Free Software Inflates BSA's Piracy Claims

crazney writes: "According to this article in The Age, the BSA do not count the effect of free software when calculating piracy rates. The article suggests that free software has made piracy statistics look worse and hence encourages governments to create harsher laws ... Could someone pass The BSA a cluebat?"

Comments

Thats because the BSA isn't out to serve you...

[RAruler]

The BSA is exactly that, a Business Software Alliance. It doesn't serve the end user, it serves the corporations, the difference between this and other 'agencies' is that it makes no attempt to hide this. The BSA supports draconian measures like the DMCA, they'd probably like even stricter legislation. They represent corporate greed, they 'blackmail' companies into paying for huge site licenses to cover all the workstations and then some, or face a 'software audit' in which they'll no doubt find some violations. Have a 100 machine site license and a hundred machines, but just bought that new desktop for the boss? Lost the paperwork for the server in the corner?

Tobacco companies fund studies that find that Ciggarette smoking is less dangerous than playing golf in a thunderstorm, the BSA fudges facts to make Pirates seem like the scum of the Earth. The music industry and the 'software' industry have yet to realize that inflated prices lead to inflated piracy. Personally, i'm of the mind that if you make money with software, you should purchase that software. Some companies are alright with this as well, think of the thousands of script kiddies with their pirated versions of photoshop, they were never going to buy it in the first place.. Adobe cares about that printshop, or the graphics design place.. and most of these places wouldn't touch a pirated version of Photoshop with a ten-foot pole. They don't need the BSA to police them, at best the BSA makes a huge hassle, people decide that paying thousands of dollars a year to Microsoft for a site license is insane and switch to something free, many times open-source. Their draconian policies and scare tactics have probably won more converts than a slick red hat ad.

Re:Thats because the BSA isn't out to serve you...

[bass_miologics]

Here goes my karma( gulp).
Yeah it should have fucking gone.

software companies need to be paid and you cannot pirate or steal their work.
You're right, I cannot "PIRATE" or "STEAL" their work because it's not piracy OR theft. It's called copyright infringement, get it right.

Script kiddies are far from their minds.
Really? Then why are they including them in all their statistics?! Bullshit, they count every single mofucka out there who is using any kind of software unpaid for INCLUDING free software. Thats the title of this /. story numbnutz.

Using someone else's software without compensation is stealing.
Again, No, it's not. It's called copyright infringement and the fact that you're DYING to associate it with a more serious activity does not impress me. In fact it makes you very suspect in my mind.

I know many of you reading this are college students who are poor and are scoffing at this but realize that hundreds of programmers at these software companies need a paycheck.
HAH! you shouldn't be including poor college students either since we can't afford any software. Don't preach to me buddy. No, I don't "realize programmers need a paycheck". If the stuff they are doing isn't cutting it in the market and isn't profitable, that's not my fault and i don't wanna pay software taxes to support unsound buisness models. No company DESERVES to be paid. Programmers deserve to be paid by their company, not by me. If their company is an unsound buisness, they better look for other employment.

How would you like it if your employer only partially compensated you for writing code?
I wouldn't, and I would get another job and sue the fuck out of them. Don't blame the general public when you don't pay your staff buddy.

All that the BSA does is make sure the software companies are adequately compensated for their particular licenses.
NO, that's not all they do. Read the fucking /. story. They LIE like a mufucka. They lobby for laws that I wouldn't wish on anyone. They blackmail companies. They get court warrants at the drop of a hat to force themselves in your buisness.

They do not have the intention of ripping off the public.
CHRIST almighty! Ripping off the public is what they do, it's their job and if they could do it any better they would be in heaven. Ripping off the public is the ultimate goal for ALL corporate greeders.

If you think its too expensive or the license is outrages, then don't buy it. Purchase Linux or cheaper alternatives.
AMEN! that's what this story is all about. Most of us do this here! Not only that but we're pissed because we get fudged into counting as copyright infringers in the BSA's statistics.

On another note, comments like the one I'm replying to are a prime example of marketing. And for the BSA no less. *shrugs* I just wanna remind /.'ers to keep their eyes open and think for themselves.

Go BSA!

[Anonymous Coward]

I think I read it in some /. comment a while ago - Shouldn't people be encouraging the BSA (as long as they're not lying)? The reason everyone uses proprietary data formats and protocols is because 90% of the world runs on warez copies of MS Office or whatnot. If people had to pay for that cr&p, joe public wouldn't think it's such a good deal anymore.

Re:Go BSA!

[yatest5]

The reason everyone uses proprietary data formats and protocols is because 90% of the world runs on warez copies of MS Office or whatnot.

