Free Software Inflates BSA's Piracy Claims

crazney writes: "According to this article in The Age, the BSA do not count the effect of free software when calculating piracy rates. The article suggests that free software has made piracy statistics look worse and hence encourages governments to create harsher laws ... Could someone pass The BSA a cluebat?"

Cluebat?

That suggests there is salvageable grey matter there. Might I suggest a LART?

Thats because the BSA isn't out to serve you...

The BSA is exactly that, a Business Software Alliance. It doesn't serve the end user, it serves the corporations, the difference between this and other 'agencies' is that it makes no attempt to hide this. The BSA supports draconian measures like the DMCA, they'd probably like even stricter legislation. They represent corporate greed, they 'blackmail' companies into paying for huge site licenses to cover all the workstations and then some, or face a 'software audit' in which they'll no doubt find some violations. Have a 100 machine site license and a hundred machines, but just bought that new desktop for the boss? Lost the paperwork for the server in the corner?

Tobacco companies fund studies that find that Ciggarette smoking is less dangerous than playing golf in a thunderstorm, the BSA fudges facts to make Pirates seem like the scum of the Earth. The music industry and the 'software' industry have yet to realize that inflated prices lead to inflated piracy. Personally, i'm of the mind that if you make money with software, you should purchase that software. Some companies are alright with this as well, think of the thousands of script kiddies with their pirated versions of photoshop, they were never going to buy it in the first place.. Adobe cares about that printshop, or the graphics design place.. and most of these places wouldn't touch a pirated version of Photoshop with a ten-foot pole. They don't need the BSA to police them, at best the BSA makes a huge hassle, people decide that paying thousands of dollars a year to Microsoft for a site license is insane and switch to something free, many times open-source. Their draconian policies and scare tactics have probably won more converts than a slick red hat ad.

Re:Thats because the BSA isn't out to serve you...

"The BSA supports draconian measures like the DMCA, they'd probably like even stricter legislation"

Do you know this for a fact?

The BSA and the SPA are not the same as the mpaa. For example I know the SPA is very anti-Microsoft which I find surprising. They are also very pro technology and are probably against the dmca. Remember that software companies do not like closed computers unless they are in the entertainment sector.

Here goes my karma( gulp).

I know they sound really evil and are unpopular but they have a right to protect software companies. Remember that whether you like it or not software companies need to be paid and you cannot pirate or steal their work. This is especially true for corporations. Script kiddies are far from their minds. The BSA wont be slamming down your door anytime soon for bootlegging like the mpaa plans to, but corporations need to pay for the software they use. Especially if they can afford it. Using someone else's software without compensation is stealing. I know many of you reading this are college students who are poor and are scoffing at this but realize that hundreds of programmers at these software companies need a paycheck. How would you like it if your employer only partially compensated you for writing code?

All that the BSA does is make sure the software companies are adequately compensated for their particular licenses. They do not have the intention of ripping off the public. To them if a software company is stupid enough to over charge then it's the software company's problem and not theirs. For example Oracle has ridiculously expensive and outrageous pricing. Guess what? They no longer even have %50 marketshare anymore. SQL Server, Mysql, and DB2 are catching up.

If you think its too expensive or the license is outrages, then don't buy it. Purchase Linux or cheaper alternatives. I oppose piracy and I believe piracy is hurting free software rather then helping it. Borland as well as Linux would have greater marketshare if people stopped pirated Visual Studio and Windows. Remember that its not greed when a software company overcharges. Its stupidity. Oracle is a prime example of that.

There's the question of motivation...

They do not have the intention of ripping off the public.

That's debatable. What isn't debatable is that the vast majority of their income is derived from the huge fines etc that they levy even if their victim then buys a site licence.

The motivation is all wrong: the BSA (and in Oz, the BSAA) stand to make more from hurting people than from helping software companies.

Here in Oz at least, when they send an audit demand, the correct answer is `ummm...' followed by some hurried quick checking. If the checking ain't too disastrous, you proceed to `OK, send your guys around when you're ready' - you see, the EULA gives them the right to audit, not the right to force you to audit.

If they do bother to come around, you make everything as difficult as possible, e.g. by only allowing them to audit a machine when the user is present (privacy regulations, you see), then arranging for a skeleton staff when they do arrive so that the minimum number of computers are available for checking, and make finding out who `owns' a computer as difficult as possible. Meanwhile, all the time, so sorry, wish we could hurry things along a little but can't break these rules.

