Software Compliance
  • Home
  • What We Do
    • Services
    • Tools
    • Experience
    • FAQ
  • Resources
    • Company >
      • About Us
      • Careers
    • Agreements
    • Documentation >
      • Brochure
      • Datasheet
      • Security Measures
      • ComplianceWare >
        • Software
        • Hardware
        • Cloud Configuration
  • Contact Us
  • Latest
  • Search

Broadcoms VMware - and it is so.

28/11/2023

0 Comments

 

Perpetual licensing is no more.  It is not resting ... it is stone dead.

Picture
Further to the update in our May'22 blog Broadcom have announced a 'simplified offering lineup and licensing model' that will - of most interest - put an end to the availability of perpetual licenses. The statement itself is quite definitive:
  • Complete the transition of all VMware by Broadcom solutions to subscription licenses, with the end of sale of perpetual licenses, Support and Subscription (SnS) renewals for perpetual offerings, and hybrid purchase program/subscription purchase program (HPP/SPP) credits beginning today (effective dates will vary). Additionally, we are introducing a bring-your-own-subscription license option, providing license portability to VMware validated hybrid cloud endpoints running VMware Cloud Foundation.
So as we predicted at the back-end of 2021, customers will no longer have the benefit of ownership to revert to - it's subscription all the way - and that is entirely at the behest (benevolence?) of the supplier. So now the observations begin in earnest. Will subscriptions result in the benefits commercial and otherwise that are promised, or will you find your choices are more limited, while your costs are not.
To challenge any degradation in your position you'll need the facts - the basis of your original position to compare to where you have arrived, and this may well be some years down the track, so again this is where a robust SAM function will step-up with the analytics and the matter of record to enable such a conversation to occur.
Overall - a sad chapter in the history of software licensing. Where choice is removed from the client it can only be bad.
0 Comments

Flexera to acquire Snow Software

19/10/2023

0 Comments

 

in a major narrowing of ITAM / ISAM providers in the market ...


Clients with funds to spare no doubt mulled over - and most likely performed a market comparison - across these 2 players, and now, they will be left with .... one.

A win for clients or a dent to market competitiveness ... well remember - there are alternatives !
Picture
Flexera's announcement would suggest that the "Joint offering and strengthened partner network will provide customers with more data and capabilities to understand their IT environments, manage cost and reduce risk", and interestingly (at least for now) state that they will "continue to innovate, enhance, maintain, and support both Flexera and Snow solutions".
Now for those organizations that aren't flush with funds, and don't need a full FinOp's solution, but perhaps just want to get across their IT hardware and software landscape and garner control of those assets why not look at the niche solutions market here - including our own ComplianceWare product - you might well find that you can have a product at a much lower cost that meets your needs and solves the problems you have, without over investing in inflated platforms that are over-loaded, over-sold, and over-priced for what you actually need.
0 Comments

What? ... Cloud options restrictive and costly?

22/9/2023

0 Comments

 

Now who would of thought.

US ​Government Accountability Office (GAO) finds restrictive software licenses associated with commercial cloud contracts have resulted in increased costs and limited choices in service providers.

Picture
The GAO analyzed six randomly selected Department of Defense (DOD) programmes based on fiscal year 2023 budget size and grouped the investments into three groups — greater than $100 million, between $100 million and $10 million, and between $10 million and $1 million, with key findings that vendors:
  • limited the ability to migrate the department’s software obtained through pre-existing, traditional commercial software licenses to cloud computing;
  • established terms and conditions that limited DOD access to previous versions of software;
  • established terms and conditions that impeded the department’s use of specific software by requiring compatibility with specific versions of software from other vendors;
  • limited software available for cloud computing in certain commercial markets where the vendor had significant market share;
  • restricted DOD’s use of software to the vendor’s proprietary cloud or a limited number of competitor cloud solutions;
  • prevented DOD from operating software on specific cloud platforms; and
  • sold software that met DOD requirements only in packages with other software not needed to meet requirements.
Not a good story, although no doubt a common one that, given CIO's and CTO's relentless push to the cloud in recent times, (fully endorsed by doe-eyed executive committees and boards clambering to chat that 'yes, we're doing that too') are unlikely to get air time in that respect - just glowing reports of progress and ever increasing (perhaps slowly)  'number of migrated applications' statistics.
Now we're not saying there is no place for the cloud - there is - but per the recommendations of the GAO from this report, it needs to be formulated through guidance and plans that fully address identifying, analyzing, and mitigating the impacts of restrictive software licensing practices on cloud computing efforts.
And therein is the problem. Many CIO's and CTO's would rather rely on vendors or consultants recommendations rather than their own in-house expertise across IT, SAM and procurement teams who know in detail what - and where - costs and impacts are likely to arise.
So if nothing else, perhaps try to use the GAO's Examples of Reported Restrictive Software License Practices table below as a minimum checklist of what to consider with your next cloud migration programme - it might bring some future issues to light and maybe even save just a little grief! 
Picture