Insightful my ass. 90% of HOME users may use copied Microsoft Office, but they do that to use WORK documents which are created on LICENSED Microsoft Office.

If the world's offices used StarOffice, that's what people would run at home.

It is absolute bunkum to suggest that piracy is helping MS be successful on the desktop. MS being successfuly on the desktop may be helping piracy, but that's the total opposite.

I'm not sure how all this adds up

[KNicolson]

The article says:

"We ask respondents to choose from a very long list of specific software titles, reporting which ones they regularly use. This means we identify Microsoft Word versus, say, WordPerfect," says Metafacts principal analyst Dan Ness.

Open-source competitors are not included as alternatives, he says.

So, do they assume that because x% of users say they don't have a licenced copy of one of Word/WordPerfect/etc, then some percent of this percentage MUST have an unlicenced copy of one of the above? What about people who just don't use Word Processors, or Spreadsheets, or whatever? Seems to be some fishy maths going on here! The article doesn't clarify what's going on.

Re:I'm not sure how all this adds up

[Krow10]

Blockquoth Ian (and me):

Right. So how does this affect the copyright violation statistics....I don't see how this can lead to bad results

Yes, exactly. The poster to whom I was responding was implying that people who didn't use word processors at all would be skewing the results. They wouldn't - they'd be completely excluded as you correctly point out.

The poster to whom you were responding was saying that the article wasn't clear. And it wasn't. Nowhere is the claim made in the openning sentence that "[a] flaw in the way annual software usage statistics are compiled may have led to legal distribution of open-source programs being lumped with illegal trafficking in desktop applications, inflating losses to industry through `phantom' piracy" justified. The poster to whom you were responding isn't saying that people who didn't use listed word processors were skewing the numbers, he was asking if that's what the article was implying. I think you, he and I are agreeing that the given information does not justify the conclusion presented in the article. Can anyone divine the justification for the article's claim that free (beer) software is skewing BSA(A)'s copyright violation estimates?

-Craig

Re:From the BSA homepage...

[chrismear]

It's interesting that, while they make the potentially valid point that a proliferation of free software might discourage local software industries from developing, they've completely missed the reasons behind this.

If these software companies went ahead and produced software that was better than the available free software -- that is, actually worth the cost of ownership over the free software -- then they would probably sell copies. As it is, it sounds like the BSA is saying that decent, respectable software companies aren't able to get away with hawking mediocre products, because the evil free software developers are producing software that's as good or better, and giving it away! Well, boo hoo.

Incidentally, this quote's a keeper: "free software, which is often manufactured by organized criminals". Classic.

Don't be surprised...

[allanj]

that they didn't factor in Open Source. It would have lessened their argument, and it's bad enough as is. Besides, piracy figures from the BSA and similar bodies have always been - at most - one notch above reading tea-leaves.

Re:Statistics

[H3XA]

???

is this "steps to profit" the next lame replacement for "imagine a beowulf cluster of these"

- HeXa

Napster?!?

[Johnny O]

Im sorry, the article mentions Napster as a source of software?!?! Not only does napster not exist anymore, but it never shared software....

BSA is a business

[Alain Williams]

The BSA's primary interest is it's own bottom line and the continued employment of it's staff. This is more important to it than the profits of BSA members.

Thus the BSA will generate stories and statistics that ensure it's continued existance.

BSA is not that different from many commercial organisations.

Here's one

[heikkile]

Could someone pass The BSA a cluebat?

Have someone inform BSA that the FSF office is actually using pirated word processors for all their work. Let them ask for an audit, and try to force the matter. Immediate self-lart, with lots of publicity for both parts!

Isn't this good?

[ultrabot]

All the laws against piracy actually benefit the Open Source community. Now the companies are starting to realize how expensive commercial software is, when they actually need to start paying the full price for all the seats. This is just what we *need*. One might even hypotethize that MS doesn't want BSA to be too strict, in order to prevent mass migration to greener pastures.

please everyone remember...

[Lumpy]

The BSA is NOT a government agency, they have no real abilities outside of having a fleet of overpaid lawyers and a buttload of money to blackmail or assult a company with. remember these words... the Business Software Alliance is Nothing but another Company.

And this company is paid to make money for the companies that pay them. Of course they are lying about how much piracy is happening. Of course they publish false and misleading information about the amount of money lost due to piracy. Of course they include linux, BSD, Open BeOS, Samba, Open office, Abiword, Gimp and everything else that is 100% free AND popular in their numbers. It inflates them and makes the lies they publish previousally look even better.

Remember the Business Software Alliance is nothing more than a paid extortion racket. If they threaten your company you should never let them in without a judge-signed search warrant.

They ARE NOT A GOVERNMENT AGENCY! Unlike OSHA who is, they have ZERO legal power and ZERO rights above what you have. Fight the bastards and make them spend their money to get in your building, and then be sure to sue for lost revinue, destruction of property, and public defamation.

Thank you, This post is brought to you by the Council to stop freeware piracy. "Remember every time you pirate a freeware program you hurt...Ummm... well you hurt someone!"

Re:Harsh

[rseuhs]

If "you should be keeping detailed records" is so important how come that now TCO study I've seen so far has accounted these costs in?

What about the risk of getting busted? Some part-time employee installing pirated software can cause the company to pay huge fines or even go under.

Again, when do studies start to calculate these risks in?

Re:Harsh

[imadork]

Have a 100 machine site license and a hundred machines, but just bought that new desktop for the boss? Lost the paperwork for the server in the corner?
Then you're one hundred percent in the wrong. When you're an organisation you should be keeping detailed records (after all you probably do when it concerns money owed to you).

In that case, since you're an expert as to what organizations do, I'm sure that you have proof of purchase for every piece of office furniture that you have in your office, don't you?

After all, by your logic, if the Office Furniture Alliance comes and does an audit, and finds that you're missing the proof of purchase for that one file cabinet in the small office that nobody uses, then somebody must have stolen it, right? Because if you can't prove you own every piece of furniture, you're one hundred percent in the wrong. When you're an organisation you should be keeping detailed records (after all you probably do when it concerns money owed to you).

Re:Harsh

[imadork]

You, sir, must have one heck of an office manager in your workplace. I know there's a process in place where I work to keep track of things like that, but things do get lost, although not very often. Especially after a few office moves and personel changes, like we've had here. Sometimes people move from department to department (I'm in a big company) and bring their office furniture with them since it was bought with their ergonomics in mind; in your workplace, you obviously must transfer the reciepts for their equipment (and all their pencils) as well. I bow to your mad foo powers.

Anyway, I think you took my response a little too literally. I was trying to point out the absurdity of having some outside agency assume that if you can't prove you bought something, than you must have stolen it. Because that's what the BSA does on a routine basis. The Government is bound by this silly notion that you are innocent until proven guilty; luckily for us, in the BSA's world, we're all guilty of theft until we can prove we've bought every tool, chair, and pencil. I feel so much safer now.

I have no sympathy for business who try to cut corners by engaging in mass copyright infringement. But the BSA often goes too far in the other direction, and treats well-meaning businesses who are trying to comply with the rules with the same hardball tactics as the businesses who don't care about licensing.

Yes, we do have proof . . .

[SimplyCosmic]

RAruler said:

The BSA supports draconian measures like the DMCA, they'd probably like even stricter legislation

Billly Gates replied:

Do you know this for a fact?

From any of the number of BSA press releases:

The DMCA was designed to promote a safe and legal online world while advancing the dynamic change that is synonymous with the Internet. Since the DMCA's enactment the evidence of the abundance of creative content available online is proof that the DMCA is working.

Going through their press releases you'll even come across others promoting stricter legislation.

Microsoft's Free-Software Dichotomy

[schmaltz]

On the one hand, Microsoft attacks free software (mainly because it's bad for Microsoft's business plans, so it seems.) On the other hand, while free software has a strong hold in certain sectors -and a bid for certain desktop uses- Microsoft continues to aggressively price upward their offerings to businesses.

They're driving IT departments toward free software. Self-defeating in other words, particularly considering today's economy and business climate, where IT budgets are not faring well.

Re: um actually they are, I know....

[grumpyclam]

actually you are incorrect. I did some contract work for the BSA last year and yes, they ARE as draconian as some other posters have suggested. I quit the job because I was so sickened by the audacity of their belief of power over software license holders. They should be checked and analyzed at every turn so they don't push things too far. They are equally as bad as the MPAA. And, BTW, Microsoft lobbyists are the biggest voices in BSA if that tells you anything...

Re:The Exception

[MrResistor]

And what about in third world countries. It sounds like they can not even install a proprietary operating system, simply because the price is not adjusted to their economy. No wonder piracy is such a large problem there. I see no ethical problem here, either.

Many third world countries have no copyright law, and so discussions of piracy are totally inappropriate there. Without copyright there is no piracy, regardless of what is actually happening. This is another way that the BSA, et al, distort the truth of piracy. They list all this activity going on in countries that have no copyright law and call it piracy.

Anyway, just a thought I figured I should throw into the mix.