Slashdot Mirror
Why the BSA Is Less Reviled Than the RIAA
Hugh Pickens writes "The Business Software Alliance (BSA) is a trade group established in 1988 representing a number of the world's largest software makers whose principal activity is trying to stop copyright infringement of software produced by its members, performing roughly the same function for the software industry that the RIAA performs for the music industry. Yet, as Bill Patry, author of a 7-volume treatise on US copyright law and currently Senior Copyright Counsel at Google, notes on his blog the BSA is a 'far less unpopular organization' than the RIAA because there are three key differences between the BSA's campaigns and the RIAA's. First, BSA's members have always offered their products for sale to the public, through any channel that wants to sell them. Second, BSA's members are consumer-oriented; they try to develop products that respond to consumers' needs, and not, the reverse: focusing on what they want to sell to consumers. Third, because consumers can easily purchase BSA's members products, those who copy without paying are simply scofflaws. 'I think the fact that the public does not object to BSA's campaign proves my point [that]... people do not want things for free; they are willing to pay for them,' writes Patry. 'It should not be surprising that when consumers are not treated with respect, they react negatively. That's something the software industry learned long ago, and that's why people don't object to the BSA's enforcement campaign.'"
Let's not forget the Ernie Ball story.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Let's be honest here. If the RIAA was sueing a company for using music in an unauthorized fashion at their place of business most people would shrug. When you're using a product to make money you normally get much less sympathy than if you were using it for private use. And even when a company follows the rules the public still doesn't normally feel too bad about them getting the screws.
And, AFAIK, the BSA isn't busting kids downloading Grand Theft Auto.
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
Isn't it also possible that a significant volume of the online debate over the years against the RIAA/MPAA has been by technologically savvy folks, say perhaps people in IT? And why would these people want to bite the hand that feeds them, their own software alliance?
I am not so sure the BSA's actions to date are 100% responsible for the muted reaction to their approach to software piracy. I postulate that folks that want to sell software are more likely to support them, and the folks that want to sell CDs and Movies simply aren't in a position to influence the debate the way IT folks are.
This post brought to you by your friendly neighborhood MBA.
I think it's a lot simpler than that. Because the BSA attacks businesses, not disabled single mothers, children, and the dead, fewer people even know about them. They haven't gone as far across the line into cartoon super villainy.
Loose lips lose spit.
Software has an intrinsic value. To a business, the return on investment from a piece of software is something that can be measured. Spreadsheet software, for example, makes accounting many times easier and cheaper than trying to keep the books in books.
But music (and to a lesser degree video) has no intrinsic value. It is something enjoyed passing time. Like a frisbee at the park or a cup holder in a car. It's something that is nice to have but ultimately unnecessary.
If anti-copyright proponents would be unhypocritical, they would demand that software be downloadable for "sharing" among friends. That they only make this claim for music shows and video shows that there is a fundamental difference between software and music in their minds. I attribute this to the ephemeral nature of music, something which can be enjoyed but in the end has no real value.
whose EULA's allow them to conduct raids and search+seizure, and hand out $100,000 fines for having one workstation that has XP installed, but they can't find the License that came in the box (The CD sleeve with the key is NOT proof of license, and you WILL get a fine if you only have that!) My OEM copy of Vista that came with my laptop doesn't seem to have the hologram encrusted license that my boxed copy of 2000 came with, so I imagine I'm automatically guilty if they ever send in the SWAT team for a surprise inspection.
ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
I think the BSA are largely less hated because it is less well known than the RIAA. The fact that it rarely targets individuals is probably part of this. If you don't run a small-to-medium sized business, the BSA are unlikely to really be on your radar. But small business owners who've interacted with the BSA hate them at least as much as your average Slashdot reader hates the RIAA.
The RIAA goes after busy moms and foolish children.
Extracting a hellish price.
The Bsa goes after business who have made the mistake of using proprietary software unwisely
That the BSA goes after companies, and the RIAA goes after individuals? Do we really need to go hunting for reasons why joe-on-the-street dislikes an outfit that might send lawyers after him more than an outfit that gets involved in a bunch of boring disputes between corporations and their suppliers? Srsly?
Obviously, I'm sure corporate officers, shareholders, IT guys, (and, of course, Ernie Ball) don't like the BSA much; but their numbers are tiny compared to "the public" at large. Even if only potential victims disliked the RIAA(as opposed to potential victims and anybody who has heard the "and then they sued some poor lady who didn't even own a computer" stories) that is probably greater than 20% of the population.
It may also be that the BSA is nicer in some way, though I'm not wildly sold on the notion; but this isn't rocket surgery.
Fourth reason:
The BSA does not sue you for millions of dollars if you're infringing.
Karma cannot be described by words alone.
The reason people don't complain about the BSA as much is because the BSA doesn't attack normal people, they only attack companies, and usually only large ones. They don't attack grandmas or people without computers. Slashdot has its own versions of the 'think of the children' fallacy, it's 'think of the non-pirating file sharer!' or 'think of my rights!' or only somewhat less obviously, 'think about me!' The BSA doesn't bother me, so I don't worry about them as much.
Qxe4
A BSA audit is a big invasion for the affected business, even if the licensing is all correct. The licensing requirements are often complicated and the effort that goes into maintaining license information is a tremendous burden.
There are two reasons why the BSA isn't as low in the public opinion is simply that the BSA doesn't go after individuals. The BSA targets businesses. The other reason is that most people make a clear distinction between copying for personal purposes and copying business applications.
