We got a letter at work recently from the BSA, the Business Software Alliance. It’s a software license watchdog that works with Microsoft, Symantec, and lots of other prominent companies to make sure you are only using software you are licensed to use. A certified letter arrived the other day saying something to the effect of they have recieved information that we may be using unlicensed software and they want to audit us. I know for a fact that the company I work for pays for everything we use.
Are they just bluffing? What powers does the BSA really have? Could they just show up at our door and demand an instant audit?
My guess is that they take in a percentage of cash from the people who foolishy comply with the audit and they’re just fishing. In addition to being offended at the accusation itself the wording of the letter is just kind of nasty. It would take lots of time and resources to go though a software audit and I have no intention of doing so.
Has this ever happened to anyone here? What was your response? If I ignore them will they go away?
If they had any proof of illegal copies, they could get a search warrant, but you can’t just march onto private property and start snooping around. If you look at the letter, it’s probably carefully worded to avoid explicitly saying that they have any actual right to conduct an “audit”, while strongly implying that is the case.
Under what statute can a private organization get a search warrant for anything? If the BSA thugs showed up at my door with a “warrant,” I believe I’d laugh. If they didn’t go away, I’d dial 911 and report the trespassers.
Civil law in many jusidictions have a variation on what is often called an “ex-parte” suit, where the plaintiff claims that warning the defendant would irrecovocably damage their ability to prove their case. After agreeing to pretty stiff undertakings about bearing costs and damages, the court issues what is essentially a private warrant. In Ontario, the plaintiff is required to pay off-duty police officers (or, I believe, court sheriffs) to accompany them when they swoop down and execute the court’s order.
Of course, that might or might not be the case in your own jurisdiction. IANAL, YMMV, etc.
“Yo, Tony. You’re behind in your merit badges. Cough up a couple Pinewood Derby entries or you’re going to be working on your undersea merit badge for a long, long time, if you know what I mean…”
LOL, sorry, I should have spelled out the name in the title!
Yeah, pretty much what I think too. They’re probably making a living off of people who are using pirated software and somehow think the BSA knows because of the letter. I know we paid for everything hence the suspicion. If I was using copied software though it might give me a small scare.
From my experience, the BSA has to have enough proof to go to court to get a federal search warrant, then convince the US Marshalls to act on said warrant.
Also, from my experience, the court usually issues the warrant based on “anonymous tip”, and the US Marshalls Office will execute the warrant if the alledged pirating is high enough (but I’ve never been able to track down what that value is – they accepted my tip on the 2000 seat call center I called in, but not on the 3 person office).
Let me add that my “tips” are usually very detailed. For the call centers, I was able to identify (because of my former position with the company) the exact number of computers involved, their exact loadouts and configs, their exact locations in the building, and how many licenses I could actually account for. Just saying that they are pirating MS Word won’t do it – you have to tell the BSA where, when, and how.
The BSA essentially asks for an audit to be undertaken to avoid litigation. It is up to the company receiving the request to decide whether they want to incur the expenses to do the audit, or take the risk of a lawsuit.
The BSA typically does not send out these letters unless a violation has been reported to them.
In my case, an employee reported our company to the BSA. We decided to comply with the audit, and as expected, there were instances of software that had been installed where there wasn’t a valid up-to-date license. We’re a small software development company so we can’t afford a fully automated monitoring system. In addition, with our Software Developers having full MSDN licenses, there are copies of all the Microsoft software at people’s fingertips.
The BSA usually doesn’t impose the maximum penalty. In our case, they imposed a 2x software license cost as the penalty. Our attorney is in the process of negotiating this downward.
Noteworthy to the OP, their settlement letter says that “this is one of the very few cases that the BSA has not referred to outside counsel for settlement negotiations or other legal action. Indeed, if [company name] accepts the terms set out in the attached agreement, this will mark one of the few settlements in which the BSA did not seek to recover an additional amount in compensation for its attorneys’ fees.”
In my humble opinion, the BSA is serious about their mission.
The court process Cerowyn described is known in Commonwealth countries (U.K., Canada, Australia, New Zeland, etc.) as an “Anton Pillar order.” There’s a good summary of how it works on this site: What is an Anton Pillar Order?. Don’t know if it works in the same way in the U.S. (although the site appears to be an American site). I have a fuzzy idea that the U.S. federal courts have ruled they can’t issue Anton Pillar orders, but I don’t know how the various state courts approach the issue.
Another reason not to piss off the company psycho, then fire him - straight to BSA he’ll go. And if you have 50 computers, and only 45 authorized copies of MS Word, you’re in trouble. Such a wonderful world we live in.
