US Navy Denies Pirating Software on 550K Computers, Says It Had Bought Licenses For 38 Machines (arstechnica.com) 170
Earlier this year, the U.S. Navy was accused of pirating 3D software after testing a software package offered by Germany company Bitmanagement Software GmbH. The company had sued the United States of America for nearly $600 million. The U.S. Navy has now responded to the accusations, saying that though it did install the aforementioned software on "hundreds of thousands of computers within its network" without paying the German software maker for it, it did so with the consent of the software producer. Many might disagree, however. From a report on ArsTechnica: The Navy says that it could use the software on hundreds of thousands of computers with licenses for 38 machines. The Navy denied that a procurement official "acknowledged that additional licenses were necessary for it to distribute BS Contact Geo to its users." The government admitted that it had purchased 38 licenses, but "denies that the software licenses were 'limited,' as alleged by Plaintiff."
rofl (Score:5, Interesting)
Then why did they buy more than one?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Umm, I don't think copyright works like that.
Re: (Score:3)
Umm, I don't think copyright works like that.
This is not just about copyrights. It is mostly about contract law. Have you read the purchase contract or license? No? Me neither. So anything either of have to say about this matter is pointless and meaningless.
Re: (Score:2)
We can, however, reasonably speculate whether the Navy's claims are plausible.
And as software developers, we can take this as a warning to make our contracts extra clear when dealing with the Navy.
Re:rofl (Score:5, Interesting)
We can, however, reasonably speculate whether the Navy's claims are plausible.
And as software developers, we can take this as a warning to make our contracts extra clear when dealing with the Navy.
Maybe the Navy is arguing that they had 38 seats that could be active at one time. Maybe they installed the software on 550k machines but only had 38 active users at a time? I don't know why they would install the software on so many machines, but who knows? Without the contract and an understanding of the software, we can only speculate.
Re:rofl (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Which is why this lawsuit should serve as a warning: make sure your contract is bullet proof and crystal clear, because this contract obviously somehow failed to be.
Re: (Score:2)
Make it clear in the license about how many machines or devices it is allowed to run on. Because no matter how bizarre you think the misunderstanding might be, there are contractors who operate that way and contractors who don't. Every single contract they have is unique. If you're dealing with the government then never ever rely upon them following the common practice used in corporations (best not to even assume corporations follow an unwritten common practice).
We haven't seen the contract so it's just
Re: (Score:2)
There probably isn't a contract. They most likely picked up the 38 licenses on a p-card, and then their proof of concept test moved to full production.... Just like all the other government It projects.
Re: (Score:2)
"Hillary Clinton said we could do it"
Case dismissed.
But she deleted the E-mail that said so using bleach bit..... FBI investigating.... Or not...
Re: (Score:2)
That's not how the law work.
Re: (Score:2)
I have personally negotiated a con
Re: (Score:2)
My guess is that, the way they saw it, they needed 38 licenses for employees doing X with the software (e.g. producing new content). Meanwhile, those purchased licenses (again, as they see it) also allowed them to have free reign to install it for everyone else who is doing the lesser task Y (e.g. viewing content).
Re:rofl (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:rofl (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh don't worry, the Donald will call Angela on the phone and explain that because the Navy is getting sued for $600 million, he's going to have to make some cut-backs on civilian staffing at US bases in Germany to take up the slack, how NATO is kind of obsolete and our allies really need to step up and be more responsible for paying for their own defense. After that the DOD is going to ask the vendor how they knew about the over-installs and how the DOD frowns on call-home features in software on DOD comput
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, that's what the Navy claims in its official answer to the claims by the plaintiffs.
15. [...] Defendant denies that the licenses were limited to installation of BS
Contact Geo on a total of 38 Navy personal computers, and Defendant further avers that the
Navy procured concurrent-use network-installation licenses of BS Contact Geo.
By the way, avers means asserts. So the sentence should read as "Defendant further asserts that the Navy procured concurrent-use network-installation licenses...".
