Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Privacy

When Threatened By Lawyers for Licence Violations? 70

Posted by Cliff from the innocent-until-proven-guilty? dept.
An anonymous reader asks: "I help run the a small branch-office (15 staff) in a foreign country. Today I received a letter from Borland's lawyer saying that we are illegally using their software. We spoke to the programmers and with their permission, we did a 100% check of all the staff's PC. We found NO evidence of violations. The Borland rep/lawyer mentioned that their HQ has received online registration of their commercial software in the companies name. They refused to name the software and the person involved. I told them what we did but they insist we pay. But pay for what? Borland's lawyer has given us 10 days to act and reply. I feel threaten and angry. Other than paying good money for a lawyer to defend what I view as Borland threatening us, what can I do to get Borland to pay for my wasted time and my lawyer's fee. Slashdot users, anyone has receive such threats from Borland or other companies ?" It seems that when dealing with commercial software, any vendor you deal with can level these kinds of accusations, which will result in Cease and Desist letters appearing in your CIO's inbox. Many times, these letters show up on the basis of very little and sometimes incorrect information. How can a company accused of infringement convince the software publisher that no such infraction has occurred (assuming the company is innocent) without spending a barrel full of dollars to prove it? Update: 12/26 Noon, EDT by C :A few spelling errors corrected. Sorry about that.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

When Threatened By Lawyers for Licence Violations? More

When Threatened By Lawyers for Licence Violations?

Comments Filter:

  • Invite them to audit you. (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 26, 2002 @08:39AM (#4959947)
    Sure, you'll lose a day or two of work for whomever you have escorting the auditors, but that has got to be less costly than a court case.

    Is Slashdot really a good place to go for legal advice?
    • Is Slashdot really a good place to go for legal advice?

      Slashdot isn't just read by unemployed webpage writers and Linux users. The occasional solicitor can be found amongst the hordes.

      The real trick is for the ignorant non-solicitors to shutup. Unfortunately this doesn't happen even when technical questions are asked.

      • > The occasional solicitor can be found amongst the hordes.

        Any lawyer that gives legal advice over ask slashdot is a lawyer with a short career. There's doctors on slashdot too, but we don't see "Ask Slashdot: What's this pain in my crotch all about?"

        • Any lawyer that gives legal advice over ask slashdot is a lawyer with a short career.

          Why? What gave you this idea? Where is it written that "lawyers shall not talk about legal things unless there is money involved"? Do you have this strange idea that the bailiff will hunt them down and serve out a writ for "MrByte, Slashdot UID 198374" for giving free advice on an Internet message board? Perhaps you think they will be disbarred because they spoke before receiving a big fat cheque?

          • Actually, the ABA forbids lawyers from distributing legal advice without a power-of-attorney type agreement. They say it's to protect their members, but I suspect it's more about protecting their bottom lines. I actually know a couple of lawyers who read slashdot. This is the one instance in which advice from an AC is probably better than from someone who's logged in.
        • That pain in your crotch is from 27 years of build-up due to lack of sex life. I perscribe taking many woman out to dinner, and get plenty of sex.

  • Ask them to prove it. (Score:3, Informative)

    by Nate Couch ( 589643 ) on Thursday December 26, 2002 @08:39AM (#4959948)
    As far as I know you are still innocent until proven guilty. As them for a written statement as to the "supposed" infraction. If they are not willing to provide such a written statement then tell them you will be writing Borland HQ about this lack of ethics -IMHO. Lawyers are not my favorite people in this world. So if they still won't provide you with the information you need to track this 'supposed' infraction down tell them to shove it.
    • Lawyers have nothing to do with the problem; a secretary probably wrote the form letter.

      Simply write back to Borland stating your dilemma and that so further action can be taken without documentation in writing. Be nice, be firm, enclose a copy of their letter and reference your disappointing telephone conversation. Send it certified with return receipt, keep the record, and likely for just a couple of bucks you'll never hear from them again.

      Odds are you can just ignore them, but I can't quite recommend that you do so. :)

      Obviously no responsible businessperson could do anything on their say-so. Treat this as an invoice from some company you never heard of, or an overcharge from a utility. Realistically it would cost far more to come after you than to pursue the matter (I like the notion someone here has of countersuing!). Unfortunate that they have a poor operating attitude, I'll make a note of it for the future.

      Wouldn't it be nice if people didn't pirate software in the first place. You appear to be in the crossfire of unethical people retaliating against unethical people. :)

      None of this is legal advice -- just practical.
    • Exactly!

