Slashdot Mirror
SAP License Fees Also Due For Indirect Users, Court Rules (networkworld.com)
SAP's licensing fees "apply even to related applications that only offer users indirect visibility of SAP data," according to a Thursday ruling by a U.K. judge. Slashdot reader ahbond quotes Network World:
The consequences could be far-reaching for businesses that have integrated their customer-facing systems with an SAP database, potentially leaving them liable for license fees for every customer that accesses their online store. "If any SAP systems are being indirectly triggered, even if incidentally, and from anywhere in the world, then there are uncategorized and unpriced costs stacking up in the background," warned Robin Fry, a director at software licensing consultancy Cerno Professional Services, who has been following the case...
What's in dispute was whether the SAP PI license fee alone is sufficient to allow Diageo's sales staff and customers to access the SAP data store via the Salesforce apps, or whether, as SAP claims, those staff and customers had to be named as users and a corresponding license fee paid. On Thursday, the judge sided with SAP on that question.
What's in dispute was whether the SAP PI license fee alone is sufficient to allow Diageo's sales staff and customers to access the SAP data store via the Salesforce apps, or whether, as SAP claims, those staff and customers had to be named as users and a corresponding license fee paid. On Thursday, the judge sided with SAP on that question.
what could possibly go wrong?
I have talked to dozens of SAP customers, and I always ask them "Are you happy that you decided to go with SAP?". So far, this is that number that have answered affirmatively: 0.
While my gut reaction is "this is outrageous!", I have been approached by several clients asking me to create systems/applications that would act solely as a proxy to allow them to skirt licensing costs. I want to believe that's what happened here but it's hard to say without actually seeing what the application did and how "indirect" it truly was. If a small piece of functionality was pulling reporting data from SAP that's one thing, if the primary purpose was to just to present data to users through a single license, that's another.
and there's no way SAP will allow someone to see data from their ERP system without paying for it. We've invested over $200 million in licensing fees and configuration. That isn't counting the money we've lost since it doesn't fit into our company's business model very well. After an audit in 1996 when we exposed data via a web site that I wrote in C in 1996 (which was like digging a hole to China with a spoon), we've paid user fees for customers since they have access to a small portion of their ERP data. It's great that we have a "single source of truth" with SAP and in the previous ten years before 1993 when we didn't use SAP things were just a disaster, but it's not worth the cost. Over my company's 45 year history, we've had total profits less than what we've pad to SAP which isn't including the about $75 million we spend in configuration.
According to:
https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/mx/Documents/human-capital/01_ERP_Top10_Challenges.pdf
" 55% to 75% of all ERP projects fail to meet their objectives." I don't see how that number is not larger considering the difficulty in getting SAP to do even basic stuff and the cost of customization. From talking to friends that use SAP, I would guess the failure number would be well over 90%.
Well, once you've got it, I suspect getting away from it is HARD.
And they sell it to the C-suite, not the people who will have to run it or use it.
A thousand pounds of wood moving at 300 feet per minute. Don't get in the way.