back to article BSA name-and-shame tactic may have backfired

The processes – or lack of them – applied by the Business Software Alliance (BSA) to determine if crimes against software were committed have been placed under the spotlight. Call management software developer Tiger Communications was rapped on the knuckles late last month for using software illegally and BSA boasted it had …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. A J Stiles
    Linux

    I hope people remember Ernie Ball

    I hope businesses targeted by the BSA goon squads decide to do what Ernie Ball did in a similar situation:

    http://news.cnet.com/2008-1082_3-5065859.html

    I'm not condoning software piracy in any way. Every pirated Windows / Office install is a missed chance for a GNU/Linux / LibreOffice install.

    1. Field Marshal Von Krakenfart
      Paris Hilton

      No Strings attached

      Well, I know what brand of guitar string I'm going to get in the future.

      Paris, ‘cos I’ve seen her G-String (its the one between the B and D strings)

    2. Keep Refrigerated
      Thumb Up

      Counter-FUD

      Thanks for sharing that article - it's nice to know that next time Microsoft start sligning the FUD about the legal dangers of using Linux (i.e. patents), that there's something to fling back. Namely in the legal dangers of using MS software (courtesy of the BSA) - even for legitimate licensees!

    3. Steen Hive
      Thumb Up

      This is what RMS bangs on about. Choices. Free as in Freedom. Well done that man.

  2. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

    Two good things about the BSA

    1) They only have power over you if you use proprietary software.

    2) http://news.cnet.com/2008-1082_3-5065859.html

  3. Efros
    Happy

    crimes against software

    Title phrase could be applied to any of the major applications release in the last 10 years.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Efros

      You can be forgiven if you struggle with English - but I really think you will find it useful to look up the PAST TENSE.

      1. Chad H.
        Thumb Down

        He who critisised spelling and Grammar

        Obviously has nothing worthwile to say.

      2. Efros
        FAIL

        What a twonk

        The PAST TENSE... I'm sure there's more than one of them.

        1. AdamWill

          Indeed

          A perfect response to an imperfect snark, sir!

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        You, AC, are and idiot.

        What tense do you suppose Efros was using in the word "applied" from the original post?

        Therefore the post contained enough information to deduce that Efros was perfectly aware of the past tense and how to use it, and that "release" was a mere typo, omitting the final "d" accidentally. You, however, weren't able to follow a chain of thought that far.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          I am sorry you think I am being "and idiot"

          However I don't think your explanation as regards typographical error is very likely. A large number of individuals recently demonstrate that they are in fact ignorant of the past tense and unaware of the modifications applied to words to denote a time component in their sentences.

          This is not in small part due to the fact that many base their lexical variety solely on aural understanding, which leads to many problems with homophones and so on. This is exacerbated by the fact that most native speakers are lazy with pronunciation and run their words together which makes understanding of such subtle but important details difficult.

          I dare say that those who struggle as such and with many other simple but incredibly common spelling and grammar mistakes have very rarely read books or other properly-edited written material, out of which stems the problem.

          Also if commentards could actually be bothered to read their own drivel before posting it, simple typos, etc. such as in your title would be less of an issue.

  4. Joe Montana
    WTF?

    Extortion racket

    The BSA are just thugs, making threats and seeing if anyone pays up... The real solution is to simply not use software from any company that supports the BSA. Several companies have migrated entirely to Linux and other open source software after being harassed by the BSA, if more start doing so it will effectively cut off their air supply and good riddance.

    1. JC_

      Not Defending the BSA

      But switching to open-source is hardly the solution, unless you think GIMP really is the equivalent of Photoshop. Some software just has to be paid for, or else it won't be written or supported.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        We could use...

        ... some more pressure^Wdemand for software that runs on anything but windows. Definitely we could.

        I don't necessarily agree that you need to pay for software for it to be written or supported. With source available you can buy the support separately, or heck you can even pay for software to be written then released as open source, should that make sense to you.

        The great thing about open source isn't that it's set to take over the world, but that it's there and that the mere fact of such being available creates possibilities that closed source doesn't. And some of it is in fact better than commercial stuff that mortals can still pay for. Doesn't mean there won't be a market for commercial software; sure there will be.

