyah, nyah!!"

      Schwab

    2. Re:What if you won your software? by Amazing+Quantum+Man · · Score: 2

      Me too. I won a copy of BCB5 Pro in their online contest. Where do I get my receipt?

      --
      Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
  63. Jeez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe it'd be easier to just get laid instead...

    Nevermind.

  64. BSA??? by Ann+O'Nymous-Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Ack! I just found out I'm not as much of a geek as I thought I was. On my first glance at the header I did a doubletake and wondered what dastardly deeds the Boy Scouts of America were up to now! :)

  65. great by poemofatic · · Score: 2



    now just disclose the name of your company. A BSA audit should be a breeze, no?

    --

    When in doubt, have a man come through a door with a gun in his hand.

  66. no, receipts do not get thrown out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You have to keep a carbon of the check, with the reciept stapled to it, for seven years. SEVEN, moron.

    Those who don't have those reciepts never forked over the licensing dough.

    No sympathy for thieves. Licensing fees are for those who don't care about costs. To wit, state and local gov'ts are getting hit.

  67. So Audit the BSA by AgTiger · · Score: 2

    I wonder how the BSA themselves would stand up to the cold light of an audit of every one of their machines.

    Sure, they may have licenses for all of the products they use from member companies that subscribe to their services... But I wonder about Joe Employee and his favorite pirated pieces of software (utilities?) that he brought in. I wonder if every IT person is 100% clean.

    Guilty until proven innocent goes BOTH ways.

    Now the only thing we need to do is find a disgruntled ex-BSA employee who suspects this is going on, go before a judge in the BSA's home county, ...

    If the BSA is reading this, and you can pretty much bet they are, I wonder if the sweat beads just started on the forehead. I hope that simple suspicion is enough to get my point across about the way they do things.

    If everyone here were to donate one dollar to a pool to hire a sufficiently powerful corporate lawyer to go after them, it might uncover some very interesting things.

  68. Re:I apologize by nixadmin · · Score: 1

    Is is too late to declare first post now? ; ) It's funny, dammit -- LAUGH!

  69. mod parent up!! by phoxix · · Score: 1
    holy cow!

    talk about fighting fire with fire!

    Maybe some of us should take the time to stick BSA's leg right up thier own @$$'es :)

  70. Oh, _that_ BSA... by d0st03vsky · · Score: 1

    I thought this was another article on the Boy Scouts. Durn.

  71. I just got a letter from by jsse · · Score: 2

    BSA, including a sound threatening letter and two forms. The forms required us to list the hardware and software we are using and their model and serial numbers

    I think the request is outragous, why do we want to expose our company information to other company whom we have no business deal with and never will? However, I'm worrying that if I don't fill the forms they would 'redlisted' us and might give us some trouble, but on the other hand I also believe that they'd do the same if I filled the forms.

    We do use some Windows for clients but we are very sure we want nobody else touch our enterprise servers(Linux), nor bring it down for a second!

    Anybody can give me some advise?

    1. Re:I just got a letter from by ender81b · · Score: 1

      Copied this from a previous post (but in general tell them the same thing - they will run away).

      "I know someone that was audited by the BSA and decided to fight it. Basically they countered by stating they wanted full disclosure of who reported them so as to determine the validity of the claim prior to wasting internal resources and dollars. They also argued that the reporting tools are a violation of privacy. Yes, they expected them to place some software on their network which scans their entire network not to mention each machine's registry. Third, they also argued that even if they were in violation of license, the license is between them and the vendor (after all, the license does not allow for the BSA as having legal proxy interests) and unless the vendor in questions decides that they'd like to personally persue the issue, the BSA does not have legal authority or the legal grounds to persue the action. Furthermore, they argued that even if something odd was discovered and they lost, only the government has the right to impose fines on legal matters as such and they would be within their legal rights to simply purchase any outstanding licenses or settle directly with the vendor in question and completely dismiss the BSA altogether thereby eliminating the need to pay any fines or added fees.

      Last I heard, even though two ex-employees had turned them in, the BSA simply walked from the issue as, from what I gathered, they really don't have a legal leg to stand on."

    2. Re:I just got a letter from by jsse · · Score: 2

      That might not work. Last time I check the local custom is hand in hand with BSA, I even saw a press release they are shaking hand in cooperative partnership. Oh btw, here is not US.

      Thank you for your help, but I think we are doomed here.

    3. Re:I just got a letter from by ender81b · · Score: 1

      Oh. That might be a factor lol. Sorry figured you where in the US. What I would suggest is

      getting a lawyer and fast

      re-image all your drives and make sure that everything on their isn't pirated.

      Lock out employees from installing anything at all

      That should work. Anything else you can tell em to go F**K themselves

    4. Re:I just got a letter from by jsse · · Score: 1

      Even showing them legal licenses but failed to produce supporting reports generated by some Software Asset Manager tools on NT server sold by them they will:

      1) have local custom bash the door and show their warrant
      2) stop anybody from touching the computers
      3) unplug all computers and line them up against the wall, seal them with tapes for the custom to take photos
      4) the other team(probably from BSA) will come to investigation the day *after* tomorrow

      That basically drove my friend out of business.