"First, BSA's members have always offered their products for sale to the public, through any channel that wants to sell them"
Try to buy an obsoleted version of a program to run on an old platform. Got an old IBM-XT? Where are you going to purchase a legit copy of Lotus 1-2-3 not to mention DOS? But you *can* be sued for pirating them, at least technically.
"Second, BSA's members are consumer-oriented; they try to develop products that respond to consumers' needs, and not, the reverse: focusing on what they want to sell to consumers."
Did someone at Microsoft write this?
"Third, because consumers can easily purchase BSA's members products, those who copy without paying are simply scofflaws."
See the first reply, but "easily" is in the eye of the beholder. A typical recent college grad who wants to freelance graphics design work might say "easily"purchasing Adobe's Creative Suite is all but impossible for their finances. Yes, I know there are FOSS alternatives, but the truth is that the ad/graphics/printing world runs on Adobe. For example.
None of that makes stealing software or music content right, but the rationale for BSA being less unpopular is not the reasons cited above. It may be far more simple: BSA doesn't typically sue consumers, it seems that they typically go after businesses.
We can also purchase a competing product that does the same job. The market itself works to adjust the pricing based on market volume. With the RIAA there is only one entity selling the latest (pick your favourite band)'s album. There is no other avenue to buy a 'one of a kind' production. No compitition, no markent influences. You just pay what they demand or you do without, and they know it.
I think the major difference that the tatics in use by most business software vendors are accepted because they for the most part don't try to engage in device lock-in like DRM'd music does. Once you've gotten a copy of the software, you're free to install it on a computer of your chosing, and when you want to move it to a new PC it is generally not too difficult to do (except for Adobe stuff.) This is not enough to satisfy OSS zealots, but is enough to keep customers relatively happy.
The other issue is that customers don't feel that they ought to have to buy a CD of a cassette the had. They don't feel they ought to have to re-buy Blu-Ray movies they have on DVD or VHS unless there is a significant improvement. When consumers try to move their media to newer platforms and the company actively prohibits them from doing so, and has build a business model on it, it makes people mad.
People don't feel "ripped off" when they can't drop their Chevy Corsica '91 engine into a newer car (maybe you can... I'm not a mechanic) because they see it as a utility, something that eningeering improvements have made the parts truly depreciated. For media, consumers see newer platforms as marginally better ways for companies to make them rebuy something that is artifically depreciated. Computer software fits into that category where one can reasonably expect 20 year old software isn't going to work, and isn't going to (usually) be as compatible as new software on a brand-new computer.
I also think the OP's comments about tactics and focusing on institutional pervasive piracy over individuals has paid off in the publics perception of commercial software and probably been more lucrative when litigation is necessary.
Forgive my spelling from time to time. I'm often posting during short breaks.
True, the BSA isn't nearly as reviled as the RIAA. But who hasn't looked at a BSA ad in a magazine (or even, shudder, on /.) and thought: gee, the BSA is kinda douchy.
Part of the problem, I think, is the fact that the RIAA are abusing the copyright bargain, while the BSA are not. In most places copyright (quite properly) is not a "moral right". It is a voluntary concession on the side of the general public in order to encourage authors to publish, for the public's benefit. The public clearly wishes to be able to privately share music, create new mixes and share these too. Would this discourage the production of music? since nearly all musicians make their money from live performances with the recordings basically serving as advertizing, the answer is no. Thus changing the terms of the bargain (allowing for free private non-commercial dealing in at least some kinds of works) is the right things to do. Moreover, the public seems to treat commercial and non-commercial use of copyrighted works differently; copyright law basically assumes that infringement will only happen on a large commercial scale (hence you can get statutory damages of $150K per work infringed without proving actual damages [this requires proving "wilful infringement" which seems easy in practice). The BSA thus follows the model the public likes. In fact, they like some level of private copying: they recognize that not every illegal copy equals a lost sale, and would rather entrench their products (especially Microsoft with their OS monopoly) with customers who would otherwise not pay for them. Just like college students with "illegal" copies of professional software suites on their home computers will in the future buy this expensive software once they have a job (that's the software they are used to, after all), I'm sure that many college students will buy music CDs once they have the income to do so. Until then giving them "free samples" is the way to go.
I'm not necessarily disagreeing with the reasons, or saying that I agree with either sides of that blog fully, but when you're comparing your organization(BSA) to an organization(RIAA) it's very easy to look good in the public's opinion: -The RIAA has launched a major extortion campaign against (in some cases) children, single mothers and the elderly. While BSA doesn't target end users, mostly companies using software without licenses. Businesses are generally lot harder to have sympathy for then a child in a court room staring up a lawyers. -The RIAA believes that there music is worth is weight in gold (see: 1.92 *cough*billion*/cough* I mean million dollars) where the BSA understands to a slightly greater extent it's software actual value and don't look like an ***hat by going after businesses to get licenses for there products.
We all know college students have no money and beg, borrow, and steal anything they can.
Generally, we tolerate them because at that point in life, it's not such a terrible thing.
The software they steal may be used to make something awesome, and they'll buy it later in life...
You can't say that for the mainstream music the RIAA pimps. Once you've heard that drivel for about three weeks, you never want to hear it again.
Beating up on college students and fining them absurd amounts of money is like kicking puppies.
The RIAA needs to stop pimping drivel.
The BSA, on the other hand, beats up on businesses who have no excuse not to buy the software. That's like kicking stray, hungry dogs with their eyes on your plump toddler.
Tenenbaum committed his acts before Amazon's DRM-free MP3 store went online. He got caught in the vortex of the learning curve that the RIAA is currently going through that the BSA has already finished.