        What is entirely achievable is to switch as much as you can to unencumbered software, with luck even entirely, giving the BSA exactly no leverage to extort you. Which is nice.

        1. M Gale

          The problem...

          ..is that while BSA won't try to extort you, Microsoft may well have a go. Until someone definitively wins a court case over alleged patent infringements in Linux and stomps that nasty little company into the dirt, they will continue to try it on.

      2. Goobertee
        Alert

        ...unless you think GIMP really is the equivalent of Photoshop

        @JC_ Specious argument. It doesn't matter whether it is the "equivalent." It doesn't matter whether Open Office/Libre Office is only as good as Office 2003 or 2000, or 1997. What matters is whether the software does what you need to have done.

        Frankly, I think Office 97 got it right--does what I want and the help system pops right up, rather than waiting to see whether it has a network connection and finally bringing up a window. I would probably still be using it, if I hadn't had to teach a couple classes of "ribbon." Yuck.

        1. JC_

          Nope, not specious. If a user can't do something they need to efficiently (or at all) with the open-source application, then what's the drama about paying for the closed-source application?

          Few people would argue that GIMP* is as good as Photoshop; even fewer would claim that there are open-source equivalents of the thousands of LoB applications out there.

          I love the fact that Linux exists and use it everyday, but one would have to be a zealot to insist that open-source is always the solution.

          1. Not That Andrew
            Gimp

            In fact, in the past people have offered to pay the GIMP developers to add missing features, only to be refused because it wasn't in the roadmap, or some such bullshit. This was the the reason for the FilmGIMP/CinePaint fork.

            And GIMP really is a stupid name for a piece of software that expects to be taken seriously.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "I would hope it's an isolated incident"

    This is a nice example of what is accurately described as "wishful thinking". Like with all the other copyright rackets, subtle they are not.

    Thanks for the Ernie Ball link, that was useful. There are more examples, like Municipality of Munich's LiMux project, but that one's a tad bigger and more involved. If you're not that big, well, all you need is the drive to do it and a tech or two to get going. Don't even have to wait until the BSA comes a'knockin'.

  6. jonathanb Silver badge

    If the BSA calls, tell them to get lost

    If the BSA wishes to claim damages for copyright infringement, they have to prove that 1) they own the copyright to the works in question [see ACS::Law], and 2) that you have infringed them.

    You are not obliged to assist them in obtaining this evidence, so if it went to court, all the BSA would have to rely upon in evidence is the say-so of a disgruntled ex-employee.

    Remember, the BSA are not the police, HMRC, or trading standards. They have no more powers than a door to door salesman.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      I am the law!

      In the UK the BSA wont do the enforcement themselves, they use good old Trading Standards. By doing so they are protected against any recourse should a visit and inspection turn out to be caused maliciously i.e. a disgrunted employee tells the BSA some porkies about you having a warez copy of photoshop on every machine, the BSA tell Trading Standards, Trading Standards then come and confiscate all your hardware for a month and find nothing. Action you can take against the BSA, nada. BSA just point to Trading Standards and say "not us" no compensation from us matey. Good luck trying to get anything from Trading Standards, they tend to be protected from litigation when their actions cause hardship during an investigation, even if it turns out to be a false alegation.

      BSA have for a long time used Trading Standards, however TS have recently admitted that they now have the powers to audit themselves, without a complaint from a 3d party. I.e. they can just turn up now without a complaint and do an audit, just like health and safety can turn up and audit.

      http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2008/12/24/cardiff_standards/

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Stop

      That's right, the BSA are basically toothless...

      You can just fob them off if they start pestering you. In my experience they have always been most polite.

      However, FAST are the ones to worry about.

      I have seen circumstances involving small businesses where FAST have obtained a search warrant from a court in order to carry out a software audit, and they are assisted by the police.

      They will be waiting at your office first thing on a Monday morning, and they will look closely at all of your computers. If there's no proof of a license to use any software that concerns them (e.g. MS, Adobe) then they can confiscate computers as evidence. The directors of the business will end up in court.

