Slashdot Mirror
Recession Turning Software Auditors Into Greedy Traffic Cops
judgecorp writes "As the recession bites, software auditors are cracking down, and some are simply exploiting loopholes and technicalities to meet their targets, according to analyst Forrester. They may be within their rights, but they aren't endearing themselves to users; Steve Ballmer faced weary customers in London last year, and admitted Windows licenses have deliberate 'gotchas.'"
I don't use ANY proprietary software at my company. I own a software development company in Argentina. If I get an auditor (Auditions here are done by ARBA, the state-wide equivalent of the IRS in Buenos Aires) I just won't even open the door. Sue me if you want. I use NO privative software, and no one has any right to log in into my servers or workstations (We have ~40 machines at our offices).
Fuck them in the ass.
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
Don't run Windows. "Software auditors" are just about unknown to users of any other platform.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
They may be within their rights, but they aren't endearing themselves to users; They are not looking for endearment, they are looking for a paycheck.
Home of The Suki Series
They may be within their rights,
What right would that be, exactly? If they're not law enforcement, and they don't have a court order, they have zero "rights." Yes, even if they show up wearing fancy raid jackets to try and look like law enforcement.
I've posted this several times before. If the BSA or any of these other vultures come knocking, they have ABSOLUTELY NO RIGHT TO DO ANYTHING, SEE ANYTHING, TALK TO ANYONE, etc WITHOUT A COURT ORDER. If they have one, that means you're already in the process of being sued, and the first person you should call is your lawyer, and you should ONLY do EXACTLY what the court order requires you to.
Here's the Superbanana Super Guide To BSA Bullshit Shutdown.
If they don't have a court order, don't let them see anything, touch anything, install anything, connect anything. Don't answer any questions. The only information you should give them is your attorney's phone number.
Please help metamoderate.
For those who forgot:
http://news.cnet.com/2008-1082_3-5065859.htm
In the town next to the one I sit... there's a old police officer who has a "quota" of traffic fines he needs to collect in the budget. Miss his income number, and he's unemployed. The budget number is public record as and in as a separate line item in the official budget. He's authorized to put up a "Speed Limit 30" sign at any intersection because that's the state law at all intersections marked or not.
Now, on the way out of this town, there's a highway interchange. That's an intersection, but the state highway people don't want you going as slow as 30 miles per hour there... you won't be up to 55 on the short ramp to the highway if you do. So they've rigged this intersections with enough signs that the traffic officer is locked out... if he puts his sign up, it's not properly displayed because it's either blocked from view or too far from the intersection. He still writes tickets there, and if you take him to traffic court you can get it kicked. He's hoping you confess or just send in the check. There's even a state website where you can pay your fine with a credit card.
If enough people do get his tickets kicked, he'll be done.
Julian Heathcote Hobbins, General Counsel for the Federation Against Software Theft (FAST), spoke in defence of the software industry protecting its property rights
Could the guy have a more pretentious name? Really? Julian Heathcote Hobbins? Could that guy have any other job beside going around and telling people they are using the product they bought incorrectly?
4. REPORTING AND AUDIT. If Customer wishes to increase the number of Installed System, then Customer will purchase from Red Hat additional Services for each additional Installed System. During the term of this Agreement and for one (1) year thereafter, Customer expressly grants to Red Hat the right to audit Customer's facilities and records from time to time in order to verify Customer's compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Any such audit shall only take place during Customer's normal business hours and upon no less than ten (10) days prior written notice from Red Hat. Red Hat shall conduct no more than one such audit in any twelve-month period except for the express purpose of assuring compliance by Customer where non-compliance has been established in a prior audit. Red Hat shall give Customer written notice of any non-compliance, and if a payment deficiency exists, then Customer shall have fifteen (15) days from the date of such notice to make payment to Red Hat for any payment deficiency. The amount of the payment deficiency will be determined by multiplying the number of underreported Installed Systems or Services by the annual fee for such item. If Customer is found to have underreported the number of Installed Systems or amount of Services by more than five percent (5%), Customer shall, in addition to the annual fee for such item, pay a penalty equal to twenty percent (20%) of the underreported fees.
Shame you got modded troll. This is pretty insightful, though it should say "Outsource your work to a country which has lax tax laws."
