Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft to Get Tough on License Dodgers

An anonymous reader writes "PC Advisor reports that Microsoft is going to start getting tough with certain small business customers. They are going to examine their small customer license database — any discrepancies and it will call you for an audit. If you refuse it will send in the BSA and the legal heavies. "

14 of 564 comments (clear)

  1. Summary is incorrect. by Virak · · Score: 4, Informative

    It plainly says in the first sentence of the article that they're going after medium sized companies, and later on that "Microsoft is targeting companies with around 250 PCs", which is a bit more than a small company would have.

  2. Here we go again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://www.osv.org.au/index.cgi?tid=91

    One of the hoariest linux switch stories is about Ernie Ball, a company that makes guitar strings. The BSA treated them miserably and tried to make an example of them with a court case and huge publicity. Ball retaliated by switching to Linux and launched their own publicity campaign aimed right back at Microsoft.

    Microsoft is between a rock and a hard place on this one. They could end up with a bunch more high profile switching-to-linux stories to contend with.

  3. Re:But, can the BSA actually do anything? by QuantumG · · Score: 4, Informative

    Heh, the BSA goes to a judge and the judge gives them power to force entry and seize all hardware at your facilities. Depending on where you are, the local or federal police will even help them.

    These things are pretty much handed out like candy.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  4. Re:But, can the BSA actually do anything? by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 5, Informative

    There's a clause in the EULA where you give Microsoft or it's agents the right to come in and audit you at any time, at your expense. Refuse to let them audit and you're automatically in breach of every Windows license you have in addition to any other violations. And they'll hold that you agreed to the EULA for any pirated versions as well, since you had (in their opinion) to click OK to the EULA to be able to install the pirated copy and that constitutes agreement to the EULA's terms.

    The only way out is to not be running any of their software and be able to prove it in court. Do that and make sure to have provided them that proof when you refused the audit and, while you can't stop them from suing you and getting a court order allowing them to do the audit, you can probably counter-sue them for every penny of costs.

  5. Re:So true by jstomel · · Score: 5, Informative

    Nope, read your EULA. Microsoft has the right to audit at your expense at any time.

  6. For what it is worth... by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 4, Informative

    They're starting with the small ones, because we all know what would happen if they started with the big ones. It has been my experience that the bigger a company gets and the more money there is floating around the less the PHBs care about workstation OS licenses. It's the little companies who are more likely to try to pinch pennies by cheating on Windows licenses and software licenses in general. When a company gets to a certain size the cost of Workstation OS licenses tend to take second place to the licenses they have to buy for much more complex production software products where the costs can rapidly spiral into huge sums of money that can dwarf what ever they are paying for Windows workstation OS licenses. Most of the larger companies I have worked for actually made regular efforts to check the licensing status of their various departments and paid up the Workstation OS licenses without giving it much thought. Most of the effort went into wringing the last bit of value out of the obscenely expensive production software.
    --
    Only to idiots, are orders laws.
    -- Henning von Tresckow
  7. Re:So true by eric76 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Having disks, license keys, and boxes on site apparently isn't enough.

    According to some reports, the BSA reportedly requires original invoices dated before notice of the audit and showing the company name exactly. Supposedly, if you change the name of the company, you have to buy a whole new set of licenses and have the original invoices to prove it.

    That is one of the best reasons of all to ditch Microsoft for good.

  8. Eat your cake by Foerstner · · Score: 3, Informative

    "Have your cake and eat it, too" is an idiom meaning "To have it both ways." It was originally "Eat your cake and have it, too" but became confused in popular usage, to the point where the corrupted form is understood (by most people) and accepted, while the more sensible original form is not.

    Hope this clears that up for you.

    --
    The US free market: two halves of a government-granted duopoly are free to set the market price.
  9. Re:Go Microsoft!!! by rbochan · · Score: 3, Informative

    ...But what infuriated them is that their offices were publicly raided by the BSA....
    No sir, they were raided by "armed Federal Marshals" enforcing for the BSA.

    Power dontcha know...

    --
    ...Rob
    The American Dream isn't an SUV and a house in the suburbs; it's Don't Tread On Me.
  10. civil vs. criminal... by SuperBanana · · Score: 3, Informative

    Your participation with their audit is voluntary unless they have sufficient probably cause to justify a warrant, in which case they will be accompanied by a law enforcement agent.

    Wrong. Participation is voluntary, unless they get a court order, filed as part of a lawsuit. it's not a warrant. Warrants are used in criminal cases, not (private party) civil suits.

    Remember that, at least in the US, the evidence must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

    Yet again, please get your facts straight. Copyright violation is a civil, not criminal, matter. In civil court, the standards of evidence are much, much lower- which is why you can get a parking ticket, have it blown off your windshield, and have the fine double (and if you refuse to pay, your license revoked.)