      He was planning to take legal to recover his lost but to his dismay local Laws actually grant them the right to take such an action. :/

      I'm not worrying about legalese as we are using legal software, and I don't want to setup a NT server for Software Asset Management. Why do we want to buy an NT server for silly function, and generate reports for other company who want use die?

      Thank you for your help so far, your advise is very valuable. :)

  72. Proof by cgleba · · Score: 3

    Here is the lines from the MS EULA that say you can't sue them for their products being buggy or insecure, no matter how much gets destroyed in the process:

    "CUSTOMER REMEDIES. Microsoft's and its suppliers' entire liability and your exclusive remedy shall be, at Microsoft's option, either (a) return of the price paid, if any, or (b) repair or replacement of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT that does not meet Microsoft's Limited Warranty and that is returned to Microsoft with a copy of your receipt. "

    Meaning that if Windows messes up and destoys all your data, MS, *at their option* may refund your money. In addition,

    "LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, IN NO EVENT SHALL MICROSOFT OR ITS SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF BUSINESS PROFITS, BUSINESS INTERRUPTION, LOSS OF BUSINESS INFORMATION, OR ANY OTHER PECUNIARY LOSS) ARISING OUT OF THE USE OF OR INABILITY TO USE THE SOFTWARE PRODUCT OR THE FAILURE TO PROVIDE SUPPORT SERVICES, EVEN IF MICROSOFT HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. IN ANY CASE, MICROSOFT'S ENTIRE LIABILITY UNDER ANY PROVISION OF THIS EULA SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE GREATER OF THE AMOUNT ACTUALLY PAID BY YOU FOR THE SOFTWARE PRODUCT OR U.S.$5.00;"

    Meaning that no matter how much damage a MS product causes and no matter what it does, they have the option of refunding your money or giving you $5 -- I have no idea where that number came from. Moreover EVEN IF YOU TELL THEM THAT THEIR SOFTWARE HAS A FLAW THAT CUOLD DESTROY ALL YOUR DATA AND THEY DON'T FIX IT, YOU STILL CAN'T SUE THEM!

    This type of EULA does not come with bridges and is why you can't sue MS for buggy software. If a Boeing plane were running MS sofware in its navigation system and that system messed up causing the plane to crash no one could sue MS, however if an engineering firm designed a new, let's say rudder for a Boeing jet and it failed causing the plane to crash its most likely the engineering firm can be sued.

    Its all about monopoly -- if there was competition, people would not have to accept this implied consent EULA.

  73. Constitutionality needs to be tested... by letxa2000 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    One does not have the authority to arbitrarily search others on the grounds that they may have committed some infraction against you; that firms have allowed the BSA to get away with such behavior is IMHO quite scandalous.

    What needs to happen is some company that has their licenses in order should tell the BSA to screw off. When BSA comes storming in with a court order the company should obviously comply. The BSA will find nothing. They should then sue the BSA for wrongful prosecution, sue for damages (lost productivity due to having to deal with them), treble damages, and hopefully get the process itself checked on constitutionality.

    The BSA has the right to sue. But the courts shouldn't be dishing out court orders for these kind of raids unless there's evidence of violation. A tip is heresey unless the tip comes with evidence--copies of email sent within the companying that acknowledge the presence of pirated copies, etc.

    Consider their acknowledged source of tips: disgruntled employees. Sure, they may have knowledge of violations. Or they might just be getting back at their ex-employer. They might not have any pirated copies, but the disgruntled employee will at least cause his ex-employer some headaches.

    Is a disgruntled employee really a reliable source for determining whether there is justification to violate somebody's (or some company) right to be free of unreasonable search and seizure?

    This needs to be tested constitutionally, but I think it'll require 1) A company with their licenses in order. 2) The company snubbing their noses at the BSA. 3) The company subsequently being raided. 4) The company sueing the BSA.

    Lots of "ifs" considering most companies are in business to make money, not test constitutionality issues. We can dream, though.

    1. Re:Constitutionality needs to be tested... by mpe · · Score: 2

      What needs to happen is some company that has their licenses in order should tell the BSA to screw off.

      Maybe a little more formally, e.g. anti-stalker legislation.

      When BSA comes storming in with a court order the company should obviously comply. The BSA will find nothing. They should then sue the BSA for wrongful prosecution, sue for damages (lost productivity due to having to deal with them)

      "Wrongful prosecution" does not make much sense. "Trespass" does, as does "fraud"...

  74. Gosh, that looks so bad! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's the disclaimer of liability contained in the GPL:

    NO WARRANTY

    11. BECAUSE THE PROGRAM IS LICENSED FREE OF CHARGE, THERE IS NO WARRANTY FOR THE PROGRAM, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW. EXCEPT WHEN OTHERWISE STATED IN WRITING THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND/OR OTHER PARTIES PROVIDE THE PROGRAM "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR CORRECTION.

    12. IN NO EVENT UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW OR AGREED TO IN WRITING WILL ANY COPYRIGHT HOLDER, OR ANY OTHER PARTY WHO MAY MODIFY AND/OR REDISTRIBUTE THE PROGRAM AS PERMITTED ABOVE, BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR DAMAGES, INCLUDING ANY GENERAL, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE PROGRAM (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LOSS OF DATA OR DATA BEING RENDERED INACCURATE OR LOSSES SUSTAINED BY YOU OR THIRD PARTIES OR A FAILURE OF THE PROGRAM TO OPERATE WITH ANY OTHER PROGRAMS), EVEN IF SUCH HOLDER OR OTHER PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.


