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.'"
...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
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.
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.
"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"
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
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.
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".
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:
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.
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.
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.
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.
If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
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.
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.