Depending on your situation, you should be able to cut them down to six computers a day or less. Over 3 working man-weeks to audit a hundred-screen shop. Make them earn their fines. And keep harping on about your reliable Linux servers, your bulletproof OpenBSD network machines, and how you're testing Linux Terminal Server technology for your desktops and wondering whether it's worthwhile cutting over to it...

Re:The Exception

And what about in third world countries. It sounds like they can not even install a proprietary operating system, simply because the price is not adjusted to their economy. No wonder piracy is such a large problem there. I see no ethical problem here, either.

Many third world countries have no copyright law, and so discussions of piracy are totally inappropriate there. Without copyright there is no piracy, regardless of what is actually happening. This is another way that the BSA, et al, distort the truth of piracy. They list all this activity going on in countries that have no copyright law and call it piracy.

Anyway, just a thought I figured I should throw into the mix.

Re:Thats because the BSA isn't out to serve you...

they 'blackmail' companies into paying for huge site licenses to cover all the workstations and then some, or face a 'software audit'

I can personally testify to this. My company, a fabric manufacturer with sites worldwide, was recently approached by Microsoft with an offer for a 'maintainence plan'. Since we have a full IT team, we didn't need it. A week later an e-mail appears in our CIO's mailbox saying that we're being audited by Microsoft. Now every morning, he walks into work and says "Alright, what can we do today to get rid of more windows boxes".

Microsoft's Free-Software Dichotomy

On the one hand, Microsoft attacks free software (mainly because it's bad for Microsoft's business plans, so it seems.) On the other hand, while free software has a strong hold in certain sectors -and a bid for certain desktop uses- Microsoft continues to aggressively price upward their offerings to businesses.

They're driving IT departments toward free software. Self-defeating in other words, particularly considering today's economy and business climate, where IT budgets are not faring well.

Go BSA!

I think I read it in some /. comment a while ago - Shouldn't people be encouraging the BSA (as long as they're not lying)? The reason everyone uses proprietary data formats and protocols is because 90% of the world runs on warez copies of MS Office or whatnot. If people had to pay for that cr&p, joe public wouldn't think it's such a good deal anymore.

Re:Go BSA!

Yes and No.

Yes. Also, people lets Word before they even find htier first job. Of course, that may mean the use Word because that's what their employer will value.

No. Your boss uses Word and probably has a pirated copy at home. Every office runs Word because they know employees (high or low rank) will be able t pirate Office to make the homework.

So that leads me to the conclusion that if NOBODY ever had even the slightest chance of getting an Office without actually paying for it, you'll have like (my guess) 80% of the computer-litetare US population outright complaining about this overpriced piece of crap being imposed to them.

BUT OF COURSE ... MS knows they can easily charge "corporation X" and not "citizen X", so they don't ever "audit" peoples homes. But they will when they evaluate they can get value added from it (ie: discounted cash flow triggered by anti-piracy@home [including all side effects such as riots, bad PR, etc.]). If they haven't done so, it's because they are better off charging corps than everyone.

And you can't (sucessfully) argue that Openoffice would greatly benefit from BSA starting an large scale antipiracy crusade at companies AND home users.

I'm not sure how all this adds up

The article says:

"We ask respondents to choose from a very long list of specific software titles, reporting which ones they regularly use. This means we identify Microsoft Word versus, say, WordPerfect," says Metafacts principal analyst Dan Ness.

Open-source competitors are not included as alternatives, he says.

So, do they assume that because x% of users say they don't have a licenced copy of one of Word/WordPerfect/etc, then some percent of this percentage MUST have an unlicenced copy of one of the above? What about people who just don't use Word Processors, or Spreadsheets, or whatever? Seems to be some fishy maths going on here! The article doesn't clarify what's going on.

Doesn't surprise me...

... given that the BSA has defined piracy as "downloading software without paying for it" before. Having a bit of a narrow view on the world, aren't we?

Of course, software (and everything else) should be payed for. Nobody should give something of value away and not charge for it -- you're underselling if you do, and that's unfair to the good people who are trying to make a profit here. How else are we going to have a healthy ecosystem of goods and services?

In these tight times, citizens should not be harming the economy that way. All those ways in which a good transaction is still wasted today! People playing music for their friends, without purchasing records. Walking in parks with just trees and no shops. Reading books without advertising. Come on people, these models are just not viable anymore.

We should teach people that giving things away is stealing from the economy. It's simply unethical.

Gorsh...

"Could someone pass The BSA a cluebat?"