    It's standard boilerplate. Don't get your panties in a knot.

    1. Re:Gosh, that looks so bad! by BlowCat · · Score: 2
      The difference is that in case of GPL, I can buy warranty from a third party. In fact, my previous employer did just that and paid tens of thousands of dollars to a well known Linux company. The liability was not limited to $5 or the cost of the software.

      I doubt that anybody without complete source of Microsoft products and the right to produce fixed versions of it would sell you warranty for Microsoft's products.

  75. Smells LikeBS!Re:Laughable tactics to a large com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We called several software suppliers and informed them that we were changing companies due to BSA interference, M$ was one of the companies contacted. Within 48 hours the BSA went away and we've not heard back.

    *cough* Bull shit *cough*

  76. Sorry, but the BSA will beat you down. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Using Open Source software?

    That's nice. They don't care. They'll still scream, "Audit!" and let slip the greedy bastards of war.

    Just like audits do great damage to businesses who use proprietary software and do have their licensing in order, it does the same to businesses who use Open Source/Other non-proprietary software. You still need to pay people to go through your systems and make sure Hoser Joe hasn't installed Win 3.11 on a workstation somewhere. You still need to be able to prove you've no proprietary products that are in violation of licensing.

    In the end, you still get slapped with a large bill, and they get off scott free, even if you've done nothing wrong.

  77. Re:The Disgruntled employee by Jeremi · · Score: 2
    I dunno, how hard would it be for a disgruntled employee to install a pirated copy of M$ Office on a Linux or *BSD box?


    Trivial; he could just do a bit for bit copy of the CDs to a .ISO file on the hard drive. I don't think the BSA would say "oh, it's not executable on that machine, so it's okay" -- instead, they'd say it was a distribution site or somesuch.


    Hell, if he were extra clever he'd probably throw some kiddie porn in too.

    --


    I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
  78. Re:Smells LikeBS!Re:Laughable tactics to a large c by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey, sounds like a guy who works for MS or BSA.

    How does it feel to be whaleshit?

  79. Sauce for the goose... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok, let's use this to our (the rabble-rousing OSS zealot's) advantage...

    It's a well established fact that you can run various Microsoft executables through something like 'strings' and find references to certain OSS licenses (eg. the BSD license for their ftp client, etc.) Given the BSA's ability to obtain a court order based upon the heresay of a 'disgruntled' employee, it should then be a no-brainer to drop in front of that same judge the output of your investigation,point out that MS has demonstrated a willingness to use OSS code in their own software, and therefore they need to be 'audited' to ensure that they have not slipped in some GPL software as well.

    I would buy a plane ticket from the East coast to fly out to Redmond and watch the US Marshalls loading onto a few trucks any computer identified as containing Windows source code, to be stored and 'audited'. I'd even buy them all coffee.

  80. Just thought of something by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2

    Isn't there, in the US legal system, the ability to get a pre-emptive judgement? I.e. somebody's treatening legal action, as a threat, you can take the case to the judge yourself and be declared legally clean? Maybe somebody with the cash should do that. Get the polite BSA letter, send a polite one back, get the threatening letter, send a 'fuck you' reply back, then go to the judge and cart out all these arguements; extortion, protection rackets, innocent until proven guilty, burden of proof of ownership, and so on. Might even set a precident that other companies can use.

    --
    Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  81. Paging Robert Vaughn by battlinbill · · Score: 1
    Most companies come back with a different settlement number, and we negotiate," says Jenny Blank, the BSA's director of enforcement. "I'm not going to say they're cheerful about it, but they recognize that this is probably easier and less expensive than taking the case to court."

    This is funny cause I live up in the Northeast where they show a commercial that has hammed up acting just like this for Jacoby and Meyers. One lawyer comes in and says something like we're being sued, the other says something like flip off. The first lawyer then says it's Jacoby and Meyers, the second jumps the gun and says we'll settle.
    I found it humorous, then again I've been drinkin jameson all night.

  82. A Look Inside the BSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's a difference between making a point and making a claim, especially when the claim is blatantly false. Companies who don't want to deal with the BSA can always use Open Source software, but that won't keep them from being audited by the BSA or SPA. The BSA can still go to court and run a raid, and the company can still lose a large amount of money demonstrating it's innocence. If the BSA gets an order to seize computers as evidence, things will get worse.

    IMHO the BSA and similar organizations are bullies who blackmail companies into paying license fees that are not owed in order to avoid the truma of an audit.

  83. Burden of proof??? by zerofoo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Let me get this straight....a pissed-off ex-employee reports his former employer to the BSA and then the BSA requests an audit???? What kind of crap is this? Guilty until proven innocent? What charter is the BSA operating under that gives them the right to become a law enforcement agency....none that I know of. Also, who pays for the man-power to do a software audit? This could be very expensive for a large corporation.

