Robert P. J. Day wrote:
what does that mean? how would they know? i would think that it's MS's obligation to prove your guilt and not yours to prove your innocence so i can't imagine any legal basis for MS demanding the right to wander in and start doing an audit. so with what data does MS claim that you might not be in compliance? has anyone addressed this?
It seems the logic is that most proprietary software shops ARE out of compliance with the licensing. If someone from that place, perhaps the old "disgruntled former employee", dropped a dime then that might be enough to raid the company and they can bet they will find *something*. Unless what you have is Linux and Open Office of course. There's another little feature of the BSA racket that is not widely known, see the last paragraph quoted below from this 2003 ZDNet Interview:
''...Q: Can you start by giving us a brief rundown of how you became an open-source advocate? A: I became an open-source guy because we're a privately owned company, a family business that's been around for 30 years, making products and being a good member of society. We've never been sued, never had any problems paying our bills. And one day I got a call that there were armed marshals at my door talking about software license compliance...I thought I was OK; I buy computers with licensed software. But my lawyer told me it could be pretty bad.
The BSA had a program back then called "Nail Your Boss," where they encouraged disgruntled employees to report on their company...and that's what happened to us. Anyways, they basically shut us down...We were out of compliance I figure by about 8 percent (out of 72 desktops).
How did that happen?We pass our old computers down. The guys in engineering need a new PC, so they get one and we pass theirs on to somebody doing clerical work. Well, if you don't wipe the hard drive on that PC, that's a violation. Even if they can tell a piece of software isn't being used, it's still a violation if it's on that hard drive. What I really thought is that you ought to treat people the way you want to be treated. I couldn't treat a customer the way Microsoft dealt with me...I went from being a pro-Microsoft guy to instantly being an anti-Microsoft guy.
Did you want to settle?Never, never. That's the difference between the way an employee and an owner thinks. They attacked my family's name and came into my community and made us look bad. There was never an instance of me wanting to give in. I would have loved to have fought it. But when (the BSA) went to Congress to get their powers, part of what they got is that I automatically have to pay their legal fees from day one. That's why nobody's ever challenged them--they can't afford it. My attorney said it was going to cost our side a quarter million dollars to fight them, and since you're paying their side, too, figure at least half a million. It's not worth it. You pay the fine and get on with your business. What most people do is get terrified and pay their license and continue to pay their licenses. And they do that no matter what the license program turns into.
...'' http://news.com.com/2008-1082_3-5065859.html -Andy
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