      There are laws of discovery. Tell them to show a warrant to come in your place. If they can't, they can take a hike. If they are not willing to show evidence, they may not have much. Until you are charged they don't have to provide it however.

      Do not talk to any of their people without your lawyer present. I know this is expensive on your part, but you have to have a good lawyer just to stay in business these days. He will probably tell them to take a hike and not charge a whole lot for that. There is not not much a lawer can do until the time that evidence is presented.
  • Or rather, threaten to countersue (for lost time and costs) unless they provide evidence and help you.

  • Get more details (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward

    They are being compeltely unreasonable by not giving you any details. Refuse to cooperate until they tell you what you are supposed to have done (name of software package, name of person). Make it clear that you will cooperate if they give you the details.

  • My advice (Score:2, Insightful)

    by RaboKrabekian ( 461040 )
    Go ask a lawyer, not Slashdot. You're bound to get better advice.

    • Go ask a lawyer, not Slashdot.

      Ask Slashdot is a tool for gathering the impressions of others who have been in the same situation. The secondhand legal advice it provides (which is not "legal advice" under the law) is useful so that the original poster can walk into the lawyer's office with at least a sense of what might happen and prepared to receive real legal advice.

  • Ignore them until they sue. They likely won't follow through if it's just a single copy they're talking about here.

    If they do follow through, it's going to be an expensive disappointment for them, and you've got grounds to counter-sue.

    Regardless, everyone's gotten a taste of Borland's business ethics from your article now. On top of that, if you do buy Borland's software, I'll also advise you all that Borland's C++ Builder comes node-locked now, and if you call them up, they're even more prohibitive about one user installing in multiple locations for his own use than Microsoft are with Visual Studio.NET.

    In this case, I'm making an earnest effort to convert the dialog code we were using away from Builder. Away from Builder and to Visual C++ so that we can prevent new licneses until Borland stops being ugly.

    • also advise you all that C++ Builder comes node-locked now

      What is node locked? I own several versions of BCB up to vesrion 5, I was thinking of upgrading but I'm very unhappy with Inprise. They're not supporting their products, to get bugs fixed you have to buy the new versions each year that has *no new features.* Whereas Visual Studio 6 is still supported 6 years after it came out.

      Not to mention MS gave me a free copy of vs.net with *no* restrictions ...

    • You say you are going to stop using Borland because you don't like the whip hand that you live under and yet you're migrating to Microsoft? Hello? Perhaps you should investigate Free Software [fsf.org] and liberate yourself.
      • You say you are going to stop using Borland because you don't like the whip hand that you live under and yet you're migrating to Microsoft? Hello?

        Would that I could.

        The application in question needs to be used by many artists who use Maya, and many programmers who use CodeWarrior for Playstation 2 and Game Cube, and Visual Studio.NET for XBox.

        The above necessitate that it be a Windows application. To the best of my knowledge, there are no free rapid GUI development tools for Windows which produce native apps and support anything beyond basic buttons and sliders.

      • Free Software / Oper-source isn't the answer to all life's problems. Although it's a great thing, many business modals do not revolve around giving their trade-secrets away. Besides, from what I have seen there are no elaborate RDE's available with the possible exception of Glade but then your code must be OSS.

  • Thanks for the info (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Lord Sauron ( 551055 ) on Thursday December 26, 2002 @09:20AM (#4960015)
    I was about to choose between Borland's Delphi and MS's VB for my company. I think MS has more ethics than Borland. My decision is done.

    • Re:Thanks for the info (Score:4, Insightful)

      by WIAKywbfatw ( 307557 ) on Thursday December 26, 2002 @10:07AM (#4960092) Journal
      If that's the basis on which you decide which application vendor to use then you're nuts. (Sorry, don't mean to be offensive but there's no other nice way to say it.)

      Forget about whether or not Microsoft has more ethics than Borland (a statement I, several US states, dozens of other countries and countless software and hardware vendors would dispute) just take in the facts.

      1. Someone registers a piece of software with Borland. That someone seems to be from company X.
      2. Borland contact company X about unpaid for software.
      3. Company X says we don't have any such software; Borland has evidence (granted, we don't know how strong or how weak) to the contrary.
      4. Borland insists that company X pay for the software that they honestly believe company X is using.

      That's the story so far. I'm sure the same thing happens hundreds of times every day with Microsoft, Lotus, Adobe, Macromedia, Borland, etc and I'm sure that, 99% of the time, things get sorted out way before they get really nasty. I'm sure that'll be the case here too.

