Pirate Software Myths

    Hello! Today we want to raise the topic related to liability for illegal software.



    2 weeks ago, we held a webinar for SmartCIO community members on this topic, and judging by the record (for the community) of 170 simultaneous listeners, this topic is very, very relevant.

    In today's post, we will write and dispel the main myths related to the issue, as well as leave a link to the full webinar entry for those who wish.

    So let's go.


    Myth 1. Everyone is not transplanted.


    However, some statistics. During the year 2000, 875 crimes were registered under article 146 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as a result of which 87 people were convicted. In 2007, 5216 criminal cases were instituted, of which 3,182 cases reached the court (for information: acquittal is issued in less than 1% of cases).

    Further more. So, for 6 months of 2010, more than 4 thousand "criminals" were identified.

    Myth 2. Will be planted only for Microsoft


    The statistics of the K Department for Crimes for 2010, as it were, hints to us that this is not true.



    Myth 3. The intentional nature of a crime cannot be proved.


    Of course, ignorance of the law does not exempt from liability. But it’s a little bit different. Those. man does not deny that it is illegal to use pirated software, but he claims that he did not know that pirated software. As evidence, the competent authorities use:
    • Warning letters to copyright holders;
    • Written warnings from police officers.

    If neither the first nor the second came to you, then the following approach is quite successfully used as evidence. Since you are an IT manager or a system administrator, then you have the appropriate education and experience, and you, by virtue of your position, could not know about the unlicensed nature of the software used.

    Myth 4. A memo eliminates risks.


    In a chat at the webinar, many really expressed the opinion that if you write a memo to the director of the company that, due to insufficient funding (or some other reason), the company uses non-licensed software, then there will be nothing responsible for IT.

    Of course, this is a myth. Moreover, the presence of such a memo aggravates the position of its author, because it becomes material evidence of the intentional nature of the crime (once I wrote a memo, I knew that the software was pirated).

    In general, the position of an IT nickname in an organization in this case is much worse than that of a manager — it is much more difficult for him to prove that he “did not know”.

    Myth 5. Verification can only be carried out with the statement of the copyright holder.


    The first allegation: an offense under Art. 146 of the Criminal Code refers to cases of public prosecution, which means that a criminal complaint is not required to open a criminal case.

    The second statement: guided by the law on the police (which, in terms of the topic under discussion, is no different from the law on the police), the Ministry of Internal Affairs has the right and duty to prevent offenses.

    Therefore, for verification, a statement from even a homeless Vasily from a neighboring basement is enough (although Vasily may need a passport). To initiate a criminal case, following the first statement, the application of the copyright holder is also not required.

    Myth 6. Computer is not mine


    The point is this. A check came to you, a pirate, say, Photoshop was suddenly discovered on a computer. And here you valiantly declare that this computer is not the computer of the company, but belongs to the employee personally (or is the property of another company and you rent it).

    Not a ride, because:
    • The employee is likely to not take the blame and testify against the organization;
    • All the same, they won’t take a word for you and as a result of the check (including the contents on the PC’s hard drive) it will be found out in the interests of which organization and by which person the PC was used;
    • If you rent a computer (along with software) from another company, then the use is still illegal, since a special license agreement with the copyright holder is required for the rental.

    Myth 7. The computer is turned off / does not work, which means there is no fault


    Art. 1270 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation tells us that the fact of finding the program on the medium is the use of the program (the method of use is reproduction). Well, during the examination it will still be established that you turned on the computer. And at the time of work, pirated software was installed on it.

    Myth 8. You can remove a computer only by court order.


    The removal of computer equipment can be carried out on the basis of:
    • Police Act;
    • Code of Administrative Offenses;
    • Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation.

    None of the listed legal acts speaks of the need for a court decision. So, it is not needed.

    Myth 9. Free software = free software


    This is still simpler, although an important observation: tax authorities can interpret the use of free software by commercial organizations as making a profit and require payment of tax on the amount equivalent to the cost of similar products.

    Those wishing to familiarize themselves with the recording of the webinar, as well as ask questions to the facilitator, are invited to click on the link .

    Also popular now: