Jim I've found that my college has copies of the latest windows os which they give to the students, they also have a tech dept that will repair students puters fer free! How cool is that :)-->
Another cool deal I heard of was a college that would sell you an educational copy of Adobe Creative Suite, enroll you in the college and give you a web course on it. The cost was about $600 vs around $3000 for the full-up business license.
When I was installing Win2003, I was confused about how the client licenses were tracked, as I had to pay for a fixed number of them. Searching usenet I learned that the client license tracking process was essentially broke and should be left turned off and you were on the honor system for the number of clients you served.
I'm convinced that you should never have to pay full pop for software.
Except that in the Terms & Conditions on academic software licenses, utilizing an academic version for any type of commercial use violates the license. So, you may get a cheap copy of Adobe Creative Suite, but you can't sell anything you make, nor even use it for business purposes of any sort.
Of course, if you don't care about such things, that's up to you. It's not like they can monitor what is done with every single copy, but if it ever did come down to a court battle, you'd lose.
Speaking of deals for students - if you are a student or work for a university or other school, sign up at studentuniverse.com and you can get GREAT! deals on airfare.
quote:Of course, if you don't care about such things, that's up to you. It's not like they can monitor what is done with every single copy, but if it ever did come down to a court battle, you'd lose.
Manditory "I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice" disclaimer.
I'm pretty sure that the shrinkwrap license agreement concept has never been tested in court and at this point, I'm not so sure Big Software would want to risk testing it. I'm doing my best to keep everything legal copyrightwise. A little sliding here or there on the licensing "agreement" is another matter.
Well, Jim, the shrinkwrap license agreement concept HAS gone to court.
In the city of Chicago there's even a whistle-blower hotline for people to call in about software license violations, and some companies have paid pretty hefty fines in the last several years because of license violations.
Got a cite? I'd like to look at it. I know people have been busted for copyright violations, but I've never heard of a clear cut license violation case.
Just so we're on the same track, a copyright violation is where you're running software that you did not pay for and that you or someone else made an illegal copy of. Yes, people have been busted for that.
Now a license violation is using software that was legally purchased, but in a way that is not in agreement with the shrinkwrap license.
There's a big difference. A copyright violation is breaking a law that the government enforces.
A license violation is a civil dispute, and must be resolved in court or by negotiations between the 2 parties.
Note that it is to the advantage of Big Software and Big Media to confuse the two issues in the minds of consumers so that they will tend to comply with licensing agreements as if they were law.
Adobe tried to ban unbundling and reselling of it's software from packages by a clause in the shrinkwrap license. The courts ruled that this violated the "doctrine of first sale" and was not enforceable. The ruling also decreed that software purchases be treated as sales transactions, rather than explicit license agreeements.
Another reason that the distinction between the two are blurred is from the way that Microsoft and BSA have busted government and corporations.
If you're a large user of Microsoft product, you generally negotiate a site license. This is a pen-and-ink document that gives you a reduced price for your bulk purchase of their software. But it also gives Microsoft or their representitive the right to enter your business and conduct an audit. What happens is that a disgruntled employee notices that you're running more software than you're licensed for, drops a dime to Microsoft, Microsoft sends out the audit boys and you're in the news.
Otherwise they'd have persuade a DA to persuade a judge to issue a search warrant to check compliance, something that they've pretty much reserved for blatant criminal violations.
I'm a former business anaylst for Liberty Mutual info systems. My job was to audit our people for compliance (it was very interesting seeing what every remote user had on their harddrives, letmetellyou!).
In some of the dealing with MicroSucks, such as with my company, MS can also require you to upgrade all users if your old agreement with them has expired. Once that expiration date hits, per the contract, your company can owe them $$ for each day each user (even if they're out on vacation!) has MS's license sitting on their desktop. If you have more users than licenses, then you pay for the licenses - even if the licenses aren't assigned to a user.
In short - read the fine print. It sounds like your company is small, but what happens when you sign employee/computer user #11 onto the payroll? Can you purchase a single user license then? Or do you have to buy another bulk of licenses? What about the expiration of the license - will be you required to upgrade?
Be careful my friend, nothing with MicroSoft is quick, easy and CHEEP!