    In order to raid a business, the BSA must obtain a warrant since the constitution (Amendment IV) of the united states protects its citizens against unreasonable search and seizures. In order to obtain this warrant; the BSA must convince a court that there is compelling evidence of piracy...just the word of disgruntled employees is not compelling evidence. After all, ex-employees are tainted witnesses.

    There are checks and balances in our government that try to prevent abuses of our justice system. These abuses could force a legitimate company out of business.

    My question is this: Could a legitimate company sue for the costs of a BSA investigation that produced no evidence of piracy? That would be justice.

    I'm not a piracy advocate, but I hate people that use our justice system to do their dirty work.

    -ted

    1. Re:Burden of proof??? by Graymalkin · · Score: 2

      The BSA isn't a government fucking agency and thus requires not a warrant to performa an audit. If you signed a contract saying they could perform and audit you're fucked. Besides in civil cases involving contracts all you need is a vague clause saying something to the effect "if we think you've broken the contract we can tear you a new asshole" and then your signature. A civil court can't do anything to protect you because your John Hancock is on the contract. The legal system protecting people from government doesn't mean you're protected from other people. Be more careful about the contracts you sign. There is a big difference between civil courts and criminal courts. Why is that so hard to understand?

      --
      I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
    2. Re:Burden of proof??? by zerofoo · · Score: 2

      You still need evidence that both parties entered into the contract. Take this case:

      Company "A" pirates all their software....did they enter into a user license agreement agreeing to an audit? No, not contractually/legally.

      Company "B" legally uses its software. How do you prove what software is running on the machines without doing a physical audit? Remember, we are still at the "convince the judge to give us a warrant" phase.

      The bottom line is that the BSA is effective because they use the THREAT of legal action to further their agenda. If all businesses excercized their legal rights of protection against unlawful search and seizure, the BSA would take 10 times as long to do any audit...and therefore become less or non-effective.

    3. Re:Burden of proof??? by Graymalkin · · Score: 2

      That is another matter entirely. The original poster was complaining about the "powers" of the BSA which are pretty much non-existant. If people would stand up for themselves and make an agressor jump through hoops to attack them on a justifiable legal basis the BSA would become toothless. They wouldn't try to audit anybody if there was a hassle whenever they tried. In a civil case the burden of proof is STILL on the accuser. They have to make a convincing argument to a judge that you're broken their contract.

      Actually in your case of company A if there was a click through license as in "read this before proceding" they ARE indeed contractually bound by the terms of the license. If you click through a license in bad faith a civil judge is going to throw the book at you and award the BSA anything they want. The terms of EULAs are pretty straitforward if you take the time to read them. By clicking the "accept" button you are contractually bound by the EULA's terms. Your example of company B is pretty easy as well. To convince a judge you need permission to do a physical audit you can bring public records up like finacial reports, news article, industry documents, just about anything in the public domain as evidense. You'd say "company B bought 20 new computers of such and such quality, we only sold them licenses for the 20 computers they already had, we believe they may have broken our license agreement by installing software on them they didn't pay for". The judge will then allow company B to give a statement "these are computers for accounting so they don't need [software package] that the accusor sells thus we did not install it on those systems". Unless the judge things Company B is full of shit he/she is probably going to tell the BSA to go fuck itself ever so politely. Civil courts don't take kindly to business organizations trying to fuck over other businesses. There are some districts where the opposite is true but these judges are usually owned by said business organization. Most districts however will look at the situation logically, if there's reason to believe the small company is pirating software rampantly they'll be punished for it if a case is brought against them. If the BSA is just trying to nickel and dime a company they'll get a whoopin.

      --
      I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
  84. Some of you are missing the point by PhreakinPenguin · · Score: 1

    Those of you who are saying that if they owned a company, they wouldn't pirate software. Well, it's not like most companies are out there running warez ftp sites or downloading iso's from someone. Most of the time I have see "licensing infringements" is when a company has every intent on paying for the software. Most companies will only by the amount of licenses they need, and they won't have an extra 5 or so copies around. An emergency comes up and they need a new server up, they pop in the Windows 2000 server cd and install it. Then they make a note to order another license when the do their next purchase of software/hardware. We usually did it once a month.

    --


    My sig of choice is Marlboro
  85. Be careful, but informed by werdna · · Score: 5, Informative

    There is no substitute when dealing with bullies like the BSA: make sure you are well-advised. They misrepresent the extent of their powers and advantages in these threatened litigations, wildly mistate their rights under the law and appropriate burdens of proof; but they do have significant advantages that you should never underestimate.

    While BSA likes to compare themselves to other licensing enforcement operations, such as ASCAP/BMI, there are fundamental differences, and at the end of the day, these can make substantial differences in the result if you are willing to duke it out.

    A truly compliant entity, even poorly documented, can turn the tables powerfully on such a bully. Indeed, even a party who is slightly out-of-compliance can do so, by using a number of devices available at law, such as Offers of Judgment, to turn the tables or test the will of a BSA threat. (Indeed, it may be wise -- again YMMV -- to consider filing a preemptive declaratory judgment action against them for several reasons.)

    ASCAP/BMI, when asked, will produce actual opinions of actual cases where they have collected actual damages at trial in comparable enforcement scenarios. Ask a similar question of the BSA -- they will cite to the cases of the Performing Rights Societies and not to those of the BSA.

