Slashdot Mirror
Software Audits: How High-Tech Software Vendors Play Hardball (infoworld.com)
snydeq writes: InfoWorld's Dan Tynan offers an inside look at how high-tech software vendors such as Adobe, Oracle, and IBM play hardball over software licensing, pushing customers to "true up" to the tune of billions of dollars per year -- and using the threat of audits as a sales tool to close lucrative deals. "When it comes to software audits, the code of omerta prevails," Tynan writes. "It's not a question of whether your organizations' software licenses will get audited. It's only a question of when, how often, and how painful the audits will be. The shakedown is such a sure thing that nearly every customer we contacted asked us to keep their names out of this story, lest it make their employers a target for future audits."
several times as many CALs as have employees, we're moving what we can to Linux.
The only audits of open source software are to remove bugs. Ditch proprietary software and this isn't an issue.
This is why I only use FLOSS software in my business, and why I don't care which Free/Libre/Open license it is.
Freedom means some external entity can't interfere or try to pull the rug out. I have what I have, I know what it is, and nothing will change unless I accept change.
Software is immensely expensive to create. The bigger, real world systems actually in use cost a fortune in real money to create because the bigger and more complex they get, the more people are needed to try to increase productivity by increasingly small percentages.
The money has to come from somewhere. If companies can't pay their programmers, the software stops being made. The open source model is an alternative in SOME cases - but not all.
Software is pathetically easy to steal. Somehow the companies making the software need to get paid. Going after individual thieves is a waste of time, but targeting corporations with deep pockets makes perfect sense.
Sue Joe Smoe for ripping off Microsoft Office, and you won't recover enough to pay your lawyers and the fees to file the lawsuit. Sue Exxon because they paid for 1000 copies of Office but used 10,000, and they will be able to pay any court judgement. You can ask the courts for your legal fees, the cost of the software they stole, and compensation for your trouble.
Not see what is unfair or unjust about this. The "hardball" tactic described here is to find companies that are stealing software, and offer them this "true up" deal. This is just a pre-lawsuit bargain - they pay a lot less than they would pay if there were a court judgement, you get your money now. Sounds fair and reasonable to me.
If companies don't want to face this risk, they can use open source software. Oh, it costs them more to have an in house programmer staff to customize the software for their needs? (since open source stuff tends to be a bit rough around the edges) Then pay the damn commercial license fees, and buy a few more than you need just to be on the safe side.
The only audit I ever ran into came from Adobe, and it was for some product that I had signed off on the requisition for someone who ended up never using it anyway, but it was still my job to track down the original P.O. Not a huge deal, but it was a waste of a few hours along with accompanying anxiety. My solution to prevent a recurrence in the future: I will never approve a requisition for any product from Adobe ever again.
Ernie Ball
I did some work for a local government and Microsoft went back and forth with me on licensing. They wanted photos of all 75 computers product keys to prove they had OEM licenses for Win 7 Pro. Those that didnt have were covered by about 30 Windows 8 licenses I purchased with downgrade rights (Same price as Windows 7 and we dont use Windows 8). It went back and forth about 4-5 times and he really haggled over the most minute workstation licenses. I had sent proof on multiple occasions and they couldnt even verify my windows workstation licenses from a large reseller (I think Compugen). I eventually told the Microsoft licensing rep to stop bothering me and send me the finalized audit that showed i had valid licenses or go away. That was in 2013 I believe. We get them every 5 years. Also, online activation compared to licensing can lead to audits on corporate keys.
That's one of the reasons I switched to VirtualBox. The other reason was that VMWare pushed me to a new version that would not work on my upgraded Mac unless I paid again to upgrade the VMWare license. It's been on the shelf ever since :-)
In my distant past I was the guy who would made Oracle things happen for clients. But as I got more and more into dealing with clients I realized that Oracle is just a mean thing to do to people. One interesting part of the Oracle sales process seems to be to delay giving a final price. This way the project is well underway or even done before you present the client with some sticker-shock.
Then there were the prices themselves. I deployed quite a number of systems and could never predict the price. Would it be $30,000 or $300,000.
Then there were the end runs. Once Oracle got ahold of your client they were perfectly happy to see you swapped out and replaced with another consultancy who would slather the entire client with Oracle products. It was bordering on Oracle Doorbell for all your ding-dong needs.
There is no way I would ever use a solution that results in a company like that able to mess with my clients. No Microsoft, no Oracle, no IBM, or SAP.
My favourite is when I have a client who is in the process of throwing them out and they ask, "What will it cost to licence MariaDB." Then when they ask, "Can it handle our Enterprise database?" I will say, "Your $400,000 system has 40,000 rows of data in it. A $25 raspberry Pi could handle your needs." Then they ask about per seat licensing costs. "None." At this point I can see them fishing around in their heads for how they are going to be screwed; suddenly it dawns on them that the screwing is now over. They then go through a list of features that they have built up over time but couldn't afford. When they get the quote for those they pretty much throw up in disgust at how badly they had been treated over the years.
When they put it all together they realise that their previous consultant hadn't been working for them but effectively for a company like Oracle.
It has been over a decade since I dumped everything Oracle and will never go back.
An attorney told me that those audit clauses in contracts are effectively unenforceable and you should just refuse to let them audit you.
Boxed software licensing stupidity pushed us into the cloud.
We are a private school, and we got tired of constantly tracking our licensing status. Do we have enough AV seats? Do we have enough Exchange and SQL cals?
Enough is enough.
We put our staff on Mac OS and we put the kids on Chromebooks and Google Apps. Our experience with Microsoft's crazy licensing schemes was one of the reasons we didn't even consider their "cloud" solutions. Yes, an E1 Office 365 is free for schools, but Google Apps and Chromebooks are dead simple and the staff and students really like them.
We kicked Adobe to the curb for the same reasons. The licensing and compliance costs, even for Edu, were absurd.
While much of the software used in my workplace has some very annoying licence management software to punish the honest, it at least does not trap people by letting them go into non-compliance so the legal vultures can come in and feast.
If your software allows 835 seats when you are only allowed 800 it's either a deliberate trap or incompetence on the part of the vendor or whoever they have bought their licence management software from.
If seat 801 can start up then someone on the vendor side has fucked up, or it's a trap.
I agree.
But, having done many myself, what actually happens is that the Chef will try charging you for 6 sandwiches. You will say, hey, look, I only got 3. And he will say, prove it. So you have to measure your feces to prove it is only the weight 3 sandwiches would produce. He will then reply, maybe you are constipated, so that isn't proof. You then take a laxative, and show him that your bowels were empty, and indeed only received 3 sandwiches. He will then agree over the phone, and send you an updated license position statement, clearly showing you received 3 sandwiches, but only paid for two. You then have to go through the whole exercise again before the Chef understands. Meanwhile, you spend 30+ unproductive hours convincing some "sandwich artist" you aren't a thief.
I think for every hour over 2 spent on an audit that doesn't result in "fines", the client should be reimbursed at market rate for IT in that area. VL are more expensive than advertised when you include the audits! From my recent experiences, it looks like MS is making them more frequent now too, closer to every 2-3 years instead of 5-8 like it used to be!
The people I talk to online tell me KiCad is crap compared to even Eagle.
Funnily enough the people I talk to online tell me the opposite. That includes the exchange between me and my board house, which went something like:"
"How do I get you to make those slots plated"
"er, are you using eagle?"
"yeah..."
"Put it in as chain drilling of plated through holes, and I'll fix it up before sending it to production. But if you want a lot, you should consider switching to KiCad. It's better anyway. Have you seen the push routing?"
SJW n. One who posts facts.