Re: (Score:2)
Which would give everyone not being "more equal" jail time for hacking under the DCMA. Well, just throw in a good measure of blanket terrorism.
Network Licensing (Score:2)
It's a bit of an extreme example but plenty of companies sell network based licenses. So you can install on an infinite number of machines, but can only be running simultaneously on 38 machines at once.
Re: (Score:2)
But then it comes down to: Did this software have such a license? If so was the license server configured for only allowing 38 uses at once?
Re: Network Licensing (Score:3)
When it comes down to that, the story is awfully vague on what those 38 licenses were for: Named users? Node locked? Floating? Site? Enterprise? Creation? Playback?
Re: (Score:2)
but if that's true and the Navy did the rollout w/o paying for the licences to back it then it's still a problem.
It sounds like:
Navy bought 38 licences with a licence manager to test SW
Navy liked SW and told vendor they wanted to roll it to fleet but wouldn't pay unless the enforcement mech was removed.
vendor removed mech, expecting payday
Navy rolled out and went with the "we already paid (for 38) licence fee". - this step is fraud
Re: Network Licensing (Score:2)
That says nothing about the nature of the licenses in question.
Re: (Score:2)
Or there are site wide licenses. So 38 different licenses could means 38 different facilities. For any particular scenario you can think of for a license, it's likely the US government has dealt with that type of license at some point.
Re: (Score:2)
Then there would be no reason to sue. The software vendor would know if licences were floating or site or any other kind that would make 500000 copies legal.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Look, 500,000 heavily armed soldiers looking at you in a menacing way aren't wrong, are they? Think about it.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:rofl (Score:5, Informative)
Technically, as it's the Navy, they would be Marines which for some reason people forget are actually part of the Navy and not a separate branch.
Not for almost 200 years, if this is to be believed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U... [wikipedia.org]
In 1834, the United States Marine Corps came under the Department of the Navy.[46] Historically, the Navy has had a unique relationship with the USMC, partly because they both specialize in seaborne operations. Together the Navy and Marine Corps form the Department of the Navy and report to the Secretary of the Navy. However, the Marine Corps is a distinct, separate service branch[47] with its own uniformed service chief – the Commandant of the Marine Corps, a four-star general.
Re: (Score:2)
The Commandant is, indeed, the head of the Marine Corps; however, it is definitely part of the Department of the Navy. (See the Marine logo.)
Re: (Score:2)
The Navy actually operates one? As in it's installed on a ship and actually functional? I thought they were all still in design/testing phase with only the USS Zumwalt having excess power capacity to fully power one.
Re: (Score:2)
No, the Zumwalt class have the power, but so will the Ford class carriers. The Ford carriers were designed with solid state lasers and rail guns in mind, they produce 3x the power of the Nimitz class and have a vastly superior distribution network to enable many high power hard points.
Re: (Score:2)
The Navy actually operates one?
No.. it's too expensive.... :-)
https://news.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org]
What license? (Score:2)
Re:What license? (Score:5, Interesting)
A proprietary license written specifically for that project, since the plaintiff indicated that there were terms specific to the project that the Navy is in breach of. For instance, the license stipulates that the Navy agrees to keep some tracking functionality in place, presumably so that the company could track the number of installations during the trial phase in order to ensure that the Navy didn't engage in any shenanigans. After installing the software hundreds of thousands of times, the Navy disabled that functionality without having first negotiated a new contract that allowed them to do so, so the number of installations may actually be far higher than the 550K number that the plaintiff is aware of.
Re: (Score:2)
Not only that, but if you read into the details of the suit, you find out that the Navy didn't even stick to the terms of the licenses they acknowledge they had with the company. Apparently, they purposefully disabled functionality built into the software that allowed the developer to track the number of installations during the trial phase of the deployment. The license explicitly said that the functionality needed to stay in place, presumably so that the company could find out if the Navy pulled a stunt l
Re: (Score:2)
I think the idea was that it would be there for the trial deployment of 38 computers only. Once it was accepted for full deployment, a new contract/license would be drawn up (which they were apparently in the process of doing when all of this went down), that stipulation would be removed, and the Navy would deploy the software without concern of that sort of tracking.