    Ex parte seizures or searches can backfire seriously as well. A 6th Circuit case not too long ago found that a defendant who can show a seizure to have been improper can proceed past a motion to dismiss on a civil rights and trespass claim not only against the overreaching plaintiff, but also against their attorneys. It is a good idea to put them on notice of this fact early in the correspondence.

    And from this article, I learned something quite interesting -- their constituents only get the license fees, they retain the multiples they extract. Not so with Performing Rights Societies, who, as understood, are non-profit entities that return their proceeds after costs to the composers and rights owners they represent.

    It is therefore essential to get solid representation from someone who knows what they are doing. A stone wall could expose you to substantial liability. On the other hand,

    Please do not consider any of the above to be legal advisc beyond the following: get a lawyer who is highly competent in this area to advise you. Specific legal advise is highly fact-dependent, and subtle differences in facts can often necessitate dramatically different strategies. Accordingly, no "cookbook" or single posting can provide you with a clear, definitive solution -- get competent advice and act on it.

    1. Re:Be careful, but informed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YAAL, aren't you!

    2. Re:Be careful, but informed by werdna · · Score: 2

      Yes, I am.

  86. Re:The Disgruntled employee by msaavedra · · Score: 2

    This has probably happened at lots of places. It makes me wonder if a class action lawsuit against the BSA is possible. Perhaps your boss should find some enterprising lawyer who would like to pursue something like that.

    It also seems to me that the BSA's little game is extortion or racketeering. They are using fear and intimidation to grab as much money as they can from their prey, whether or not said prey is actually pirating software. I'd personally like to see the executives of the BSA end up behind bars (like hopefully those at Enron will be).

    --
    "Any fool can make a rule, and any fool will mind it."
    --Henry David Thoreau
  87. 150,000% penalty = too risky to fight by geekotourist · · Score: 3, Insightful
    With penalties this high no one except the largest companies can fight it- and that's wrong. You'll fight a traffic ticket because you can afford to lose. What if the original ticket was $100,000, with a "negotiated" fine of $1,000? This is extortion, not a negotiation- you'll accept whatever the court says because you cannot risk losing. Not to mention if *you* had to show that you didn't speed, even a little bit, and lack of evidence = proof of guilt. Extraordinary fines should require extraordinary proof, but instead the BSA has you do all the work, and even if you are entirely innocent you can still get hit.

    Or, are the BSA members willing to accept the same rules for their own activities? Would they accept a Software Consulting Association that can send audit letters out checking for late payments to consultants? If you've paid a consultant more than 30 days late, you get fined $200k. Or an Hourly Workers Association- you have to prove you've never underpaid hourly workers, or its $50k. How about a Pricing Gun Mistake Association- if the grocery store misprices an item, you get $600. Not double the difference, or 10x, but 1,000x for each instance.

    No, they wouldn't, because the rules that the BSA use wouldn't work if applied to all of society. Unless a mistake can cause extraordinary harm, you don't usually get to treat mistakes like a felony! What makes the BSA so special? Earlier people wrote about OSHA- at least that affects life and health. We tend to allow bigger fines for that. But is software piracy that much worse than discharging toxic substances into waterways (max fine $125,000)? Misbranding a drug in interstate commerce (max fine $100,000)? Violating the Sherman Antitrust Act (the fine listed in Section 3571 (d) is "not more than the greater of twice the gross gain or twice the gross loss" caused by the conduct...)?

    In this Slashdot / Salon / LATimes coverage we saw Microsoft / BSA vs the LA School District, where "hundreds" of unlicensed copies were found. the threat was $150,000 fine for each copy of a $100 per license product. ($100 at best. 1/3 was MSDOS, and schools get very good rates). They "negotiate" down to a $300,000 total fine, and the school district probably felt very grateful for this kindness of the BSA.

    This is a 150,000% fine negotiated down to a 1,000% fine. (or 1,500x down to 10x). How does the BSA get to levy fines so out of proportion to actual damages? Yes, illegal copies are a crime (as is speeding), but the LAUSD wasn't running a mass piracy operation. Assuming that "hundreds" = 500 copies found, then the LAUSD had found roughly 1 copy per school, or 1 copy per 120 employees. The BSA got to treat the LAUSD as if it had found widespread felonious behavior rather than a few years worth of a few people deliberately or mistakenly making copies. No proof of bad intentions needed.

  88. Can We Say "Corporations run this country" by SkewlD00d · · Score: 1

    It's impossible to deny that coporations have the power in this country, that the laws are to serve the corporations, not the people.

    --
    The biggest trick the devil pulled was letting lawyers become politicians so they can write the laws.
  89. "Good Old Boys"? by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

    Just two good ol' boys
    Never meanin' no harm
    Just like you never saw
    Been in trouble with the law
    Since the day they was born

    (Mod me down if you must, but you're just jealous that you didn't make the reference first :) )

  90. A Letter from BSA by keeyu · · Score: 1

    Recently my company director received a letter from BSA, Hong Kong (see below). The director told me to ignore BSA but make sure our software used are legal. Does anybody have similar experience with BSA and how do you deal with them?

