Slashdot Mirror
Man Gets 7 Years for Software Piracy
mytrip writes to mention a C|Net article about the largest sentence for software piracy ever handed down by a U.S. court. Nathan Peterson of Los Angeles has been levied with an enormous fine after selling millions of dollars worth of software between 2003 and 2005. "U.S. District Court Judge T.S. Ellis III on Friday ordered Peterson to pay restitution of more than $5.4 million. Peterson pleaded guilty in December in Alexandria, Va., to two counts of copyright infringement for illegally copying and selling more than $20 million in software. Justice Department and industry officials called the case one of the largest involving Internet software piracy ever prosecuted. "
This is considerably different than the average "pirate" who downloads software for him/herself and perhaps distributes copies to friends. This guy was *selling* pirated software. That's a whole different ballgame, and it makes him a garden variety criminal in my opinion. Not really news, and certainly not relevant to me in a "Your Rights Online" sort of way.
Wait, so he sold $20million, pays $5.4 back? Not a bad return I would think. Should I assume the government also seized all his assets etc?
He got what he deserved.
He was stupid to allow himself to be caught. Lost 7 years of your life for only money.
Again everything in this world seems related to money one way or the other.
I think people who cheat others out of their legitimate software purchases ought to get jail time when it's obvious they or others will do it if no harsh penalty is on the table.
Isn't 7 years a bit long in comparison to more serious crimes of violence and fraud? Perhaps 7 years is average for a fraud conviction, but I don't understand why rapists [in Canada at least] get about 5 year sentences, mercy killers [Robert Latimer] 10 years, and serial killers [Karla Holmolka] gets 9 years. Where is the equity?
Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
... his website ibackups.net has been defaced.
(serves him right)
I don't believe that putting a person in prison for seven years and make them pay an unrealistic fee is good public policy. I think that anyone convicted of a non-violent crime should receive no more then one year in prison and the fines should not exceed 10% of their expected lifetime income. Now we have to pay $250,000 to house this guy and he will never pay the fines against him becuase they are impossible to pay. I remmeber in the 90's a man accidently started a fire and the USFS gave him a bill of $100 million dollars. He filed for bankruptcy and moved out of the country.
Selling illegally copied software is fraud. Unless you are being explicitly clear that people are buying an illegal copy (in which case they aren't likely to buy) you are defrauding them. They believe that they are getting a great deal on legit software. Ok, you can argue they should be smarter than that but hey, fire sales happen sometimes (for example I got a free copy of Visual Studio 2005 for going to a launch event). Regardless, the crime is on the seller's end. They are the ones pushing their merchandise as legit.
So while I firmly believe that copying software illegal for personal use is a minor civil infraction, like speeding, and should be punished accordingly (a small fine that's enough to make you not want to do it but proportional to the harm) I believe that commercial copyright infringement is much more serious.
>>
It's like any prohibition: criminalize the behavior and you get even more social dislocation as a result. Then, we're all victims.
The solution is to mandate the use of Free Software everywhere.
>>
Well thats a pretty stunning juxtaposition. If the existence of laws creates crime, won't criminalizing closed-source software make criminals out of closed-source software developers, causing even more social dislocation among them and their customers? I can see it now: "Pst, buddy, you need a productivity suite? I got a holo-certified copy of Office 2007 right here. This "#$& is real, holmes -- usable UI, attractive ribbon interface, backwards compatible with all your documents, contains actual documentation, and a comes complete with a toll-free number for tech support. I just gotta ask you -- you ain't a GPLnarc or nothing, right?"
"Open up, this is the police!"
"Aww #$%", its the GPLaw. Quick man, hide that "#$" under a Knoppix CD and pretend we were discussing something innocuous, like crack."
Help poke pirates in the eyepatch, arr.
"Serves him right. (Score:-1, Informative)"
Dude, you got a -1 Informative on Slashdot. Put that on your resume!
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
Why do you think pawn shops are doing good business?