One of the most unintentionally hilarious points in TFA is Steve Ballmer's comment;
Users such as the Government of the Isle of Man are already saving up to £120 per year using the beta version of Windows 7
The Isle of Man is largely an offshore tax haven with around 1,350 desktop computers for the entire government. If all of the promised "£100 per desktop per year" savings materialise, the IoM government will have saved a grand total of £135,000 by using beta software. So why would Ballmer be so interested in such a small deployment?
Accounts for Microsoft Ireland Research, an Irish subsidiary of the global software giant, show that the company paid just €460,000 in tax, on profits of more than €1.2 billion last year.
http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/category/microsoft/
That's 0.04% tax.
Still wondering why Microsoft is heavily involved in an offshore tax haven?
Even funnier, the IoM Government was an early supporter of Windows Vista, and claimed savings switching to that OS. Though only completing their rollout in October 2009, they were just in time to save even more money changing to Windows 7. If they keep making savings upgrading like that, pretty soon Microsoft'll be paying them for installing Windows.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
Suppose I'm a healthcare company. Software auditors show up at my door, waving contracts in my face. I let them in. They insist that they must inspect ALL machines running, say, MS Office. Some of these machines contain sensitive health information for ten thousand patients. I have now committed 10,000 willful HIPAA violations, and could go to jail, in theory, for up to 10,000 years (maximum jail time for willful but non-malicious breach is 1 year per instance).
Or what about SarbOx? Any possibilities for violation there?
I think a strong case could be made that if you are a HIPAA covered entity who uses software which is subjects to such agreements, and you abide by the agreements, then you are committing a felony. Thus, using Microsoft software is a felony. QED
Here's a nice old story about a Microsoft software user that got audited, sued, fined and dragged through the press. Apparently they sell guitars. Of course a loss for somebody is naturally a win for somebody else.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
No, I don't think you understand HIPAA very well. It DOES allow for a number of disclosures without patient consent:
To law enforcement
To treating physicians and other clinicians, for public health activities, for health oversight purposes, to protect against personal and material harm
Even for marketing
And a raft of others.
This is not the bogeyman you are looking for.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
B.S. Nobody wants Microsoft licensing to be that complex, except the SAM contractors and other licensing Nazis that Microsoft and a good chunk of the proprietary software world has let loose upon us all.
I had a SAM review last February and March, that started with a letter from a Microsoft "partner" (read: contracted henchman) that, once you got passed the bullshit about them being hear to help me, was clearly a software audit.
I was given 30 days (with an extension if I needed it) to put everything together. That part wasn't too bad. We had largely inherited the licenses from the firm that we had taken over, and it was a bit of a mess. Of our three copies of Server 2003, one was an inherited Small Business Server 2003 OEM edition that I had applied the Transition Pack to to turn into proper Server 2003, one was an OEM copy of Server 2003 R2 bought by us and one was a Server 2003 that we had inherited, purchased through Software Assurance. As well, there were about 15 Office Pro licenses, as well as 13 or 14 Office OEM copies sold with the Dells that we had inherited. On top of that, I had a backup server running Windows 2000 server, plus CALs both purchased by us and by the people we had bought everything from.
I first smelled trouble when they asked me to verify that 22 of our workstations (all running OEM copies of XP) were not running Office (they were running OpenOffice). I found the question more than a little accusatory. Then came the seeming inability for them to count CALs. At one point they had us in the red 15 CALs, despite the fact that I had invoices, both of my purchases and of the previous organization's, showing the CALs. This literally went back and forth for two weeks, until finally I had had enough, and sent off a very angry email to the contractor accusing him and his "team" of severe arithmetic disabilities, and explicitly using the phrase "you are harassing me".
Then, as if unwilling to declare defeat, they came back with a final number of -5 Server 2003 CALs, because, and get this, though I had enough CALs to cover everything, I hadn't bought this 5 CAL pack via Software Assurance, and wasn't permitted to use it as a User CAL on the Server 2003 machine installed via the single copy of Server 2003 bought via Software Assurance. I sent back a very angry letter, CCed to my manager, asking them if they seriously thought that I was going to pay $150 bucks again for CALs I already owned, because I bought them from a reseller as opposed to Software Assurance. I think at that point they got the hint that they weren't going to be getting any money out of us, and sent back a letter saying that as long as I agreed to change them into Device CALs, I'd be in the clear with them.
