Microsoft Software Asset Management Review SAM
-
I suppose CLO would often be a better term (Chief Legal Officer) but I have never seen that used before. But corporate counsel is normally part of the C suite.
-
Well, he definitely doesn't have a copy of any agreements.
-
These days, sadly, the top skill needed work working with Microsoft products is legal and licensing skills, not technical ones. I think more companies need a good understanding of the actual cost, overhead and risk involved in choosing to work with Microsoft products. Most would still chose them, but the skills and investment that they put into tracking them would be different.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
Well, he definitely doesn't have a copy of any agreements.
Who agreed to the volume license agreements then?
-
I suspect it is in the EULA as well.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Carnival-Boy said:
Well, he definitely doesn't have a copy of any agreements.
Who agreed to the volume license agreements then?
Me.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Carnival-Boy said:
Well, he definitely doesn't have a copy of any agreements.
Who agreed to the volume license agreements then?
Me.
I don't suppose that you have a copy?
I think that if you log into the volume license center than you can get a copy of it, but I am just guessing.
-
Also check the EULA, might just be in there.
-
This is a big reason why, when dealing with brand new companies, I try to make them think VERY carefully about if they need Windows. The penalty is huge.
-
If you use tons of Windows, the penalty is small overall. But bringing in that one Windows server in an otherwise Windows free shop can create a lot of overhead.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
I think that if you log into the volume license center than you can get a copy of it, but I am just guessing.
I assumed so, that's why I asked how to get it as I couldn't find it. But I've found it now. Or at least, I've found a copy of our Open Licence Agreement. But I can't find anything there that say Microsoft can audit everything - even non-Microsoft software and hardware. Where did you get this information from? Are you sure you didn't dream it?
All I can see on auditing is this passage:
- Verifying compliance.
Customer must keep all usual and proper records relating to the Products Customer runs. Microsoft may request that Customer conduct an internal audit of all Microsoft Products in use throughout Customer’s organization, comparing the number of Products in use to the number of effective Licenses issued in Customer’s name. Following any audit, Customer agrees to deliver to Microsoft a written statement signed by its authorized representative, certifying that either (1) Customer has sufficient Licenses to permit all usage disclosed by the audit, or (2) Customer has ordered sufficient Licenses to permit all usage disclosed by the audit. By requesting an audit, Microsoft does not waive its rights to enforce this agreement or to protect Microsoft’s intellectual property by any other means permitted by law, including conducting an onsite audit.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
@scottalanmiller said:
I think that if you log into the volume license center than you can get a copy of it, but I am just guessing.
I assumed so, that's why I asked how to get it as I couldn't find it. But I've found it now. Or at least, I've found a copy of our Open Licence Agreement. But I can't find anything there that say Microsoft can audit everything - even non-Microsoft software and hardware. Where did you get this information from? Are you sure you didn't dream it?
All I can see on auditing is this passage:
- Verifying compliance.
Customer must keep all usual and proper records relating to the Products Customer runs. Microsoft may request that Customer conduct an internal audit of all Microsoft Products in use throughout Customer’s organization, comparing the number of Products in use to the number of effective Licenses issued in Customer’s name. Following any audit, Customer agrees to deliver to Microsoft a written statement signed by its authorized representative, certifying that either (1) Customer has sufficient Licenses to permit all usage disclosed by the audit, or (2) Customer has ordered sufficient Licenses to permit all usage disclosed by the audit. By requesting an audit, Microsoft does not waive its rights to enforce this agreement or to protect Microsoft’s intellectual property by any other means permitted by law, including conducting an onsite audit.
Doesn't that cover the scenario? You are being asked to do the former in the hopes of avoiding the latter?
-
You can always grab a solicitor and see what they think that you need to do.
-
I'm sure that what you are bound to do is different in the UK than in the US.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Doesn't that cover the scenario?
No. The agreement says I have to audit our Microsoft licences. You say I have to audit our Linux Workstations. They are completely different things.
If it said "Microsoft may request that Customer conduct an internal audit of all Microsoft Products and any other non-Microsoft products that we specify in use throughout Customer’s organization" then I'd get your point.
Maybe it is different in the US. I know the US is a pretty crazy country at the best of times.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Doesn't that cover the scenario?
No. The agreement says I have to audit our Microsoft licences. You say I have to audit our Linux Workstations. They are completely different things.
If it said "Microsoft may request that Customer conduct an internal audit of all Microsoft Products and any other non-Microsoft products that we specify in use throughout Customer’s organization" then I'd get your point.
Maybe it is different in the US. I know the US is a pretty crazy country at the best of times.
Maybe you don't have to. You'd have to ask a solicitor. It's a self-audit, so they only know what you choose to disclose. But that means you don't need to mention printers, phones, etc. either.
-
-
@scottalanmiller said:
If you use tons of Windows, the penalty is small overall. But bringing in that one Windows server in an otherwise Windows free shop can create a lot of overhead.
How many companies do you run into today that don't have windows at all?
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
If you use tons of Windows, the penalty is small overall. But bringing in that one Windows server in an otherwise Windows free shop can create a lot of overhead.
How many companies do you run into today that don't have windows at all?
Depends on what they do. Datacenter I contract for has no windows at all. We couldn't even run windows on the old stuff if we wanted to as it was IBM system I.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
If you use tons of Windows, the penalty is small overall. But bringing in that one Windows server in an otherwise Windows free shop can create a lot of overhead.
How many companies do you run into today that don't have windows at all?
Depends on what they do. Datacenter I contract for has no windows at all. We couldn't even run windows on the old stuff if we wanted to as it was IBM system I.
OK that was their data center - but they had not a single employee on a windows system?
I know this is becoming more common in silicon valley, but the rest of the country/world?