I was thinking prime locations, friendly staff and clean stores with outstanding merchandise... no?
Well, TFA says he sold $20 Mill worth of software. It doesn't mean he sold it for $20 mill. From what I've seen, pirates usually sell software for about 10% of what it's worth. If that's the case here he got $2 mill before hosting expenses, etc... and fined $5.4 mill + jail time. Now fudge the numbers all you want but I really doubt he's going to come out of this thrilled with his financial situation.
The BSA has been making up numbers of this type since its founding. Please note, that their acronym has many other fun derivations. These Bull Shit Artists are claiming that there has been a 34 BILLION dollar loss, and worse, it's a 1.6 Billion dollar increase over last year! While they have yet to PROVE unequivocably that there is this type of loss, they're getting plenty of press on the reason you're getting DRM shoved down your throat. Perhaps those 'perceived losses' are from the software vendors who are having trouble making their bottom line. Perhaps those losses are coming from a tanking of the PC industry because they keep rehashing the same processor and stamping it with a different name. 'Ooooh, I know, let's up the voltage on the clock and see if people buy last years fab!'
There is absolutely no proof of these losses. They are estimates based on what they think people should be buying. Being an industry lobby (well paid by the vendors) OF COURSE they think people should be buying more software.
Here's the rub, people can't afford to buy them... They're still reeling from when computers used to be 2-3 THOUSAND dollars each (or more), and still needed to be upgraded every five years (or less)... Let's face it, the PC business has raped the populace for 25 years now, we're starting to get a little sore down there...
if I claimed I was emperor just because some watery tart lobbed a scimitar at me they'd put me away!
In my experience, people who steal once tend to do it again...even if they get caught. It becomes a wierd habit. Look at George Bush. He stole the first election and, even thought he got caught, he proceeded to steal another. Software thiefs are much the same.
I'd take a guess that if the price was right for pirated copies, he wouldn't be making US$ 20 million dollars selling them.
Or maybe it's like the 'change bank', it's all about volume?
Freedom is the freedom to say 2+2=4, everything else follows...
Actually, having worked in a pawn shop in my younger years, I feel forced to chime in here.
Most states have extremely strict laws regarding the pawn trade; and most pawn shops today are extremely careful concerning their business practices.
Pawn shops in Florida (as an example) are highly regulated and are required to work with both state and local authorities. Forms (including make, model and serial numbers) of merchandise are filled out in triplicate and provided to the local police. When make, model and serial are not applicable (as in the case of jewelry), exact measurements (in both carat and composition) of stones and and metals are recorded as is a precise description of said piece. All of the above are matched against local and state stolen item reports on a weekly to monthly basis. (I use Florida as my example, as that is the state in which I worked; I gladly tie that in with others, as the National Pawnbrokers Association allowed me the opportunity to meet and speak with pawnbrokers from all over the country -- 99% of which followed the same practices).
Often, in the case of theft, the Pawn Shop owner is the one that actually loses out in the case of stolen merchandise; as the property is then pulled into state custody as evidence and eventually returned to its owner.
The pawn trade itself is, by and large, nothing more than a lending mechanism for the lower (to lower-middle class) establishment. Afterall, please tell me a single bank that's going to loan Bob Whoever a c-note to cover his insurance payment while waiting for a drywall job to pay up. Granted, it charges a higher interest rate, but even that is regulated in most states.
I might suggest you take a look at the business models of both Cash America and Value Pawn as an example of how the industry has changed. Personally, I think the indy shop has more in the way of value for the lendee, but I mention them only to counter the "dark and stinky" shop notion that seems to surround the pawn industry.
So, if you want to cite a comparison between immoral activities (such as the active sale of pirated software and something else), why not point the finger at professional lobyists, criminal defense lawyers and/or telemarketing firms?
#SickNotWeak
I see lots of people saying things like, "He deserves it and death!" but no one bothering to report exactly what ibackups.net actually did. According to this, the guy was selling "backup coppies" of software that people claimed they already owned. The business model, presumably, was made to fill the very real service gap in commercial software for people who manage to lose their original distribution media. As far as M$ and many other companies, people like that are out of luck and have to buy the software all over again. This happens much more often than you would think. Unlike MP3.com, it was not possible to check if the customer had a copy by asking them to insert it though he could have asked for product activation keys. In any case, this guy was not simply pressing CDs and selling them, he depended on the honesty of his customers.
It's no surprise that this guy got slapped down after the demise of MP3.com's similar backup scheme.
I don't really understand the vindictiveness of the responses. Once again, using free software avoids all of this monkey business. Why give money to people who throw people in jail for trying to help you? It's not like the guy actually hurt anything but the bottom line of some of the country's most wealthy companies. Seeing as those companies are still doing just fine selling software to complete suckers, I don't see where this person hurt anyone. Financial ruin should be punishment enough. I don't want my government wasting law enforcement resources on nonsense like this.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Well, as I understand it, (although it's not made fantastically clear in TFA, so I could be wrong) the $20 million figure is the market value of the software he sold, not the amount he sold it for. So say Program X sells for $400 in PC World, and our guy sells 50,000 pirate copies for $50 each, that would be software with a value of $20 million, but he only made $2,500,000. That's the standard way the softwre industry* produces figures for piracy, using the amount it would have sold for legitimatly.
*Actually, every industry in any way affected by piracy/counterfeit goods does exactly the same thing.
"I realise this is not a very popular opinion but it's the truth, and there for needs to be said" -Bill Hicks
"I know that the time my grandfather speaks of will never return"
Mainly because it never existed in the first place. Older people (like me) tend to talk of the "good ol' days" because the human mind represses bad memories and enhances good ones. For example, a pack of smokes in the 70's cost $0.50, but by the same token in 1976 I was taking home $60/week.
I do agree with the population thing but how do you stop people breeding without resorting to a totalitarian state?
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
he should be better off in the end.
I am guessing "his end" will not be better off after 7 years in federal prison!
Hey, there is only one Return and it's not of the King, it's of the Jedi.
In all fairness, the wrong he did was not copying, not selling, but defrauding the people he sold to to believe they had a valid key when they didn't. In that sense, he is no more a criminal then Microsoft is every day for criminalizing people for mere act of copying.
I don't like those who sell pirated versions of software. They deserve to be heavily fined and driven out of business. However, in a world in which the man who started a war in the middle east based on pretenses continues to roam free and unpunished, I think condeming them to seven years of being imprisoned, subject to the whims of power tripping bureaucratic thugs and regular anal raping is a bit disproportionate. I'm sure this will be mod'd off-topic, but it really isn't.
>But today, getting children married requires taking a loan.
What? I think in most states the license fee is on the order of $50.
A minister will usually charge something between $100 and $200.
If you desire more, you are so entitled, but you should try to remain within your means.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Meanwhile you have to drive drunk a few dozen times before they put you in jail, if they even do.
'Piracy' is the term used to describe illegally copying software for as long as I can remember, including back to the early days of the C=64, over 20 years ago. It's not a new term, nor is it specific to DVDs.
The term may have been adapted from imagery over pirates of the seas, but I would venture that it is the software pirates who adopted the imagery and term themselves, not the authorities who wanted to make the crime seem more sinister.
'Piracy' is just another bit of jargon used in the world of computer software, nothing more. To say that it's 'not piracy' but simply 'illegally selling copies of software' is like saying 'it's not water, it's H20'.
Photoshop was free with HP and other scanners a few years back. I haven't checked recently. There is no way that the vast majority of people even paid for Photoshop.
Fact is that if people actually had to pay for products like Windows they would try to find freeware. THE ONLY REASON WINDOWS MADE ITS MARKET PENETRATION IS BECAUSE IT WAS PRE_LOADED
People like me were expected to pay for windows as a bundled product then reformat the disk and install another OS we paid for like OS/2. Microsoft owes me quite a lot of money. Of course they have no intention of paying. No worries. I have no intention of supporting Microsoft.
