Slashdot Log In
BSA's Tactics and Motives Questioned
Posted by
kdawson
on Tue Jan 29, 2008 04:50 PM
from the shakedown-artist-is-still-an-artist dept.
from the shakedown-artist-is-still-an-artist dept.
_Hellfire_ sends us over to Baseline Magazine for a longish article entitled After 20 Years, Critics Question the BSA's Real Motives, which paints the Business Software Alliance in the same colors as the RIAA. "A recent Associated Press story highlighted the fact that 90 percent of the $13 million collected by the BSA in 2006 came from small businesses. Since 1993 the group has collected an estimated $89 million in damages from businesses on behalf of its members, every penny of which it keeps. 'I don't know of a business where you can get away with raiding a customer with armed marshals and expect them to continue to do business with you...' said [Sterling] Ball, who shifted his company to open source software after the raid."
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
BSA? (Score:4, Funny)
Same again (Score:5, Interesting)
Should make Linux a bit more of an interesting proposition.
Tactics & Motives are Questioned ????? (Score:3, Insightful)
Quite frankly, a quick look at their business model shows them to be what they are - the new corporate raiders.
2 cents,
QueenB.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If you are in compliance, be cooperative and let them look over your inventory. The moment they start demanding payment politely escort them off your property, and remind them if they continue to push the matter you'll have every consumer advocate g
Re:Same again (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, that's very true, the big company can afford to pay people solely to look after their licensing.
It also has to do with the kinds of licensing small business vs large ones can afford. A large corporation can afford site licenses or bulk-licenses where a large number of users are covered by a single license. It's much easier to keep track of, and to know whether any particular user of the software is legal (either they all are, or any machine that can get a license from the license server is), and easy to know when it expires (there's one date).
Whereas a small company that has to buy individual licenses (especially in the form of shrink-wrapped boxes which means the license is in paper form) has a lot more to keep track of, like when each piece of software was purchased and thus when it expires, and more documentation to dig up when the BSA comes knocking. Plus the BSA is notorious for going after technical violations of licenses where things like moving a hard drive from one machine to another is against the terms, so even though Software In Use == Legal Software Licenses and thus the software vendor got all the money they deserve, the BSA will still force them to pay a fine.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You have a small company that you could either get to buy a handful of licenses or pay a steep fine.
You have a huge company that you could either get to buy a ton of licenses or pay about the same fine.
Question for 500: Which one of those is going to get sued, and which one gets the option to "correct" their licenses?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How many computers do you keep around for 20 years? Same with servers, a 3 year lease leaves you paying for 80% of the value of the product and you get refreshed with new hardware after the term is up. As a result you always have hardware under warranty and you get to take advantage of increased processing ability. Of course not every business grows as fast as the one I'm responsible for. We just started leasing hardware as we're finding it to be far simpler all around. Don't have to worry about Windows or Office licensing, it's all built-in.
Leasing makes a lot of sense, especially when you consider that you're not forced to run the new software on the new hardware. You always have the ability to use an older version. That is the reason a Vista license is valid for XP with a simple phone call if you're a single sap at home or through the VL site if you're a business customer.
Of course you do pay for the convenience but it's quite worth while. That NT4 license from the 90s isn't all the useful to me now. Same with Netware 3, of course I do get a number of servers without an OS and use Debian for my workhorse servers. Then I don't have to worry about expiring licensing and all I have to do is remap the LUN when I get the new server to replace it.
Looking in my server rack, there's nothing there less than eight years old and one machine which is twelve years old (and that one is still serving the same system it served twelve years ago, which says something for stability). All of them except the old one run Debian. The thing is, except for big databases, few server-side tasks are actually that demanding - they're all bandwidth limited, not processor limited (even big database systems are more likely to be IO-bound than mill-bound). I agree a twenty
Him again? (Score:5, Interesting)
Perhaps a more accurate title would be "After Eight Years, We've Found a Second Person to Put In a Story With Sterling Ball"?
Admittedly, the new guy, who seems to have been knowingly using unlicensed software, isn't the most sympathetic figure, but at least it's a break from extrapolating Sterling Ball to the entire business world.
After 20 years? (Score:3, Funny)
I have been in an Audit once (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Microsoft funded business pirates Microsoft SQL.... story at 11.
adversaries (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:adversaries (Score:5, Insightful)
But what happens when I do buy a TV from Best Buy. I hand them my credit card, the charge is approved, it shows up on my bill and I pay it, in short I bought and paid for that TV. 2 years later, Best Buy comes around demanding that I prove to them that I really did pay for that TV, and if I can't they're going to charge me with theft. I show them my credit-card statement showing their charge for the price of the TV, and they say "Not enough. You need to show us a printed store receipt for it.". Now, after 2 years the warranty's expired. The credit-card charge is long since paid and history. The TV's not something I can take as a deduction on my taxes or anything. Why in the world would I have the receipt still around? But Best Buy still says that they'll charge me with theft if I can't cough up that receipt.