    Thanks.

    David.

    ---

    Dear [my-director's name]

    We refer to our mail sent to you on DD-MM-YYYY regarding a series of crackdowns by the Hong Kong Customs & Exercise Department on companies using software without authorization. As you may aware, companies found to possess illegal copies of software for the purpose of or in the course of carrying out their business could face - for every illegal copy - up to HK$50000 and 4 years' imprisionment.

    BSA is urging companies that may be at risk of criminal software piracy to take immediate steps to ensure that the software in use on their computer systems is fully licensed. We want to make sure that companies make the most out of the software they use and that they are fully compliant with the law. The first step in achieving this goal is to determine what software is in use on a company's internal computer system, and compare it to the licenses purchased for such software. Should there be any discrepancy between these two numbers, steps should be taken to get sufficient licenses. Some companies undertaking a software audio determine a high level of illegal software use - others find that they have sufficient licenses.

    We urge you to undertake a software audit to assess your internal software usage situation, and are willing to provide you with assistance for a limited time only. To be eligible, you must fill out the attached audit form and return to BSA within 14 days from the date of this letter. Forms can either be posted to faxed to us at . BSA will be in touch with our after receiving your completed audit form.

    If you have already taken steps to ensure that your company's software use is fully legal, we encourage you to continue to monitor and maintain the legal of software in your organization. Anyone wanting to learn more about software asset management can visit www.bsa.org/hongkong, which contains a series of free software asset management tools that can be downloaded.

    Compliance with the law is everyone's responsibility - please carry out a software audit today.

    Very truly yours,

    [signature of BSA-HONGKONG-chairman]

    [name-of-BSA-HONGKONG-chairman]
    Business Software Alliance
    Chairman

  91. Re:Or, vice-versa...occams edge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The same old.
    If it's tangable, it's stealing.
    If it's not, it isn't stealing.
    Oh what a fine edge we hang our misdeeds from.
    Shame, it will not make a difference in the end.

  92. Re:the bsa only works because 90% cave in-Police by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "...and use police forces to gain access.."

    Does federal marshalls ring a bell?

  93. Re:The BSA has paralells with OSHA-Any "port"... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Good argument for open source / free software - though as pointed out elsewhere for a great deal of niche markets the software just doesn't exist."

    Better argument for companies to take some of the money they normaly use on "license managment" and write/port what they need for the business.

  94. Re:Or, vice-versa...occams edge by Ogerman · · Score: 3, Funny

    never said it wasn't wrong. but you're right. It makes no difference since proprietary software will be completely gone in 10-15 years.

  95. This is totally backward. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Consider a company that is using software legitimately.

    Is it reasonable for the BSA to ask them to perform an audit at their own expense?

    Not to mention the fact that the burden is on the company to prove its innocence to the BSA...

    I wonder whether it would work for a company with truly nothing to hide to perform the audit when asked by the BSA and then bill them for it.

  96. What licences realy say by kingosric · · Score: 1

    When I install software, I tend to flick through the licence that comes up at the start of the process, and I have noticed that none of them say "You are only licenced to use this software if you have paid $CASH to $COMPANY". So why are software companys suprrised when people don't pay for their software?

  97. Response ? by ThorbyBaslam · · Score: 1

    I wonder how a simple "Go Fuck Yourself" in response to a proposed BSA "investigation" would be received.

  98. Re:the bsa only works because 90% cave in-Police by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Excellent, if you force them to do that, and then sue them for lost profits (be sure to inflate the losses just as when a supposed "hacker" breaks in) to the tune of oohhhh, 2 million per day sounds normal. Be sure to make it very public, call the press give the press lots of inside information, photos of them trashing your business, etc...

    and then also be sure to go after the Judge. sorry but if the judge issued the warrent without probable cause he can be sued,etc....

    all it will take is one or two to actuially fight back.. (or better yet, set a honeypot up to nail them hard.... no violations in the building/company) to take em down.

  99. Re:The Disgruntled employee by mpe · · Score: 2

    Bad example. If someone tries to frame you for a criminal offense then you at least have a chance of defending yourself,

    Also it's quite possibly that with something like a disgruntled employee planting drugs the police will still go after that person anyway...

  100. Aurthur Anderson Solution by stinkydog · · Score: 2

    When you get a letter from the BSA, shred all your hard drives.

    SD

    --
    âoeWho knew something as harmless as willful ignorance could end up having real consequences?â
    1. Re:Aurthur Anderson Solution by JWReed · · Score: 0

      The 'Hooked on Phonics Solution': Learn to spell, Tard... It's NOT "Aurthur Anderson " It's just "AndersEn" as in: http://www.andersen.com/ ...how about just using 'opensource freeware' and losing the cheapshots?

      --
      "the smaller the mind, the bigger the noise it makes"
  101. When George Bush was crowned elPresidente... by bubbha · · Score: 1

    ...one thing leads to another

    --
    I want to be alone with the sandwich
  102. I couldnt care less by jopet · · Score: 1

    Letters from the BSA are handled like other SPAM: silently deleted. This bullshit is not even worth getting angry about.

  103. Woah ... by Archanagor · · Score: 1

    According to Blank and Kruger, the burden of proof is on the targeted company.