What these shysters fail to realise is that short term gain does little more than gain them an enemy and I for one have a very long memory.
Linux WILL replace microsoft.
It will do so through large institutions, businsess and schools. Large organisations have the resources to be able to support an alternative and over the last few years we have begun to see many reports of the cost savings involved with switching to Linux. This will expose more and more people to the benefits, and as has been happening, through this process a critical mass will form.
Most people use a computer like a phone. They would never consider swapping an operating system any more than they would consider swapping the motor on their car. It has to be done for them. Like a phone - the computer is only worth what it can do for them at the moment. Most people do not back up their work because ususally they have no real work worthy of being backed up. This is in stark contrast to the graduate students who routinely fail to back up their Thesis!!!
For people like this - there is close to ZERO vendor loyalty. The minute something better comes along they will switch. In fact, its worse... Our field is very subject to fashion trends. Often those who adopt a new fashion do so without any logical reasoning why the new custom might be better than the old. They just switch because they want to try something new for a while.
The thing is this switch will take place and it will do so likely at the speed a large herd of buffalo changes direction.
One can look at the herd while it is stampeding and think this herd has a large areal extent and hense it cannot change direction quickely. Yet it can. Suddenly the individuals decide to switch and they do. Stampedes are not lead by leaders. When they change direction it can be totally non-obvious and just as unpredictable.
Vehical buying patterns can switch suddenly as well and for the same reasons. The actual "investment" people have in a vehical is not very large. They can be driving one model one day and another the next day. In fact the automobile industry takes advantage of this through the sale of so many different models.
Taken in this light, Linux offers far more flexibility than M$ ever has. We have several choices of shells and desktops for instance, it is actually a very rich environment.
What the USA auto manufacturers discovered in the early 70's and now again in the 2005-present time frame is that there is little in the way of vendor loyalty. Once there is a perception to change something a large part fo the population will hop on the new bandwagon whatever direction it is going.
The stockmarket also shows this. The "investment" one typically has in a share is the amount of time and the commisions to sell out. Of course some folks form an emotional attachment to the stocks they own. I rather think day traders make their living off these emotions.
Most market crashes have not been predicted very well. We might have a general feeling of unease that a crash may be forming now. We can surely find some pundits who are predicting this. We can also find some who are not. Thus whatever happens - some folks will be right and we can search them out for interviews by the talking heads and ask them how they were so smart.
------------
The crit
Yes, this guy is a "criminal", while the "average pirate" that downloads warez (and distributes copies to friends) is guilty of a "civil" infraction of copyright infringement. Unless this "average pirate" does this for more than $1000 worth of software (and music, movies, games) in the span of 180 days - at that point the infraction becomes "criminal" rather than "civil". So watch how much you pirate if you want to make sure that you stay out of the "criminal" category. (See http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html#506
BTW, it appears that when distributing multiple copies to friends (and by "friends", I assume you mean real friends, not just anyone that happens to connect to your computer via P2P) each copy counts towards that $1000 threshold. For example, let's say a particular program costs $250. If you download a pirated copy for yourself (that's one illegal copy) then distribute it to three friends (that's three more illegal copies), then you've participated in the illegal distribution of 4 copies, for a total of $1000, which gets you into the "criminal" category (and making the program available to millions over P2P would get you into the "criminal" category with the quickness).
-- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
Yeah, I know I'm a sucker for thinking proprietary software is ever worth anything. The GIMP is so much better than Photoshop, right? Can you really claim with a straight face that Audacity is better than SoundForge?
I can tell you with a straight face that only a few professionals actually need the one or two tweaks found in non free software and that even they would be better off if software patents and device makers games did not make things that way. Given the choice between a free and non free program that do the same things, the one with less restrictions is the obvious winner. Given the choice between software costing $100s of dollars and a free, restrictionless program that does everything you need or want, the choice is also obvious.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.