illegal licenses solid edge

[TETRASTORE]

excuse shinobi9, do not consider this my statement, that I failed to correct in time assigned:

the statement "or I make you a fine or you pay me the license" is exposed by what I understand from a person who has no title in that sense and I think he only expressed it verbally as punishment; If he insists, tell him that he asks you in writing, you can swear that he won't, and words don't have legal value.

but consider this:

the statement: "or I make you the fine of euro tot or you pay me the license" is exposed, to what I understand, from a person who has no title in that sense and the written request as it was formulated by e-mail is appealable from the legal point of view and if you insist ask him to reform it via pec.

 

[shinobi9]

no boys we did not understand, I didn't take it at all indeed thank you for the info.with trivial and degenerate things I meant that it ended on the moral level and we absolutely agree that it is wrong because rightly people work behind us. They are things that sometimes do without thinking too much taken from the desire to learn new things. I thank everyone in particular for the advice.

 

[+forte]

confessing was stupid, because you could have untied the mail of the siemens, uninstalled the incriminated sw, or better formatted the pc, otherwise there were still traces
As long as you didn't have plans with that sw
and you were gdf-proof
Now, if you don't have solidedge projects in your office
you can bargain at the bottom of the price they made you
they shot high, you shoot the lowest price of the solidedge license

 

[shinobi9]

It was stupid and I think that certain subjects are based precisely on the unpreparedness and fear of the moment.without taking anything away from the error but it comes to me to say sharks with red fish. .

 

[stevie]

In any case it seems clear to me that the difference between private/professionals and business and commercial activities is made.

to me the difference between "professionals" and "business" seems a madness...both have p.ive and use the software for profit purposes, so differences are not there, and in recent years the only discriminating is the end of profit or not...

the only case in which you could close an eye is the student who downloads the software to learn it...and in fact I never heard that some software house tried to beat cash with a squattrinated student. . .

 

[stevie]

but the specific reasons I don't know them I think that very banally downloaded it because interested and wanted to keep it there in the pc and then use it calmly a little to the fly.
dettp this was obviously an error to download it illegally. . just that as I say it seems to me an absurd situation because I do not understand if and how lawful and legal it is to say "or buy it at a higher cost (among other things defined as?) or I make you fine more controls".
It's like a cop says to a thief or you give me the refurbishment or I'll arrest you to continue your comparisons.

Nooo is like you're being stopped by an anti-tacheggio from the supermarket and they say "or you pay everything or we'll report you." . .

There is no higher cost...they simply pay all active packages at the price of price list, without discounts...the fact that cracked versions are full premium super expert explains the exodus cost of the license

 

[stevie]

is not an increased price, but the normal cost of the license with the addition of all add-ons enabled by c r a c k.

to me it sounds strange that for thirty seconds of use the siemens has activated. They usually intervene on real illegal uses, and do well to protect the competition that the software pays them and therefore suffers from an extra cost than if it gets them with ease.

I believe that in the case of species the trial has been activated by inserting the data of the user...then finished the month they had the brilliant idea to load the crack to unlock the license, at that point the software has communicated to the central server that "pinco pallino " with license trial n° xxx expired has activated the software with other license n° yyy , at that point the yyfluent license was not authorized and therefore it started automatically

 

[+forte]

nooo is like you're being stopped by an anti-tacheggio from the supermarket and they say "or you pay everything or we'll report you." . .

there is no higher cost...they simply pay all active packages at the price of price list, without discounts...the fact that cracked versions are full premium super expert explains the exodus cost of the license

the dealer has forgotten that solidedge is possible to rent it, full price 500 euro\mese ,

Subscription Solid Edge

Solid Edge può essere acquistato in subscription sottoscrivendo un abbonamento mensile o annuale online oppure acquistando una licenza permanente tramite ENGINEERING spa. Guarda i Prezzi sul nostro sito

www.engineering.it

therefore, first of all, it must demonstrate that the licence is full
and then if they really used it for a few months and only confessed to use of a few months and did not invoice projects under the tarocca licence, at most they must 500 x a few months, at least 130 x a few months

 

[stevie]

the dealer has forgotten that solidedge is possible to rent it, full price 500 euro\mese ,

Subscription Solid Edge

Solid Edge può essere acquistato in subscription sottoscrivendo un abbonamento mensile o annuale online oppure acquistando una licenza permanente tramite ENGINEERING spa. Guarda i Prezzi sul nostro sito

www.engineering.it

Therefore, first of all, it must demonstrate that the licence is full
and then if they really used it for a few months and only confessed to use of a few months and did not invoice projects under the tarocca licence, at most they must 500 x a few months, at least 130 x a few months

probably the license activated is permanent. . .