Re: (Score:2)
the Navy has many levels of air gaping and they can't open the networks to some 3rd part non us server. They also have systems / networking that are very locked down and don't have a local server licensing at each site for each network.
Adobe CC has a offline ver for government
Re: (Score:2)
"The Navy denied that a procurement official "acknowledged that additional licenses were necessary for it to distribute BS Contact Geo to its users." The government admitted that it had purchased 38 licenses, but "denies that the software licenses were 'limited,' as alleged by Plaintiff.""
Then why did they buy more than one?
Because government is full of ignorant spenders who don't care about the taxpayer dollars they waste.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like they thought there was a difference between dev seats and production seats and maybe there wasn't. A lot of developer tools only require licensing for developer seats, while allowing you to distribute the software you produce without restriction. Other software charges no fees for the developer but requires a license for each production user. Some do both.
I would guess that the Navy had devs build software around this package, and distribute it. They paid for 38 licenses for their devs and thought they were good. The German company disagrees.
EXACTLY THIS!
Often you get a development seat which entities you to develop and build an application that uses a licensed product, then distribute said application free of runtime licenses. Other times, you pay per runtime seat and they give you the development tools. Usually, they charge for development tools, then expect a per-seat royalty for runtime installs. It all depends on the exact terms of the software license..
Was anybody actually using the software? (Score:5, Insightful)
Copying the software to those machines might be a technical violation of the license, but was there any evidence that those unlicensed copies were ever actually used?
Otherwise, this is more of a theoretical violation as opposed to showing that the Navy was using software that it just didn't want to pay for.
Re:Was anybody actually using the software? (Score:4, Informative)
It seems pretty unlikely that less than 0.1% of the total installations would be used at any given point in time. I mean, you can install on multiple machines to make things easier and faster, but THAT MANY?
Re: (Score:2)
Some software uses the local network or even the Internet connection to the vendor to determine active count.
Re: (Score:2)
It seems pretty unlikely that less than 0.1% of the total installations would be used at any given point in time.
0.1% would still be 15 times the amout of licenses they had purchased.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, miscounted the decimals. Not that "Less than 0.01% of the installations were in use!" sounds any better for their efficiency.
Re: (Score:2)
or it's part of some software catalog system and some things that it being listed as being able to be installed. Counts as being installed on each system.
Re:Was anybody actually using the software? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Was anybody actually using the software? (Score:5, Interesting)
You've never read a site license.
Don't feel too bad; nobody has except the DoD lawyers. Yes, I had to wait 2 months for legal to finish reading a license to let me buy a $12 piece of software.
And yes, nobody really cared that I spent $3K in lawyer time for a $12 piece of software.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you think that is unique to the military?
I was an engineering intern that wanted a $150 HTML editor for my semester project of updating a part of the company website. I spent at least a day writing a proposal to get a $150 HTML editor, getting paid for this time. So that the proposal could disappear for much of my internship, where I don't know who looked at it, and those people were getting paid to look it over. Not near the scale you speak of but I'm sure it happens all the time.
The alternative is t
Usage doesn't matter in the US (Score:2)
There was a case of Microsoft vs a company where they had an enterprise license, meaning to OS is not locked to a machine. They had under the number of licenses in use on active computers, but they had some computers that were scheduled for wiping and hadn't been wiped yet putting them over the legal number of "active" licenses.
The judge ruled in Microsoft's favor as lawfully she had to, but as part of the judgement stated that morally Microsoft was in t
Re: (Score:2)
Copying the software to those machines might be a technical violation of the license, but was there any evidence that those unlicensed copies were ever actually used?
Otherwise, this is more of a theoretical violation as opposed to showing that the Navy was using software that it just didn't want to pay for.