Is the BSA really less reviled amongst people that know about them? Their random forced audits are far more odious than anything the RIAA does, I think that they are simply less well known.
To the haters: You can't win. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
The RIAA doesn't care if you make a copy of an audio CD for different machines in your own house. The BSA does.
The BSA's target is the company that buys one copy and runs ten copies.
The Google ad for this page is:
Earn up to $1 Million for Reporting Software Piracy - All Confidential
www.BSA.org/reportpiracy
If the RIAA/MPAA is so reviled - why is it that "the jury of his peers" hammers the file sharer into the ground when these cases go to trial?
The geek is quick to assume that he is representative of the larger community of which he is a part.
That everyone believes in his right to his free media fix.
But when things go wrong - these assumptions are never seriously questioned.
It is easier to take refuge in loose talk about the incompetence of the lawyers, the jury and the bribery of the judge.
If I've gone through all the trouble to make sure all my workstations have licensed versions of -say- AutoCad (5000$) and my competitor has simply cracked it then I want him stabbed in the ass. Its that easy. Some companies will do anything to take out a competitor and if they have cracked software might as well report them. Not going to do that with some jerk down the street downloading limp bizkut.
Every member company of BSA has been found to have 'unauthorized software' [citation needed] but of course those aren't reported to the media like the rest.
I did asset and software management for 15 years before finally being able to dump the whole mess on someone else. Every license was tied to a purchase order and every purchase order was tied to a machine. Whenever we got a new Microsoft rep (since they were the majority of our products) I would show them the huge lateral filing cabinets with every license in order. Yeah, they're going to try to pull an audit on us.
I did get a call from the Microsoft 'legal' department once trying to tell us that we didn't have enough Exchange licenses for a company our size. When I asked which company, since we had 15 affiliates, they couldn't tell me. And when I told them that only 2 affiliates used Exchange and the rest were Lotus Notes they got truly confused. At which point I essentially told them to fuck off until they could get their facts straight. Surprisingly I never heard back.
Yes, the BSA uses disgruntled employees as their main source of information and they pay for it. They're evil and while I have no pity for companies that buy one license and install on fifty machines the BSA tactics and fine structure completely suck.
It should not be surprising that when consumers are not treated with respect, they react negatively. That's something the software industry learned long ago, and that's why people don't object to the BSA's enforcement campaign.
I would say that's a pretty tall conclusion. It only applies because the BSA audits businesses and not individuals, so most people outside of IT aren't even aware of who they are. And calling a BSA audit "treating people with respect" is sort of the same mentality that says a rape victim was asking for it.
The documentation requirements go way beyond reasonable. I've seen people get big fines for fairly minor oversights. Engineering moves some old machines to another department and nobody wipes one of the old apps. No one is using the app, and they have licenses for active users, but it's still there.
Makes me glad to be running Linux and doing our development on open source. Sure, audit our Linux boxes. We'll be down at Starbucks breathlessly awaiting the outcome. Part of what got me out of Microsoft World was the ridiculous amount of time and effort you spend dancing on their string. It's just nuts the amount of time you put into serving Microsoft. And don't get me started on the costs. Why is anyone continuing to put themselves through that these days? It's crazy. Get off the treadmill.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
Just curious...one of the arguments I always hear for the MS servers, is that Outlook's shared calendar doesn't have much serious open source competition. And there doesn't seem to be an open source drawing tool that works with Visio's proprietary file format.
Good on you for dumping them. A company that treats its customers like criminals risks alienating said customers. Often, these alienated customers examine their options and become "former" customers :-)
Before the RIAA, the BSA was the most reviled.
The RIAA will continue to be until another commercially interested company does worse according to some (then current) social/moral compass.
As I recall, the BSA fostered the RIAA. Maybe to get the heat off of themselves. What could the RIAA help spawn to draw the heat?
The thesis assumes facts not in evidence. The BSA's insane audits and contentions that owning the original discs, packaging materials and manuals do not constitute legitimate proof of ownership make the BSA reviled by people who know them. The BSA is simply less well known than the RIAA.
Maybe if the RIAA would sue for reasonable amounts, say $3 / song or something like that they'd be taken a bit more seriously.
I mention $3 only because this would be the equivalent to the BSA system, which fines the guilty party 3x the retail value of the product they pirated. Not 100 or 1000x like the RIAA seems to enjoy charging.
BSA says: Pirate a piece of software worth $200, pay $600 fine.
RIAA says: Pirate 1 song worth $1.25, pay $15,000 fine.
Something's a bit off with those numbers if you ask me.
The BSA sues corporations. The RIAA sues ordinary people. There's your reason.
1. the fact that the BSA rarely files suit for casual violations.
2. they usually give you an opportunity to become compliant unless your obviously violating copyright intentionally and blatantly.
3. most of the products the BSA represents have alternatives, so producers cannot afford to risk alienating their consumers. Sure you can listen to different musicians, but thats not the same as finding a different payroll package.
4. most business software packages actually benefit from moderate amounts of piracy. For example, very few IT types would pay for a $10K enterprise software to use at home. However by "stealing" it, they increase product's mind share and actually increase it's profit making potential.
5. business software typically consists of two components, the actual software, and a license. The BSA is not so concerned about the distribution of the software, but they target use/sale without a valid license.
Comparing the BSA and the RIAA is not a fair comparison. Even if the RIAA were more consumer focused (or should I say consumer satisfaction focused), they would never be able to operate like the BSA does.
Sometimes the best solution is to stop wasting time looking for an easy solution.