      So why are you getting pissed at Borland because they're trying to protect their investment? Is making sure people pay for something they get really that hideous a concept? Or should Borland let everyone who tries to get something for nothing get away with it?

      What do you think that'll do to the company's bottom line? To it's chances of being around to develop the next generation of its tools? To the price of the software for honest users?

      As I've stated elsewhere in this Ask Slashdot, it might be that Borland's right, it might be that both parties are the victims of someone else's malicious scheming or it might simply be a clerical error.

      Whatever the situation, don't blame Borland for trying to protect itself from what it obviously sees as a genuine attempt to pirate its software.
      • How can they honestly believe company X is using if they know anyone can type a wrong name in the registration ? If they blindly believe in this kind of info, then it's VERY easy to frame someone.
      • 5. Company X contacts Borland to clear up innocent misunderstanding;
        6. Borland management opt to be rude time-wasting secretive jerks.

        I think it's that last part that bothers folks.
      • It is the responsibility of Borland to convince anyone who uses their software that they are to pay some desired amount. No-one is ever entitled to payment in this wonderful system of free enterprise.
      • So why are you getting pissed at Borland because they're trying to protect their investment?

        I feel you are misunderstanding the issue. Nobody is pissed at Borland because they expect people to buy their software. They are pissed because Borland is levelling an accusation but producing no evidence. If they want this issue to be resolved they need to give more information than: "You owe us money." That isn't the proper way to request payment. They need to either handle this professionally (send an invoice detailing the software package, who registered, date registered, etc.) or forget it. There is no excuse for such unprofessional behavior.
    • You might want to read the stories today about SmartPhone IP to help make up your mind.

  • Before you do anything else... (Score:5, Informative)

    by WIAKywbfatw ( 307557 ) on Thursday December 26, 2002 @09:48AM (#4960058) Journal
    1. Double and triple check your systems, including servers, workstations, laptops and any remote installations (teleworkers, etc).

    Better you find out yourself than have an expensive auditor find out for you.

    Make sure that all employees know that you've been contacted by Borland in this manner and that they appreciate the seriousness of the situation. Make it clear that if someone has inadvertently installed some software that they shouldn't have that now is the time to come forward, at no penalty to them, rather than later, when severe disciplinary action may be taken.

    If necessary, have employees sign a piece of paper stating that they have not installed any unapproved/unsupported/unregistered applications on their PCs.

    Of course, now would be a good time to audit all your software. The last thing you want is to get hit by Microsoft, Lotus, Adobe, Macromedia, etc as well.

    2. Make it clear to Borland that you are willing to cooperate in any way possible, but that you have verified that you're not using any of their software illegally.

    Of course, this assumes that you find nothing incriminating.

    Show Borland your auditing data. Show them the licenses for all the other software that you use and reiterate that you do not use their software.

    Ask them to provide further evidence so that you may investigate more thoroughly. Perhaps you're the target of a disgruntled former employee, perhaps it's a clerical error and they've got the wrong guys (you're Acme Chemicals, they're really after Acme Chemical International). Either way, explain that you're just as concerned as they are as it's in your interest to make sure that this situation doesn't occur again in the future.

    3. Offer to let them have your systems independently audited at their cost.

    The onus is on Borland to prove you've committed software piracy, not on you to prove that you haven't. Remember, you're innocent until proven guilty.

    Ask them to back up their accusations with facts, but do so in a non-aggressive manner - getting into a you-vs-us fight before anything has been proven won't help you solve the mystery and it certainly won't help you if litigation is started.

    If the matter ever does go to court, a judge will look upon you far more favourably if you can show that you were cooperative from the get-go and tried to work with Borland rather than against them.

    4. If necessary, be prepared to bill Borland for any expenses you incur.

    Explain to Borland that you'll help them all you can but that, when they don't find anything, they should be prepared to reimburse you for your lost time, the inconvenience caused to your business, etc.

    Of course, if you want to go down this route then you're going to have even more documentation available for scrutiny. Logs showing your unscheduled audits, tracking IT personnel time, etc will be a must, as will all relevant internal and external email traffic and any legal bills, etc.

    5. Ask Borland why they picked on you.

    They may have had some software registered in your company's name but why are they chasing you regarding piracy? Did someone mislead them into believing that you were doing something wrong or did you match some sort of profile that typically leads them to software pirates?

