Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft To Issue Blanket License To NGOs

itwbennett writes "Following a recent report that Russian police have used software copyright raids to seize computers of activist groups, Microsoft announced it will issue a blanket software license to nonprofit groups and journalist groups outside the US. The new blanket license should remove software piracy as an excuse for 'nefarious actions' by enforcement authorities, Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith wrote. The new license 'cuts in one swoop the Gordian knot that otherwise is getting in the way of our desired handling of these legal issues,' he said. 'The law in Russia (and many other countries) requires that one must provide truthful information about the facts in response to a subpoena or other judicial process. With this new software license, we effectively change the factual situation at hand. Now our information will fully exonerate any qualifying [nonprofit], by showing that it has a valid license to our software.'"

20 of 255 comments (clear)

  1. and the qualifier is... by bsDaemon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And the qualifier is, of course, "qualifying." The article doesn't say who qualifies, and says that journalists and NGOs don't have to do anything to get the license, which means they don't find out that they don't qualify until they're in the same situation they're already facing, I guess.

    1. Re:and the qualifier is... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 5, Interesting

      And the qualifier is, of course, "qualifying." The article doesn't say who qualifies

      The article does not, because it talks about a future event ("will issue a license"). I would imagine that the text of said license would go for over 40 pages (as usual) detailing out who qualifies for what.

    2. Re:and the qualifier is... by vux984 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      And the qualifier is, of course, "qualifying." The article doesn't say who qualifies, and says that journalists and NGOs don't have to do anything to get the license, which means they don't find out that they don't qualify until they're in the same situation they're already facing, I guess.

      This isn't the sort of situation where microsoft would be trying to weasel. More importantly, the way it worked from what I can tell, is that russian authorities needed Microsoft lawyers to essentially sign-off on the complaints against dissidents -- they'd indicate they had "reason to beleive" group-X was using priated software, and the MS-attack-lawyers would say 'raid away'.

      This change is essentially instructions from Microsoft to its own legal counsel saying if its an NGO or Journalist etc then they have a license, and not to be party to police requests.

      Strictly speaking they could instruct their lawyers to refuse to pursue cases against NGOs and so on without the license, but this 'grant of license' is:

      a) good PR

      b) makes it harder (impossible?) to for the police to build a software piracy case as long as the legal system isn't competely subverted. The Microsoft lawyer simply says "they are licensed" end of story. He doesn't have to say, something like "my client isn't interested in prosecuting a case against them". Its more thorough and complete this way. It changes from "they might be doing something wrong, but we don't care to find out" to "we are completely satisfied that they are licensed".

      which means they don't find out that they don't qualify until they're in the same situation they're already facing, I guess.

      As you can see they don't really need to "know they qualify". The protection is indirect - its really more a way to give microsoft's lawyers an out from having to cooperate with russian police against NGOs more than direct protection for the end user. At least that's how i read it.

    3. Re:and the qualifier is... by Peeteriz · · Score: 4, Informative

      Also, in the previous cases they don't really say "my client does not want to press the issues" - Russian government had started a criminal process, and as in most criminal process the 'victim' does not get a choice to stop the persecution, and granting a license after a request would not help either (as the violation occurred in the past, when the license was not there yet) - so if the prosecutors want to press charges, they have a valid case.

      These same issues may apply to any other country where criminal penalties apply for copyright violations.

    4. Re:and the qualifier is... by Fluffeh · · Score: 4, Funny

      The general story could be summed up with this:

      MS Exec: Oh shit, our name is being dragged through the mud big time and we didn't really lift a finger to stop it happening. This is bad. This is costing us more money in lost reputation than it would cost us just to give everyone a license. Joe, get right on it!
      Joe: Yessir! Free copies coming right out.
      MS Exec: Also, can we put a spin on this to say that we are supporting victims, journalists and fighting organized crime and extortion?
      Joe: Sure thing boss. Spin is being added now!
      MS Exec: Righto, that's the morning done for me, time for a coffee. Hmmm, Joe, how can we squeeze some more money out of people?
      Joe: Well, with all that free time now, perhaps we can set the lawyers on the EU again? What about we put Google through another adwords privacy scandal? Maybe we just give them a week off and feed them some more children, you know it's been almost a whole month since they last tasted child flesh...
      MS Exec: Make it happen Joe. You will go a long way here someday...

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
  2. Re:No price or freedom by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Most opposition NGOs in Russia are routinely harassed by the government while trying to expose many cases of corruption and widespread violation of human rights. Some (albeit, thankfully, very few so far) are imprisoned, others are beaten by thugs who are then conveniently never found by police.

    The issue of "being able to change the software" simply doesn't enter into the picture - I mean, do you seriously think these folk have the time to submit kernel patches? For most of them, computer is just a tool to do what they think of as their civic duty, one among many other such tools.

  3. Re:hmm... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 4, Informative

    It will be interesting, but it only lasts until 2012. It's hard to believe they would extend it longer.

    Apparently it's an interim measure while NGOs learn that they can take part in an existing program involving "donation" of software to non-profits. End result is effectively the same, as you get free licenses, but donations are to a specific org, whereas this is meant to be a blanket license to shield everyone from abuse right here and now.

  4. Re:What about here? by Locke2005 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Can you cite evidence of any "dissident" groups in the US that have been busted for software piracy? This is a case of Microsoft trying to "do the right thing", they should be applauded for their efforts, not criticized.

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  5. Re:No price or freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not to mention increased protection from prying eyes. If I was criticizing a government known for harassing its opponents I sure as shit wouldn't be using something as insecure as Windows.