" people do not want things for free; they are willing to pay for them,' "
Those aren't mutually exclusive.
I'll pay for my new care, but it sure would be nice if it was free.
For the record. the BSA puisses me the hell off to,for the same reasons the RIAA does.
Don't need evidence, can get the sherif and FBI to due there bidding, again without evidence, the can bully cvompanies, and they won't pay for loss caused by their presence.
They also have "guilty until proven innocent" attitude, and there arguments are rife with logical fallacies.
They are counter to everything this country stands for.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
And a Chevy Suburban gets better gas mileage than a Unimog. A Porsche is cheaper than a Ferrari. A daisy cutter is less powerful than a nuke. So what? The BSA is probably only the THIRD most reviled copyright enforcement organization on Slashdot (after the RIAA and MPAA)... that ain't saying much.
You must reply if you read the story summary in my voice.
I've seen a ton of bsa ads show up in my slashdot rss feeds, and they are often pretty onerous, looking for people to turn in their employers. So why is there a Slashdot article that tries to be somewhat backhandedly sympathetic to the BSA? I hope its just a coincidence.
I consider them to be a protection racket much like the RIAA is, and one that is much easier to step in. If you never run file-sharing software, you will probably never hear from the RIAA. If you have a disgruntled and misinformed employee, you may hear from the BSA, and they can get you for essentially not keeping records the way they want you to.
I think all members of the BSA should be required to include clear and obvious documentation with all of their products about just exactly what is considered proof of license, how to deal with audits, and how to get replacement proof if needed, and also clearly label their web home-pages and product packaging with the fact they are members. Consumers can then make an informed choice to either opt out and not buy from BSA members, or to take steps to protect themselves from this racket.
If anti-copyright proponents would be unhypocritical, they would demand that software be downloadable for "sharing" among friends. That they only make this claim for music shows and video shows that there is a fundamental difference between software and music in their minds.
Really? I think if you actually went and asked people who make that claim for music and video, they'd say the same thing for software. Most of the "anti-copyright" arguments I've heard revolve around the nature of IP itself (being non-exclusive and non-rival) and don't have anything to do with "the ephemeral nature of music." Sounds like you've just set up a strawman.
Also, not that "anti-copyright proponent" is the right way to describe RMS, but he certainly does argue that free software should be shareable - it's one of the four freedoms.
"Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
they are one of the most convincing arguments for swtiching to open source. Some people most be tied, and punished, and tortured, till they recognize the good points of switching, and the BSA does exactly that. Why people think they are evil?
Third, because consumers can easily purchase BSA's members products, those who copy without paying are simply scofflaws. 'I think the fact that the public does not object to BSA's campaign proves my point [that]... people do not want things for free; they are willing to pay for them,' writes Patry. 'It should not be surprising that when consumers are not treated with respect, they react negatively.
Who wrote this load of crap? It is difficult to purchase music and that is why people pirate it? Really, how hard is it to go to iTunes (or Amazon, or Lala, or eMusic, or whatever other online shop you want to go to) and purchase an MP3 of the hot new song? It is easier in most cases than going to one of the torrent sites (or whatever Napster replacement is popular currently) and finding the song and downloading it. Sure, there may be some older, out of print songs that you can't get anymore, but 99% of the time those are not the ones being downloaded and there is also old software which can't be bought anymore as well.
the idea that people are pirating music because it is too hard to purchase may have held water 10 years ago, but now it is actually easier to purchase it than download it.
"Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
The quote seems to imply that unlike the RIAA, BSA members treat their customers with "respect". Then how come I'm forced to buy a Microsoft licence with a vast majority of computers, even if I already have a valid one or won't use Windows? And what about all that crippled (but not demo) software that comes with virtually every device, scanner, DSLR, TV card, you name them? Etc., etc.
Respect, indeed.
Of course the BSA isn't reviled like the RIAA and MPAA. The Boy Scouts are to help boys grow into better men and teach them all sorts of useful and age appropriate skills that they will use for their entire lives.
Another possible reason the BSA is not vilified is that they do not sue 12 year olds.
Proverbs 21:19
The BSA came down really hard on Ernie Ball. They were going to make an example of him and it backfired. They were smart enough not to try the same stunt again.
When I saw TFA, my first thought was Ernie Ball. The first post is about Ernie Ball. It is to BSA's credit that they only made that mistake once. The RIAA, on the other hand, seems to get it wrong time after time.
Comparing the music industry to the business software industry is like comparing Twitter to Oracle. The "public does not object to BSA's campaign" because the general public does not use business software. They could care less.
"Crude and slow, clansman. Your attack was no better than that of a clumsy child."
Um, actually I do just want to get entertainment media for free*, and have no qualms about getting hold of IP without the rights holders permission. Perhaps I'm a minority, but I doubt it. The question is, are there enough consumers willing to pay to support the creation of the content I like. Thus far, it seems like there is. If there isn't, expect a cut in production budgets - starting with the salaries artists can demand.
For business software, where breaking IP laws is going to have a severe commercial impact, I wouldn't touch any software unless I had the licence to prove it is authorised.
I can only see two reasons I would be willing to pay for something I can get just as easily for free:
> Increase in the in inconvenience of downloading unauthorised content
> Personal risk
* I do pay a fee for newsgroup access where I download all my stuff from.
The BSA doesn't get nearly the press that the RIAA does, intentionally or otherwise, for descending on a small business with sheriffs in tow and carrying a no-knock warrant. It's hard to hate them when you don't know they even exist.
Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
My guess: Nobody, and this "article" is just another piece of marketing, to put it in people's heads, that nobody objects to it.