    Again, explain that it's in both Borland and your interest to not have this happen again. Not only does it waste their time and yours but if it happens repeatedly it leaves them open to a harassment lawsuit, perhaps from you, perhaps from the next guy it happens to.

    Good luck, and let us know how you get on.
    • Double and triple check your systems, including servers, workstations, laptops and any remote installations (teleworkers, etc).

      Great advice, but after determining that you have not violated any software licenses, merely document the audit, communicate a denial, and stop there. There is no need to either harass your employees or bend over for Borland. Very simply, Borland is not going to give you a penny for an internal audit. They will claim, correctly, that legal compliance is your responsibility. You will be stuck with the bill. In addition, requiring employees to make verbal or written statements offers little legal protection and will send a clear message of mistrust to your own people. Does your company already have an employee handbook with a policy on pirated software? If so, then a simple emailed memo reminding the employees of this fact (or stating this policy) will add to your documentation without sacrificing employee moral. As an employer, I would not consider sacrificing trust for Borland.
    • Also, remember that Borland also makes that cheesey PrintMaster software suite which might have slipped past in your first check. Check in the Windows registry under HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE/Software/Borland/* to see if any other Borland software is install that you might have missed.
    • I think alot of the above is sound advice.

      I'd only add that you might be able to run the audit with something *I can't believe I'm going to suggest*

      Why not get the BSA auditing software!?!

      At this point you have nothing to lose. If you run an audit of your systems with something the vultures believe to be sufficient, then maybe they'll go circle around some other poor, unsuspecting business.

    • Don't forget...

      6. Begin investigating alternative development tools.

      Switching to tools from another company that promises to be less obnoxious or, even better, to Free software tools isn't going to help you out of your current situation, and it may turn out that there aren't any better alternatives, but it's a good idea to look into it. Switching is something that takes time and costs money, but managing software licenses and performing audits also takes time and costs money.

      Also, after Borland is satisfied that you aren't using infringing copies of their software (or after they decide it's not worth their effort to investigate), you should mention that the experience has motivated you to look elsewhere, and that you'll be moving away from Borland software in the future. This won't make them change their minds about investigating you, but maybe it will encourage them to be a bit more cautious about making poorly-substantiated accusations about paying customers. Microsoft would just thumb their collective nose at you, but Borland isn't so entrenched that they can afford to piss off customers needlessly.

    • And politely remind them that barratry is a serious offense that could cause their lawyers to lose their licenses.
    • Make it clear to Borland that you are willing to cooperate in any way possible,

      Reading this over, it strikes me that somewhere the relationship between supplier and customer has gone off of the rails in regard to commercial computer software of whatever type.

      The "balance of power" has shifted from the customer (NOT "the consumer", by the way) to the vendor/supplier in some way.

      "We will cooperate with Borland in any way possible." Pardon me? Since when should it be MY responsibility as a customer to "cooperate" with a company who theoretically wants to sell me more stuff and keep me coming back?

      Hell, if I am a big customer and I want my next copy of their software to be delivered in a green plaid package they should be getting the green paint out!

      What other industry is there where the supplier is in a position to basically threaten their customers, the customers bow to their demands however unreasonable, and then the customers, by golly, come back for more! "Sell me more software, please, I'll be good and give you more money. Kick me again!"

      Truly amazing. As I said, I don't think there is any other industry that operates in this manner, or could.
      • The furniture industry. Not between retailers and end users of course, but between the big manufacturers and retailers. Lay-z-boy will cut off a retailer who doesn't participate in it's price fixing or maintain it's standards in a heartbeat. And it's the retailer who is afraid. I have the benefit of knowing a 20yr old veteren traveling rep and of having gone with him several times on sales trips.
      • The appliance parts industry. The OEM's (GE, Whirlpool, etc.) have forced the small non-OEM parts manufacturers out of the picture, some by selling off their product lines, others by going bankrupt. I worked in the industry for eight years. Unfortunately, the attitude of consumer first has been replaced by the bottom line. Whatever it takes to keep the investors happy, even if customer service and product quality are sacrificed.

  • Fishing (Score:5, Interesting)

    by airuck ( 300354 ) on Thursday December 26, 2002 @09:59AM (#4960078)
    You have already responded correctly. You investigated the accusation, determined that it is incorrect, and communicated your position. They are fishing, which is exactly what licensing officers get paid to do. Ignore them.

