Comments on: Software makers want tougher penalties for pirates

By: Robbie

Robbie — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 11:05:52 +0000

It’s very easy for people to look at piracy as a victimless crime, but it’s fundamentally no different from stealing a car or taking someones wallet. If you want to use a specific piece of software, and there is a cost associated with it, then you have to live with it. In this day and age, there are open source or cheaper equivalent to most applications (don’t want to pay for WinZip? Use 7-zip! MS Office too expensive, use Open Office). There is no excuse for stealing!

By: Greg

Greg — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 18:01:17 +0000

@Wogan, @richard: Come on – seriously? Just because the software isn’t created by a local company, it shouldn’t be defended? I’m no BSA fan, and have got the dreaded audit letter, after my company was ratted out by a disgruntled ex-employee – lucky we were 90% legal and just had to pick up a few licenses to be 100% legal. It really wasn’t much of a problem at all. The whole process was very gentle and didn’t make you feel like a criminal or anything. We didn’t have to pay even one cent to the BSA in fines/penalties, so it’s not like BSA is coining it from the pirates.

The BSA will look out for whoever pays them, I don’t think they’re evil and looking out for international companies as a matter of principle. That’s just how it is. Piracy is wrong, everyone knows it, someone has to police the pirates, it might as well be BSA?

From speaking to people in the BSA, they have a near perfect record of never having to take anyone to court, when people get slapped with an audit, a lot of them haven’t actually looked into software costs. They see what MS Windows costs at Incredible Connection and assume it’ll cost millions to get legal, but once you look at it a bit, being legal with software is really small compared to your average company turnover/profit. If you start an IT business and haven’t factored software costs into the business plan, you really don’t deserve to succeed.

I actually find it quite heartning that most people come legal after being tapped on the shoulder by BSA with a gentle reminder, and don’t kick and scream and go to court. It shows that piracy in ZA business is due more to ignorance and laziness as opposed to a generally lawless landscape.

@Wogan – yes, most of the ZA devs are online, which is quite ironic considering our connectivity! We have an amazon.com main R&D center in Cape Town, the 2nd biggest online gambling company in the world in Durban, Thawte from CT, and the list goes on – not bad for a bunch of boers in the internet backwaters!

By: Wogan

Wogan — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 15:36:08 +0000

“Game developers”? What game developers? The majority of the game dev industry in SA is centered around mobile, which is a whole other landscape when it comes to piracy.

And what “criminals” are “making a lot of money”? People who pirate software generally do it because its free that way, and the illegal sales that generate the most money in SA are movies and music.

To the best of my knowledge, SA doesn’t actually have a strong, local development company producing desktop software. Some small projects here and there, with the majority of the dev talent being websites (which are pretty damn hard to pirate).

So basically, the BSA (as richard points out), is only looking out for American and European interests here. Since when did a legally-empowered body in one country pander to the commerical dictates of another? Does nestle have shares in the local dairy oversight board? Wouldn’t that be seen as questionable?

~ Wogan

By: richard

richard — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 11:51:19 +0000

The Business Software Alliance sucks, it only interest is in the big American companies who support it. The law is not there for their personal gratification. If they don’t have to prove ownership then this opens users of any software up to abuse by unscrupulous criminals from anywhere in the world.

The SA law is just fine, work for your money BSA, better still pissoff to the USA

By: Andrew Rens

Andrew Rens — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 15:42:17 +0000

Mr Weertman complains that proprietary software makers who allege copyright infringement ” literally have to prove who programmed the product to the courts and show that the work is original”. It is the burden of proof according to an basic principle of law that “he who alleges must prove”. Its closely related to another basic principle, that a person is guilty until proven innocent. While it might be convenient for US based proprietary software vendors to have these principles overridden in South Africa that doesn’t mean its in the interests of South African software creators who could be sued.