Maybe a certain other group would have had more success, if their motto would have been "Nobody objects to the Spanish inquisition!".
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
I'm sure fewer people hate the BSa, but I suspect that among the people who have dealings with them, the hatred is as high as of the RIAA. There's just fewer businesses than there are grandmas.
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
Asshole employer. Screwed me out of cash. The BSA was my first call. They were so nice and helpful. And i had plenty of info to give them.
They wrote me a $1200 check for ratting out the asshole employer when it was all over with. The asshole employer who had screwed me out of $700. :)
The company was fined a crapload of cash too. win win win.
Oh sure.. sucks for the company. but thats what they deserve.
Go bsa!
Famous deathsquads. We'll compare them to stormtroopers from other people and other parts of time...
Sorry guys, I just can't give the BSA any more resepct than I do. Maybe I've been paying too much attention as they leave small businesses in shambles, and relieved of 100.000 each time.
It's kinda like comparing the Waffen SS with the General SS. So there's this slight difference....so what?
--- For a good time mail uce@ftc.gov
I disagree about the BSA not being as despised. At least for me that doesn't ring true.
I am very tired of them having eBay take down my listings because they say they are the V.R.O. (verified rights owner) and I have no right to sell a piece of software I own but never opened or installed. The license was never accepted so how could I be bound by the license? And who are these thugs to tell me how to live? (Don't answer that ... I realize they're all a bunch of card carrying Progressive Democrats and big donors to the TLA.). And why is eBay such a bunch of rollover patsies that they won't at least give the seller a chance to explain this before they dynamite the listing?
BSA: thugs posing as productive members of society.
Apparently they only conduct raids and investigations against small to midsize companies. Won't even investigate any large companies.
Wow, the touchy mods have no sense of humor today... I found your comment amusing. Some people hate puns, though.
Free Martian Whores!
As such, they wouldn't be caring about Nintendo's shit. You are maybe thinking of the ISDA, who is a videogame copyright association.
I have a friend who is an attorney. He has a small office that has at most 5 people working in it at any given time. He and I have been friends for years and he comes to me for computer related problems or advice. He lives in absolute terror of the BSA. He has never been visited by them, yet he still fears them. He is paranoid beyond belief that maybe, somehow, he might have one piece of software installed on an office PC that wasn't paid for and a disgruntled employee with a grudge will try to get the BSA to visit him and he will get hit with a fine for tens of thousands of dollars. He buys every piece of software he's got. If you can believe this, to save a few dollars he bought Adobe Acrobat (lawyers use PDF files for legal submissions) from some guy on Ebay. He bought 2 copies. Both were OEM. He tried to get them activated by Adobe and got some grief over them being OEM. You would not believe how much he worried about it and he said that in the future he would pay Adobe's full price just to not have to worry about it. The vendor provided a new license key for each copy that Adobe accepted and activated, but my friends is still absolutely paranoid that he is going to get screwed over this.
He refuses to run free software because of his BSA paranoia. He is paranoid that if he doesn't buy it, he'll get screwed by the BSA. The reality is that as a small business owner, he pays rock bottom wages to the people (almost always women) who work as a paralegals for him and he offers no benefits that I know of. Consequently, he doesn't keep people very long. It's really easy for them to find better paying jobs elsewhere. And his office is in a small town so it would be fair to say that he doesn't get the best and brightest to work for him and sometimes employees leave under bad circumstances. They get angry about something and quit. So the BSA has effectively made this small businessman so paranoid that he never considers free software as he is afraid that somehow he might violate some law by using it and he pays full price for everything he buys just for peace of mind and he still fears the BSA knocking on his door and somehow finding one program without a license on a PC at his office. Their tactics may be different from the RIAA but I don't know anybody who fears the RIAA the way my friend and presumably others fear the BSA.
The BSA has one purpose ensuring enough licenses have been bought and even better they stick to going after people using software to make a buck thats all pretty much fair.
The rest of the media industries go way beyond making sure IP is paid for.DRM Schemes are causing more and more irritations.
Why should pre-schoolers be forced to watch anti piracy crap and advertising?
why should we, we paid (those that didn't don't have to)!
Really the difference is the bsa wants customers to pay , the Entertainment industries want everyone to be their bitch.
I wouldn't care if they stuck to the stuff they have some right to control but they don't.
Simple example digital camcorder
tape has a family event on. plug the firewire cable between the dvd recorder and the camcorder hit play and record and after 5 seconds the recorder says the tape is protected wtf?
Granny cant be sent a dvd of the happy event because of the DRM imposed on the users own content.
Then there is the racket of collecting payments for music that has been created and given away freely and then the payments are withheld from the very people who created the music in the first place.
Then you get insane prosecution and Judgements beyond all reason for content which can even be downloaded legally for a dollar or less or even free (via google china for example).
Oh I forgot to mention the insane copyright extensions which get longer and longer so the legacy of performers long dead cannot be appreciated by anyone unless its one of the rare exceptions that have commercial value like mickey mouse.
To top it all off we are getting our privacy and our communications spied on and inspected just in case we might do something that possibly could have made the media industries a few cents.
not popular? they trash our rights our culture and threaten us when we create things without their input.
If 1 in 12 download something illegally there are 11 in 12 being treated as criminals with no justification at all.
Blarney Quality Restaurant, Plants
From your description the guy really needs a reality check with Free Software.
Or at least purchasing software from companies that aren't BSA members.
Anyone else notice the Slashdot banner ad for the BSA of the guy with the five grapes in his mouth, one red? I wonder how long you have to buy a banner ad to get a fluff piece on Slashdot?
