6 ms·

Avast sees single software license used illegally 774,651 times

56 points by ukdm 16y ago

jrockway 16y ago
Rather than killing the license code, the team at Avast decided to watch what happened and how many users would break the law by using it. Which law are the users breaking?
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- azim 16y ago
  In short, copyright infringement. Wikipedia has more information on specific laws: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement_of_software http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement_of_softw... and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement
  - pbhjpbhj 16y ago
    They're probably in breach of contract too, I expect there is a click-through. In the UK they could probably be got for "hacking" (ie cracking) as they are using the computer from which they download updates without authorisation and breaching a security feature in order to do so this puts them in contravention of the Computer Misuse Act (or at least on a naive reading, mine, it does so).
  - Dylan16807 16y ago
    I'm sure many of these people are violating copyright to get a copy of the installer, but surely that can't be the main law being broken. Avoiding the specifics of Avast that I don't know, if they can get the installer from the producer, maybe because there's a trial, there can't be a copyright violation when no unauthorized copies are made, can it? So what is the exact law being broken?
- msbarnett 16y ago
  Probably some variation of copyright law, depending on the country.
  - jrockway 16y ago
    Why is it not fair use?
    - Mithrandir 16y ago
      https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Fair_use https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Fair_use: "Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. § 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include: 1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; 2. the nature of the copyrighted work; 3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and 4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors" Personal use does not, unfortunately, apply.
    - uptown 16y ago
      "Why is it not fair use?" I don't mean this in a sarcastic way, and am genuinely curious about your answer. Why do you think it would be considered fair use?
      - deleted 16y ago
        [deleted]
jameskilton 16y ago
"Over the course of 18 months that single Avast! Pro license was shared and used on 744,651 different machines. At the current cost of $34.95 per pro license, that’s total lost revenue in the region of $27,074,052.45." No no no no no! You cannot prove that every single one of the illegal users would have bought the software legally had they not found the key. This is the same confounding logic the RIAA/MPAA keeps trying to use and it's still wrong. Anyway, it is an interesting little statistic though I have to wonder if they can actually litigate anymore given they let this go on for 18 months. It is really illegal anymore?
- ukdm 16y ago
  Later in the article: "You can’t count all those users taking advantage of the license as lost revenue, like the music industry does with song downloads. The Avast! Pro license was there to be used, so people used it. If it hadn’t been on P2P sites then the vast majority of users would have gone elsewhere for protection."
  - AdamTReineke 16y ago
    Right, but with free alternatives available such as the fantastic Microsoft Security Essentials, so you can't say that the industry lost $X in sales because of the license.
    - ohashi 16y ago
      That's literally the next sentence. >You don’t need to spend any money to keep your machine protected, especially if you run Windows. Microsoft offers you a firewall as part of the Windows default install now, and Microsoft Security Essentials anti-virus software is free.
  - ericd 16y ago
    It seems that that latter part is part of the Geek.com writer's commentary on the original article from PC Pro, though, so the original article likely didn't call out their own broken logic.
- 16y ago
WestCoastJustin 16y ago
What an opportunity! Those pirates obviously like your software but might not be willing to pay for it. Rather than simply killing the key (turning off the user base) they are trying to slowly convert these people to paying customers! I like it and thank goodness they had the sense to do it.
- arn 16y ago
  Yep, it's actually very interesting. In fact, it's possibly a great marketing technique, if a polite offer to upgrade to the paid version converts at all.
  - pixelcort 16y ago
    Amanita Design did this with their Machinarium Pirate Amnesty promotion: http://machinarium.net/blog/2010/08/05/machinarium-pirate-amnesty/ http://machinarium.net/blog/2010/08/05/machinarium-pirate-am... It doubled as a limited-time discount for first-time players as well.
  - trotsky 16y ago
    I think it's brilliant. Thinking about it, I'd do it intentionally at least for AV. Once a typical AV customer has chosen one specific product and is willing to buy it, I think it's very unlikely they will first look for a pirate version of it. I dare say a large amount of their profits come from retail or pre-installed trial conversions or high priced renewals. The mass of 1st tier AV available for $0-$10 after competitive upgrade rebates etc. clearly shows they expect most of their money in the long run. But imo someone looking to pirate AV is mostly going to choose a product out of the options available for downloading. They may have a preference but if it's simply not available they'll go for #2. Also, they may choose partially based a reputation for working consistently - eg people report product x has worked flawlessly for a year but product y is always being broken and needing new cracks. Legit free versions may be option C. If you accept my presumptions - AV makes most of their money in ongoing or addons - and pirates are cost conscious but rather brand agnostic - any one firm likely loses very little in sales by having their product copied. On the other hand the firm gets the chance to have the user grow comfortable with the software and all of the highest tier features if they don't cut it off. Obviously there is a non-zero conversion rate here and importantly they may no longer view free options as feature rich enough. So by this logic it's actually in the best interests of the company to make sure their product is widely available in pirate circles instead of fighting it. Why let your competitor get a chance at a piracy conversion instead of you? Not only that but you'd want to make sure it was a good experience - trojan free - no bad cracks - up to date signatures - so the user had the best impression of it. It's the ultimate in price discrimination - giving it away free to those who wouldn't pay anyway in hopes of future conversions - something they do anyway with free after rebate deals - while ensuring the illicit nature of the distribution keeps it from cannibalizing most legitimate sales.
ck2 16y ago
Doesn't Avast have a free version? (in fact I'm using it) Why bother with Pro, seems unnecessary. I guess the logic is those people wouldn't bother to pay anyway but I am surprised they would allow their IP to ping the server in the first place.
- jonknee 16y ago
  > I guess the logic is those people wouldn't bother to pay anyway but I am surprised they would allow their IP to ping the server in the first place. Stopping an anti-virus from phoning home means you're out of date and every day it has less value. That said, I suspect the vast number of computer users would have no idea to prevent said ping (or even know it was happening). Especially those in the market for AV software.
libpcap 16y ago
Switch to AVG Free.
- ukdm 16y ago
  err, no thanks http://www.neowin.net/news/avg-update-sends-computers-into-limbo http://www.neowin.net/news/avg-update-sends-computers-into-l...
- wh-uws 16y ago
  Switch to Microsoft security essentials. faster. smaller. no spy/spam/ad/junkware better
  - quicksilver03 16y ago
    And corrupts SVN checkouts, and who knows what else: svn: Checksum mismatch for 'servers/dev/jboss/jvspoc_dw_loader/lib/jboss-serialization.jar'; expected: 'f26ddb52dc01622d93625264f104b142', actual: '838620288f1f8089176d015930a152dc' No thanks.
- vegai 16y ago
  Switch to Linux.
vietor 16y ago
They did advocate piracy ... http://www.avast.com/lp-talk-like-a-pirate http://www.avast.com/lp-talk-like-a-pirate More seriously, I wonder what the numbers are for the second most popular pirated key? And more generally, what is the frequency distribution of users per key like? Is one pirated key dominant, are their competing rivals? What proportion of users share their key among only a few extra computers? Also interesting is the approach they are taking to handling this. It will be very interesting to see what the conversation rate is, if they share that information as well.
dools 16y ago
It's actually kind of a good sales tactic since they can now contact each user and tell them to pay up or switch to the free version. Like a viral trial ...