Now, should Best Buy be demonizing me, calling me a thief? Or should I be demonizing them as clueless nut-cases?
Parent
Re:adversaries (Score:4, Insightful)
You haven't dealt with the BSA, have you? Having unique product keys isn't enough, the BSA says that outright. All you having that key means is that someone somewhere paid for that software. The BSA wants proof that it was you that paid for that product, not your friend down the street who gave you a copy of his stuff. You can wave product keys and certificates of authenticity around all you want, they won't accept those without the receipt to go with them.
And no, they will get upset with you if it's only one computer missing the receipt. Maybe especially if that's all they can find. After all, if they don't find something to pin on you, you might very well be able to sue them for the (rather high) costs you had to incur. Ask Sterling Ball about that.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Go look at the BSA's website. What they want is two parts: proof that your copy is legitimate (product key or certificate of authenticity) and proof that your copy was paid for (actual receipt made out to you). Note that this is entirely reasonable, the unreasonable part is the BSA's standards of proof being far more strict than the law allows for. They then use the cost of your going into court and proving that they don't have a case to get a settlement from you.
Re:adversaries (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, but there's a problem: it's going to cost a lot of money to defend yourself in court, even if you win. And, except in very exceptional circumstances, you will not be allowed to counter-sue for your costs. If you manage to prove that you do have licenses for all the software the BSA wants to audit, you're guaranteed not to be able to recover costs. The EULA for the software you just proved you legally have (and whose EULA you accepted) is almost guaranteed to provide for BSA audits at your expense, and the court's very unlikely to rule that you aren't bound by the terms you accepted. The only way you'll have any chance at recovering costs is if you don't use even a single copy of any piece of software from a BSA member, have never at any point used such software, and can document the installation history of every bit of software on every machine your company owns in sufficient detail to convince a judge of this despite the best efforts of the BSA to poke holes in your records. And even in that case you'll have to spend large sums of money now, while any recovery you get (if you get it) will be years down the road after all the appeals are settled.
The BSA knows all this. They count on it. If they think you're balking, the first thing they'll do is point out just how much more they can cost you if you don't co-operate. And most businesses do the short-term economic calculation and decide it's cheaper to roll over than to fight and win.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
and obviously with 92% compilance they ARE customers aren't they. BSA is nothing more then a witch hunt organisation
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
my point is these people maybe partly unlicensed but they are STILL CUSTOMERS, where the IRS don't consider you a customer at all and it's not like there's any other tax agency competing with them.
If you think sending legal attack dogs after 92% of your business in order to collect on 8% is good business tactics then your cut from the same cloth as SCO, and we all saw how that ended up.
this is just like (but on a much smaller scale) the time the local video s
Re:adversaries (Score:5, Insightful)
If you're accused you must be guilty. Yeah, that's a safe assumption.
It couldn't possibly be that it's a disgruntled ex-employee who called in a bogus tip simply to harass their former employer. It couldn't possibly be a disgruntled ex-employee who was themselves responsible for the licensing and thus the lack of compliance, and they were the only ones who knew it.
I'm sorry, but in my world thats not gray, thats black. Having one valid license to a software product that was copied 200 times doesnt make it "gray".
And is having 200 valid licenses to a software product that was installed 201 times because someone forgot to delete one copy off an old computer black as well?
Is having 200 valid licenses to a software product that was installed 200 times, but someone didn't obey the specific terms of the EULA and moved the software from one computer to another also black?
Is having 200 valid licenses to a software product that was installed 200 times in complete accordance with the license terms, but not being able to meet the strict (and poorly specified) accounting to prove this to the BSA when they raid your company also black?
Is there any gray at all in your world?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Well if the BSA comes around you better believe they are operating under than philosophy.
My point is that if someone is tipping off the BSA then SOMEONE at your company realises that you are not in compliance.
Copypasta:
It couldn't possibly be that it's a disgruntled ex-employee who called in a bogus tip simply to harass their former employer. It couldn't possibly be a disgruntled ex-employee who was themselves responsible for the licensin
The real motive (Score:4, Insightful)
The real culprits here are the legislators who make the laws that cause such a market to exist.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You could just as easily apply that premise to the Mafia. Look, the desire to make a buck does not make every such effort acceptable. An organization whose only product is intimidation, extortion and litigation cannot be considered a legitimate business entity in any civilized society.
So far as the BSA is concerned, the term "racketeer" comes much closer to the mark. Sooner or later they're going to piss off the wrong
Armed Marshals? WTF? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Note that when the legislators are bought also (as appears to be the case here) it makes the process much, much easier for the buyer.
tell them to go fish (Score:5, Interesting)
'I don't know of a business where you can get away with raiding a customer with armed marshals and expect them to continue to do business with you...
