madison

Open licensing: their gain, your pain

Evan Leibovitch | December 27, 2000 12:00 AM PST

The Unix wars of the last decade pretty well blew the word "open" intouselessness, but I'm still intrigued by the way it has been turned upsidedown yet again in one sad little corner of the computing world.

I'm referring to the Microsoft Open License Program. Of course, Microsoftisn't alone in the misappropriation: Adobe calls it OpenOptions; Computer Associates and others also have "Open Licensing"programs.

So what is an "open license"? The term apparently evolved from what mostfolks refer to as volume purchasing: buying software licenses in bulkwithout the extra boxes and CD-ROMs. With an open license, instead of allthat packaging, all you need to keep track of are license numbers orunlocking keycodes - and those can even be delivered by e-mail.

Is it environmentally friendly? Sure. Is it cost-effective? Not as much asit should be.

Is it open? Heck, no.

As you might guess from the names of some of the companies who offer it, openlicensing has nothing to do with open source. On the contrary, some of theprime marketers using the term are those most interested in the failure ofopen source software. Indeed, I can think of few companies more hostile toopen source ideals than Microsoft and Adobe. (Luckily the most desirablesoftware from those vendors have open source replacements, such as Linux,OpenOffice,Ghostscriptand theGimp, that are more than suitable.)

On the flip side of the coin, Linux-friendly companies such as Corel and Lotus carefully avoid the word "open" when describingtheir volume purchase programs.

You would think that paying for license numbers and keys rather thancardboard boxes and plastic would save you all kinds of money andheadaches. This kind of transaction was practically made for e-commerce,direct from the software publisher to you. Unfortunately, the workings ofthe proprietary software industry make such high-tech savings much lessattractive.

The main obstacle to the real passing on of bulk-license savings to buyers is theintervention of software wholesalers and retailers. This complex chain ofdistribution serves a valuable purpose in moving of boxes of software, but it also getsin the way of the customer's desire to get extra keys quickly andinexpensively.

A few weeks ago I attended a seminar sponsored by software wholesalerIngram Micro that extolled the merits of so-called open licensing to asmall assortment of resellers. The primary message of the session was thatresellers shouldn't be afraid of open license plans, and it described thevarious ways that resellers can inject themselves into these simplemoney-for-keys transactions.

Because of the involvement of this extra level in bulk-purchasetransactions, the speed and convenience that online shoppers should takefor granted are replaced with procedures that are cumbersome, bureaucraticand full of needless paper trails. I've seen the forms that resellersneed to fill out to be involved in bulk-buy programs, and the complex point systems used to calculate what constitutes a volume purchaseunder some of these plans. It isn't pretty.

However, according to one report, it's the end-user, not thereseller, that gets hurt the most by this process. The municipalgovernment of Virginia Beach was recently asked for an inventory andproof-of-purchase for all its Microsoft software, and ended up paying forlicenses that they likely already paid for.

The threat of the audit is the key here: while buying a typical box ofsoftware doesn't require you to allow for an arbitrary audit, buying inbulk can. Virginia Beach, in order to get the volume rates, signed acontract that subjected the city to audits at Microsoft's demand.

Still interested in open licensing?

Consider software based real open licenses -- open source licenses --instead. Using free software instead of their commercial counterpartswon't bring the software police to your door - no matter what volume you use. If you must keep using proprietary products, consider carefully therights you sign away in return for cost savings that may be far less thanthey should be.

Or, you could just keep in mind that use of the term "open" in "openlicensing" really refers to "open checkbook."

Have you looked at your bulk contract lately? Let me know in the TalkBack below.

Talkback - Tell Us What You Think

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity