Slashdot Mirror
Australia's Largest Police Force Accused of Widespread Piracy
beaverdownunder writes "UK software giant Micro Focus is demanding at least $10 million in damages from the New South Wales police for widespread use of unlicensed copies of its ViewNow software it is alleged were used by members to access the COPS criminal intelligence database. Although other government organisations also alleged to have mis-used the software have settled with Micro Focus, the NSW police refuse to do so, instead seeking to fight out a battle in Federal court."
We acknowledge that the crime didn't happen in the U.S., and the company involved is British. But we feel we have jurisdiction.
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
Paid software is dead anyway
Those cops put their lives on the line everyday! Who else would protect us from murderers, robbers and people who don't ....pay for....things they use...
nevermind
The eye patches, hooks for hands and tendency to say "Argh" a lot should have been a dead giveaway!
That's what they want ISPs to do to others...
Also note that when Micro Focus started investigating the cops illegal software copying, the cops began deleting the software from a number of systems.
That is willful destruction of evidence of a crime.
which 'the man' is doing the sticking, and which 'the man' is getting stuck?
it seems whenever a major multinational corporation or government entity is charged with piracy, they arent. theyre simply "out of compliance" or "underlicensed" or some other equally innocuous amorphity they can escape through hiring a compliance officer, cutting a comparatively insignificant check, and saying theyre sorry. when a private citizen is charged with piracy its almost always widespread, intractable, correlated to violent terrorism, and prosecuted at the fervor of a rape case. its exactly the opposite of what it should be.
if as numerous industries do you are trying to make the case for intellectual property, it seems to do irreparable harm to the thesis to have a double standard for something so dire. if indeed using BusyBox and not adhering to the GPL or downloading the latest Nine Inch Nails album and not paying for it is just the same as stealing a car, then the logical conclusion is this police department should be disbanded. but if in practice we see a double standard then we're led to consider legitimately that piracy probably isnt as demonic as copyright clearing houses would hope you will believe.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Police department wants to fight it out in federal court to try and establish their right to steal software? Hmm...
I went to eat some animal crackers and the box said, "Do not eat if seal is broken." I opened the box and sure enough..
A friend who has worked for several lawyer firms says they never buy more than one copy of anything and often swap software with other firms. He thought it pretty much standard legal firm behaviour from what his collegues had said.
I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
Copyright infringement? I would sentence them all to life in a remote penal colony...oh, wait.
Ezekiel 23:20
corporation licensing is not the same as music downloads and being in compliance is not easy. Also trying to take a compliance case to the courts may set a bad precedence. What happens when the judge or jury can't work out the licensing rules that are different for each piece of software or get confused about what is the right paper work needed to say that you have a good license. Some times COA do not count other times they do.
Someone screwed up, or misinterpreted the contract. Maybe thats the NSW Police or maybe it was an overeager MF salesperson a decade ago. Vendor says you owe us big time, org says nu-uh we'll just remove the software. Most corps and vendors settle before the lawyers get involved but occasionally things go further.
The massive beat up about the cops being untouchable and the vendor not being able to get the police to investigate themselves is complete bollocks. Seriously since when do the cops get involved in corporate contract disputes?
National media coverage of MicroFocus suing their customers is probably not a good way for them to drum up business.
Australian police pirates...
join the Party!
You are welcome on my lawn.
Is this a surprise? The Brits sent boatload (metric units of course) of murderers and crooks... I'm sure a few pirates would have gone through too.
It may prove to be interesing to live where the police hate you!
Wuddooeyeno? IITYWYBMAD? Like nuts? eclecticallyincorrect.com
corporation licensing is not the same as music downloads and being in compliance is not easy
Bullshit.
Under the law, they are the same. Copyright law does not distinguish between software, multimedia, or books.
--
BMO
All those apply for REGULAR PEOPLE (ie small businesses) right now. Courts happily buy into these cases all the time.
Corporate licensing is like complaining you have "too many" cars to keep valid insurance and tags on... That's just another piece of "complex paperwork" too. Wonder what the Police opinion on that is?
.
Thanks for the laugh... I needed that.
The corporation is treated just like a human being... except when it isn't.
how come this isn't at 5, Funny?
Simply comes down to the contract, which we can't see.
The software in question is called ViewNow. It is a mainframe computer program NSW Police began using in 1998 to access the COPS database, which holds the highly confidential details of just about every citizen in the state.
Mr Craig ... says police were allowed to use up to 6,500 ViewNow licences and if they wanted any more, they would have to pay for them.
They made software with no copy protection, and were suprised that noone could be bothered to write down every computer they installed it one - especially at 6500+ copies?
Micro Focus say when they asked police just how many ... licenses they were using, a police employee allegedly told them: "Oh f--k. We've rolled out 16,000 devices".
Maybe they made up some new terms after the fact and no-one can remember nor has a paper trail to prove otherwise.