56 points by ukdm 16y ago

Rather than killing the license code, the team at Avast decided to watch what happened and how many users would break the law by using it. Which law are the users breaking?

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
azim 16y ago
In short, copyright infringement. Wikipedia has more information on specific laws: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement_of_software http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement_of_softw... and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement
- pbhjpbhj 16y ago
  They're probably in breach of contract too, I expect there is a click-through. In the UK they could probably be got for "hacking" (ie cracking) as they are using the computer from which they download updates without authorisation and breaching a security feature in order to do so this puts them in contravention of the Computer Misuse Act (or at least on a naive reading, mine, it does so).
- Dylan16807 16y ago
  I'm sure many of these people are violating copyright to get a copy of the installer, but surely that can't be the main law being broken. Avoiding the specifics of Avast that I don't know, if they can get the installer from the producer, maybe because there's a trial, there can't be a copyright violation when no unauthorized copies are made, can it? So what is the exact law being broken?
msbarnett 16y ago
Probably some variation of copyright law, depending on the country.
- jrockway 16y ago
  Why is it not fair use?
  - Mithrandir 16y ago
    https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Fair_use https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Fair_use: "Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. § 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include: 1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; 2. the nature of the copyrighted work; 3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and 4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors" Personal use does not, unfortunately, apply.
  - uptown 16y ago
    "Why is it not fair use?" I don't mean this in a sarcastic way, and am genuinely curious about your answer. Why do you think it would be considered fair use?
    - deleted 16y ago
      [deleted]

jameskilton 16y ago

"Over the course of 18 months that single Avast! Pro license was shared and used on 744,651 different machines. At the current cost of $34.95 per pro license, that’s total lost revenue in the region of $27,074,052.45." No no no no no! You cannot prove that every single one of the illegal users would have bought the software legally had they not found the key. This is the same confounding logic the RIAA/MPAA keeps trying to use and it's still wrong. Anyway, it is an interesting little statistic though I have to wonder if they can actually litigate anymore given they let this go on for 18 months. It is really illegal anymore?

