Felix Salmon debunks recent claims of a $500 million seizure of counterfeit software, demonstrating why the claims are enormously overstated.
Deconstructing Counterfeit Software Claims
August 1, 2007
Share this post
One Comment
Law Bytes
Episode 199: Boris Bytensky on the Criminal Code Reforms in the Online Harms Act
byMichael Geist
April 15, 2024
Michael Geist
April 8, 2024
Michael Geist
March 25, 2024
Michael Geist
March 18, 2024
Michael Geist
March 11, 2024
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Recent Posts
- Debating the Online Harms Act: Insights from Two Recent Panels on Bill C-63
- The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 199: Boris Bytensky on the Criminal Code Reforms in the Online Harms Act
- AI Spending is Not an AI Strategy: Why the Government’s Artificial Intelligence Plan Avoids the Hard Governance Questions
- The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 198: Richard Moon on the Return of the Section 13 Hate Speech Provision in the Online Harms Act
- Tweets Are Not Enough: Why Combatting Relentless Antisemitism in Canada Requires Real Leadership and Action
Counterfeit vs Unauthorised, Perfect Cop
Let’s also debunk some semantic abuse going on with respect to counterfeits and copies of digital works.
A counterfeit is an often inferior product manufactured at lower cost (for profits at a very competitive price) designed to deceive the purchaser that it represents the product and manufacturer they are familiar with and expecting.
When people purchase software, they care little whether the acetate disks will last 5 years or 50 years, as long as they are buying MS software made by MS.
There are many people very happy to buy unauthorised copies of MS software, as long as they aren’t being deceived. Such copies are not counterfeits, but unauthorised copies. Being digital, the copy is perfect, interchangeable with the original and just as good.
There’s a comparable issue concerning imitation Gucci bags or imitation Rolex watches, as opposed to counterfeit Gucci bags or Rolex watches. As long as the customer is being sold an imitation rather than a counterfeit, they are quite happy to make the purchase (paying according to their value).
Imitations unavoidably infringe the original manufacturer’s trademark, but that doesn’t mean the imitation is a counterfeit.
Unfortunately, because counterfeiting is plainly unethical, whereas copyright infringement is arguably not, the former term is extended as an umbrella term to include the latter – and thus help deceive the public that a greater crime is being committed than is actually the case.