IiS: Hello Mr CEO were are from an Asset managment software, do you have any?

CEO: No.

IiS: Would you like to buy any?

CEO:No.

IiS: Hi guys, we've got one for you, probebly dodgy as he won't buy our software/ can you do a raid please.

FAST: Of course we will. Here's £100 for the tip off.

...IiS are not, and have never been, a vendor. They're an industry "best practice" promoter and certification body.

Google is your friend. Please ask his advice before making an idiot of yourself in future.

Please remember / learn that FaST are no longer the primary enforcement agency as this is now done by Trading Standards

I have my original MS Office '97 CD with a license printed like a bank note. That is not enough to convince FAST. I can still use this software because I kept the receipt and it is (barely) legible. My DOS disks (original, honest and paid for) have had to go because the receipt faded to the point where I do not think it would keep FAST at bay.

Do you have all your receipts? Do you have a climate controlled room to keep them in? If not, there is no point in buying license management software.

http://www.smashingparticles.com/archives/2004/11/how_to_make_an_2.htm

... NEVER WAS an enforcement agency: it was/is a federation of private sector companies that is funded by, and in support of, private sector profits.

Its primary assumption is that individuals and companies must demonstrate to FaST that they have any software licences necessary, or be presumed to be involved in software piracy - see their "software audit notices" as posted out by the sackful to all and sundry, "requiring" just that.

That's the attitude that Stu Reeves was (quite rightly) referring to, albeit with tongue in cheek, and I didn't know that the assumption of guilt in the absence of proof of innocence was "industry best practice".

I've seen the complete mess that is Microsoft's LAR licence records, and the notion of trying to use these as the basis of a prosecution or civil action is a complete joke. Let them get an Anton Pillar order (civil search warrant), and bear the cost of that and the settlement of a compensation claim when the "piracy" suspicion evaporates like morning dew in the daylight, that should curb FaST enthusiasm. In the meantime, no doubt they will continue to try to bully and intimidate small businesses into buying unnecessary but expensive software audit tools, in the belief that these are "required" to prove legitimacy.

Do you seriously doubt for a moment that this is deliberately tending towards "If you don't run our asset management software then that proves you're guilty"?

I have an honest-to-Bill licensed copy of Office 2003 that Bill's minions gave me after suffering through an intolerably inane roll-out of some hype in Visual Studio. They didn't give me a receipt and the Kool-Aid drinkers were all there for free.

Does this mean the Gestapo will beat down my door and take me to the Gulag if I run my Office 2003?

('Scuze me... That would be Bill's copy of Office 2003 that he only grants me temporary use until he comes out with the equivalent of Vista for Office -- which he has, called Office 2007 -- and decides that Office 2003 licenses are no longer valid...)

I have to go. The Black Helicopters are here. Not to worry, though. They run Open Source so they shouldn't be in any danger... Or are they? Can you prove that you haven't violated the terms of that agreement? Oh, you can't.

Come with us. We're the Blacker Helicopter people. We are above the law. We are beyond the law. We are the Men In Blacker.