ukdm 16y ago
Later in the article: "You can’t count all those users taking advantage of the license as lost revenue, like the music industry does with song downloads. The Avast! Pro license was there to be used, so people used it. If it hadn’t been on P2P sites then the vast majority of users would have gone elsewhere for protection."
- AdamTReineke 16y ago
  Right, but with free alternatives available such as the fantastic Microsoft Security Essentials, so you can't say that the industry lost $X in sales because of the license.
  - ohashi 16y ago
    That's literally the next sentence. >You don’t need to spend any money to keep your machine protected, especially if you run Windows. Microsoft offers you a firewall as part of the Windows default install now, and Microsoft Security Essentials anti-virus software is free.
- ericd 16y ago
  It seems that that latter part is part of the Geek.com writer's commentary on the original article from PC Pro, though, so the original article likely didn't call out their own broken logic.
16y ago

WestCoastJustin 16y ago

What an opportunity! Those pirates obviously like your software but might not be willing to pay for it. Rather than simply killing the key (turning off the user base) they are trying to slowly convert these people to paying customers! I like it and thank goodness they had the sense to do it.

arn 16y ago
Yep, it's actually very interesting. In fact, it's possibly a great marketing technique, if a polite offer to upgrade to the paid version converts at all.
- pixelcort 16y ago
  Amanita Design did this with their Machinarium Pirate Amnesty promotion: http://machinarium.net/blog/2010/08/05/machinarium-pirate-amnesty/ http://machinarium.net/blog/2010/08/05/machinarium-pirate-am... It doubled as a limited-time discount for first-time players as well.
- trotsky 16y ago
  I think it's brilliant. Thinking about it, I'd do it intentionally at least for AV. Once a typical AV customer has chosen one specific product and is willing to buy it, I think it's very unlikely they will first look for a pirate version of it. I dare say a large amount of their profits come from retail or pre-installed trial conversions or high priced renewals. The mass of 1st tier AV available for $0-$10 after competitive upgrade rebates etc. clearly shows they expect most of their money in the long run. But imo someone looking to pirate AV is mostly going to choose a product out of the options available for downloading. They may have a preference but if it's simply not available they'll go for #2. Also, they may choose partially based a reputation for working consistently - eg people report product x has worked flawlessly for a year but product y is always being broken and needing new cracks. Legit free versions may be option C. If you accept my presumptions - AV makes most of their money in ongoing or addons - and pirates are cost conscious but rather brand agnostic - any one firm likely loses very little in sales by having their product copied. On the other hand the firm gets the chance to have the user grow comfortable with the software and all of the highest tier features if they don't cut it off. Obviously there is a non-zero conversion rate here and importantly they may no longer view free options as feature rich enough. So by this logic it's actually in the best interests of the company to make sure their product is widely available in pirate circles instead of fighting it. Why let your competitor get a chance at a piracy conversion instead of you? Not only that but you'd want to make sure it was a good experience - trojan free - no bad cracks - up to date signatures - so the user had the best impression of it. It's the ultimate in price discrimination - giving it away free to those who wouldn't pay anyway in hopes of future conversions - something they do anyway with free after rebate deals - while ensuring the illicit nature of the distribution keeps it from cannibalizing most legitimate sales.

ck2 16y ago

Doesn't Avast have a free version? (in fact I'm using it) Why bother with Pro, seems unnecessary. I guess the logic is those people wouldn't bother to pay anyway but I am surprised they would allow their IP to ping the server in the first place.

jonknee 16y ago
> I guess the logic is those people wouldn't bother to pay anyway but I am surprised they would allow their IP to ping the server in the first place. Stopping an anti-virus from phoning home means you're out of date and every day it has less value. That said, I suspect the vast number of computer users would have no idea to prevent said ping (or even know it was happening). Especially those in the market for AV software.

libpcap 16y ago

Switch to AVG Free.

ukdm 16y ago
err, no thanks http://www.neowin.net/news/avg-update-sends-computers-into-limbo http://www.neowin.net/news/avg-update-sends-computers-into-l...
wh-uws 16y ago
Switch to Microsoft security essentials. faster. smaller. no spy/spam/ad/junkware better
- quicksilver03 16y ago
  And corrupts SVN checkouts, and who knows what else: svn: Checksum mismatch for 'servers/dev/jboss/jvspoc_dw_loader/lib/jboss-serialization.jar'; expected: 'f26ddb52dc01622d93625264f104b142', actual: '838620288f1f8089176d015930a152dc' No thanks.
vegai 16y ago
Switch to Linux.

vietor 16y ago

They did advocate piracy ... http://www.avast.com/lp-talk-like-a-pirate http://www.avast.com/lp-talk-like-a-pirate More seriously, I wonder what the numbers are for the second most popular pirated key? And more generally, what is the frequency distribution of users per key like? Is one pirated key dominant, are their competing rivals? What proportion of users share their key among only a few extra computers? Also interesting is the approach they are taking to handling this. It will be very interesting to see what the conversation rate is, if they share that information as well.

dools 16y ago

It's actually kind of a good sales tactic since they can now contact each user and tell them to pay up or switch to the free version. Like a viral trial ...