What do you have against the Boy Scouts Of America? Why they're a fine bunch of ...Business Software Alliance? Oh, Never Mind!
You must be new to /. The BSA is one of the many forms of the antechrist, if you are to believe the people round these parts.
One big difference is that its easy to rationalize stealing music by saying that the record companies get most of the money from your CD purchase, with only a pittance going to the artist (assuming that the label's creative book keeping ever actually shows the disc in the black so that the artist is supposed to get royalties). Rip off music, and you are just hurting the evil record labels that ripped off the artist.
With software, when you buy a copy of Office or Photoshop or Final Cut Studio, there isn't some "software label" standing between the company that wrote the software and you taking most of the money. You can't rationalize that pirating the software is OK because buying it wouldn't get significant money back to the developers.
BS. Of course they do. Its human nature. But, people are willing to pay when they have to.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
You have a point about XP32 being limited there, but what about the applications?
If those are 32 bit, they will still be limited to 2 GB per app even if they run on a 64 bit OS. So more RAM won't help much on legacy apps (if they need that much in the first place). So if you switch to 64 bit, you might end up buying new application licenses anyway.
At this point, re-evaluating if it really needs to be Windows seems worth a try. You still may find out that Linux does not match your needs, but the switch to 64 bit seems an opportunity to look at the alternatives.
C - the footgun of programming languages
It's hard to go to iTunes. If I go to iTunes, it'll tell me that I need to download and install the iTunes software. If I try to install the iTunes software, it'll tell me that I need to install QuickTime. And based on my prior experience with QuickTime, I think I'd rather be punched in the face, than install that piece of crap on my computer.
Amazon doesn't sell music... in my country anyway. Neither does Lala, nor eMusic, last I checked.
On the Piratebay, on the other hand, music is only a few clicks away. I need no additional software - the torrent client is built into my browser.
Large companies have legal teams to dwarf the BSAs. Imagine a raid of an IBM office (not going to happen because IBM is a member, but suppose they weren't...)
BSA: A-HA. You have 250 copies of Microsoft Word at this office, and you only have a site license for 225.
IBM Manager: Nice try, but we have these other 30 loose copies from our acquisition of the company which originally ran this office
BSA: You have any invoices for those?
IBM Manager: Nope, they were lost before we got the office. We do have the original boxes discs, documentation, and shiny hologram thingies.
BSA: NOT GOOD ENOUGH, FOOL! YOU MUST HAVE INVOICES, AND THEY MUST SAY IBM! BOW BEFORE ME AND PAY!
IBM Manager: I've had enough of this. THRAKATULUK AGH BURUZUM-ISHI KRIMPATUL!
BSA: Huh?
IBM Lawyers: (appearing in a puff of sulfurous smoke) You called?
IBM Manager: Hey, BSA, why don't you tell THEM what you just told me?
BSA: (Bravely) Mere possession of authorized copies isn't good enough. You must have dated invoices with the actual...
IBM Lawyers: (Interrupting) AN INTERESTING THOUGHT. PERHAPS WE SHOULD DISCUSS THIS FURTHER IN OUR OFFICE.
BSA and IBM Lawyers: (vanish in another puff of sulfurous smoke).
Funny that both this slashdot article and this reg article were on my iGoogle simulatenously
also, everyone on slashdot works in computers, and few in music.
Next.
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
In my experience, companies in the USA and Canada truly want to be legal with software. I've had them request license servers to manage our licenses and ensure they **could not** violate them.
OTOH, in Korea, Japan, and China, I've seen the difficult looks from customers as I informed them we were deploying a license server with the next release of our software. Fortunately, they **really, really** wanted some of the new features and took the release. I showed them quickly how they could monitor license usage and even save money, but it appeared that none of them bothered. 6 months later, I looked at the license utilization in Japan and saw that while they owned 500 user and 5 admin licenses, only 3 admin and 15 users had been used peak. Usually there was just 5 users in at a time. I know they planned to implement a web interface to our software - we built a new "batch" interface for them, intended for overnight batch processing. As such, it was limited it to 1 concurrent instance. This made it unsuitable for web deployment except for very casual use.
Anyone need a few MP3s?
BSA's members have always offered their products for sale to the public
A couple years ago I needed a specific version of Windows, in English, while being in a foreign country. It was not available for sale in said country, so I thought, I'll just go purchase it online. After a bit of googling, I was really surprised that I couldn't find it for sale as a downloadable ISO (I needed it on that very day). Finally on eBay I find an auction to "a link to a downloadable version of Windows with license". I instant pay and within one minute of each other I get 2 messages, one from the seller that gives me a link to a fake site with just written "download Windows with license" (and nothing else); and another one from eBay that states that the sale was pulled for breaking terms of service on software (what, after I pay ?!?), without even offering a refund.
Now call me naive, but on that day I learned 2 things: (1) Windows lost not only a sale but many customers since it was the very day that I started installing Linux on my customer's PCs because of their reluctance to sell online; (2) eBay actively encourages criminals and just do some handwaving to cover their ass.
Non-Linux Penguins ?
Self serving BSA advert. BSA primarily goes after businesses, presumably often based on inside company sources, even if deceptively obtained. Still a slimey business from what I have heard. e.g. overkill and unreasonable demands on documentation where good faith evidence exists for legal software, especially for vanishingly small percentages of incomplete documentation. Which I personally believe is a form of business fraud.
If anyone on your street block pirates music over cable TV's IP (maybe it's you, maybe it's your neighbor), eventually the RIAA might come a-suing. They seek you out. You never need to do anything to get their lawyer's attention.