    Good call. Because there's absolutely no way in hell that the Russian government has people who could hack backdoors into open source, compile it, and surreptitiously install it onto rooted Linux systems.

  6. Re:Weird terminology by Culture20 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Am I supposed to know what a "blanket software license" is?

    If American English is your primary language, yes.
    If not, know that here in America, we license our electric blanket software (the programs that tell a blanket when its getting too hot). Sure, some hip nerds install Linux on theirs so they can literally feel the system load, but most people just think of electric blankets as appliances.

  7. Re:What about here? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So far as my limited understanding of US copyright law goes, the government cannot sue someone for copyright infringement on behalf of the rights owner; the latter actually has to initiate the process. In Russia (and a few other places), this is not the case - copyright infringement (even small-scale) is a criminal matter, and prosecuted as such by the state, with or without cooperation from the rights owner. This is what made possible the abuse in this particular case. It's actually hinted at in TFS:

    The law in Russia (and many other countries) requires that one must provide truthful information about the facts in response to a subpoena or other judicial process. With this new software license, we effectively change the factual situation at hand.

    The situation before was like this: say, Russian police gets a tip from "above" to harass a particular NGO. They raid the offices on some premise (it's not US, so there are many ways to legitimize such a raid) and confiscate a bunch of PCs. They then subpoena MS to testify whether software on those PCs, in which MS holds copyrights, is legitimately owned or copyright-infringing. Chances are high that at least a few boxes would have something unlicensed on them - and if they don't, you can always plant it there (rumor it is that it's precisely what they did in the case in question), so MS says "yes, some of that is not licensed". Police then takes it to state prosecutor which uses it as the grounds for the copyright infringement case.

    The whole point of this blanket license is so that, if govt tries that trick again in the future, MS can say that all software in question is legally used, without even having to look at it. Hence there would be no grounds for a lawsuit.

    Though something tells me that they'll just start looking for pirated Photoshop etc from now on.

  8. Re:Linux and BSD ... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The irony is that you can still end up in court for running Linux on PCs without "licenses", because the police don't understand it, and will only take those shiny holographic stickers as a proof that your software is "licensed". It's boneheaded, but some Russian Linux distribution companies have since started selling special stickers for Linux just for this purpose.

  9. Ah fuck! by AnonymousClown · · Score: 5, Funny
    I wish I could delete the above comment. I thought I was replying someone else here on Digg.

    Weird shit has been happening to me since I started taking Ambien!

    --
    RIP America

    July 4, 1776 - September 11, 2001

  10. Re:So let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    In Soviet Russia, Microsoft protects you from government.

  11. Microsoft treats non-profits very well by dave562 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I used to work for a 501c3 non-profit and we got ridiculously good deals on Microsoft licensing. Everything from server licenses, to Office suite, Exchange and the whole Back Office line of products (SQL, Sharepoint, etc). I know that our Office licenses (for the Professional edition) were in the neighborhood of $30 a piece. That included a provision that allowed the users to have a copy of the program on their home computer as well.

  12. Re:Tax breaks by blagder · · Score: 4, Informative

    I think you are misinterpreting that paragraph; and thus not giving Microsoft their due credit.

    It is saying that Microsoft already does run a ‘donation’ program to NGOs that likely does allow them tax deductions at no cost. But that’s not what this is. By instantly creating a license that any NGO can use for free; they cannot claim a deduction. For a deduction, they would have to get the NGO/journalist to go through specific channels so that they could document the ‘donation’. And that of course if why they want to move people to their donation program.

    This is talked about in a bit more detail in the Microsoft blog entry that announced it. I would expect this to make it a bit more difficult to get NGOs to use their donation program since the motivation for jumping through the hooks is less.

    This is a fantastic program and Microsoft should be commended for it. Even on Slashdot.

    Now, getting deductions for software (or other IP) donations in general is ridiculous and something that governments should reconsider. Any business deduction where they can control the value of the donation by their pricing is somewhat shady. But this license does not seem to be taking advantage of that.

  13. Educational institutions too by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For instructional use, they give us software for free. We decided to just go and get their software assurance pack (more or less a site license for their software for any use) and it is extremely cheap on a yearly basis. Students get massive discounts, and the get to keep the license when they leave and use it for any purpose, including for profit.

    MS and Adobe are actually two of the best companies for cutting educational institutions a break. Some of the engineering companies... Well they are assholes :P.

  14. Re:No price or freedom by Score+Whore · · Score: 4, Interesting

    But did you build your OS via tapping bits onto the SATA bus with a paperclip? Otherwise you have no idea what your OS is putting in there. See Ken Thompson Reflections on Trusting Trust.

  15. Did the thermostats in Hell just drop? by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Never thought I'd be posting this on Slashdot, but an unbelievable move for good by Microsoft. It's good to see them take a stand against repression. Now, I hope these same ethics get cemented in all their business processes.

  16. Re:Interesting, but... by jc42 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... won't government agents with an agenda simply look to non-Microsoft software as an excuse for a raid?

    It might mean a change in excuse by the Russian cops. After all, if you're running linux or *BSD or other free software, you have a license to run it. Just keep copies of the GPL and other appropriate licenses around to show people.

    Of course, this won't really stop the raids and theft of computers. It'll just mean that "suspected software piracy" won't be the excuse it has been. The government's creative types will think up other wordings.

    It is sorta funny that the Russian cops don't seem to be raiding the botnet operators and other spam operations, which seem to be headquartered in Russia in great numbers these days. I wonder why that might be?

    --
    Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.