"USED" vs "Installed" may not be something the owner differentiates in the license. In which case it would not matter if the software was actually used.
Re: (Score:2)
I have no idea of the terms of the license given to the Navy which may have granted to them the ability to copy the software to any computer they wanted, however, this is not theoretical.
Absent any additional rights transfer, whether or not a copyrighted work is used or not doesn't matter, all that is required for a violation to occur is for a copy to be made.
yes. Just remove the sarcasm tags. (Score:2)
Seriously??? Yes, they installed it on 500,00 computers FOR NO FUCKING REASON AT ALL. Makes perfect sense. Go to all the effort of rolling it out everywhere because nobody wants to use it.
See, this guy gets it.
Welcome to the Navy.
Contract Law 101 (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Although their assets are rather tied up in inventory. Which does admittedly have a resale value but there will be other laws governing who would make an acceptable buyer. I don't think it's a long list.
$600 million? Maybe they're set on 425 cruise missiles as settlement?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I'm German and living in a cave. Most of us are. There are a few that aren't, but they are the outcasts.
Maybe try learning some FACTS.
What Happened To NMCI? (Score:3)
We didn't! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Never underestimate the power of a virus which can make a modern network centric aircraft carrier a sitting duck.( I saw it on Independence Day so it must be true)
Re: (Score:2)
Silly, of course. Germany doesn't need an army anymore. All it needs to do to make everyone in every government office and three-letter-agency in the USA shit their pants is to leave NATO and make a free-trade agreement with Russia. It would pull the rest of the EU with it and the american economy would crater faster than you can say "oh shiiiiiit".
Concurrent Licenses? (Score:2)
Given that the copy protection / license management was disabled by the vendor and 38 copies were purchased, I have to wonder if the Navy purchased a 38 user concurrent license vs a per machine license or believed they had done so. If so, the software is responsible for communicating with a license manager to ensure that a maximum of 38 machines can use the software at a given time.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Concurrent users vs installations (Score:3)
Part of the user discussion on the article is about whether the licenses are for concurrent users or installations.
Now the software uses a central Flexnet licensing server and that supports a license pool and concurrent users. It depends on the terms of the license, but if the Flexnet allows an instance to start, then by my definition, that instance is licensed.
Re: (Score:2)
and what if they need to have it run on systems that are very locked down / have limited out side networking?
Need to have more then central Flexnet licensing server for different areas do to locked down networks?.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Concurrent users vs installations (Score:5, Informative)
Yeah, when deployed, seats cannot be pinging the internet over a ship's intranet (and the severely limited internet connection), it's seen as a security threat, and from my own experience working on the NMCI contract, vendors WILL hear about it.
Arr matey (Score:5, Funny)
The US Navy are pirates? Can't wait for the new whites and blues to be issues with eye patches...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You keep looking for that word: privateer. I do not think that word means what you think it means.
Re: (Score:2)
Works for me, our foreign policy is just a few steps removed from "Plunder".
Written Contract vs Oral Contract (Score:3)
I'm no expert, but if the representative on the phone promises something that makes it an oral contract, and could potentially supersede the written contract and especially any EULA. For example, if they specifically asked whether the contract meant 38 concurrent users vs 38 installs and they were told it was concurrent users. Of course, proving it in court is a different story.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ever actualy been on a conf call for a big company every sales money has a vp title that implies authority to enter into contracts.
should have contracted to utilize blender (Score:2)
Honestly, they should have contracted the work to a company that would make the program they needed based on something free like blender and then bought 3d/texture asset data. When you pay for a license, you are at the mercy of the copyright holder, even if you are the Navy.
Re: (Score:2)
LOL! I hope you are kidding, for some uses it can actually be orders of magnitude of price difference between buying some _expensive_ software and taking open source software and funding development (in the case of blender probably rewrite the whole lot). Not in the favor of open source. Oh, and that assumes you can wait let's say 10 years on the result.
