Slashdot Mirror
Contracts Contracts Contracts
An anonymous reader submits: "There's an article over at CNet about all those software contracts that are out there, and what to watch for before signing the dotted line. Using California's $95 million Oracle problem, they define what the general terms are that get used in software procurement and support contracts. While mostly geared at commercial software, one can use most of this article to target open source tech support contracts."
I've discovered that most companies that I've "contracted" with won't use the open source suggestions I give them simply cuz they can't SUE someone if things go wrong. I also state in my contract that they can't sue me for anything other than bad programming and for them to prove that! Ha!
when they ban enctryption only criminals wi$21*J *#JF$%!@#$':
At least in California, the list of "things to watch for before the contract gets signed" is pretty short:
1) A $25,000 campaign donation to the Governor's re-election fund.
do you want the easy money out of contracts and the secret to avoiding bad contracts?
sign below and I'll tell you.
x__________________________
Jesus saves souls and redeems them for valuable cash prizes
I have to sign up for a Verisign test server certificate every two weeks. As part of this, I have to agree to a lengthy service agreement displayed in an editable TEXTAREA. Of course, I always delete the contract text before agreeing to it.
When perusing a software contract, beware any clauses containing language similar to this:
Client agrees that all clients database are belong to us. You have no chance to appeal.
Well, this is interesting.
I was hired this summer by a large corporation (4,000+ employees and will otherwise go nameless) to do software cost analysis on their mainframe software. They hired me precisely for this reason: to analyze each contract and summarize their software license/maintenance costs for the current year and into the future.
Thankfully, my company has been in business since the 1960's and are pros when it comes to language in the contracts. I mostly do work with mainframes, and I've found a few keys to look for:
1. Hardware upgrades - Many companies will charge additional license fees for upgrades to mainframe CPU's (often in MIPS or MSU ratings)
2. Maintenance - It is important to put some kind of "cap" on maintenance. A typical example: "maintenance shall not exceed the lesser of 15% of current license fee or 10% over the previous year." Also, it must be assumed that fees *WILL* increase the maxiumum allowable charge under the contract.
3. Usage - In a large corporate setting, companies often must pay for the use of software on multiple sites or for use of partially owned, divested, or acquired entities.
As you can see, the charges mount quickly. That's why it's essential only to run the software necessary, and nothing more.
-Bullseye
In several other industries, there are "standard contracts", and I think it is well past time that became the case in the Software Industry. A specific example is the Building/Construction industry. They have "AIA" (I forget what that stands for, but it should be easy to find) standard contracts that they can call on so everyone is on the same page. A very good idea.
One reason I love Open Source software is that there are only a few licenses that I have to know about, and just by knowing the name of them, for example knowing something falls under the "GPL", or a "BSD" license, I know EXACTLY what to expect. This is of immense value to me as a user of software.
I think that property should be more heavily emphasized by the Open Source industry.
Frankly, I don't know why people put up with the EULA uncertainty and why the courts let Software companies take advantage of people in that fashion. They don't for most other products, heck even "media/content" products.
Erich Boleyn
erich@uruk.org
Nope, no sig
"We comb through each word of every contract to make sure that the definitions that we think we agree to are the ones that are written into the document. It is worth the extra time and money to avoid getting jewed by the other party." said Stephen Weinberg, CTO of Dimension Securities.
I realize that the man is probably Jewish, and that he works in an industry that this type of language is the norm, but holy cow, does CNet have to print it?
It's bad enough that such epithets exist and are used, but does the man have to slander his own race by using the term? It's like black people who have struggled to gain acceptance in society and transcend racial stereotypes calling each other 'nigger'. It's sad.
Maybe it's just the paternalistic white man in me that's struck by how backwards the use of these terms is. Maybe my sensibilities are too high. In any case, I guess the only thing I can do is avoid using these words altogether.
>
>Since it was a government contract, the money belonged to the taxpayers of California... Am I to intrepret your post as a knock on Californians ?
I'm not gonna speak for the original poster, but consider what Californyuh's facing.
$23B deficit, budget at an impasse (to be fixed using Enronesque off-balance-sheet financing tricks that won't show up in higher taxes until after the election), mismanaged power crisis, highly questionable Oracle deal, pay-for-play legislation for pipefitters unions (in exchange for campaign donations, banning PVC pipe because it's cheaper to install than metal, which the pipefitters oppose) and prison guards' unions (similar exchange: give campaign funds, get favorable legislation).
Dot-com implosion started in 2000. Last time I looked, this was 2002. Anyone here not able to guess that capital gains taxes would drop precipitously, resulting in a drop in state revenues? Yet spending is up, year-over-year, by a rate far over that of inflation. Up 20% this year alone. Oh, right. This is CA, where only budget that matters is the campaign budget.
Yet Davis still leads in the polls. So yeah, it looks like a taxpayer and his money are easily parted.
But I'll be charitable and withhold judgement until after the elections.
ummm....the pvc banning isn't just a union thing
My house was built with (illegal in our county) internal pvc supply lines about 15 years ago.
Last August a pipe broke and flooded two rooms, destroyed wallpaper, drywall, etc...
Copper pipes would not have had a problem.
And Davis leading the polls....look who his opponent is (Bill Simon). Needless to say if Reirden had won the primaries, Davis would be falling fast.
I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
The article states that a perpetual software license means that you can use it for the life of the product provided that you continue to pay the contract fees.
As I understand things, a perpetual license really means that once the software is licensed in a particular way, you can go on using it as long as you want. You will run out of support for it after your contract term is up, but you can still make use of the software.
I have run across this type of license often. It is tied to a hardware component, dongle, or (rarely) a particular site. I have fixed many an older machine just for the use of the software licenses attached to it. The contracts clearly stated the word 'perpetual' when defining the license.
In many cases, a physical device is used in combination with FlexLM to provide the license functionality. If you do fail to pay your fees and want to move the license, many companies will either require you to purchase a new license (at the current version) or pay all back fees to get a new license key for the version that was in use.
Anyone else think this definition is bogus, or was I misunderstanding what I was seeing?
This type of experience was one of the primary motivators for me to begin exploring OSS for my computing needs.
If you can learn to compile and use Open Source software, then you are set for life.
Blogging because I can...