    Ummm. This is disturbingly unconstitutional. Since when was the burden of proof on the defense? In the U.S. Legal system, the burden of proof is always on the prosecution. I can't believe they can get away with violating the rights of U.S. citizens.

    "It's no good to show me a software box," says Blank. "We need proof of ownership, and that's a dated invoice." "It's a good idea to have a document-retention policy for your company," says Kruger. "If you don't keep documentation and you don't have any ability to show you own your software, it's a problem -- there's a point at which sloppiness can get you into trouble!"

    This is bullshit. What gives them the right to accuse someone who obviously legitimately owns the software? Yes, I have the box, yes, I have the original CD along with all of the printed material included with the software, but, because I can't find an invoice I'm guilty of stealing software? What a crock of shit!

    Also-- The business of imposing heavy fines on a company that may have lost track of a single software license (maybe that 1 PC in the LAN closet didn't have the proper licensing for NT. Whoops, that's $150,000 out of my pocket.)

    How in the hell does BSA get away with these kinds of tactics? As far as I'm concerned, if I were ever accused of software theft, I'd say bring it on, but don't be a bitch about it and take me through a lawsuit, where the tort lawyer runs amok. Bring about charges of theft so that the criminal court can take care of it. So that the burden of proof is on the BSA's side.

    I should not have to prove my innocence to an unrelated third party. Or any party for that matter. I do have rights in this country, and I especially have the right that no one shall infringe on my rights!

    1. Re:Woah ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since when was the burden of proof on the defense? In the U.S. Legal system, the burden of proof is always on the prosecution.

      Careful when making absolute statements like "always" and "never" - you're almost always never going to be correct :)

      Consider the situation when you sue a landlord for improperly witholding part of a security deposit that, by contract, was to be returned to the leasee if certain requirements was met. Even though they are the defense, the burden of proof is now on said landlord to provide sufficient justification for breach of contract.

      (NB: IANAL, I just happened to have been in this situation with a landlord in Virginia a few years ago. FWIW, we won the case, but didn't get the treble damages we'd hoped for.)

    2. Re:Woah ... by Archanagor · · Score: 1

      Right, but generally, in the US the burden of proof is in the procsecution. In only very rare and extreme circumstances is it the other way around.

    3. Re:Woah ... by rjamestaylor · · Score: 2
      How in the hell does BSA get away with these kinds of tactics?

      Because it's the law. (Change it. You HAVE the power.)

      --
      -- @rjamestaylor on Ello
    4. Re:Woah ... by Archanagor · · Score: 1

      What law states that any random organization can fine me exhorbinant amounts and barge into my place of business at will?

  104. It's because the gay guys are gone.... by bubbha · · Score: 1

    ...its all about balance!

    --
    I want to be alone with the sandwich
  105. Yeah but they will be bumped off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if they know too much that might be embarressing

  106. Here's why... by bubbha · · Score: 1

    43% of the nation's wealth is owned by 1% of the population...and 88% of them are Republicans. Now you know the REST of the story....

    --
    I want to be alone with the sandwich
  107. You don't (shouldn't) pay for software... by bubbha · · Score: 1

    ...you pay for the requirements analysis and systems analysis. When a problem is so well understood that a band of good-natured coders can create something way better and give it away...then time to take your profits and come up with somthing else. Read "No Silver Bullet". Of course, Apache is the exception that makes the rule since it was always free...

    --
    I want to be alone with the sandwich
  108. Scare tactics=contracts by pantherace · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I have been around a school system, which was recently forced to do somewhat of an audit. Of course, not all of the software was properly licenced. (kids downloading and installing software, paperwork not all organized, teachers, etc.) Basically, Microsoft forced the school system to pay a huge contract for a complete site licence for their software. Here is the problem: Any other member of the BSA could do this, say Adobe, and it would have to be redone.

    In another case, A large school was basically threatened, and told that if you buy such-and-such hugely priced licence, we won't audit you, and things will be fine. The administation agreed, and paid for the contract. Here is the problem the licence they were conned into is horrible. It is an upgrade licence, that requires an original copy of a windows licence, and it invalidates the individual licences if the contract isn't renewed. Can you say extortion? It doesn't prevent having to do an audit at any time, and if you ever get out of it, you have to remove all of the software you otherwise have licences to.

  109. Re:These aren't logical fallacies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These aren't logical fallacies. Logical fallicies are logical mistakes, i.e. incorrect reasoning. Most of what you've written involves challenging false assumptions about factual (as opposed to logical) matters.

  110. Criminal Court recourse? by SablKnight · · Score: 1

    Disclaimer: My legal experience extends to watching a lot of Law&Order, one or two eps of night court, and griping about the OJ trial.

    Couldn't the target of these threatening letters press charges of racketeering or extortion? If both the BSA and the US Marshals were charged, it might make people think a little differently, and with a good lawyer you might even be able to get an indictment...

    -SablKnight

  111. Scare tactics=contracts EXACTLY by hndrcks · · Score: 1

    I haven't received a BSA threat letter yet that didn't include marketing drek from some local company all too willing to 'make me legal'.

