BSA UK ’settlement’ increases
p2p news / p2pnet: British companies appear to be turning their employees in to the US-based BSA (Business Software Alliance), funded by Microsoft, Apple Computers and DRM firm Macrovision, among others, in record numbers.
However, 80% of settled cases, "were a result of negligence, not deliberate illegal use," says Computer Weekly, which has a BSA spokeswoman saying the largest payment was for £31,000 (about $53,917) with another eight settlements worth more than £20,000 ($34,790) each.
Last year also saw a 25% increase in UK companies ’settling’ with the BSA for "illegal software use" with IT organisations producing the highest number of "offenders," says the story.
In associated news, Microsoft says it’s running its own personal UK anti-counterfeit crackdown, with eBay as one of the targets.
Microsoft will, "target computer shops, resellers and online auctions," says Silicon.com.
Also See:
Computer Weekly – Software piracy settlement cases up 25%, February 16, 2006
Silicon.com – Microsoft launches ‘terrorist-fuelling’ piracy crackdown, February 16, 2006
February 17th, 2006 at 7:45 am
The last two paragraphs on the article at silicon.com read as follows:
–quote–
Paul Ramsden, deputy CEO at the Trading Standards Institute, added that software piracy is not a victimless crime and the proceeds help fund much more serious crimes.
He said: “These people we are dealing with aren’t local criminals. This is big business. It funds terrorist organisations.”
–end quote–
Once again, we see the terrorist boogeyman card being played in the context of copyright infringement. So far there has been NO solid evidence uncovered connecting copyright infringement of entertainment content or software with terrorism. Careful review of any such anecdotal reports would indicate that infringement was only incidental to any alleged terrorist activity. Typically, it was found that the computer of an alleged terrorism suspect had one or more software packages that were infringing copies of copyrighted works. I would submit that this doesn’t even come close to supporting the contention that copyright infringement FUNDS terrorist activites, no more than it supports kiddie porn and pedophiles because the latter might use infringing copies of video and image editing software.
If Big Content’s spinmeisters are continued to be allowed to get away with slipping these specious assertions into their press releases and they go unchallenged, these fallacies will eventually be accepted as the truth and will result in a reluctance to put constraints on Big Content’s demands for additional government mandated control mechanism and more draconian consequences for copyright infringement. Eventually it will be the p2p users and those who develop tools for p2p that will be branded as ‘terrorists’.
–Turbogeek
February 17th, 2006 at 8:30 am
Persionaly I think music business douse more to promote pedophiles, why simple look at there PR/Video’s there one thing which they are using more and more. I am talking about legs and the brests of star to sell some music, why have they got to have close up’s legs etc durring video’s. As such teenage girls think that why they have to dress to get an boy.
February 19th, 2006 at 11:46 am
“If Big Content’s spinmeisters are continued to be allowed to get away with slipping these specious assertions into their press”
Yhe label use to be “communism”, whose problem was political corruption as was/is a problem with capitalism. It went mostly unchallenged. The populance swallowed the label. Now it is terrorism. All for political purposes.
February 19th, 2006 at 11:47 am
“If Big Content’s spinmeisters are continued to be allowed to get away with slipping these specious assertions into their press”
The label use to be “communism”, whose problem was political corruption as was/is a problem with capitalism. It went mostly unchallenged. The populance swallowed the label. Now it is terrorism. All for political purposes.