0 Comments

End of Support for BigFix version 9.5

21/8/2023

0 Comments

 

Effective June 30th, 2024, HCL will cease all updates to the BigFix 9.5 platform, including security patches.

Picture

As announced by HCL with the release of BigFix 11, support (across all BigFix Platform components including Root Server, Relay, Client, Console, Web Reports) for version 9.5 will end. Users are encouraged to upgrade to either version 10 or 11 (free under S&S subscriptions) or face potential extended support costs if still running 9.5.
As a result, IBM have also announced that their License Metric Tool (ILMT) will withdraw support for BigFix server and clients in version 9.5 at the end of Q4 2024. While it doesn't mean that you'll be ineligible for PVU subcapacity, it does mean that you won't receive support from IBM if your environment stops working correctly, and no doubt prove increasingly problematic in various ways.
So while its 9 months away its best to get the upgrade onto your plans now, as that time will all too easily disappear leaving you with a budget shortfall to cover what is typically hefty extended support fees!
0 Comments

Don't Forget Development Licensing

19/7/2023

0 Comments

 

Although it's easy to overlook regular reviews of your development environments - it's still necessary.

Consider one of the most prolific of these - Microsoft's Visual Studio, with an updated 2023 ​Licensing Whitepaper for the Microsoft Visual Studio Product Family and Visual Studio Subscriptions.
Picture
Focusing on the 2022 edition of Visual Studio, the guide complements the standard Product Terms and/or the EULA for retail and community versions, with the Visual Studio License Directory also a good reference site covering all things related to Visual Studio, including prior versions.
Firstly, aside to the Community Edition (being the free, full-featured IDE for individual developers and small organizations with 5 or less developers, and for education and open source software), what are the available options:
Picture
The licensing fundamental with all Visual Studio subscriptions and Visual Studio Professional is that they are licensed on a per-user basis, meaning each licensed user may install and use the software on any number of devices to design, develop, test, and demonstrate their programs. Visual Studio subscriptions also allow the licensed user to evaluate the software and to simulate customer environments to diagnose issues related to your programs. Importantly, each additional person who uses the software in this way must also have a license.
You'll also need to consider the environments in which Visual Studio can run, as although the licensed user can install multiple versions on multiple devices, it cannot be used in a production environment or environments that constitute production environments such as:
  • Environments that connect to a production database
  • Environments that support disaster-recovery or backup for a production environment
  • Environments that are used for production at least some of the time, such a server that is rotated into production during peak periods of activity. 
So keeping in mind these two base conditions - ie. everyone who uses the software (with some exceptions such as acceptance tests) must have a license, and use is limited to certain environments - review the paper for guidance specific to your situation and ensure you are compliant, as remedial costs attached to any breach can be very (and that is Very) costly.
0 Comments

HCL Pricing Policy Update

22/6/2023

0 Comments

 

HCL announce that as of July 15 2023 a standard 15% annual increase will be applied.

... with the caveat (aka incentive) that "prices and uplifts may vary depending on the unique selling scenarios, including multi-year renewals, expansion license sales, cross-selling a new product into the customer portfolio, conversion to term licensing, and other selling and promotional opportunities"
Picture
Published on their Customer Support website HCL have advised that charges across renewals and the full software catalogue price list are increasing by a hefty 15%, which is likely to burden already stretched IT budgets. And while the impacts of this jump are fully considered, keep a lookout for similar announcements from other software vendors - these announcements tend to come in waves.
So best get prepared for your upcoming renewals with those arguable positions, concessions, additions or any available means to minimize your uplifts, along with the inevitable explanations to those in your organization who believe (others) costs should only go down, never up!
0 Comments

IBM SaaS to be available on AWS

12/5/2023

0 Comments

 

IBM Signs Strategic Collaboration Agreement with Amazon Web Services.