And then I apologize for all these "slims" of the kind you used it to bill, you never used it, you used it for trial, etc... I think they're very interested for legal purposes... it's like stealing a dvd at the supermarket one justifies itself saying "but I haven't looked at it yet."

 

[TETRASTORE]

as an update to this discussion and also to That's another similar, I suggest to look questo recente video very interesting, that responds clearly and exhaustively to the various questions and concerns exposed by various users on the use of illegal software and, in particular, in the case of receipt of a distrust by the softwarehouse owner of the program used illegally.

In particular, the following topics are dealt with:How do anti-piracy controls happen?
How do I spy on pirate software?
What is the purpose of the trouble I receive?
how did you get my personal data?
I got a hard time! What do I do?
I got a search in the company, what do I do?

 

[+forte]

as an update to this discussion and also to That's another similar, I suggest to look questo recente video very interesting, that responds clearly and exhaustively to the various questions and concerns exposed by various users on the use of illegal software and, in particular, in the case of receipt of a distrust by the softwarehouse owner of the program used illegally.

In particular, the following topics are dealt with:How do anti-piracy controls happen?
How do I spy on pirate software?
What is the purpose of the trouble I receive?
how did you get my personal data?
I got a hard time! What do I do?
I got a search in the company, what do I do?

It is clear to a certain point that it does not clarify the point, that is, the personal data of the alleged cracked material user are sufficient to condemn the alleged craccato software user, but without the search and therefore without the acquisition of the alleged pirate licenses contained in the pc

 

[cacciatorino]

It is clear to a certain point that it does not clarify the point, that is, the personal data of the alleged cracked material user are sufficient to condemn the alleged craccato software user, but without the search and therefore without the acquisition of the alleged pirate licenses contained in the pc

I believe that for a conviction in a trial the investigation must be done by law enforcement. The software house is a private actor, so you can say what you want, but until there's an investigation, their word will go like that of the supposed pirate. but generally the software house I think has no interest in dragging you into an expensive process, but just selling you a expensive license.

I have very old software here, on request, I can't expose the purchase invoice (very old robe dating back to before the electronic billing).

 

[Fulvio Romano]

It's like a cop says to a thief or you give me the refurbishment or I'll arrest you to continue your comparisons.

No. It's like the owner of the minimarket finds you with the stolen goods in your pocket and says, "or you pay it or I'll give you for theft."
I don't see the problem.

 

[TETRASTORE]

It is clear to a certain point that it does not clarify the point, that is, the personal data of the alleged cracked material user are sufficient to condemn the alleged craccato software user, but without the search and therefore without the acquisition of the alleged pirate licenses contained in the pc

we see the two main legislative assumptions.

1) to hold and use computer programs functional to the conduct of the activity of free professionals (or private) without the mark s.i.a.e., it does not integrate crime (Article 171 bis l.d.a.), therefore hard disks and pcs cannot be seized for probatorial purposes, except if you try the use and abused duplication of these programs for the commercial or entrepreneurial purpose provided by the norm.

Whereas in this case there is no criminal offence but only a slight administrative penalty may be provided, it is difficult for a softwarehouse to carry out legal action against one of these subjects only on the basis of a data tracking. if you do so, you should also obtain financial intervention to confirm the presence of your software on the user's computer, then you could only claim damages. However, this would lead you to start a cause from the uncertain outcome and long times and without the certainty, in case of winning, to obtain the compensation requested in the face of significant legal expenses incurred.

2) different is the case in which the possession and use of illegal software by a company for which a criminal offence is also configured as well as the possibility of incurring a significantly higher penalty (from 2582 to 15493 €).

in this case, the tracking of the activity through information automatically transmitted by the program itself and the files generated and distributed, from which it is possible to desumerate a use of the illegal software, is sufficient to request the intervention of the g.d.f which will be able to search for evidence of the illegal use (both software and generated files) both on the company pcs and, potentially, also on those of any customers in possession of the same software, but legal, to which they were provided.
It is obvious that the company that receives the notification of abuse, will try to accept the conditions proposed by the softwarehouse (which looks randomly, often correspond to the maximum value of the penalty), because by making a simple economic calculation that understands the penalty, the legal expenses, the possible request for damages and the problems of image, will surely have the convenience to accept the transactive proposal.