If the BSA ever shows up at your door, unless they have a court order, tell them to get lost. If they refuse, slam the door in their face and call the police. Write down every license plate number you can see.
For extra giggles, when you call the police, complain that the people who won't leave are dressed like police officers (the BSA guys wear those black nylon rain jackets with big yellow letters to try and look like government agents), and if they're armed, make sure to mention that too. Cops don't take kindly to people pretending to be them.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Hello, BSA? I have reason to believe that my ex-company are using illegal software!
What?! What's the address?
1 Microsoft Way. They're using using modified GPL c
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Huh? (Score:3, Interesting)
AFAIK in the UK, the BSA doesn't have any legal powers to enforce such an audit to take place. Microsoft/Adobe/Foo are all businesses and so is the organisation I work for. What gives software companies special privileges to demand an inspection of someone else's business?
If I sell chairs, am I allowed to go to Microsoft HQ and make sure that Ballmer isn't throwing them around, breaking the licence agreement printed on the underside? If a finger can agree to a supposedly legally binding contract, why can't the derrière?
A heartwarming story (Score:5, Interesting)
They had the usual problems of any large organisation - software would get installed and not removed, people would move desks, jobs, etc. They weren't knowingly in violation, but they couldn't really honestly say how many licenses were in use or where everything was installed.
They decided to write a system that would track all the licenses and software in use across the organisation, and allow it to be fully managed - installed and removed on demand. It could handle many different kinds of licensing for many different bits of software. There was nothing commercially available at the time that could do what they needed.
Anyway, after doing this, they found out that not only had they had been over-buying company A's software licenses, the flexibility of the new management system allowed them to have far fewer licenses anyway. Effectively, they had been buying enough to cover installs in all the remote offices, for their more mobile staff, of which there were a lot. Apparently, it was a very pleasant moment when they told A they didn't need any more licenses for the next year or two.
Every penny of which it keeps? (Score:4, Interesting)
BSA or Microsoft one threatened schools systems (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm surprised this hasn't been brought up since if it wasn't the BSA directly, it was Microsoft and those two are tied at the hip with how they do 'business'. IMO
LoB
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:If you're being raided... (Score:5, Interesting)
Either way in a lot of cases the Bullsh!t Stealing Alliance raided them and hosed them seriously for minor infractions.
The only ones that didn't get hosed were the ones that up and paid a fine outright. Sound familiar?
Parent
Re:If you're being raided... (you are a customer) (Score:5, Insightful)
B) most of the people they get actually had licenses but have no clue how to fulfill the strict audit requirements. No the stickers on the back of your machine are not enough. You must have a purchase agreement for _everything_
C) most of the time the they threaten jail sentences (for the IT managers and staff) and accept money.
People just don't bother to fight because it's not worth it unless you are whiter than white, which is almost impossible in any company actually working and not spending it's entire time preparing for a BSA audit.
In other words, the best way to avoid the BSA is to stop being a Microsoft customer and switch over entirely to free software like Linux. Even if you claim the proprietary stuff is better (which it isn't) is it really worth destroying your life for a few bucks more of your employer's time?
Parent
Re:If you're being raided... (you are a customer) (Score:5, Informative)
Keeping certificates is not enough. I worked for a company that got audited once. It was a small business, but run by a pair of lawyers who were sticklers for details. They shredded old paperwork after some number of years, and they got nailed because they had the certificates that came with NT 4.0, but not the receipts.
I honestly believe you could do everything by the book, and they'd still find something to nail you for... Not to mention that the audit costs your business in both time and money.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:If you're being raided... (Score:5, Informative)
I find it interesting that there is such a strangle-hold in the software world. It's ridiculously oppressive. It's also amazing to find what people will tolerate. I guess some of the reality is that you rarely know anyone directly who has had the worst of experiences. But it amazes me still that even after a BSA run-in, companies continue to use the software of companies that enable the BSA to operate. In some respects, it seems unavoidable, but it's all about how we got where we are and looking at what it would take to over-throw the systems we have in place now. It would take LOTS to overthrow Microsoft, Adobe, Apple, Autodesk and the rest and switch over to F/OSS or something along those lines. It would lead to better things in the future, but people aren't willing to take short-term, personal hits for long-term, social benefit. Lots of people saw it all coming from far away and long ago, but people wouldn't listen and they still won't listen.
But things seem to be changing... slowly...
