[snip]
>
>I sincerely doubt that MS will come after you to make an example.

Sincerity is no guarantee of being right:
http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2393620,00.html
When you look at this story, how many will immediately conclude that the charge itself is equivelent to guilt. That is, they are guilty until they prove themselves innocent.

Put '"Business Software Alliance" goes after little people' into google and you will see several hundred stories about piracy.

[snip]
>
>They already do - sort of. They and other S/W companies (Symantec and Oracle for example) are part of a Consortium that have legal offices, have sent out letters (I received two as a matter of fact.) demanding a self-audit, use of a third party auditing S/W package called 'GASP', etc... They state in the letter that I'd be better off safe than sorry - *after* an ex-employee, for example, reports me for using illegal software. (I have no 'ex-employees' being a one-man shop.) I can't blame them for pushing for licensing.
>I checked the consortium out, talked with them, asked them about their legal rights, probable cause, search and seizure, etc. When I was satisifed that they were not bogus and were exercising their legal right I filled out their questionaire truthfully (1 MSDN Universal Subscription, 2 desktops and a laptop) and returned it. Haven't heard from them since and that was early spring.

You talked to the BSA?
Curious.... Who did you reach? What authority do they have to speak for the BSA and be quoted publically?