Software cartel accuses Sweden
p2p news / p2pnet:- John Hugosson, chairman of the software cartel’s Business Software Alliance, and Peter Bergh, director of its Swedish Software Association, claim every fourth computer programme in Swedish state-run companies and public authorities is unlicenced, says The Local, quoting Svenska Dagbladet.
“It’s unacceptable that state authorities or companies don’t bother to be correctly licenced and thereby contribute to a lack of public understanding about what’s right,” wrote Hugosson and Berg, says the story, going on:
“The pair have demanded that the government acts and introduces a policy of zero tolerance against pirate copying within the state sector, demanding that the maximum penalty for breach of copyright should be “raised to at least 4 years’ imprisonment”.
Resources for police and prosecutors “who work with copyright protection” should also be increased, adds the story.
Britain’s highly prestigious The Economist recently wondered how far one can trust BSA conclusions.
In BSA or just BS? – the magazine wrote of an ‘independent’ cartel study:
“The association’s figures rely on sample data that may not be representative, assumptions about the average amount of software on PCs and, for some countries, guesses rather than hard data. Moreover, the figures are presented in an exaggerated way by the BSA and International Data Corporation (IDC), a research firm that conducts the study. They dubiously presume that each piece of software pirated equals a direct loss of revenue to software firms.
“To derive its piracy rate, IDC estimates the average amount of software that is installed on a PC per country, using data from surveys, interviews and other studies. That figure is then reduced by the known quantity of software sold per country-a calculation in which IDC specialises. The result: a (supposed) amount of piracy per country. Multiplying that figure by the revenue from legitimate sales thus yields the retail value of the unpaid-for software. This, IDC and BSA claim, equals the amount of lost revenue.”
Something you think we should know? tips[at]p2pnet.net
See:-
The Local – Software piracy rife in public authorities, September 10, 2005
trust BSA – The Economist angers BSA, June 15, 2005
September 10th, 2005 at 3:51 pm
This just goes to show that the state/goverment everywhere do not abide by the laws that they want imposed on everyone else.
September 10th, 2005 at 4:34 pm
“Resources for police and prosecutors “who work with copyright protection” should also be increased, adds the story.”
Does this include pay increases ?
September 10th, 2005 at 4:37 pm
Not America…. They can do whatever they want… And you can’t say that its right or wrong… Most countries would agree with me that the US is very wrong as far as most of its laws go…
September 11th, 2005 at 5:33 am
Let me see if i understand this properly. These 2 clowns have just accused swedish govt agencies and departments of engaging in criminal activities without going to the police and providing any proof or evidence of their claims?
Ok. I don’t know what swedish law is like in that regard, but i’d be surprised if those guys don’t wind up in some kind of legal trouble over this.
Oh yeah, and speaking of their “statistics” does anyone know if they’ve STOPPED counting macs as pc’s for the purposes of “number of computers sold vs number of copies of windows sold” yet? I’m amazed that apple hasn’t jumped on these organisations for labelling mac purchasers as windows pirates because they’ve bought a “pc” without paying for windows.
September 11th, 2005 at 8:08 am
Good points Tony.
What about the fact they’ve hired someone to set up their network and the company sold them computers with the Illegal software on it. Big money in doing that. And who would really check? They bought them from a legit busniess.
These guys need to get all the facts before they start pointing fingers. Their going to end up with egg on their faces.
September 11th, 2005 at 1:17 pm
True, i hadn’t even thought about them buying “solutions” from consultants who would have been responsible for supplying the software as well. As for who would check?
Back in 96 a company down here in Oz, turned around sold a govt department some pc’s equipped with ibm/cyrix 486 chips, but charged them for intel 486 chips instead. Big deal? Well, the ibm/cyrix chips were slower, and a big percentage cheaper than the intel ones. So they’d been charged the price of the more expensive chips, but had been supplied with the cheaper chips.
They got caught when the IT manager at the govt department took the cases off the pc’s to record all the serial numbers of everything inside the case for their insurance. The company didn’t last long after that. If there’s one thing govt’s HATE, it’s someone trying to turn the tables and rip them off ;o)