Okay, here you go [unt.edu]. :)

bag of crap

This is a load of shite. This self-interested "study" is being used to push through laws with incredible reach and implication, relying on a complete unawareness of Joe Public.

It is amazing that this can happen. We could lose most of our rights as consumers because of this, based on no real facts. I only hope a judge will see through the lies in court when cases start coming to them.

It looks like these laws will go through though; you never hear headlines in the regular press about any of this sort of stuff - no-one is going to go against it that has any real clout (i.e. FSF are, as far as I can see, impotent).

We'll see if it really does affect things the way /. are saying it will though - are they going to arrest every open source user / contributer? I think that'll be hard to push in court. Though I suppose it won't be possible anyway if DRM stops it being installed / downloaded in the first place...

Don't be surprised...

that they didn't factor in Open Source. It would have lessened their argument, and it's bad enough as is. Besides, piracy figures from the BSA and similar bodies have always been - at most - one notch above reading tea-leaves.

think like business people......

and you will come to the following conclusion :

open source = no profit (most of the time)
piracy = no profit

since
no profit = no profit

it follows
open source = piracy

Statistics

Seems like BSA followed usual business plan:
stage 1: Post biased annual piracy statistics in media
stage 2: ???
stage 3: PROFIT!!!

Harsh

They represent corporate greed, they 'blackmail' companies into paying for huge site licenses to cover all the workstations and then some, or face a 'software audit' in which they'll no doubt find some violations.

Harsh. If you purchase a product then the very least you should do is purchase the correct number of licences. This is the nature of commercial software after all.

Have a 100 machine site license and a hundred machines, but just bought that new desktop for the boss? Lost the paperwork for the server in the corner?

Then you're one hundred percent in the wrong. When you're an organisation you should be keeping detailed records (after all you probably do when it concerns money owed to you).

You can't use lazyness and sloppyness as an excuse for violating a licence. Whatever that licence is.

If someone used that excuse as a reason for violating the GPL, I doubt it would wash - so why do you think it should the other way?

Re:Harsh

Have a 100 machine site license and a hundred machines, but just bought that new desktop for the boss? Lost the paperwork for the server in the corner?
Then you're one hundred percent in the wrong. When you're an organisation you should be keeping detailed records (after all you probably do when it concerns money owed to you).

In that case, since you're an expert as to what organizations do, I'm sure that you have proof of purchase for every piece of office furniture that you have in your office, don't you?

After all, by your logic, if the Office Furniture Alliance comes and does an audit, and finds that you're missing the proof of purchase for that one file cabinet in the small office that nobody uses, then somebody must have stolen it, right? Because if you can't prove you own every piece of furniture, you're one hundred percent in the wrong. When you're an organisation you should be keeping detailed records (after all you probably do when it concerns money owed to you).

Of course, one has to consider...

The actual piracy rates are a wild guess as it is. Its based on the number of applications they expect to sell. Since piracy has been around for at least as long as computers, this figure has never been calculated from a static value.

While it is true that they ask people what software they use, a lot of people genuinely don't know. They'll say Word when they have StarOffice

Question

> Could someone pass The BSA a cluebat?

Would a cluebong do instead?

These people have a clue.

The BSA knows exactly what they are doing and they are very smart. They simply interpret the facts in the most convenient way they can to advance their agenda. Open source software is a threat to their members, so why should they make any allowances for it in their statistics if they don't have to?

I suspect the BSA is run by rampant free market ideologues. If you pressed them about their philosophy, they would probably say something like that open source software is a threat to the free enterprise system and mostly copies commercial software; while open source may not be illegal, maybe it should be.

Don't expect to be able to reason with those people. Oppose their claims with facts whereever you can, and expose the irrationality and inefficiency of their model of software distribution.

Terminology

I suspect the BSA is run by rampant free market ideologues. ... they would probably say ... while open source may not be illegal, maybe it should be.

As a "rampant free market ideologue" (Libertarian), I will be the first to point out that you have confused the meaning of free-market economics (i.e. capitalism), which implies the absence of government interference (coercion) in the market, with a hypothetical regulation, imposed through coercion, which happens to favor one particular group over another. Capitalism does not necessarily imply profit but only the absence of coercion in the market. Free market economics is grounded in voluntary cooperation, not coercion (which is the definining prerequisite of any government). Hence, open source software falls squarely into the category of free-market enterprise, and in fact, to a greater degree than any software vendor which relies on patent law to sustain a business model. (Patent law, you may be surprised to know, is contrary to the true principles of free market economics, because it is derived from coercion.)