    That said- YES, you should ALWAYS tell the BSA to get off your property and not to come back without a court order. Unless they're fairly certain that you have enough license violations to justify the labor, they won't be back.

  11. Re:So true by Uncle_Al · · Score: 5, Informative

    Sorry, but that is bull.

    While they do license per developer, you can change the licensed developer.
    http://www.trolltech.com/products/qt/licenses/lice nsing/qtlicensing

  12. Yeah, and "She was asking for it," right? by KingSkippus · · Score: 3, Informative

    I've frequently found myself pirating a software initially and as I find more and more uses for it, and become dependent on it, I purchase a license. Is it proper?

    No. If you want to try out software from Microsoft, almost every product will allow you to in a perfectly legal manner. What do you want to try out? How about Microsoft Office 2007 Pro? Visio? What about Visual Studio Pro? Money? Or maybe you'd like to try out some entertainment software like Age of Empires III, Halo, or Zoo Tycoon?

    Don't see something you want in that list? Call Microsoft. They're actually really good at working with businesses (and we are talking about businesses here) at getting them trials and evals of whatever they want.

    Is it wrong?

    Yes, it is. No stupid rationalizations, no bandwagons, no mitigating factors, no ifs, ands, or buts; it's wrong, plain and simple.

    They stealthily encourages piracy and then demanded all pirated users pay.

    That's bullshit. How exactly are they encouraging piracy? Seems to me that with all of this WGA shit that's coming down, they're bending over backwards to the point of screwing up honest customers' computers in trying to keep piracy under control. What an idiotic thing to say. What exactly do they have to do to convince you that they don't want you to pirate their software? Send men in sunglasses and black hats to your house to break down your door, check your computer, and break your legs if you've installed their software illegally?

    Are you basically saying that having only rudimentary CD-Key verification, or even no verification at all, in previous versions of Windows is somehow encouraging piracy? That's basically saying that right or wrong, it doesn't matter if someone rapes a girl if she was dressed like she wanted it, and like I said, that's bullshit.

    Or maybe you're saying that because Microsoft offers sweet deals to OEMs, schools, governments, and big customers that they're encouraging piracy. Guess what... That's bullshit too. Every software company of any decent size does that. It's called trying to sell your software, not asking people to illegally use your stuff. If I make widgets and I offer a volume discount on them, am I asking for people to steal them? No. Do widget pirates have a right to fight back if I try to keep them from stealing widgets? No.

    And god knows that I am not a fan of Microsoft or the BSA, but when I read comments like yours, it's hard to not cheer for them. That arrogant smugness, unapologetically doing what you know is wrong, is exactly what makes them look reasonable and justified and what keeps companies and organizations like them in business.

    It's people like you who completely undermine everything that people who contribute to FOSS projects stand for. If more people were like you, there'd be no need for things like Linux, OpenOffice.org, Firefox, The Gimp, or any other FOSS. If someone wants an office application, there's no need to look for a FOSS alternative; just pirate a copy of Microsoft Office. Don't use Linux, just pirate a copy of Windows.

    God, what a moron.

  13. Re:So true by eric76 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The question isn't what a jury is going to find. It is what the BSA considers acceptable to keep them from taking you to court for software piracy. They know that the enormous litigation costs means that few, if any, cases will ever see a jury.

    From Proof of License in BSA Audits:

    Not Considered Valid Proof


    Copies of Checks to Software Vendors
    Dated Purchase Orders
    Undated Software Licenses
    Credit Card Statements Evidencing Software Purchases
    Certificates of Authenticity
    Media, Manuals, or Key-Codes
    Invoices Bearing and Entity Name Other than the Entity Named in the BSA's Initial Letter

    Valid Proof of Purchase

    Dated Invoices in the Name of the Audited Entity
    Soft Records (online account statements) from Recognized Resellers
    Signed and Dated License Agreements
    Soft Records from BSA Member's such as Microsoft Licensing Statements
    Cash Register Receipts for Retail Sales where Product, Version, Quantity and Price Paid are Included.

  14. Re:So true by Sax+Maniac · · Score: 3, Informative
    They are actually quite reasonable. There's only a few GUI developers at our place who regularly write Qt code, but everyone compiles the entire system. They didn't force us to by one license per developer. It is a little weird. I would guess they're trying to stop buying a single license for the entire company. For us, it's Chump Change to pay up in exchange for goodwill and support.

    Not that they can do anything about it. You have the source code!

    --
    I can explanate how to administrate your network. You must configurate and segmentate it, so it can computate.