In recent years, software manufacturers such as Microsoft, have expanded inspection channels companies about their licensing software, in order to combat piracy. These channels include partners who send e-mails, phone calls or notifications, to small and medium-sized companies throughout Brazil, requesting that the responsible company or IT department presents survey of existing equipment in the company, as well as software licenses, or even ask for the installation of software that performs such immunity automatically be made.
Most of these communications are made in intimidating tone, threatening to take a series of legal steps if they are not answered. From there arises the question of the need to comply with such requests and what the implications of non-compliance.
In fact, a software has the nature of intellectual work, so their property is governed by the Federal Constitution, the Copyright Law (Law No. 9.610 / 98), and specifically, the Software Law (Law No. 9.609 / 98), which requires, under Article 9, that the use of computer program will license agreement object, and in the event of any lack of agreement, the tax document relating to the acquisition or licensing of copies will serve to prove the regularity of use.
Thus, the use of computer program without the owner’s permission can result in criminal liability and civil, including compensation for material and moral damages and fines for those who edit and sell work without permission of the owner must pay for each of the copies sold. If the number of copies sold can not be computed, the offender must pay the value of three thousand copies, in addition to the seized.
With regard to this right of inspection of software vendors in order to monitor the existence of pirated copies of its products, the software Law (n. 9.609 / 98) provides, in Article 14, the possibility of the software owned by the holder promote legal measures to stop the irregular use of it, and hold the violator. Among the feasible measures may be the judicial request for inspection on the premises of the companies to realize the use and the amount of illegal copies and since then other steps are taken.
As for the request for judicial inspection the Software law itself determines that it should be taken only by evidence of piracy, and who require search and seizure and other measures prescribed by law in bad faith, emulation, caprice or gross error is subject to being held liable for losses and damages under the Civil procedure Code.
in this sense, Microsoft itself had been ordered to indemnify the company against whom filed a survey of action for suspecting that she improperly used their programs, what is left unchecked . In this case, there was condemnation for moral damages, on the grounds that the Writ was filed for mere oversight without any evidence of irregularities in the use of property of the appellant software, extrapolating the right as guaranteed by law.
in other words, the survey in the user company software, the manufacturers of such products is possible, but the obligation exists only by court order, and by piracy evidence (unlicensed use), it is not for the imposition of such inspection administratively, leaving it to the company receiving such communications (notifications), the compliance or otherwise of requests presented there.
Still, it is recommended that companies receiving such contacts perform licenses of surveys of existing software, and regular use, and in case of non-compliance, make the necessary adjustments, given that in some situations the software use irregularity may not be aware of the responsible for the company because they are measures taken by staff iT, or even by third-party service providers.
it is possible, moreover, that the announcements of proprietary software are met, and made the required procedures, which are not as invasive as it via rule, the initial intention is not to take legal action, but encourage the settlement, with the sale of the deficit in licenses. Software installation, personal survey on company computers no longer seem feasible measures to be accepted because it can expose sensitive data or access the company does not intend to allow third parties.
Finally, it is noteworthy that companies using software need to be aware of such legislation, preventing the use is irregular, not to be surprised with such responsibilities. Remember that each user of the company must have the license of the software you use.
No comments:
Post a Comment