相信不少企业的CXO 经常接到各种软件维权的电话，一般以外资软件为主，动不动就以企业使用盗版或者授权数不足等理由，扬言发律师函或者法院起诉，有些电话语气强硬甚至威胁，往往年底或者企业有上市计划时候，高管接到的骚扰电话就格外多。
根据数字化转型网读者社区、微信社区一些读者的反馈，有些企业确实是使用了盗版软件，而有些是在公司禁止的情况下有员工私自安装破解版企业背锅，还有些CXO在我们的高管社群反馈本企业并未使用该公司软件（正版盗版都没有使用）也收到维权骚扰电话，怀疑维权者是在广撒网钓鱼。
打击盗版进行维权本是一件好事情，如果过度维权乃至广撒网式钓鱼维权，对企业管理层频繁恶意电话骚扰，早已是一件惹众怒的事情。中国电力规划设计协会这次站出来和这种恶意骚扰行为正面硬怼，在今年2月份代表协会会员单位向北京市公安局进行举报投诉，声称这两年协会会员单位收到大量的Autodesk的函件和骚扰电话，很多电话直接打给法人和董事长，对企业正常经营造成严重干扰。
北京市公安局西城分局5月对该案进行立案，12月13号进行了正式回复，调查结果令人大跌眼镜：警方调查发现，主张权利的欧特克软件（中国）有限公司与Autodesk Asia pte.ltd（可能是版权方）在法律上并无关联，而且欧特克软件（中国）有限公司在国内没有直接销售Auto CAD的权利，其强迫交易的行为正在进行补充侦查。
软件正版化是我国加入WTO后一直强调并大力推行的事情，但有些软件企业把版权维权这些脏活累活给国内代理商或者干脆外包给一些不知名小律所。这种行为一方面在法律授权上可能有一些不合规的地方，如这次被中字头协会举报的autocad和autodesk，此次在法律权利主张上确实出现了一些合规合法问题。另外一方面，有些代理维权的公司、律所为了完成盗版维权业绩压力，往往使用一些极端的手段，比如非法购买高管、股东、董事长的个人信息电话号码，频繁打电话骚扰（购买公民个人信息违法，50条入刑）。
还有维权公司使用钓鱼式手段，在一些破解软件网站上故意发布含有追踪木马后门的免费盗版软件，等企业员工下载使用后再收集商用证据进行敲诈式维权（涉嫌恶意敲诈）。又如广撒网式维权，猜测某些企业可能使用盗版或者用户数超出已购许可数，疯狂打骚扰电话，维权为假，实现变相销售增长为实的目的（频繁骚扰电话违法）。
以上这些行为本身有些已经触犯法律，以不正当手段维权不仅对品牌方的品牌形象造成负面影响，也侵犯了客户企业的合法权益。如果有同类型替代品，因为过度骚扰，客户转而购买替代性产品是迟早的事情，某些软件公司如果长期依仗自己暂时的技术领先优势和市场垄断地位肆意妄为的行为必自食恶果。
翻译：
It is believed that CXOs in many enterprises often receive calls about software rights protection, mainly foreign-funded software. They often threaten to send lawyers’ letters or Sue in court on the grounds of piracy or insufficient authorization. Some calls are tough or even threatening.
According to the feedback of some readers in the reader community of Digital transformation website and wechat community, some enterprises did use pirated software, and some employees installed the cracked version without permission under the company’s ban. Some CXOs also received harassing calls from our senior management community that they did not use the company’s software (not even the legitimate version or pirated version). Activists are casting a wide net.
It is a good thing to fight piracy and defend rights, but if the excessive rights protection and even the wide net fishing rights protection, the frequent malicious phone harassment of enterprise management, has already aroused public anger. In February, the China Electric Power Planning and Design Association filed a complaint with the Beijing Public Security Bureau on behalf of its members, claiming that in the past two years, its members have received a large number of Autodesk letters and harassing phone calls, many of which are directed to legal persons and the chairman of the board, causing serious interference to the normal operation of the company.
The Xicheng branch of the Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau filed the case in May and officially replied on December 13. The investigation results were shocking: The police investigation found that Autodesk Software (China) Co., Ltd. and Autodesk Asia pte.ltd. (possibly the copyright owner) are not legally related, and Autodesk Software (China) Co., Ltd. does not have the right to sell Auto CAD directly in China, and its forced trade behavior is being investigated.
Software legalization is something that our country has been stressed and vigorously promoted after joining WTO. But some software enterprises to safeguard copyright rights these dirty work to domestic agents or outsourcing to an unknown small law firm. On the one hand, this kind of behavior may have some irregularities in legal authorization. For example, autocad and autodesk, which were reported by the Chinese Character Association this time, did have some legal problems in legal rights claim. On the other hand, in order to fulfill the pressure of piracy rights protection performance, some companies and law firms often use some extreme means, such as illegally buying the personal information and phone numbers of executives, shareholders and chairmen, and frequent phone calls to harassment (buying citizens’ personal information is illegal, 50 pieces of punishment).
Some rights protection companies use phishing methods to deliberately release free pirated software containing Trojan horse backdoors on some cracking software websites, and then collect commercial evidence for extortion rights protection (suspected of malicious blackmail) after employees download and use the software. Another example is the wide net rights protection, speculation that some enterprises may use piracy or the number of users exceeds the number of purchased licenses, crazy harassing calls, rights protection is false, achieve disguised sales growth for the purpose of reality (frequent harassing calls are illegal).
Some of the above behaviors have violated the law. Safeguarding rights by improper means not only has a negative impact on the brand image of the brand owner, but also infringes the legitimate rights and interests of the customer enterprises. If similar alternatives are available, it is only a matter of time before customers switch to alternative products because of excessive harassment, and some software companies will suffer the consequences if they rely on their temporary technological lead and market monopoly for too long.
本文由数字化转型网（www.szhzxw.cn）根据公开素材及采访而成，作者：数字化转型网木铎；编辑/翻译：数字化转型网默然。
免责声明: 本网站(https://www.szhzxw.cn/)内容主要来自原创、合作媒体供稿和第三方投稿，凡在本网站出现的信息，均仅供参考。本网站将尽力确保所提供信息的准确性及可靠性，但不保证有关资料的准确性及可靠性，读者在使用前请进一步核实，并对任何自主决定的行为负责。本网站对有关资料所引致的错误、不确或遗漏，概不负任何法律责任。
本网站刊载的所有内容(包括但不仅限文字、图片、LOGO、音频、视频、软件、程序等) 版权归原作者所有。任何单位或个人认为本网站中的内容可能涉嫌侵犯其知识产权或存在不实内容时，请及时通知本站，予以删除。