The only way to avoid RIAA is to opt out, any no one knows how to do that. (Abstaining from pirating isn't enough.)
Now look at software.
If you go to a retail store and buy software, or if you pirate software, the BSA doesn't know you exist. You are anonymous. Even if they pull your name out of the phone book, they have no way of knowing (or even have reason to suspect) that you have their stuff. They don't know if you're "supposed to" have 0 copies or 30 copies of Photoshop. They don't know how many computers you have. The only way something is going to happen, is if you pirate and you (or your disgrunted ex-employee) tells them.
Ergo, it's likely nothing will ever happen.
You get the BSA's attention by licensing, rather than buying, software -- pretty much the only mainstream way that people acquire software non-anonymously. You make a deal with Microsoft for a huge site-license, for example. It's a lot of dollars and it's worth someone's time to monitor your compliance. There's a contract. They know your name. They're gonna occasionally audit you.
You know this, going in. With BSA, you make the first move.
PDF would work perfectly fine, they all handle it, and every OS has software supporting the format :p
The reason the BSA is much less reviled is because it hardly has to come after home consumers. Most get their software when they buy a new PC so they don't have to bother with those really. And it is called the "Business Software Alliance" after all!
Really, the BSA has never been more than a minor annoyance in the background. Noisy and irritating, but hardly threatening for most people.
The RIAA (and MPAA) are proving that they're willing to punish people for ten times their annual livelihood, even when not guilty. That is enough to make them a danger to everyone, and thus much more reviled.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
Fuck them in the neck with fire.
I went through a bullshit audit back in the day, when a disgruntled employee tried to inform on the college where we worked. He was largely responsible for the mess, I was largely responsible for cleaning it up in spite of political pressure from the top to keep things working as they always did. A couple of months after the cleanup, they notified us we were being audited. We had the ability to run our own audit and when they were not helpful in narrowing the search, supplied a multi thousand page report in 8-pt type giving every executable on every machine.
Months later they found one classroom still had software on it that was not being used in that room (class was moved to another building). They asked for something like $30K in fines. We told them we were poster children for compliance, could prove that the software was not used, and told them to fuck off. They did.
Bastards went on a fishing expedition elsewhere, hitting non-profits and other underfunded .edu's where they figured the IT depts would cave rather than fight because they lacked the resources to control their environments.
So much effort that delivered nothing toward the mission. Fuck them.
This is marked as flamebait, but it's a pretty neutral statement about the "gay movement" (whatever that is. Homosexual advocates, at any rate)'s feelings about the Boy Scouts of America, which have held the acronym of BSA for like five times as long as the Business Software Alliance, and are, to this day, still far more recognized by said acronym.
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
"Where are you going to purchase a legit copy of Lotus 1-2-3 not to mention DOS? But you *can* be sued for pirating them, at least technically."
I think the point the author is going for is that while you can be sued for that, the BSA generally doesn't. And while I'm no fan of the BSA and its members, that is a valid point. Just because you *can* sue doesn't mean you *must* sue.
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
"Every member company of BSA has been found to have 'unauthorized software' [citation needed] "
Self-identifying bullshit. Now *that's* an innovation! Can you automatically call yourself a Nazi, too?
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
Reply to GP: harryfeet
On the one hand, XP does not support large expanses of RAM.
On the other hand, XP does not consume large expanses of RAM (compared to Vista and Win7)
To make a car analogy out of this, you are suggesting that fuel efficient vehicles with less than 400 gallon gas tanks would become obsolete if petrol suddenly became less expensive.
I suppose my point is that a commodity becoming relatively inexpensive is no excuse to wantonly waste the commodity. I am not a fan of the resource treadmill our technology is currently on where all design mistakes are swept under the rug of Moore's Law.
Does your software have memory leaks? Well, today's hemorrhage will be tomorrow's perspiration. Don't fix it, add more features instead.
What, are you still coding to check for exhausted resource exceptions? What kind of nut are you? There will always be more RAM! :P
No, I think a design limitation at 3.2GB for another year or five would do application developers some good. Eventually even well written software will require more RAM than that, but I really think by that time such software would include a raft of better OSen, making the present day virtualization mantra of "stack bloated kernel atop bloated kernel" a thing of the past.
This is my 02c,YMMV
Wow, if you think I'll get any mileage off of 02c, then I guess you took that car analogy mighty seriously! ;D
People willing to trade their freedom of expression for temporary entertainment deserve neither and will lose both.
Sir that is a half-truth
The truth is a competitor or disgruntled customer could also turn you in. All they have to do is sound like they know what they are talking about.
Ya know? I was at that there factory dropping off some parts, while I was standing there in the front office someone said "Hey Charlie, I need a copy of office for this machine". Yup plain as day I saw Charlie hand him a CD with "Office 2003" written on it with a magic marker. Yes sir ree bob, yes I did. I was just being friendly and I asked them if that was legal and they said, "who cares, everyone does it". Now Mr. that just aint right, I had to give yer 800 number a call and tell ya all about it.
vi +
Why? Because Photoshop CS3 is JUST FINE and CS4 is a waste of money. They all want you in the upgrade path. "Just good enough" computing hasn't come to the software market. Yet.
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
Repeat after me: Jury Nullification.
Cases with laws this unjust should never get past a jury.
But what if the jury believes that justice is being done? That the geek's defense is fraudulent?
The juror is a small-C conservative. He has worked hard for what he has. He accepts responsibility. He does not believe in the free lunch.