Recommended Posts
herbiejuan
Jim I've found that my college has copies of the latest windows os which they give to the students, they also have a tech dept that will repair students puters fer free! How cool is that
:)-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jim
I've heard of that and it's cool.
Another cool deal I heard of was a college that would sell you an educational copy of Adobe Creative Suite, enroll you in the college and give you a web course on it. The cost was about $600 vs around $3000 for the full-up business license.
When I was installing Win2003, I was confused about how the client licenses were tracked, as I had to pay for a fixed number of them. Searching usenet I learned that the client license tracking process was essentially broke and should be left turned off and you were on the honor system for the number of clients you served.
I'm convinced that you should never have to pay full pop for software.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zixar
Except that in the Terms & Conditions on academic software licenses, utilizing an academic version for any type of commercial use violates the license. So, you may get a cheap copy of Adobe Creative Suite, but you can't sell anything you make, nor even use it for business purposes of any sort.
Of course, if you don't care about such things, that's up to you. It's not like they can monitor what is done with every single copy, but if it ever did come down to a court battle, you'd lose.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve!
Speaking of deals for students - if you are a student or work for a university or other school, sign up at studentuniverse.com and you can get GREAT! deals on airfare.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jim
Manditory "I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice" disclaimer.
I'm pretty sure that the shrinkwrap license agreement concept has never been tested in court and at this point, I'm not so sure Big Software would want to risk testing it. I'm doing my best to keep everything legal copyrightwise. A little sliding here or there on the licensing "agreement" is another matter.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve!
Well, Jim, the shrinkwrap license agreement concept HAS gone to court.
In the city of Chicago there's even a whistle-blower hotline for people to call in about software license violations, and some companies have paid pretty hefty fines in the last several years because of license violations.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jim
Got a cite? I'd like to look at it. I know people have been busted for copyright violations, but I've never heard of a clear cut license violation case.
Just so we're on the same track, a copyright violation is where you're running software that you did not pay for and that you or someone else made an illegal copy of. Yes, people have been busted for that.
Now a license violation is using software that was legally purchased, but in a way that is not in agreement with the shrinkwrap license.
There's a big difference. A copyright violation is breaking a law that the government enforces.
A license violation is a civil dispute, and must be resolved in court or by negotiations between the 2 parties.
Note that it is to the advantage of Big Software and Big Media to confuse the two issues in the minds of consumers so that they will tend to comply with licensing agreements as if they were law.
Adobe tried to ban unbundling and reselling of it's software from packages by a clause in the shrinkwrap license. The courts ruled that this violated the "doctrine of first sale" and was not enforceable. The ruling also decreed that software purchases be treated as sales transactions, rather than explicit license agreeements.
http://www.fact-index.com/f/fi/first_sale_doctrine.html
Again, "I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve!
Well, then, I sit corrected. Yes, they were copyright violations.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jim
No problem, Steve.
Another reason that the distinction between the two are blurred is from the way that Microsoft and BSA have busted government and corporations.
If you're a large user of Microsoft product, you generally negotiate a site license. This is a pen-and-ink document that gives you a reduced price for your bulk purchase of their software. But it also gives Microsoft or their representitive the right to enter your business and conduct an audit. What happens is that a disgruntled employee notices that you're running more software than you're licensed for, drops a dime to Microsoft, Microsoft sends out the audit boys and you're in the news.
Otherwise they'd have persuade a DA to persuade a judge to issue a search warrant to check compliance, something that they've pretty much reserved for blatant criminal violations.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChasUFarley
I'm a former business anaylst for Liberty Mutual info systems. My job was to audit our people for compliance (it was very interesting seeing what every remote user had on their harddrives, letmetellyou!).
In some of the dealing with MicroSucks, such as with my company, MS can also require you to upgrade all users if your old agreement with them has expired. Once that expiration date hits, per the contract, your company can owe them $$ for each day each user (even if they're out on vacation!) has MS's license sitting on their desktop. If you have more users than licenses, then you pay for the licenses - even if the licenses aren't assigned to a user.
In short - read the fine print. It sounds like your company is small, but what happens when you sign employee/computer user #11 onto the payroll? Can you purchase a single user license then? Or do you have to buy another bulk of licenses? What about the expiration of the license - will be you required to upgrade?
Be careful my friend, nothing with MicroSoft is quick, easy and CHEEP!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.