      There is a fairly good get-out, though. If the business can show 'due diligence' to sorting out any licensing issues, they will probably be let off with a slap on the wrist and maybe a small fine. A nice policy that says something like "we intend to buy a new computer every month to replace those in use, and we will ensure that new computers are only be installed with fully-licensed software" goes a long way in these kind of circumstances.

      1. A J Stiles

        Fun with FAST

        How ethical would it be for a struggling Open Source Migration Strategies Consultant to pay a few speculative visits to firms just before, and again just after, they get visits from FAST ?

      2. Mark 65

        Errr, no. Even if they have a search warrant they cannot come in. The police can, but FAST can f*ck off.

        1. Fair Play
          Boffin

          Errmmm... wrong!

          The warrant can also list "named persons" (i.e. non-police officers) who are also empowered to enter by the warrant.

          And if - as happens more and more these days - they obtain an "Anton Pillar" order, they needn't even have the police present, although it's expensive and more risky for them to go down this route...

  7. philbo

    er..

    > BSA boasted it had forced the firm to cough £25,000 in settlement fees

    ..

    >Hoadley claimed the settlement amount had been £5,800, including £800 to pay for the licence after driving down the BSA's demand from £25,000.

    Sounds like someone's been putting the "BS" into "BSA"

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    'If there's no proof of a license to use any software that concerns them (e.g. MS, Adobe) then they can confiscate computers as evidence. The directors of the business will end up in court.'

    This suprises me. It is civl not criminal law so the standatrd of proof is balance of probability but that is still far beyond what is suggested here. Surely there must be reasonable evidence that software is being used without a license not simply absence of proof that it is licensed.

    The idea of using only open source software is a poor joke, however much we might wish there to be completely compatible open source tools for every commercial software package it does not exist in many areas. Wishful thinking is not a good way to run a business.

    1. Andus McCoatover
      Windows

      "The idea of using only open source software is a poor joke"

      Well, Eddie Ball did it...

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Unhappy

        Alternatives

        OK, where are the open source alternatives to iRacing, rFactor, Live For Speed?... What about the proprietary servo amplifier setup programs we use? How do we teach our customers how to use Linux? How do we get them to force their simulation engine vendor to switch everything to linux?

        If you're running a print shop or a bakery or a driveway paving service, you might be able to manage a wholesale switch to OSS - at least, with massive, massive effort and learning curve costs. And switching operating systems will -always- be a huge time sink, no matter from what to what. And -any- time lost is usually disastrous for a small business.

        This isn't so easy, and getting high and mighty about how evil/stupid/clueless windows users are only serves to add to the final barrier to adopting linux: People who have already adopted linux.

        1. JC_
          Thumb Up

          Freetards are Thick

          They don't seem to realise that a lot of software is very industry-specific and if it isn't paid for, noone is going to write it, let alone support or document it.

          1. Rob - Denmark
            Facepalm

            Did you RTFA?

            Yes, I can see how Photoshop "is very industry-specific" to a "firm specialising in call management software".

          2. A J Stiles
            FAIL

            but PHBs are thicker

            A large amount of the bespoke software that runs industry was written in back bedrooms by spotty self-taught "programmers" with a pirate copy of Visual Studio and an attitude, and ordered by a manager who does not know what Source Code is, let alone why you should *always* insist to have it for *every* piece of software you use.

            It is all going to have to be rewritten eventually; because instead of doing networking and filesystem access properly, as in by the book (which these VB kiddies don't have, because it only comes with a paid-for copy; but by Golly they *can* guess and Google), it relies for its day-to-day operation on the exact same insecurities exploited by viruses, worms and other malware.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              ...And if the makers of iRacing, etc don't let me have insanely complex code that I coild never use anyway? So you honestly think that having the source to, say, the Gimp would help me when I'm a. Vvery limited programmer?

              Or should expert knowledge of every area of software development be required before owning any software?

              But again - what do I do when I -can't- get that useless source? Declare bankruptcy and go work in a Wal Mart? What's your alternative?

              Make sure you shout - I can barely hear you up on that high horse.

This topic is closed for new posts.