********** From: Mark Milone <miloneat_private> Cc: "politechat_private" <politechat_private>, "Michael E. Smith (E-mail)" <mesmithat_private>, "Jay Sulzberger (E-mail)" <jaysat_private> Subject: BSA is Watching You (or NYC, at least) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2001 11:05:20 -0400 Taking the Subway home from work on Friday, I was stirred from my usual commute-induced stupor by the sight of a dread inspiring advertising campaign. Those of us who live in NYC [you know who you are], are accustomed to seeing whole subway trains devoted to touting a particular brand of sneaker, liquor, fashion line, etc. Well, on Friday Kenneth Cole took a back seat to the Business Software Alliance's Software Truce campaign (www.bsatruce.com). Entire subway cars were plastered with threats of BSA 'targeting' New York City. Paging Mr. Orwell . . . What, exactly, does this 'targeting' entail? Incentives for informant network administrators and disgruntled employees? Coordination with (and funding for) Mr. Ashcroft's Copyright Police (see the comment made by Robert Holleyman, CEO of the BSA, in Declan McCullagh's recent Wired article at http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,45608,00.html)? Incorporation of facial recognition software into NYC's photo radar system to track the whereabouts of suspected infringers? ;^) All I know from the ad is that offenders are given the choice of coming clean in exchange for a 20% licensing discount or prosecution with the promise of a public flogging. A quick view of the bsatruce.com site doesn't give too much info. There is, however, software entitled 'GASP' that companies can use to audit their systems (aside: does the BSA employ the same marketing genius responsible for naming 'Carnivore?'). The BSA privacy policy says that "The personal information volunteered by our users via the download of this software will be used by Attest for purposes of identification, direct marketing and online transactions." That's fine, I guess, but what if the software is downloaded and installed by an employee without the proper authority and in contemplation of leaving its employment? In Shurgard Storage Centers v. Safeguard Self Storage the federal district court in the Western District of Washington upheld a cause of action in favor of employers who may suffer the loss of trade secret information at the hands of disloyal employees who act in the interest of a competitor and future employer. Based on this ruling, an employee could be subject to federal criminal sanction for such actions, and the new employer could be deemed a party who is participating in a criminal conspiracy. I know it's a stretch, but could the hypothetical disgruntled employee be considered an agent of the BSA that has accessed a "protected computer without authorization, resulting in liability for BSA?" Mark G. Milone, Esq. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. To subscribe, visit http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Jul 29 2001 - 10:49:02 PDT