US government to pay $50m after 'piracy' of software

Quote:

---

The US government has agreed to pay $50m (£31m) after it was said to have pirated "thousands" of copies of military software.

Apptricity, based in Texas, has provided logistics programs to the army since 2004.

The company said it had discovered last year the software had been installed on many more machines than had been licensed.

The Department of Justice has not commented on the settlement.

The Dallas Morning News reported a DoJ spokeswoman had confirmed the agreement, but would not give more details.

Apptricity's software allows the military to track the movements of soldiers as well as key supplies.

It has also been used during relief efforts, most notably in Haiti following the 2010 earthquake.

According to court documents filed in 2012, the deal with the military meant up to 500 named users could access the software.
Presentation revelation

Apptricity later estimated that 9,000 users were accessing the program, in addition to the 500 that had been paid for.

The unauthorised copying only came to light after a US Army official mentioned "thousands" of devices running the software during a presentation on technology.

Apptricity called for $224m (£137m) to be paid to cover costs.

The settlement of $50m falls some way short - but in a statement the company said Apptricity would spend the sum on expanding the company.

"Apptricity is now incredibly energised to use the settlement resolution as a catalyst for aggressive investment in our team, our solutions and our untapped market opportunities," said Randy Lieberman, Apptricity's chief financial officer.

In recent years, the US government has stepped up efforts to combat piracy, announcing a wide-ranging strategy for clamping down in 2010.

"Piracy is theft, clean and simple," remarked vice-president Joe Biden at the time.

---

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-25137089


Read this during work today and made me and my colleagues laugh at this. The US govt. who have been going after pirate sites themselves and to shut them down as been caught pirating software themselves. Who would have thought it eh!?

Governments and institutions are always above the law, the same for politcians. Take the European Parliament and the European Commission for example - they love talking about clamping down on tax avoidance, yet they're all exempt from paying the same tax rates as everybody else! You couldn't make it up as they say.

The best example of government hypocrisy similar to the story you've posted is what Ron Paul always talks about - if you as a private citizen in America printed your own dollars, you'd be arrested and sent to prison for currency manipulation. But the politicians in the Federal Reserve do exactly that. :P Theft by citizens = bad, theft by the state = hey, no problem.

On almost every subject they do the opposite of what they preach. It's why i'm so sceptical, with good reason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

The best example of government hypocrisy similar to the story you've posted is what Ron Paul always talks about - if you as a private citizen in America printed your own dollars, you'd be arrested and sent to prison for currency manipulation. But the politicians in the Federal Reserve do exactly that. :P Theft by citizens = bad, theft by the state = hey, no problem.

---

I think the difference is the currency belongs to the country, not the individual. They also have economists to justify their decisions. Also the money they print doesn't go to a select group or individual it goes towards the government which in turn gives back to everyone either through tax reductions or services.

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Governments and institutions are always above the law, the same for politcians.

---

I think the point of the article is they aren't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chippiewill

I think the difference is the currency belongs to the country, not the individual. They also have economists to justify their decisions. Also the money they print doesn't go to a select group or individual it goes towards the government which in turn gives back to everyone either through tax reductions or services.

---

Just because it's a government printing money to pay off it's debts (and what is a government? Government itself is just a collection of individuals) doesn't mean it makes anymore economic sense to do so. And psst, printing money doesn't result in anymore services being provided at all because the money is devalued and you're getting less value per buck spent than you would have done beforehand.

And printing money doesn't go back to individuals? You sure about that? The fact that the 1% have become more and more wealthy is due to the fact that this money is given to the banks - which are private companies and thus owned by individuals - is exactly because the money supply is being manipulated and the wealthy are doing very well out of it as by the time it reaches those at the bottom, it's been devalued.

Core Austrian economic theory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chippiewill

I think the point of the article is they aren't.

---

This one time they've been held to account, sure - which is what's so surprising. :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

all because the money is devalued and you're getting less value per buck spent than you would have done beforehand.

---

You seem to be under the false impression that currency being devalued is a bad thing. If a currency were running under a structure of no printing money or gold standard then you'd end up with the ridiculous situation which bitcoin is in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chippiewill

You seem to be under the false impression that currency being devalued is a bad thing. If a currency were running under a structure of no printing money or gold standard then you'd end up with the ridiculous situation which bitcoin is in.

---

A currency being devalued is a bad thing as ultimately it destroys savings and continues the Keynesian theory that spending = the economy when really, saving & productions = the economy. There's no doubt that when all currencies are fiat currencies, that devaluation (which is a massive confiscation of wealth by the state from the population) can stall for time - but at the same time it destroys confidence, as who would invest in an economy where the wealth is being cut up and taken away? The reason afterall that we have boom and bust like in 2008 - or at least according to the Austrian Business Cycle - is because of the printing of currency by the state which then creates an artificial credit bubble that will burst as surely as night follows day.

I'm certainly for the return of a gold standard type system, and at the very least i'd move central bank policy back from the BoE to Parliament.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

as who would invest in an economy where the wealth is being cut up and taken away?

---

Woho would spend in an economy where waiting and saving is always a better move long term? Ultimately it means the wealthy who can survive without spending significant portions of their wealth.. get wealthier. Meanwhile the poor simply can't afford to save.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chippiewill

Woho would spend in an economy where waiting and saving is always a better move long term? Ultimately it means the wealthy who can survive without spending significant portions of their wealth.. get wealthier. Meanwhile the poor simply can't afford to save.

---

And where do wealthy people put their money?

The banks, not under their pillows.

Who lends from the banks?

The poor (some, not all) and the middle class (mainly) who then start a business using that money.

Remember, turning on the printing presses hurts the poor even more as they have less money and are generally more hurt whenever there is inflation whereas the more wealthy can weather any inflation that is caused by manipulating the money supply.

Is it better to fill the vaults of the banks up with constantly devalued notes that are issued by a central bank or is it better to have the banks stocked over time with a gold-backed currency by the savings people put away which are then recycled and used as loans for others? Which of the two do you think promotes better spending and savings habits not just for government but for individuals (which then removes the need for a huge welfare state as people would fall back on their savings when times are tough)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

And where do wealthy people put their money?

The banks, not under their pillows.

---

Exactly, and in a fixed quantity currency (aka gold standard or no printing) that money will increase in value over time. They'll just save it, forever. Never spend it. Guess who can't save the majority of their earnings? the poor and the middle class. What happens to their money? They have to spend it.

You're making the false assumption that that the poor and middle have significant cash savings which is simply false. When currency is devalued it devalues the wealth of the rich, most of the poor and middle class will have brick and mortar assets. Not liquid.