    I run a biotech company and received a similar communication on Christmas Eve [Merry Christmas]:

    You may not be aware that [technique] is a patented process and that performing [technique]-based service assays for third parties (or internal quality control) requires a license under patents owned by [company A]. [company B] has the exclusive right to grant licenses for this purpose in certain fields
    1. A license issuance fee of US$10,000.00, which is fully creditable against the first year's royalties;
    2. A royalty of 15% of the net selling price for all [technique]-based services;
    3. The requirement that all such testing be carried out using Authorized [technique equipment] purchased from a licensed source;
    4. Quarterly reporting of all [technique]-based services performed, along with payment of royalties.

    Since we have over 115 licensees worldwide, the terms and conditions are not negotiable.[We are Borg...]

    [Finally, the accusation:]

    ...As your website mentions analysis of pathogen load, [your company] may require a license in at least one field, most like that of Quality Assurance/Quality Control Testing, although I would need more information regarding the types of samples being analyzed to determine this.

    As a matter of fact, my company does not offer pathogen load testing for QA/QC, or any other service requiring a license as per their defined criteria. I responded once, and unless we offer relevant services in the future, I will not respond to further letters. They can fish elsewhere.
  • Despite the licensing agreement, they do not have a right to inspect your computers, servers, or anything else in your personal or business property, without either a subponea (in a civil case, which you can defend against), or a warrant (which must be served by a police agent, not a software engineer or marketing wonk, and must be issued by a magistrate because there is a reasonable assumption that investigators will find criminial activities or incriminating propery pursuant to an ongoing criminal investigation). Exercise your 4th Amendment rights. You own the property, including the computers, or your company does. You reserve the right to refuse physical access to anyone, short of court orders, even if those who sold you the software disagree.
  • And you are clean, why don't you just invite them to come and see?

    It's really simple. Ask them to come over and look for the things that they are accusing you of.

    And make them pay for your lost time. Just wait for them to call or reply to their email:

    - Yeah, we don't have illegal copies of your software. Why don't you come and see?

    Why is it so complicated to do this? Or is there a reason? In fact, probably later you can even counter-sue them based on "false accusations", moral damages, lost contracts because you were accused of being a thief, etc...
    • Except that, if you invite them in to look, you don't get to counter-sue, because they never had to accuse you of anything. Force them to take the low road, and file the suit, or make a criminal claim. Then, now that you have your ducks in a row, and they are forced to either make a substantive claim before a judge for civil issues, or convince a magistrate that they have cause to believe you are actually commiting a crime and have a warrant issued, you have been injured and have a whole host of claims available. Assuming you are clean, of course. Document everything. :-)
      • Note that a lawsuit generally is decided in favor of the person who is operating "in good faith". One way of demonstrating "good faith" is by taking a non-confrontational approach such as inviting them to audit your systems for Borland software. If you do not make efforts to resolve the situation before it gets to court, judges are VERY wary of your case. (And note that you do *not* want a jury deciding a high-tech case -- juries are notoriously difficult to educate on high-tech issues).

        That aside, I'm probably with the folks who recommend the reply letter via certified mail that says "We have performed a software audit on all corporate computers and found no Borland software" etc., because that will probably end it without the necessity of the audit.

        • Here's good faith: I am innocent of crimes, and innocent of wrong doing, unless I have been proven otherwise. If you have no evidence that I have violated your license agreement, there is no case-in-fact, and your lawsuit will be dismissed, and you will be held liable for court and attorney's fees. If you merely present suppositions of wrong doing, I am perfectly justified in ignoring your pleas. I am under no obligation whatever to demonstrate to you that I have done anything at all. It is incumbent upon you to prove that I have committed a wrongful act. Mere accusations are worthless.

  • Ironic, isn't it? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jht ( 5006 ) on Thursday December 26, 2002 @10:12AM (#4960109) Homepage Journal
    Borland used to have (in the Turbo days) what I thought was the best license ever for commercial software, the "just like a book" license. You could do essentially whatever you wanted with the product, so long as only one person could use it at a time.

    Of course, years later we have this. Granted, we're not talking about Turbo Pascal anymore - the tools are far pricier (so maybe they're a little more worried about "lost" revenue), but the restrictions they put on usage nowadays are just silly.
    • Yeah, and in those days Turbo [Whatever] was generally considered the best programming environment you could buy, and Borland was riding high. Now they're assholes, and they're also perpetually on the edge of financial disaster. Makes you wonder which is the chicken and which is the egg ...
    • Have you ever read the license agreement from Borland?