Something tells me that there are a lot more adults, who understand why things must be paid for, among the BSA end users than there would be among the RIAA's end users..
Two other reasons they are less reviled:
1) They go after counterfitters, and companies. The tactics used on companies are greasy, but they aren't going after children, single mothers, and cripples as the RIAA is.
2) RIAA and it's member companies screw over the artists they are supposed to represent. If BSA was taking well over 90% of the action they would be more unpopular than they are.
Another possible reason the BSA is not vilified is that they do not sue 12 year olds.
Nether does the RIAA.
They sue the owner of the account. The head of the household.
The "kitten on the keys" is a geek's defense.
It would of course be amusing to know what sort of music and movies the defendant claims his kids were downloading.
The RIAA has been targeting students, grannies, children and dead people. The BSA is mostly concerned with companies and "large scale" copying of their content. Simple as that.
Do you care about a witchhunt if the chance that you become a target is slim?
It also seems the BSA isn't all about "shoot first, ask later". They usually come to you and want to see your licenses. Then they suggest that you might want to bring your system up to speed. Only if they notice BIG time infringment or unwillingness to comply, they drag you to court.
It's a matter of how you treat your customer, as a potential customer or a potential criminal. You simply catch more bees with honey than with vinager.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
and they don't beat up grandmas.
The BSA is not concerned with end users, they are concerned with large businesses who have large amounts of software... The RIAA on the other hand, targets end users who cannot defend themselves and cannot afford the ridiculous amounts of money they are asking for.
Also, entertainment is optional, people can easily do without it, so having last year's britney song won't force you to buy the latest one... BSA members on the other hand, typically bring customers back through various lock-in schemes, which rely on them and those they communicate with using their software. If a significant portion of those users started using something else then they would be forced to interoperate, thus losing their biggest method for keeping customers. Pirated copies ensure the widest possible distribution of their lockin strategy.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
I completely Agree. A big part of the reason why illegal sharing of music files take place is that the industry has been doing its best to remain irrelevant. In an age of digital content, the music industry and its association has done its best to stop the spread of digital music in favor of an old CD based format. What the consumer wants/needs have been irrelevant. The old formats provide them with larger margins then digital distribution. As an Internet Lawyer who drafts many EULAs and online compliance strategies for file sharing sites, i think that a change in their strategy toward a full embrace of all distribution technologies, whatever they are today or tomorrow, would go a long way toward reducing incidents of infringements.
The CoA and sticker is not enough.
The receipt and the receipt ONLY.
And if it's the upgrade, it has to be the receipt for the upgrade and the receipt for the pre-upgrade license (and if that is an upgrade, recurse up).
And the machine has to be the same or a license transfer from the original machine (receipt only!) must be had or you are considered non-compliant in the eyes of the BSA.
When someone makes a play and someone else makes a screenplay of that play for TV, many of the same words are used. This doesn't make the original play required to be secret and unused without license until all the derived works that use some of the same words are public domain too.
If MS are still wanting control over code in XP then they can keep supporting XP.
If they don't want to support XP, then release the code to XP so someone else can support it.
It's not as if you get a free copyright pass to Win7 source code with it: you don't GET source code with Win7, so how do you know what code is in Win7 that you're illicitly accessing? And when you DO get Win7 source, that is released under NDA, so being opened in XP doesn't change a damn thing.
I'm sure it has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the BSA goes after businesses and ignores home users.
Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
I want it in raw ASCII text although I'd settle for ODF.
I think Adobe PDF is a lame, bloated format from a thoroughly disreputable company and I would be happy to never see another PDF so long as I live.
"Good Enough is the enemy of Great" -- Collins, misquoting Voltaire
Proverbs 21:19
Better to live in a desert than with a quarrelsome and ill-tempered wife.
Doesn't seem like it causes signature-length problems
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
Doesn't anyone remember BSA's extortion letters? They generally went something like this: Pay us $x,000 to perform a license evaluation or face a civil suit. Those letters were mass mailed, by zip code to, AFAIK, anyone with a business license. The only reason BSA is not still reviled is because they had to stop doing that or face a class action lawsuit (and likely racketeering charges).
Jeff Miller
http://www.assistsolar.com
http://businesscredittips.weebly.com
Probably b/c BSA doesn't audit software not produced by one of their members; where the RIAA wants to charge for anything by anyone - regardless of whether it came from one of their members. That alone probably makes a big difference.
Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
In my bubble, the BSA is just as hated as the RIAA. The only difference is the latter has been in the news more recently and more frequently.
Anyone remember those old "meet the developers" infomercials the BSA used to produce ? They'd get a bunch of "up and comers" in the game industry to come rail on and on about how software piracy is killing their babies. Well now it's been a while, but last time I heard, BillG's kids were breathing just fine.
From my perspective, as an indie software developer, piracy ain't so bad. Sure, I don't get paid when someone copies my software, but I think of it as free advertising - it's no different than if I'd given out free promotional copies. People use it, might fall in love with it, and eventually show it to someone who will actually buy it. More importantly: what the fuck could I do about it anyway ? The way I see it, the BSA is just a bunch of thugs hired/created by Microsoft and a few other big greedy heavies. They go door-to-door, sidestepping the constitution, buying congressmen and terrorizing businesses into buying software they don't need.
If the BSA worked for everyone, every single copyright-holding software developer in North America, they'd be worthy of a little more respect. They'd also have to quit it with these scare and shame tactics, the only people profiting are the lawyers. Right now, the BSA are nothing but a bunch of dickless rent-a-cops shitting where they eat.
-Billco, Fnarg.com