Parent
Re:If you're being raided... (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, we do have companies behaving in shameful and sometimes even illegal behaviors in building and maintaining their dominance in the markets. Not only that, they've manged to have laws written and have various enforcement departments operating at their beck and call with very little if any due process of law... in fact, internationally, causing armed law enforcement in other countries to violate their OWN laws in order to enforce the desires of companies here in the U.S. (Did you not hear about the pirate bay?) And even in cases where F/OSS software is 'winning' or at least gaining ground, these commercial entities have done immoral and illegal acts through bribery and corruption of foreign governments in order to reverse any deals involving F/OSS software.
I'm not ignoring any facts.
Your references to CAD software are irrelevant as even other commercial products cannot presently compete with Autodesk and not for reasons related to 'quality' and everything to do with compatibility being encumbered by the same laws written and paid [sponsored] for by these same industry leaders. Your reference to the GiMP is also pretty interesting in that the primary reason GiMP can't compete has nothing to do with its quality and everything to do with anti-competitive laws dealing with software patents that prevents the GiMP from incorporating the features needed to make it useful in a professional environment.
The point is that they play dirty... very very dirty. It's never been about quality. It has been about marketing practices, both legal and illegal, and their eventual practice of writing laws and paying politicians to make them happen. (It has also been their practice of abusing the patent and trademark laws to stifle competition... yes, I said trademark laws! 'Common words' cannot be trademarked and yet somehow Microsoft still has a trademark on the word "Windows" which is clearly in violation of the rules for trademarks.)
Parent
Re:You call them damages - I call them extortion (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:You call them damages - I call them extortion (Score:4, Informative)
However, the argument he should have made is that these long terms in no way "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts", which is pretty unarguably true (especially retroactive copyright extension; how exactly the hell is extending the copyright on something a dead person wrote going to encourage that person to write more?). There is no evidence of any kind to demonstrate that Progress is better served by 150-year copyright terms than by 20-year copyright terms.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:They tried to shake us down once (Score:5, Interesting)
The guy had to be acting ignorant or something. I think they make money off people being to confused, busy, or scared. It sucks you cant ignore them either because they supposedly act with some kind of government authority. I got stuck listing 200+ licenses for a shop that has under 50 employees.
Parent
Re:They tried to shake us down once (Score:4, Interesting)
They have the same "authority" as the RIAA. They lie to the courts and law enforcement and get the cops to do their dirty work.
Parent
Re:Obligatory: (Score:5, Funny)
I wouldn't, if I were you. You don't know where they've been.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:put BSA out of business (Score:5, Interesting)
A lot of those BSA audits fine people who have legitimately purchased and licensed software.
I know of a company that got nailed because they'd been with a product a long time and gradually growing. So each time a new version come out they bought x upgrade licenses plus y new licenses. After a decade or so and some 7 or 8 upgrades, their last of which was like 150 upgrades and 20 new licenses they got nailed...
They couldn't properly show that every single license had a proper upgrade trail going all the way back to version 1 some 15 years ago. Some one had long since thrown away the floppies and receipts showing that those had been purchased.
Of course the vendor had changed names and been bought out at some point, and they certainly didn't have any records going back that far either.
So some 50 of their 150 upgrades had been ruled in 'non-compliance' simply because they were upgrades of upgrades of upgrades that could only be traced back 4 or 5 versions, but not back to an original purchase in the early 90's.
So, even if you pay for the software that's not enough. You have to cover your own ass so carefully its absurd.
Even the government doesn't require you to keep records that far back.
The BSA's tactics would be roughly akin to the RIAA showing up in your home, grabbing your ipod full of 5000 songs you ripped from your CD collection and demanding you prove you own it all.
So you confidently walk over to your CD's and start handing them over...but you've only got maybe 100 on hand... you put the rest in storage in your basement and attic. Now its a royal hassle... but you start digging through your boxes of stuff and passing those CDs over too.
And when its all done you've found the original CD for some 4900 songs... but you just can't locate the last 8 CDs. Maybe they were in your previous cars glove box when you sold it? Maybe you lent them to your brother? Maybe you stepped on them, broke them, and tossed them? Who knows... they're gone.
Too bad for you: Only 98% compliance... prepare to be fined big time for the balance...
And that's when they look at the stack of 494 CDs you spent the last several hours digging out when they say, "Now what about these? Do you have receipts?"
Parent
You're doing it wrong. Let me help. (Score:3, Interesting)
This in an interesting piece of communication [google.com]. The author has recently taken an interest in the BSA [baselinemag.com], including this recent article [baselinemag.com] that promotes their Fear Uncertainty and Doubt message.
Quoted in the fine article [thefreedictionary.com] are a director of enforcement for the BSA and as counterpoint noted [thefreedictionary.com] analyst [thefreedictionary.com] Laura DiDio [wikipedia.org]. Ms. DiDio [yankeegroup.com] was originally famous for her role promoting the Amityville Horror hoax [wikipedia.org]. These days she is perhaps better known for her astonishing (and curiously persistent) analysis of the SCO debacle [groklaw.net] in whi