      (Trimmed for brevity)

      "Section 2.1 - Grant of License. Borland grants to you a personal, nonexclusive, nontransferable and limited license to use the Product. You may install the Product on a reasonable number of machines provided that the Named User is the only individual permitted to use the Product."

      Seems rather reasonable to me. I have Delphi 7 installed on my desktop at the office and my laptop at home. It's all perfectly legal and I can work on projects when I'm at home or on the road.

      This is a very "common-sense" based license. Don't try to screw over Borland and they won't try to screw you over.

  • What about home computers? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Sir Tristam ( 139543 ) on Thursday December 26, 2002 @10:45AM (#4960230)
    I'm going to go a little ways out on a limb here and say that you're right when you say that there are no Borland software improperly installed on the computers at work, while at the same time Borland's right that a product was registered on-line in the company's name. I'm willing to bet that what has happened is that one of your employees got a copy of some Borland product from "a friend of a friend of a friend" of the person who bought it, and they installed it on their home computer. They did the on-line registration, and since they work for you they put your company name in the registration field saying "Company" without even thinking about it. Borland's received several registrations for the same serial number, and so when this one comes in with your company name on it, they contact your company.

    So, unless you also do an audit of your employees' private home computers (good luck!) I suspect that you're not going to find the software that Borland's complaining about.

    It's also possible that Borland has a valid reason for not giving you the employee name under which this software was registered. If they realize that this scenario that I have outlined above may be the case, they might have also directly contacted that employee. If it turns out that he has not done anything wrong, then by giving you his name they might open themselves up to a slander suit by your employee.

    Chris Beckenbach

    • Your right, no one would ever turn their home machines over for a corp to inspect them. I only have one wintel box at the house, and it just has a basic '98SE on it, plus IE. Nothing else. The rest of my boxes are Linux, with GNU'ed applications. But, I would suspect everyone that has a machine at home, has some p0rn (or other such embarassing content) on it. Yeah... I'm with you... there would be NO home searches.

      On the other topic...
      Hold on, I have to switch to "I have a friend who..." type of story telling as to not anger any letigious companies, or raise susspition of slander...

      I have a friend who feels like borland recently switched some staff around. Seems piracy is deemed a huge loss for the company, and a staffer was brought on to clean things up. My friend feels that borland likes the direction that the BSA is taking, and wants to build it's own internal version. There is nothing you can do. My friend feels like the plan is to go after a couple of smaller businesses, and make the department solivent. Then, as they (borland security), get more money, they keep cooking bigger and bigger businesses until they rule the market. My friend feels like they (borland) think they will win one way or the other. They might get everyone to start paying for the software, or get paid from all the people paying fines. My friend is worried about how this will impact borlands "free" market outlook.

      That being said, call a lawyer or call it quits.
      Have a nice day ;)
    • Here's my question for you... now that I know Borland watches product registrations like a hawk, whats to stop me from getting a pirate copy of C builder and installing it a few times and entering as my company, the name of the place I last worked because I hate them for firing me?

      That happened to a friend of mine, he was a manager at a company, some jerk installed pirate software on most of the dev machines -- when he was fired he called the BSA and reported the software *he* had installed ... the company ended up paying a fine of 115k.

  • The Hazards of Commercial Software (Score:3, Insightful)

    by aminorex ( 141494 ) on Thursday December 26, 2002 @12:49PM (#4960718) Homepage Journal
    This is an illustration of the hazards of using
    commercial software. An enterprise operating
    exclusively on open-source software would be
    effectively immune to such intimadations.

  • just dump the borland software that you are useing. and go open source and then let borlands auditors come in and do a audit and then counter sue them for lost time and money (but don't listen to me, i'm no lawyer)
  • I was considering Borland's C++ compilers for a project that might be starting soon. This article has helped me immensely in my decision making process.

    I won't be using Borland's products, because my legal exposure to a company eager to sue its customers would be too high. I'll use some other compiler from a company that cares about its customers.

    Thanks again, this article has saved me a lot of time and expense.
  • 1. You say you are a branch office, then turn them over to the corporate lawyers.
    2. No matter what, this is a legal problem so you really need to talk to a lawyer.

    However, my opinion, whatever that means.

    1. It seems since you have the license to use the product, they should provide the name and address of the person who is trying to install it.
    2. How do you know the Cease and Desist letter is for real? Are you contacting them through the contact info in the letter or are you contacting them through other means.
    3. You say everyones computer is clean, how about their home computer?

Slashdot Top Deals

So you think that money is the root of all evil. Have you ever asked what is the root of money? -- Ayn Rand

Close