Now, I guess from one perspective one could say that we got off in the end, we were totally legit. But this probably consumed about $500 to $700 of my wages (my employer's money) on pointless back-and-forths as they tried to probe to find any way to make money off of us.
At this point, we are looking to abandoning Microsoft, and indeed proprietary software wherever we can. It won't be easy, and it won't always be pleasant (though it can't be any worse than the three weeks of hell that happened when we bought new Dell workstations with Vista). We're stuck with Exchange-Outlook for the medium term, but should have enough licenses to cover a small expansion that may be happening in a year. But all the new file servers are running Samba, we're set to expand OpenOffice installs, and while Office 2003 will be around for a while, there will be no upgrades to later versions, save as we replace workstations. The long-term plan is to roll more and more server operations on to open source solutions, with a set goal that when we hit 95% of our Exchange CALs, we will take the plunge and go with an open source groupware solution. I don't anticipate that we will ever be Microsoft free, but we can certainly reduce our footprint, and our exposure to the nonsensical and self-serving whims of Micro
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
I'm posting AC because I do IT work for IOM gov. Your post is full of misinformation.
First of all it's disingenuous to represent the Isle of Man as a "tax haven". It's one of the few offshore jurisdictions that aren't on the US blacklist of tax havens and has tax information sharing agreements with anyone that matters. We don't have "lax tax laws". We're one of the only 3 jurisdictions whitelisted by the UK to conduct online gambling precisely because we have good regulation and anti-money laundering protection. And the overall level of tax burned on the IOM is about the same as the US.
Second. There are about 5000 desktop and laptop computers. Now you might not think such small numbers don't matter, but it's not the numbers, it's where they are. The IOM has everything you'd find in your average government, from the executive offices right down to sewage treatment, water utilities, power generation, hospitals, schools, roads, etc, etc. Only it's much smaller. So why does MS care? Because they can deploy their products across an entire and extremely varied organisation, and capture that in only 5000 machines.
As for the Vista/Windows 7 thing. The software is licenced through microsoft's rental scheme, so whether they stay on Windows XP or Windows 7 doesn't matter, they pay the same. The claimed savings were down to lower maintenance costs etc. Also after the deployment of Vista, the upgrade to Windows 7 (like all their application deployments) is through a system called SMS. It's deployed over the network, overnight and is completed with one reboot. No user settings are lost as they're all on network profiles.
I don't like MS as much as the next slashdotter, but you're talking about things you don't know. Stop.
"Ballmer also suggested that education should be given government stimulus funding to enable young people to gain experience on the computing systems they would meet in the real world."
Seriously Mr B, go fuck yourself. You don't need the money and young people, on the whole, are pretty good at working things out for themselves as they have a "click and see what happens" approach mixed with the ability to ask another kid who knows. Doesn't matter if it's OpenOffice, Office 2007, whatever, if they really want it to do something, they'll find a way. The weak point is quite often the teachers.
Seriously, in the UK you cannot be a teacher without a University degree. A University degree should teach you to analyse a problem, research the problem and apply a solution. In software, this boils down to "I can't do X in program Y", go to Google and type "how do I do X in program Y", click links until you find answer and follow instructions on page. Most of the time they seem incapable of following this simple idea. They'll even come in and as me then watch me hit Google and search for a solution (often the first result returned) but it never dawns on them to do the same themselves next time (and no, support isn't my job). I showed a year 7 how to find something out using the "F1" key and he was amazed, he just didn't know.
The best thing for education, would be for kids to be trained to work stuff out for themselves by teachers who are trained to work stuff out for themselves. This "teaching people to use the software they'll use in the real world" argument is crippling and the seeming inability for people with far higher qualifications than mine to work out even minor problems has seriously dented my faith in the higher education system.
Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
Let's see:
-10 days notice
-at most once a year unless you get caught
-if you make a minor mistake, you pay up and you're done
-if you make a major mistake, you pay up 120% and you're done
Sounds better than anything Microsoft or Adobe have to offer.