A British property security firm has been fined £18,000 for using unlicensed software, and has had to cough up an extra £81,000 for additional licences.
The British Software Alliance (BSA) said today it had been alleged First Choice Facilities (FCF) used unlicensed software as a result of a company merger.
The firm was caught using unlicensed Adobe, Autodesk, Microsoft and Symantec products, claiming it had unwittingly started doing so after the acquisition. The BSA was tipped off by a whistleblower.
The BSA said it was a “common mistake” for merging companies to assume their respective systems used properly licensed kit.
“As an acquiring company, finding out, when it’s too late, that you didn’t run the necessary checks and inadvertently infringed intellectual property (IP) rights can result in hefty damages and substantial, unforeseen costs to buy the very software licences you should have bought in the first place,” said Michala Wardell, chair of the BSA UK Committee.
“As we continue to educate businesses on the risks of inheriting unlicensed software through a merger and acquisition, businesses will struggle to cite ignorance as a mitigating factor and those found with unlicensed software could be liable to pay greater sums of money in damages.”
The £18,000 fine marks one of the biggest penalties handed out by the BSA. In June, East Yorkshire-based Web Marketplace Solutions was told to pay £10,500 for using software without the right licences.
In March, Blackpool-based company George Morrison was handed a £10,000 fine for similar offences.
Arrgh! Do ye know about online piracy, ye scurvy dog? Take our quiz!
German foreign minister warns Russia will face consequences for “absolutely intolerable” cyberattack on ruling party,…
Google is reportedly laying off at least 200 staff from its “Core” organisation, including key…
Investor appeasement? Apple unveils huge $110 billion share buyback program, as sales of iPhone decline…
Tesla retreats from pioneering gigacasting manufacturing process, amid cost cutting and challenges at EV giant
No skynet please. After the US, UK and France pledge human only control of nuclear…
Microsoft's AI investments continue in south east Asia, after investments in Japan, Malaysia, Indonesia, as…
View Comments
Was this actually a fine? - don't think the BSA has the legal power of imposing a mandatory fine. So it was either an agreement between the two parties to resolve a copyright infringement by FCF case out of court (which is good) or it went to court and BSA won?
Agreed, this doesn't explain how BSA is actually "fining" companies. On the other hand, it's true that SMB's should be more aware of pirating software and include it in a security strategy. It's not only the fine the concern, but also the loss of customers by reputation damage.
First Choice Facilities have paid a heavy price for being under-licenced. But while the fine levied on them is significant, they have to take responsibility for it. The growing complexity of software licences means that staying compliant is a challenging process, but it does not change the fact that the legal responsibility for licence management remains with the user. All firms are responsible for ensuring they are sufficiently licenced and the BSA is right to enforce this point.
However, many firms need to take a more mature approach to licence management and realise that proactive software asset management will offer greater benefits than avoiding fines from the BSA. Firms can save an average of 20% on their annual software licencing spend simply by having a better understanding of their position. Licence management projects should therefore be driven by the long-term savings and efficiencies they deliver, rather than the value of the fines they avoid.