IBM have announced that a broad array of IBM Software will be provided as cloud-native services on AWS.
Picture
Recognizing that customers have adopted a predominantly hybrid cloud deployment model IBM has expanded its cloud collaboration offerings and will now allow clients who purchase IBM SaaS Software in AWS Marketplace to be eligible to draw down against their AWS Enterprise Discount Program commitments, quoting from the announcement:
Building on IBM Software being available as-a-Service (aaS) on IBM Cloud, this first-of-its-kind agreement between IBM and AWS will provide clients with quick and easy access to IBM Software that spans automation, data and AI, security and sustainability capabilities, is built on Red Hat OpenShift Service on AWS (ROSA), and runs cloud-native on AWS. The two companies are also committing to a broad range of joint investments to make it easier for clients to consume IBM Software on AWS, including integrated go-to-market activities across sales and marketing, channel incentives, developer enablement and training, and solution development for key verticals and industries such as Oil and Gas, Travel and Transportation, and others.
The availability of these SaaS products complements IBM's extensive portfolio of 30+ Software products that currently can be deployed manually in AWS Marketplace and the ability to Bring Your Own License (BYOL) for users that already have their own license so they can deploy the software faster. Together, this gives organizations a comprehensive set of options to build and run software in the way that best meets the unique needs of their business.
The comparative pricing options and benefits of BYOL vs the AWS drawdown credits will prove the interesting point at a client/product level here, so will now add some extra homework for the licensing experts in your organisation!
0 Comments

A Good Audit Outcome ?

27/4/2023

0 Comments

 

... maybe not.

Be aware that without a proper baseline you are basically handing full control of an audit outcome to your vendor - not only in terms of the software inventory but remediation costs that might not even be visible, hidden away in the co-incidental renewal that is now due.

A Software Baseline is essential.

Picture
While companies continue to pursue their relentless campaign of 'moving to the cloud' could they be overlooking their on-premise software position? (similarly, if you're not tracking and aligning your cloud consumption accurately you might be overpaying just the same, but lets just look into on-premise).
At a recent (2022) webinar broadcast a  former Oracle license management services (LMS) manager, ​Adi Ahuja, said that Oracle's audit has become "a sales enablement tool." Although Oracle states that their LMS "operates independently from any ongoing commercial discussions. Our services are delivered by a global team of highly experienced and knowledgeable consultants who collectively offer unrivaled knowledge on all aspects of Oracle's licensing policy."  in practice there was a close relationship between sales and licence audits, Ahuja said.
No surprise to anyone who has been subject to such an audit. But lets not single out Oracle - all of the majors undoubtedly co-ordinate an audit internally - bringing in the product team, finance, sales, and  of course, the account team.

Ok ... we get that, but how does the software baseline assist us in establishing what's really going on? 

Take the often cited audit line of 'we found a few things, but you'll just need to top up those products'. Easy enough - you buy the products in the renewal at your entitled price and all is good. What you're not potentially seeing though is the compliance cost as a result of those findings that has been built-in to your renewal fees.
Compliance cost? The renewal fees look fine - what are we referring to? Well simply, you might have got a better price overall had you been able to breakdown where those costs came from, and that means having a costed baseline (ie. line-item level) that you can apply all of the adjustors to (inflation, price increases etc) and determine whether any 'additional' costs have covertly come in to play - aka, a compliance cost. Only then can you challenge the vendors assertion that 'you'll just need to top up those products' given what the baseline will tell you is how much backdating has been applied, whether the top-up was in fact at entitled price, and ultimately whether the overall renewal fee has been indexed reasonably at all. Consider the room your vendor has to move when you're faced with a multi-million dollar renewal - there are numerous places to 'hide' revenue pulls, and that doesn't change at lower levels, it just scales down.
Establishing and maintaining a baseline can be something companies flinch at - they see it as just not worth the effort - by default then delegating this to their vendors, aka granting free rein to manipulate pricing as they see fit. So while it might take a concerted project (or how about an actual SAM practice!) to get going once established - and maintained in a purpose built system such as ComplianceWare - the overheads are much reduced and the benefits more easily returned. Further, it sends a convincing message to your vendors that you actively manage and are across your software landscape and commercial position, which makes them much more wary of any attempts to hoodwink you with a 'great renewal offer that puts any compliance issues to bed'!
0 Comments

Changes to IBMs PA Agreement

16/3/2023

0 Comments

 

Why. So. Serious ??

