There’s something deeply wrong with the business world when companies make a practice of suing their customers. The most explosive example is the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), which has campaigned for several years to reduce music piracy by bankrupting its supposed perpetrators.

While those fortunate among us sit in Canada (fortunate, that is, in all respects save for the presence of the iPhone!), we can recognize that lawsuits are the blunt instrument that American corporations and people wield all too easily. But there’s something really smelly about going after the same people that keep you in your sports cars and shmancy suits. Logic dictates that you won’t be in business very long. And while the music market is sufficiently large that many people don’t connect the lawsuits with the music, as it were, there is now enough backlash from the public that some companies are backing down. When those lawsuits first started in 2003, many seemingly innocent people were targeted, according to this Washington Post article.

While one could argue that file sharing of music has decreased as a result of those lawsuits, there are also many people — myself included — who buy a lot less music now than they used to, as a direct result of the music industry’s practices. And now that some music groups are leaving the sticky embrace of their labels altogether to pursue their own fortunes (Radiohead may be the latest, with their latest album), I think the message is getting through: lawsuits may not be the instrument of choice for reducing file sharing.

But then we get this story about how the Business Software Alliance (BSA) is using RIAA-like tactics to strangle its customers for using unregistered software.

The BSA is a collection of companies, including Microsoft, Adobe and Symantec. These are some of the biggest software producers in the world, and they are using some of the shadiest strategies to pursue their agenda. As the linked article reads,

Of the $13 million that the BSA reaped in software violation settlements with North American companies last year, almost 90 percent came from small businesses, the AP found.

Sound familiar? The biggest companies suing the smallest customers. Perfect. But it gets better:

…according to an attorney who represents companies that have drawn BSA attention, it is the offers of huge rewards - upwards of $1 million - that creates an irresistible temptation for IT execs to rat out employers, especially former employers.

Let’s draw a picture: your company has a resident IT guy. He’s responsible for running your systems and tracking your software purchases. Then, for whatever reason, he leaves the company. The next week, the BSA has handed this former IT guy a bag of cash, and they’re delivering a lawsuit to you, based on the fact that this guy either didn’t do his job, or told a good story.

And the BSA’s war chest — used solely to reward disgruntled snitches from companies — is a dirty method indeed. According to the original AP story published today, there are many innocent companies who simply aren’t aware that they are violators.

It pains me to see the name of Apple Inc. in there with the Microsofts and Symantecs of the world. In all other ways they don’t act callously with software licensing (for example, they don’t use complicated and error-prone activation with their operating systems and other software).

So the takeaway here is twofold: if you’re a small business, take some time to track your software licences. But also consider moving to free software, such as Ubuntu Linux for the operating system, and OpenOffice for your office suite. Especially if you’re a Windows user. Any company that makes a business of suing its customers deserves to lose some business too.

Share This

The iPhone.

“A widescreen iPod, a mobile phone, a breakthrough Internet device.” Since its US introduction last spring, it has been something of a preoccupation for me, and for countless others in Canada. This thing is for real, and it promises, for the first time, to put a legitimately usable networked experience into my pocket.

And it’s just freakin’ beautiful.

The only problem with the device, per se, is that because it’s a phone, it needs to be tied to a cellular network provider in each country it’s sold. Apple made a deal with AT&T in the US, an exclusive arrangement for an undisclosed number of years.

Just this week, Apple launched the iPhone in the UK and Germany; France is imminent. Meanwhile, those of us in Canada are wondering just when the heck we can expect this thing? After all, given our proximity to the US in geography, economy and love of reality television, how long could they keep us waiting?

Well, it’s pretty clear to me, if not everyone, that Apple’s not the holdout here. It’s clearly in their interest to have the iPhone for sale in as many places as possible, thus to maximize their profits. But their wireless partner in Canada — as yet unannounced — would surely be causing the delay.

It’s no surprise why this unannounced partner would be holding things up. Here’s how a conversation might be between Apple and the unannounced wireless partner (UWP):

Apple: We’d love it if you guys would carry the iPhone in Canada. Given its overwhelming success in the US, we can tell you for sure that it’ll be your best-selling phone. Ever.

UWP: We agree. We also like that we’re the only company in Canada that you can deal with, since Bell and Telus are too stupid to have a network that interoperates with the rest of the world. Their loss, we guess. Anyway, we’re good to go.

Apple: Great! We’d like you to offer the same package rates as AT&T offers in the US. $20 for unlimited data and -

UWP: Woah. HOW much for unlimited data? We don’t think we heard correctly.

Apple: Twenty bucks.

UWP: You’ve gotta be kidding us. Look. We charge $10 a megabyte up here. We’ve got our customers trained to bend over and take it with wireless data. Do you think we could maybe have a 2 megabyte plan for $20 instead? I’m sure iPhone users would be happy with that.

Apple: [making choking noises]

Nonetheless, I’m sure that a deal will be reached. Eventually.

But the issue here is that there is a giant vacuum where some knowledge needs to be living. Into that vacuum has gone everything else: unintentional errors and downright lies. This is just a sampling of the Canadian iPhone action over the past few weeks. The persistence of the so-called “news” about the launch says as much as anything about how expected the iPhone is.

So who is this unannounced wireless provider? There is only one answer. The only carrier in Canada capable of supporting iPhone is Rogers. Owing to the bizarre fact that they run the only GSM network in the country, they’re the only ones Apple can go to. Unlike in other countries, they can’t leverage carriers against each other to ensure a fast and competitively-priced time to market. And it shows: by now it’s certain that there’ll be no iPhone before Christmas, which is to both Apple’s and Rogers’ detriment.

Rogers’ currently policy is a either a terse “no comment”, or worse, a lame “it’s in Apple’s court”, that nobody could possibly believe. So right now, every Canadian who cares is simply feeling validated about Rogers: they’re a bunch of greedy gatekeepers scrabbling to hold onto their monopoly at the expense of their customers.

But just because negotiations between Apple and Rogers are stalling, doesn’t mean we need to have an information vacuum. This is actually a chance for Rogers to do something good for its future customers. The company should start by at least acknowledging the obvious: they are working to bring the iPhone to Canada. And while we’re waiting, they should let us sign up for a notification. When the iPhone is ready to launch, the VERY FIRST PEOPLE to learn it should be the people on that list. That way, no rumours will sully my workdays and get in the way of doing my job.

There’s a movement for companies to be more open. In this, Rogers could be a leader. Keep their customers-to-be in the loop, and they’ll do something more important than soak them in the short term: they’d build long-term brand loyalty.

Share This