Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Tuesday April 07 2015, @02:53AM   Printer-friendly
from the how-to-drive-away-your-customers dept.

El Reg reports (on 27 Mar)

Software providers such as Microsoft and Oracle are aggressively targeting public sector customers with licence "audit reviews" in a bid to plug falling subscription revenue, according to research. Over one-third of the 436 councils surveyed across the UK have been subject to at least one software licence review in the last 20 months, according to a report from software licensing costs advice company Cerno. Of those, 60 per cent were found to be "under-licensed" and hit with a penalty of up to £50,000.

Out of 132 universities, one quarter have been subject to at least one software licence audit in the last 20 months, it said. "This survey confirms considerable activity in licence reviews by the major software vendors - principally Oracle and Microsoft - and, critically, the high incidence of penalty demands following the review," said Robin Fry, co-founder of Cerno.

gewg_ notes that the solution adopted last century by Dave Richards of the City of Largo, Florida and by Ernie Ball, Inc. keep looking better and better. (It cost the California company $100,000 before they saw the light.)

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 07 2015, @02:59AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 07 2015, @02:59AM (#167299)

    What if Software licences could be Free?

    • (Score: 5, Interesting) by sigma on Tuesday April 07 2015, @05:40AM

      by sigma (1225) on Tuesday April 07 2015, @05:40AM (#167329)

      What if Software licences could be Free?

      That's part of the reason MS has to lean so heavily on their remaining customers.

      Windows sales fell more than 13% in the first quarter of this year, but MS is under intense pressure to maintain revenue. Because of their former monopoly status as computer operating system provider, the result is much like the Utility Death Spiral [greentechmedia.com].

      10 More and more customers migrate to better alternatives.
      20 Fewer and fewer remain to pay for the fixed cost of maintaining MS's expected revenue stream.
      30 Microsoft strong-arms more and more heavily on their remaining locked-in customers.
      40 Customers have more incentive to search for ways to unlock and leave.
      50 Goto 10.

      Of course, MS knows this, which is why they're embracing the alternatives and dropping puff-piece press releases about open sourcing Windows [extremetech.com]. It'll be interesting to see if they succeed in escaping the spiral.

  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by anubi on Tuesday April 07 2015, @03:45AM

    by anubi (2828) on Tuesday April 07 2015, @03:45AM (#167307) Journal

    Politicians are the ones who voted all this copyright crap into law.

    Now, its going to come back to get them.

    Just as it is gets the rest of us.

    Paralyzing us with compliance to whatever someone else demands.

    No different than the back doors mandated into operating systems can be used by anybody that knows how to access them.

    Politicians empowered the greedy, and this is how they get thanked.

    Now, if we could only hold politicians responsible to a budget, where crap like this comes out of each politician's personal pocket. Just as we have to budget our resources and compliance expenses come out of our personal pocket. If we did this, we may get some intelligent law passed, instead of this crony capitalism we have masquerading as a free market.

    Politicians do not seem to mind placing another tax on us, but say its not a tax, its a "responsibility fee". I would love to see each politician also assessed a "responsibility fee" for misuse of the trust the public places in them... such as blithely "vote to increase the debt ceiling", which only commits us to pay bankers "interest" on "notes" they pull out of thin air. All they are doing is robbing the people to pay "usury" to an elite that did absolutely nothing to earn that largess, no, all they had to do is have some Congressmen go for it, using the powers the public entrusted in him to legally cement an obligation to remit things of value in exchange for that the elite create from thin air... banker's notes.

    --
    "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by aristarchus on Tuesday April 07 2015, @05:50AM

      by aristarchus (2645) on Tuesday April 07 2015, @05:50AM (#167330) Journal

      Just as it is gets the rest of us.

      Nope! Not getting to me! Micro$oft free since 1995, never could afford anything Apple, so it's been free software all the way for me, even in a hostile environment, for a long, long time now. No copyright, no "open-source" crap to appeal to PHBs with the MBAs courted by BFP. (If you need help on that last acronym, the first word is, "Bruce", and he's not a shark, so far as I know.) And, wait for it! I block ads. There, I said it! I deny the economic engine of the internet! And I don't allow javascript! Or cookies! or Beacons! The Dark Side has cookies. So there. Also, universities. They have been taken over by the parasites that they let in when they considered "business" to be an academic area. Business? You mean, how to make money? What does that tell us about the nature of the universe? Use Linux. It will replace Solaris. There is no reason for actual scientists to use a toy operating system, or its associated file systems and proprietary lock ins of data that yearns to be free.

      [short version: Microsoft and Oracle are dead. Do not use. Do not touch. Quarantine Level Six, stat!]

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 07 2015, @11:16AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 07 2015, @11:16AM (#167392)

        Not getting you? If you live in one of said councils, where do you think the money is coming from? It's not like English villages have their own Federal Reserves to print more worthless paper when they need it.

      • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday April 07 2015, @02:27PM

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday April 07 2015, @02:27PM (#167454) Journal

        "Microsoft free"? As in, pirated? Yeah, all but two of my MS OS's were "free". I actually paid for a copy of Win ME for the kids, and the wife paid for a copy of XP when she built one of her computers. Oh - make that three. The wife recently built another computer, and paid for the Win7 disk to install WIndows.

        Chalk her up as a lost Linux user. She was happy with Ubuntu for several years, then Ubuntu started playing games with Unity, blah, blah blah. She wasn't willing to experiment with other distros, so she bought Windows again.

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by davester666 on Tuesday April 07 2015, @06:04AM

      by davester666 (155) on Tuesday April 07 2015, @06:04AM (#167333)

      "come back to get them"? how? it's not like they have to pay for the software and/or fines out of their own pocket. and you aren't going to vote them out of office for bungling this.

      instead, everyone in the UK will have to pay an additional pound so Microsoft and Oracle can make their numbers for this quarter.

      • (Score: 3, Informative) by TheRaven on Tuesday April 07 2015, @10:22AM

        by TheRaven (270) on Tuesday April 07 2015, @10:22AM (#167379) Journal
        Add to that, the local councillors are not the ones that voted for copyright laws. These things are handled at a national / EU level.
        --
        sudo mod me up
  • (Score: 2) by Gravis on Tuesday April 07 2015, @04:15AM

    by Gravis (4596) on Tuesday April 07 2015, @04:15AM (#167313)

    anything that raises the price of their software is fine by me. it's just one more reason for people to move to libre software.

    • (Score: 5, Informative) by Whoever on Tuesday April 07 2015, @05:03AM

      by Whoever (4524) on Tuesday April 07 2015, @05:03AM (#167325) Journal

      anything that raises the price of their software is fine by me. it's just one more reason for people to move to libre software.

      This is government offices we are discussing. They will just increase taxes to pay for their own incompetence.

  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by frojack on Tuesday April 07 2015, @04:33AM

    by frojack (1554) on Tuesday April 07 2015, @04:33AM (#167318) Journal

    With those decreasing sales triggering desperate acts against government, you have to wonder how many of these governments will just pull the plug and jump to LibreOffice, and any one of a half dozen database engines.

    When the BSA (which is largely Microsoft in disguise) comes calling, having original disks with EULAs and certificates of authenticity isn't enough. You used to have to show them invoices showing you purchased the software. At least a couple court cases I've heard about, the judge read BSA the riot act, and sent them packing.

    They can be beaten, but realistically, its just better to delete the software, and install FOSS stuff. Its easily good enough for government work. Any inefficiency in in their operations would hardly be noticed.

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 07 2015, @04:54AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 07 2015, @04:54AM (#167323)

      It will be on the front page in just a bit.
      Title as submitted:
      Government of India Adopts FOSS-Only Policy

      The wording of the "mandate" is a bit squishy, but they already have 2 states that have been doing it for a while and those folks can show them all how it's done if they can't figure it out for themselves.

      -- gewg_

      • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Tuesday April 07 2015, @05:08AM

        by bob_super (1357) on Tuesday April 07 2015, @05:08AM (#167326)

        They graduate enough engineers every year to eventually figure it out.
        And the more of them it takes, the longer we get to keep our jobs.

    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by sjames on Tuesday April 07 2015, @10:34AM

      by sjames (2882) on Tuesday April 07 2015, @10:34AM (#167383) Journal

      It's funny how the 'official' TCO calculations never seem to include the cost of compliance assurance or the cost of storing all those bits of paper and ultimately being audited. Even if you are in full compliance (meaning the BSA commandos can't find any excuse to bill you), the cost of an audit is non-zero.

      I like that since I use Free Software, I don't even have to open the door if they come knocking. I can tell them to go away and they have nothing that says I can't do that.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 07 2015, @01:52PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 07 2015, @01:52PM (#167434)

    Two steps forward, one step back. I guess their new friendly image only applies in the USA? I still think they are a much better company than they were even five years ago, but they still manage to piss me off sometimes.

    • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 07 2015, @07:39PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 07 2015, @07:39PM (#167563)

      To which "two steps forward" are you referring?

      their new friendly image

      ...because, with Windoze10, M$ is releasing whitebox makers from the requirement of users being able to toggle off so-called Secure Boot (actually, a lock-out mechanism for non-M$ OSes) in Setup and that is "friendly".

      ...because making PART of the code for dotNET "open" (after those parts have ALREADY been reverse-engineered by Mono) is so magnanimous of M$.

      ...because DirectX still being Windoze-only is M$ being a good neighbor in the computing community.

      ...because patent-trolling lawsuits have that warm, fuzzy "embrace" feeling.

      ...because M$'s voluntarily handing over to the NSA all the keys to its backdoors is what all computer users want.

      Put down the kool-aid cup and step away from it.

      I'll let Roy Schestowitz, PhD take it from here.
      Microsoft Hates Linux - Part I - The UEFI Attack on GNU/Linux [techrights.org]
      Microsoft Hates Linux - Part II - Patent Lawsuits Against Android/Linux Still Going On, New Ones Filed [techrights.org]
      Microsoft Hates Linux - Part III - Abducting the Competition (Android) [techrights.org]
      Microsoft Hates Linux - Part IV - Deleting, Attacking Android/Linux From Within [techrights.org]
      Microsoft Hates Linux - Part V - Dumping and Surveillance to Counter GNU/Linux Insurgence [techrights.org]
      Microsoft Hates Linux - Part VI - Propaganda Wars Against Free Software Facilitated While Media Control is Secured and Abused [techrights.org]

      -- gewg_

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 07 2015, @08:21PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 07 2015, @08:21PM (#167581)

        Apparently you didn't pick up on the fact that I'm disgusted with them too. Sounds like you've got a hate-boner going on there that would make anyone not as vitriolic as you seem like a Ballmer-licking MS fan. "Their new friendly image" was sarcastic on my part, did that just fly right over your head? As for the two steps forward, yes I was referring to their recent attempts to open up source for some of their products. Love them or hate them, that's a positive thing. But they are obviously still struggling with the baggage of the Old Way of doing things.

        You know, you don't have to emulate a basement-dwelling neckbeard spouting 1990s era insults to get across your perfectly valid points. Sure, you made your position known...and you also made a fool of yourself doing so. How about a reasonable, intelligent discussion next time, instead of childish mud-slinging?

        • (Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 08 2015, @12:34AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 08 2015, @12:34AM (#167652)

          "Their new friendly image" was sarcastic on my part

          It has been noted by others in the past that I have missed sarc tags.
          a much better company than they were even five years ago doesn't, however, sound like you have a proper level of apprehension about the convicted felons.
          "Drank the kool-aid" would be closer to the mark.

          their recent attempts to open up source

          Which is complete bullshit.
          M$'s "open" crap still comes with a PATENTS.TXT file.
          See also "embrace, extend, extinguish".
          Nothing is "open" now that wasn't covered by actual FOSS **before** M$'s grand announcement.
          I already noted that point and you not only didn't refute it with any actual facts, you ignored it.

          At best, you are clueless and gullible.
          More likely, you are an M$ shill engaged in openwashing.
          Anyone who knows the slightest thing about M$ knows their business model is based on being closed and proprietary.
          Saying "We are open" and getting their shills in Lamestream Media to repeat that doesn't change a thing.
          The people who swallow that bullshit do, however, reveal themselves to be easily-manipulated fools.

          childish mud-slinging

          ...and your comment is different from that description in what way?
          I gave specifics. You just made vague ad hominem accusations.
          Take just 1 of my points and give an actual description of how it is inaccurate|off-topic.

          -- gewg_

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 08 2015, @11:27AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 08 2015, @11:27AM (#167800)

            Apparently your reading comprehension is way off. Look up: I said all of your points are perfectly valid. Let me say that again: I agree with you. What I don't care for is your childish approach and your (obviously intentional) penchant for completely ignoring the meat of the comment you're responding to, instead focusing on a few random words and lambasting the commenter out of context. You're projecting your extreme hatred for Microsoft onto someone who, while they don't share your fervor, does still hold Microsoft in contempt. You want everyone to be on your level of hate and loathing, and it seems you see anyone who isn't as vitriolic as you as "the enemy". Just because I don't want to murder Gates and Ballmer like you do, doesn't make me a Microsoft bootlicker. There's a huge middle ground there, but like any religious fanatic, you're blind to it.

            So, in closing: Fuck Microsoft, but fuck you even more, asshole.

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday April 07 2015, @02:23PM

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday April 07 2015, @02:23PM (#167452) Journal

    Some arrogant bastard waltzes in through the doors, and wants to count your computers, and your licenses? Tell him bluntly, "GTFO, and don't let the door hit you in the ass!"

    What next? I buy a new Ford, and the salesman comes to the house a year or two later, to see how many cars I have?

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 07 2015, @04:07PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 07 2015, @04:07PM (#167484)

      That's just it though: You buy the Ford, you license Microsoft software. Microsoft has business agreements with companies, and if those companies violate those agreements, Microsoft feels they have the right to enforce them. I'm not saying I agree; I really wish Microsoft would finish what they started with their move to make the OS and Office software as a service instead of traditional licensing. If they would do that, and still offer the OS completely free to consumers as they are saying they will with Windows 10 and future releases, they and the companies they work with would benefit.

  • (Score: 3, Informative) by LoRdTAW on Wednesday April 08 2015, @02:23AM

    by LoRdTAW (3755) on Wednesday April 08 2015, @02:23AM (#167691) Journal

    I was talking to an IT friend the other day and he said they audited their network and needed to purchase well over 3000 CALs to the tune of $12 each. They are a large school district so they can afford it. But the licensing model is insane. It is easy to get snared in a situation where you have more devices or users than CAL's.
    Just read this article from Technet: http://blogs.technet.com/b/volume-licensing/archive/2014/03/10/licensing-how-to-when-do-i-need-a-client-access-license-cal.aspx [technet.com]
    Your head will explode when you see what requires a CAL.

    The general requirement is, any User or Device that accesses the server software, either directly or indirectly, requires a CAL. Depending on the product and functionality being accessed, additive CALs may be required as well.

    A friggen printer that gets an IP from an MS DHCP server requires a CAL. An internet user who uses your eCommerce website to access an MS backend server REQUIRES A CAL. So many orgs can loose track of little thing that can come back and bite them in the ass. And MS that really, really easy with its insane licensing model.