Changes announced under revision 11 to the Passport Advantage® Agreement (IPAA) and Passport Advantage Express Agreement (IPAEA) are likely to prove onerous to all.
Picture
Tucked away (as usual) outside the summary of updates is clause 4.1 - License Verification and to a lesser extent 10.2 - Client's Reporting Responsibilities (applicable to sub-capacity licensing), which compound compliance and reporting obligations - lets take a look.
Firstly, clause 4.1.(a) states the "Client will, for all Programs at all Sites and for all environments, create, retain, and each year provide to IBM upon request with 30 days' advance notice: i) a report of deployed Programs, in a format requested by IBM, using records, system tools output, and other system information; and ii) supporting documentation (collectively, Deployment Data)". Unlike version 10 of the PA Agreement (November 2017) which contained a much more lenient requirement that "Client agrees to create, retain, and provide to IBM and its auditors accurate written records, system tool outputs, and other system information" which would occur simply "on reasonable notice" rather than a regular, annual basis.
Adding to this, where running under sub-capacity licensing as before you are then required to "properly install, run, and maintain the most current version of the applicable license reporting tool within 90 days of Client's first deployment and produce a report. Unless IBM approves a different reporting tool, the Client agrees to the following tools.
  • Sub-Capacity Products -Client will use the IBM License Metric Tool (ILMT) and to subscribe to the ILMT support notifications at http://www.ibm.com/support/mynotifications and promptly install any updates.
  • Container Products – Client will use the IBM License Service tool and Client is responsible t to correctly configure according to the Eligible Container Product's documentation"​
Ok, no real change there and easy enough right? Well yes, you're still required to run and keep reports at minimum quarterly and retain for a two year rolling period - and remember to have an individual(s) who is assigned the "authority to manage and promptly resolve questions on reports or inconsistencies between report contents, license entitlement, and the applicable license reporting tool". Better check that's been added to the appropriate JD's along the way.  The new clause 10.2.(e), is somewhat favorable to the client in that it provides an avenue to address (with IBMs consent) deviations from the sub-capacity model, which in most cases would probably result from  operating systems becoming non-eligible over time.
What we (and others) have always attested to though is being solely reliant on one reporting tool, like ILMT, can prove very problematic in that where improperly configured you could easily be over-reporting and paying much more than you should - having an independent product (like ComplianceWare) is often the best - or only - way to reconcile outputs and ensure accuracy.

so ... when does all this start?

Well, basically now:
  • from 1 February 2023 for new IPAA Client enrollments and new IPAEA transactions; and
  • from 1 May 2023 for current IPAA Clients notified on 1 February 2023 of the new terms which will be effective for them on 1 May 2023 per the terms of IPAA. 
0 Comments

The Oracle Java Precept

23/2/2023

0 Comments

 
Picture

New Java pricing model ...
​... new cost.

Oracle have announced (January 2023) a new pricing model for its Oracle Java SE Universal Subscription offering that is based on the number of employees rather than the prior per user or per processor metrics, and that could prove costly to many customers - firstly, lets look at the Employee definition:
Employee for Java SE Universal Subscription: is defined as (i) all of Your full-time, part-time, temporary employees, and (ii) all of the full-time employees, part-time employees and temporary employees of Your agents, contractors, outsourcers, and consultants that support Your internal business operations. The quantity of the licenses required is determined by the number of Employees and not just the actual number of employees that use the Programs. For these Java SE Universal Subscription licenses, the licensed quantity purchased must, at a minimum, be equal to the number of Employees as of the effective date of Your order. Under this Employee metric for Java SE Universal Subscription Programs(s), You may only install and/or run the Java SE Universal Subscription Program(s) on up to 50,000 Processors, If Your use exceeds 50,000 Processors, exclusive of Processors installed and/or running on desktop and laptop computers, You must obtain an additional license from Oracle. 
Key points - Count all employees, not just users, and this includes those outside the organization that support your internal business operations! How many individuals might that definition capture in a large enterprise, if you can indeed identify and track them accurately at all !! Then you're facing a tiered per user monthly subscription cost (that reduces based on higher volumes, phew) that would see a shop of 500 Employees facing $7,500 per month in subs!

So what are my Java options ...

  • Oracle Open JDK is free, but you'll have to upgrade every six months to stay current (including with security patches) - note though, as Open Source there are other JDK options from other vendors that offer further support.
  • Oracle JDK has Long Term Support (LTS), ie. fully supported by Oracle with quarterly updates and a 2 year LTS release cycle, free for development etc, but you'll likely have to pay for use in production (refer below).
So lets look at the licensing currently available for Oracle Java SE releases​:
  • Oracle OpenJDK releases are under the open source GNU General Public License v2, with the Classpath Exception (GPLv2+CPE) (available since Java 9).
  • Oracle JDK 17 (the 'Program') and later is available under the Oracle No-Fee Terms and Conditions License which permits free use inclduing for your own business operations, however, if you distribute software You must not charge Your licensees any fees associated with such distribution or use of the Program, including, without limitation, fees for products that include or are bundled with a copy of the Program or for services that involve the use of the distributed Program.
  • Oracle JDK 11, Oracle JDK Java 8, and Oracle JRE with Java Web Start in Java 8, are available to Oracle Customers via My Oracle Support and also under the OTN License Agreement for Java SE. This OTN license permits personal use, development, testing, prototyping, demonstrating and some other limited uses at no cost.
  • Oracle JDK 7 releases are available on My Oracle Support for Oracle Customers only.

And how do the LTS and non-LTS releases co-exist?

For product releases after Java SE 8, Oracle will designate only certain releases as Long-Term-Support (LTS) releases. Java SE 7, 8, 11 and 17 are LTS releases. Oracle intends to make future LTS releases every two years meaning the next planned LTS release is Java 21 in September 2023. For the purposes of Oracle Premier Support, non-LTS releases are considered a cumulative set of implementation enhancements of the most recent LTS release. Once a new feature release is made available, any previous non-LTS release will be considered superseded. For example, Java SE 9 was a non-LTS release and immediately superseded by Java SE 10 (also non-LTS), Java SE 10 in turn is immediately superseded by Java SE 11. Java SE 11 however is an LTS release, and therefore Oracle Customers will receive Oracle Premier Support and periodic update releases, even though Java SE 12 was released.
Picture
This fundamentally raises some questions and no doubt financial concerns for many, so if you haven't done so already make sure you're across your Java landscape and can quantify not only future costs, but future efforts, and make the right decisions for how you want to continue with your Java developments and solutions.
0 Comments

SAM Practices - The NASA Experience

25/1/2023

0 Comments

 

Internal Audit Report highlights flaws in NASA's SAM Practices that many organizations will relate to.

Oh oh ... it's 2023 yet we see it all here again: "Software Asset Management practices at NASA currently expose the Agency to operational, financial, and cybersecurity risks with management of the software life cycle largely decentralized and ad hoc."
Picture
The OIG summary of their SAM audit says it all: 
  • Efforts to implement an enterprise-wide Software Asset Management program have been hindered by both budget and staffing issues and the complexity and volume of the Agency’s software licensing agreements.
  • NASA has not implemented a centralized Software Asset Management tool to discover, inventory, and track license data as required by federal policy.
  • NASA’s Software Asset Management policy is not comprehensive or standardized, leaving roles, responsibilities, and processes unclear.
  • Training for software license use and management is inconsistent across the Agency, with aging web-based training randomly assigned to personnel and a lack of a general software licensing training course available to the entire workforce.
  • NASA’s current efforts to compile a complete and accurate report of annual software spending is a time consuming and mostly manual effort.

... with all of the above quantified in cost terms as:

​We estimate the Agency could have saved approximately $35 million ($20 million in fines and overpayments and $15 million in unused licenses) and moving forward could save $4 million over the next 3 years by implementing an enterprise-wide Software Asset Management program.
All very compelling to implement improvements and progress NASA’s Software Asset Management from “basic” — the lowest of the four rating options in the Software Asset Management Maturity and Optimization Model developed by Microsoft — through the scale as per tiers and representations below:
  • Basic. Software is managed on an ad hoc basis with few, if any, comprehensive policies.
  • Standardized. The agency uses a discovery tool or data repository for tracking assets, although the information may not be complete or accurate enough for decision-making.
  • Rationalized. Assets are actively managed, and the agency has put in place policies, procedures, and tools integrated into the full IT asset life cycle.
  • Dynamic. Assets are optimized, with near real-time alignment with changing business needs.
The report is an insightful read for all SAM practitioners - and responsible management and executives - with clear language and succinct descriptions of the scope and challenges in the field of software asset management, and a pragmatic approach to the creation of an effective SAM Practice that applies to any size organization with a notable software inventory, not just those on the NASA scale.

So, to the findings ...

It was recommended that the Chief Information Officer:
(1) establish enterprise-wide (institutional and mission) Software Asset Management policy and procedures;
(2) implement a single Software Asset Management tool across the Agency;
(3) align the Agency Software Manager position to report to the Agency Chief Information Officer;
(4) establish formal legal representation and guidance for vendor software audits;
(5) establish a software license awareness training ‘short course’ focusing on approvals, compliance, and other issues a general user might encounter;
(6) implement a centralized repository for NASA’s internally developed software applications; and
(7) develop an Agency-wide process for limiting privileged access to computer resources in accordance with the concept of least privilege.