See free-market.net [free-market.net] if you are interested...

Napster?!?

Im sorry, the article mentions Napster as a source of software?!?! Not only does napster not exist anymore, but it never shared software....

BSA is a business

The BSA's primary interest is it's own bottom line and the continued employment of it's staff. This is more important to it than the profits of BSA members.

Thus the BSA will generate stories and statistics that ensure it's continued existance.

BSA is not that different from many commercial organisations.

Cluebats will be useless

"The article suggests that free software has made piracy statistics look worse and hence encourages governments to create harsher laws ... Could someone pass The BSA a cluebat"

I don''t think they didn't know about freeware. If you've seen your fair share of arguments, you'd know that people often like to use truth, in thier own demented way. My fist thought on this was that they intentionally left those stats in just to have thier own corporate way.

Better yet

Could someone please use the cluebat on the BSA?

Here's one

Could someone pass The BSA a cluebat?

Have someone inform BSA that the FSF office is actually using pirated word processors for all their work. Let them ask for an audit, and try to force the matter. Immediate self-lart, with lots of publicity for both parts!

Isn't this good?

All the laws against piracy actually benefit the Open Source community. Now the companies are starting to realize how expensive commercial software is, when they actually need to start paying the full price for all the seats. This is just what we *need*. One might even hypotethize that MS doesn't want BSA to be too strict, in order to prevent mass migration to greener pastures.

Welcome to the world of statistics and projections

The BSA is largely based on what is called biased-interpretation statistics and false software sales projections. Piracy is/has been in the world of computer for as far back as I can remember (pre-286 days). The largest problem is that how can a group such as the BSA base some piracy satistics when there was never a time when piracy wasn't around. So it is a guess, right? Exactly.

Furthermore, the BSA only projects how many boxes of a product might be sold or they rely on surveys in which people anonymously tell them that they have certain pieces of software and then they tell them if they are pirated or not. The problem is that most people out there downloading .NET Server, MS Exchange, SQL server are only getting it for the brag-factor. What about all those people that use Photoshop for a normal image viewer? Those people wouldn't go out and pay $500 for photoshop, they just have it since its the in-thing! I mean, what's a better deal than when its free? Of cousre, why not get the most over-powered/bloated piece of software if its free (windows-user mentality)?

The point is, if the BSA wants to skew statistics, they will. They are an organization supported by business so they will always approach this subject with a slant.

Value?

In the article they mention that Open-source solutions were not on their "list" of applications that people use; that actually makes sense - those apps are not produced by BSA-affiliated entities, so the BSA isn't interested in apps people use that aren't the IP of one of their gang.

What I would like to know is if the Open-source s/w is being lumped into those dollar estimates, what price value do they give to, say, Star Office?

Since that app isn't on their list, how can they lump it in with the values given? I would have guessed that Star Office would occasionally get the MS-Office box checked erroneously, but they are careful to mention that the applist is VERY specific, so how can this happen?

Just wondering, since this doesn't seem to make sense.

Lets fight back!

I am deeply against this type way of pushing a point. Everyone send them just 1 email to let them know this is wrong. 1 email in your protest. The computer people should stand up once and a while and show them our power too. Expose the frauds!

please everyone remember...

The BSA is NOT a government agency, they have no real abilities outside of having a fleet of overpaid lawyers and a buttload of money to blackmail or assult a company with. remember these words... the Business Software Alliance is Nothing but another Company.

And this company is paid to make money for the companies that pay them. Of course they are lying about how much piracy is happening. Of course they publish false and misleading information about the amount of money lost due to piracy. Of course they include linux, BSD, Open BeOS, Samba, Open office, Abiword, Gimp and everything else that is 100% free AND popular in their numbers. It inflates them and makes the lies they publish previousally look even better.

Remember the Business Software Alliance is nothing more than a paid extortion racket. If they threaten your company you should never let them in without a judge-signed search warrant.

They ARE NOT A GOVERNMENT AGENCY! Unlike OSHA who is, they have ZERO legal power and ZERO rights above what you have. Fight the bastards and make them spend their money to get in your building, and then be sure to sue for lost revinue, destruction of property, and public defamation.

Thank you, This post is brought to you by the Council to stop freeware piracy. "Remember every time you pirate a freeware program you hurt...Ummm... well you hurt someone!"

Chuckle..