    I work for a non-profit organization; I can purchase Win2K CALs for $7 a pop. But the companies 'helping' the BSA want me to pay full $50 price... I wonder why that is?

    --
    Everyone will start to cheer when you put on your sailin' shoes.
  112. Re:Or, vice-versa...occams edge by saintlupus · · Score: 2

    It makes no difference since proprietary software will be completely gone in 10-15 years.

    --RMS, 1985

    Yeah, good luck with that.

    --saint

  113. Nope by AftanGustur · · Score: 2


    Listen, buddy. As Richard Stallman points out, software is an entire different entity. It's very easily copied. It's easy to take those copies and transfer them. Therefore, the amount of damage that can be done by pirating software is massive and much larger than other more tangible products.

    Tsk, tsk, you been listening to closely to the media ? Let's say that reading books costed money, so if you borrow a book and read it without paying for it you're causing ***damage*** ??

    --
    echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
  114. The Falcon and the Snowman by AftanGustur · · Score: 2


    When did I stop living in America?

    You weren't born in America.. The America you have belived you lived in, ceased to exist a long long time ago.

    --
    echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
  115. Govts too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I work for a city government in one of the southern states who was on the receiving end of an audit from MS. We had to almost shutdown our operations for 5 weeks in order to audit all our workstations and servers plus go over all of our purchase orders for the past 5 years and provide proof of purchase for all the MS products we are running. We proved that we had a *surplus* of licenses over actual installs. Had they actually shown up on our premesis to conduct a search, their people would have likely been introduced to our police department's narcotics division and gotten to experience firsthand just how thorough our people are when they want to search for something. Oh, you think we'd need probable cause for that? In the South? Don't be silly, we'd do it in a heartbeat. Remember, you might be able to beat the rap, but you'll never be able to beat the ride downtown.

  116. Re:The BSA has paralells with OSHA-Any "port"... by satsuke · · Score: 1

    Most companies of more than 10 people or so have neither the stomach or pocketbook for developing they're own software in all cases.

    This is the primarily "advantage" of shrinkwrap solutions. Microsoft makes a living off of convincing people that they're solutions are the only supportable way to do business. Fortunatly the majority of the UI development work is in areas that are of common use. When someone wants a specific need the private company market is the only way to get it without developing internally. - and believe it or not a lot of small software companies will allow access to source code for customers if asked for specific business needs.

    One example of this was when I was working for an oil company. The guys with petrolium engineering degrees had a modelling package that was used to develop very specific use lubricants. The software was not available in any form in open source because the market was to small and to restricted to do anything otherwise.

    It was source-available for customers .. though it ran only on windows 3.1 in 97 and was CPU bound as hell..

    Anyway .. no open source alternative .. no deal

  117. Yess ! attractive women should be free ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As in "you don t have to offer me a beer or give me a speech full of romantic lies, honeypie. I m free tonight."

  118. Another article on BSA's tactics overseas by Krelnik · · Score: 2
    If you are interested in BSA's tactics, you might also want to read this article from a couple years ago in Mother Jones magazine. The well-researched piece essentially reveals that many of BSA's branches overseas essentially act as Microsoft sales offices, pushing licenses for MS products even on companies that weren't illegally using them, but in fact were using other (competing) products.

    For fairness, here is a link to a follow up letters column that disputes some of the facts in the article.

    Quite an eye-opener.

  119. Why you should license software... by Snibor+Eoj · · Score: 1
    From the BSA's web site, we learn why you should license your software: A virus will steal your portfolio and trap you inside your computer (Warning: Flash movie)

    -Joe

  120. IAAL... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...and I think the need for lawyers has now been demonstrated. The alternative to courts, by the way, used to be trial by ordeal or trial by combat. I don't think we would prefer these alternatives.

  121. What software is it-anybody have a list? Boycott? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This a little crazy, having products from companies in this alliance seems like more trouble than it's worth.

    I'd like to stay with some commercial software when it's better - I'm not all that ideologically pure. I really don't mind paying, but I'd like to purchase only non-BSA products. Their site http://www.bsa.org is pretty unhelpful with who their members are.

    For instance our office can do without word and excel, but photoshop is pretty far ahead of everything else. Opera is a great browser (i even payed for it) but I wouldn't actually want to get raided and have to dig up a paper receipt (which doesn't exist).

    So it would be awesome if some public spirited person could put together a list of "software to avoid." I'd follow it and do my best to get others to do the same.

    By the way for all you true believers out there, it seems like you are actually winning. You've somehow gotten the larger software vendors to think that everyone is out to get them. It's like a guerilla war, and you have conned them into turtling up and defending - the one sure way to lose. Funniest of all is that their are making war on their own reason for existance - me the customer. Just crazy.

  122. Wen Ho Lee Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you get a letter from the BSA, hide all your hard drives behind the photocopier.

  123. List of BSA members! by Prolapsed+Anus · · Score: 1

    From the bsa.ORG website: "BSA worldwide members include Adobe, Apple, Autodesk, Bentley Systems, Borland, CNC Software/Mastercam, Macromedia, Microsoft, Symantec, and Unigraphic Solutions."

  124. You don't think so? Don't be too sure... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Worked great for us in Perimadea!

    Bardas Loredan,
    Fencedr-at-Laws