Mr Craig said."The minute we advised police there was an issue they began de-installing our software. They de-installed it without keeping records."
If you realize you are in breach of the licencing terms, isn't the requirement to stop using the software and uninstalling it the correct procedure?
In essence, the NSW Police defence is that it has all been a terrible misunderstanding.
NSW Police say on their reading of their contract... gave them the right to reproduce as many licenses as they wanted.
Simply comes down to the contract, which we can't see.
>> The software in question is called ViewNow. It is a mainframe computer program NSW Police began using in 1998
Uhh no it isn't. Its (just) an X server that runs on a PC.
whatcha gonna do when they pirate YOU.
insecurity asks the wrong question irritation gives the wrong answer
If you EVER question why something is happening that seems unfair or inequitable .... If you EVER see failed logic in a situation where the obvious solution or answer isn't the one chosen -- just follow the money!
Almost every time, it winds up explaining things.
When you're a major multinational corporation or a govt. agency using software and you're not paying for all of it? The best strategy for the software publisher is to give you every opportunity to get compliant. It's established that those users have deep enough pockets so they can pay you back!
Individuals who get "thrown under the bus" over a few music copyright violations, or small businesses who get nailed to the wall in the courts over a few software programs they didn't pay for aren't nearly as lucrative for the rights-holders. In these cases, the rights-holder stands to gain more by using them as examples .... Let the law come down on them and give them some prison time or some unreasonably huge fine, and they'll act as a deterrent. Otherwise, all they'd get is a paltry few more sales for the music CDs they listened to, or several licenses the business in question should have paid for.
Waiting for Tonight... Oh OoOoH!
Get her opinion of "hot grits" please!
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
And this has nothing whatsoever to do with what I said. How is this even a reply?
--
BMO
Regular Slashdotter but posting AC. Back in the late 90's we used Windows Micro Focus COBOL a lot but we needed the Y2K version for our server that we complied the code on. Had a nice chat with the sales guy who asked what we did with it, and then a letter arrived saying we were in violation of our license and we needed a RTL for every PC we had it installed, which would have cost $60000 or they'd see us in court. Thank goodness we had a copy of our original license which allowed us unlimited clients as part of the original server install. Our legal team then wrote back telling them to piss off (in legal speak obviously). After that we migrated off their platform ASAP, wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw them.
I find it quite interesting that those in charge of the law would do this, since they are responsible for upholding the law. Anyhow my story:
I was recently in court a few weeks ago for a settlement hearing (where the judge beats up on both parties to come to an agreement) where a lady slipped and fell in our parking lot (imagine that, in March, in Michigan, there could possibly be ice in a parking lot... it boggles the mind). In the process of waiting for our turn for judicial abuse I had a chance to just hang out and see what was going on.
The bailiff was busy doing not much of anything except for.... watching movies on his laptop. Not through netflix. Not original DVDs. These were burned copies and he was quite openly talking about burning copies for the court clerk -and- the court recorder. And we're not talking about older ones either, we're talking about recent theatrical releases. That this would happen inside a Wayne County Circuit Court, with members of the court sworn to uphold the law, just goes to show how far down in peoples perception as to how serious the issue of copyright infringement is.
I mean seriously, if even the people -inside- the court system could care less about infringement, why in the world does it seem that the MPAA and Congress appear to care about little else? Well, I guess the MPAA has their reasons...
The police could mitigate the damage their reputation if they just admitted the mistake and paid what is due to the company. Here in Canada, at the airport in the city of Vancouver, four RCMP police officiers tasered a man to death. It was not the tasering that the police officiers got in trouble for, it was the lying that they did in their written reports. These four officiers severely damaged the reputation of the RCMP, Canada's national police force. The four officiers have been charged. You cannot trust a police force that the public thinks is dishonest. That is the reputation that the RCMP now has and it may destroy the 139 year old organization.
There's a lot of comment here about whether it was piracy, but note that it isn't just about the 6500 seats, they actually gave copies of the software to other organisations so that they could access the police systems. In fact, that was how Micro Focus came to hear about what was going on.
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes.
Whether police or not, government agencies often turn a willfully blind eye to licensing requirements. For some perverse reason, they think that because they're government they can do whatever they want.
Here's a clue for government agencies: You're subject to the same laws and restrictions as citizens, and then some, not less.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
Keystone Kops
"If the only tool that you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail." Donny Rumsfeld
Main Force Patrol (MPF) was the only police force in Australia.
Anyone old enough to remember INSLAW? http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/1.01/inslaw.html
Although I think that people should pay for what they use, It may be a case where the EULA didn't include Government Agencies, but the Government should pay, especially since the current convervative would be right behind and anti-piracy action.
There was an unknown error in the submission.
This company has some old products. And some new license agreements. Possibly by the appearance of some new brushes in management who had ideas about how clients should be paying them.
I suggest you take a good look at what you have signed and see if it matches what you _think_ you have rights to. Always good advice anyway.