BSA Guy 1: The piracy figures keep increasing. Watch as I subtract the number of windows registrations from the number of computers.
BSA Guy 2: Dear god, you're right. Look how many stolen copies of Windows are in use. Piracy is terrible! Must inform government now!
Monkey: Well actually, not all of those are Windows. A proportion will be free software, like Linux.
BSA Guy 1: Linux, eh?
Monkey: And friends.
BSA Guy 2: So who uses Linux?
Monkey: Well, geeks and monkeys, mostly.
BSA Guy 1: Geeks, eh? Excellent. Sound like modern-day pirates to me.
Monkey: Brooooow.

This thread would not be complete without...

a link to this excellent discussion [netcom.com] of how the BSA piracy statistics misrepresent reality. It is from a few years ago, but the principles have not changed, nor have the motivations of the parties involved.

What? You thought that their numbers were everything anything other than a publicity gimmick which they know doesn't match reality? Shame on you! Those numbers are distorted to be as high as they think they can get away with.

I Love the BSA!

They're good for open source software. Every time Mr. Business hears about a BSA organized raid on some poor SOB that didn't keep all of his paperwork for his small company computers, they'll be thinking about ways to avoid that fate.

They can file away every receipt and licensing agreement that they get or they can use software that doesn't come preloaded with BSA bullshit.

I would suggest that when you buy software that you check first to see if the software company who holds the copyright has entered into an agreement with the BSA and if you find that they have put the box back on the shelf and walk out.

Support the BSA - they hurt MSFT

The point made by some previous posters here deserves highlighting. The BSA are a potent weapon in the drive to get every software user to pay for their software. The most widely used software is Microsoft's stuff.
The pain barrier on MSFT software is only acceptable to most people because they can count on getting a cracked, copied, or borrowed copy of Office to run on their home PCs.
I predict that the BSA will be a strong force in the adoption of free software. My company moved wholesale to OpenOffice exactly because it was the easiest and cheapest way to avoid upgrading to Office XP (the alternatives being to use illegal packages or pay the licenses).
Support the BSA and fight piracy! When commercial software is pirated, people do not appreciate the value of free and open software.

I've got a metaphore for you

Picture a balloon, filled with air. The balloon itself puts pressure on the air.

Now the balloon is not tight, some air can escape through the hole, but airflow is not very high.

But as the balloon gets smaller because air is escaping, pressure goes up, since the elasticity of the rubber dictates that more force is applied to the air when it gets smaller. Result: more air molecules seek the freedom from outside the balloon, resulting in the balloon getting tighter and tighter.

Now the balloon is almost empty, since all air has escaped. Sure, there's still some air inside, but since the balloon is completely deflated, the rubber no longer wants to shrink, hence there is no more pressure.

Didya get it? didya? didya? didya?

Dave

not just open source....

but any file that is traded legally.
Is it illegal for me to download a song to which I already own a licence because I bought the record or tape 10 years ago? No, I don't think so, either.

I Buy My Software...

but I can certainly understand why some don't want to. After all, what do you really get for obtaining your software legally? Not much. You have to (pretty much) pay for tech support, not the mention that most software publishers use the EULA as a way to escape all responsibility for their product.

I think what software publishers need to do is offer legal users more than what they do now.

Well duh, who are members of the BSA?

Are any free software companies BSA members? Why would the BSA account for software created by non-members?

Now that business auditor integrity is being questioned by congress post-Enron, I'd love to see the BSA's practices put under the microscope. These guys are enforcing copyright law, and are supported by their very members. I'd hardly call the BSA an impartial auditor. It wouldn't suprize me if BSA members pressure the BSA for "results" or threaten to not support ($$$) the BSA.

A Simple Analogy

Free Software = Communism (Defined by M$)
Communism = Crime (defined by senator McGarthy)
Crime = Piracy (defined by BSA)

Therefore Free Software = Piracy

Wow. How remarkably short sighted.

Just like Axe make makers don't take into account the effect of an axe murder? I thinking I'm beginning to see...

BSA Investigated For Piracy, Shuts Down

Investigator: Mr. Kruger, do you have current legitimate licenses for every single software title on each and every computer you own or use?

Bob Kruger: Uhh.. well, we uh..."

Investigator: Mr. Kruger, have you or anyone else currently in the employ of BSA ever used software for which you did not possess a valid legal license?

Bob Kruger: Bblblb-b-b-plplpppht blub..blubb...

Investigator: ...then shut the f*ck up, go away, and take the BSA with you!

Vortran out

Get a clue? ? But this is their goal.

Since stiffer laws that give them more control is their goal, of course they will inflate things to promote THEIR viewpoint..

They have a clue.. and pretty damned effective..