Or else one could buy that _expensive_ software and after 10 years of updates have a cheaper and more capable alternative.
It seems to be a web plugin (Score:2)
If you look at the demo video on their website - http://www.bitmanagement.com/en/demos/geo - it appears to be a browser-based plugin; the actual "demo" link tries to download a file called "BS_Contact_VRML-3DX.exe from www.bitmanagement.com. The demo shows a user-controlled fly-over of an urban area, and seems highly applicable to a lot of military uses. (the software to *create* the model seems to be different - the software named in the suit is the viewer for the 3D models)
It's quite possible that the 500
Site License (Score:4, Informative)
Oracle tried to do this when I was ATT Wireless, we had a site license for oracle. When we ran a contact address book with multiple users, oracle tried to make us pay per server, then tried pay per user for millions of users. Oracle kept calling me in operations to try to get me to pay, I passed it onto legal and they smacked the shit outta them.
We had a great deal, 5 or so million a year for an unlimited license, and you can believe me, everywhere a database was needed, we ran mostly oracle.
(This was 10+ years ago, so Who knows now)
Licenses or Seats? Bad summary. (Score:2)
EQUALITY (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
two words, nuclear fucking weapons. the U.S. Navy has them, you and me and Bitmanagement do not
Like Bob & Doug McKenzie...They're using metri (Score:2)
Just double the number of licenses and add 300,000 (instead of 30)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Well when you count each os reimage as a new system or each VM a system they can add up fast.
Re: (Score:2)
And probably had a Public Servant approve it.
Re: (Score:2)
Surely that covers all 550k of our computers.... right?
Well, they bought it for the 38 people in the US Navy smart enough to use the program, and may want to use it on any of several .. errm ... hundred ... thousand computers - what if you need to quickly draw something on the missile guidance computer onboard a submarine?
Too bad they didn't ask the one guy in the Navy who is smart enough to understands EULAs-
Re: (Score:2)
Surely that covers all 550k of our computers.... right?
Well, they bought it for the 38 people in the US Navy smart enough to use the program, and may want to use it on any of several .. errm ... hundred ... thousand computers - what if you need to quickly draw something on the missile guidance computer onboard a submarine?
Too bad they didn't ask the one guy in the Navy who is smart enough to understands EULAs-
Too bad eula's are so complex they may really need someone who specializes in such a thing. There ought to be a law ;)
Re: (Score:2)
They really are not all that complex... you just have to actually read them. Which nobody does.
Re: (Score:2)
or the contract says this but the EULA says this and that over rules the former.
EULA URI on packaging (Score:2)
The words you say to each other at the time of exchanging money for goods/services are your contract. The EULA is a bunch of words that the author really hopes you'll read and listen to.
Compared to those, what weight do words printed on the packaging have, such as "By purchasing this product, you agree that its use is subject to terms at (some URI)"?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
About as much as a spoken word since it is always possibly to claim that the page contained some other content when viewed.
So long as the domain where the EULA is hosted doesn't use robots.txt, Wayback Machine can be used as evidence.
Some countries have contract law that requires that both parties ensure that the other party has read the contract
An Internet connection in the store would allow reading. And a prompt on the cash register to ask "Have you read the terms?" in the same manner as prompts to check ID for drug purchases would cover the store's behind. Finally, national anti-circumvention laws pursuant to the WIPO Copyright Treaty of 1996 can make decrypting the installer a crime even for the owner of a lawfully made copy.
Re:Soverign Immunity (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't even understand why the government buys software. With sovereign immunity copyright law doesn't apply to them. Just pirate it and be done with it.
I don't think the concept of "sovereign immunity" is part of the Berne Convention....
Re: (Score:2)
What does that matter? He didn't even win his party's nomination.
Re: (Score:2)
Does that mean that they are kidnapping, raping, robbing, and murdering on the high seas?
Insofar as software licenses, they are allegedly doing exactly that.
Re: (Score:2)