Could AgentsInvade Your Home?

It's a contentious clause in that end user licence agreement you've never read, the one that gives Autodesk the right to have agents enter your home or business looking for unlicensed use of their software.

After failing to get Autodesk to respond to his concern about the "agent" clause, and in attempt to generate some conversation on the subject, R. Paul Waddington has launched a blog at Caveat emptor.

Software developer Deelip Menezes holds the dissenting view at EULA Paranoia.

Comments

[Len]

Sadly it will take attempted enforcement with houses destroyed and average people arrested for it to even start going through the courts. And then we can only hope that the courts provide some real balance to these outrageous licensing agreements.

This is one of many reasons that pushed us to Bricscad here. But we still have one copy of AutoCAD.

And come to think of it I have not looked very closely at the BricsCAD licensing agreement....

[Mick]

Len said "And come to think of it I have not looked very closely at the BricsCAD licensing agreement...."

Why would you need to, for the price there is no need to have illegal copies and therefore the problem with the EULA is then almost trivial.

While adesk may have sold millions of copies, I reckon their profits and user base would double overnight if they had an amnesty that allowed users to pay a minimal fee to 'get on board'. And all for as little a message on a web site!

IMO I think pricing is the main cause of piracy, even if users had to pay that minimal fee every year you would eliminate most piracy, if people are using it to make money they don't mind paying a reasonable amount for a product OR services or even more for specific products such as the verticals.
Some companies, not even directly associated with the industry would then perhaps pay to use the software even just for one job! A sale is a sale.
I think adesk targets big business where the cost of software isn't so much of a big deal, that's fine but there's a LOT of 'little guys' out there too doing the same sort of work, just on a different scale, there may even be as many or more than there is in big business together, the point is this pricing 'philosophy' to them is quite steep and they WILL look to alternatives.

Where software vendors are getting their money from is not the problem, it's where they're not getting it from!
And as they say, a bird in the hand...

[R.Paul Waddington.]

There is no question Mark that pricing plays its role in what people think and when AutoCAD is sold for $7040.00(Aus) and Mechanical is $7128.00 it is not hard to reason price is used, by Autodesk, as a directional influence. Equally AutoCAD LT's price rose over 200% in several years. Whilst it might be difficult to prove this has driven the need for piracy there is no doubt it has given some the defensive argument; as warped as this thinking might be it is certainly one that is often voiced.

Mark said; "Why would you need to, for the price there is no need to have illegal copies and therefore the problem with the EULA is then almost trivial." The key here being the argument "there is NO NEED to have illegal copies". Spot on Mark, but money still has to earned to keep the developer afloat so, BrisCAD type software is one option and here's two other options.

If you look at Alibre's model here is an opportunity to say to those disposed to avail themselves of 'pirate' software; "why work illegally when you can work legally for free?" The ability to have some users using the full Alibre suite and Express for "free" is an immediate differentiator that sales people should exploit to the full. The trick then is to get conversions, and any good sales person, close to their customer, should be able to mount arguments based on income generated from the "free" software. Face is preserved and money is earned!

Mark also said "it's where they're not getting it from!" This statement is one key in understanding what is behind software developers collection of Audit and Usage data. If we put ourselves into the developers shoes; we know there is piracy, and we know we (the developer) actually don't want to reduce the number of "our" licences in use we just want the money those licences represent as legit licences! No software developer wants to stop piracy that would reduce the number of 'their' licences in use.

So if we accept software developers don't want to stop piracy - reduce licence use - it follows the next step is to create a set of tools that makes it possible to search for, track, identify and then convert renegade licences to legit ones for a fee and a higher margin than can be won through a dealer channel.

How best to do this? Use Auditing tools and Usage Data collection system.

Potentially a far more profitable proposition than reducing the price or giving software away?

R.Paul Waddington.

[R.Paul Waddington.]

Apologise to Mick. All 'Mark's in my previous response should read Mick.
R.Paul Waddington.