Additionally, to strengthen the financial aspects of NASA’s Software Asset Management it was recommended that  the Chief Financial Officer:
8) implement a “penalty spend” classification in SAP to track license infractions and true-up payouts and
9) centralize software spending insights to include purchase cards.

Nothing fresh there, just the usual (and often unheeded) advice. 

0 Comments

The Challenges of Power Metrics

17/12/2022

0 Comments

 

IBM announces a 24 Core Power 10 processor testing Oracles per Socket license model.

"Oracle Database SE2 is licensed on servers with a maximum of 2 sockets. The core counts can increase over time without impacting the license obligation. With Oracle Database SE2, customer license costs remain the same regardless of the number of cores in the socket."
Picture
In a Statement of General Direction IBM states its intention to announce a high-density 24-core processor for the IBM Power S1014 system (MTM 9105-41B) to address application environments utilizing an Oracle Database with the Standard Edition 2 (SE2) licensing model. It intends to combine a robust compute throughput with the superior reliability and availability features of the IBM Power platform while complying with Oracle Database SE2 licensing guidelines.
Now that has to present a dilemma for Oracle ... it has clearly positioned SE2 licensing as not affected by the number of cores per socket, so how might it view and react such a direct challenge to such advances in processing power and (more aptly) lost revenue opportunities?
This must bring some angst to the halls of Big Red - what to do? The obvious reaction would be to cap the number of cores, however that's a full u-turn on the defining characteristic - and 'promise' - of their licensing terms - "With Oracle Database SE2, customer license costs remain the same regardless of the number of cores in the socket." 
While there would be nothing legally preventing Oracle from refining these rules it would still very much sour and sully the opinions of their customers, and no doubt cause skepticism longer term. And ultimately, it brings to question consistency - might it be more beneficial to everyone to have uniform metrics across vendors? Ultimately it comes down to processing power, so would a universal metric like mainframe MSUs or MIPs be more appropriate?

... we think so.

0 Comments

Enterprise Software Licensing and Audit Trends - 2022

30/11/2022

0 Comments

 

Despite all of the advances of IT provisioning and supply in recent years (BYOL, managed instances, cloud based offerings etc) it seems nothing in the context of software compliance and audit outcomes has really changed - companies are still getting slammed.

Picture
Unisphere Research, a division of Information Today, Inc., surveyed the readership of its Database Trends and Applications publication, which consisted of database managers, developers, CIOs, and IT directors.  The survey, which sought views and experiences with software licensing and audits, was conducted in partnership with LicenseFortress gathering a total of 283 usable responses of which 155, or 69% of survey respondents, reported having been audited within the past three years, and 79% reported having been subject to a software audit within past five years. 

And the key findings? - the same fundamental approach and issues persist:

  • Moving to the cloud has not alleviated issues or concerns with software licensing and audits. Close to eight in ten enterprises report software compliance issues have either increased or remained the same after moving to the cloud.
  • More than half of enterprises in the survey report being audited by one or more software vendors. Of respondents reporting audits within the past three years, Microsoft was the most frequently cited vendor requesting audits. Activating features outside of original contracts and confusion over virtualization are creating the most license issues.
  • Companies being audited by Oracle incurred the greatest costs. There are hidden costs as well, even if the vendor does not levy additional charges. Most audit processes required at least three employees, and 40% of companies had their CIOs involved with the process.
  • A majority of audited companies did not seek outside assistance to guide them through the process. While many depend on tools or software asset management to support their efforts, a majority fail to keep track of software changes on a continuous basis.

Lets take a closer look ...

Interestingly, with all the hype and suggested benefits and advantages of moving to the cloud, close to 80% report that it has not changed their software compliance issues, or, in the case of 38% of respondents, it has increased compliance concerns. Only about one-fifth - 21% - say cloud has reduced their compliance issues. And even with close to half - 46% - reporting significant amounts of applications and data in the cloud (defined as greater than 25%), more than half of enterprises reported being audited by one or more software vendors!
Similarly, audits themselves haven't changed much at all with 60% of respondents reporting their software audits lasting up to two months, 30% reporting audits lasting between three to six months, and 10% had audits extending more than six months into a year and beyond. The length of audits had 41% of smaller companies wrapping` up audits within a month, while half say the process lasted beyond three months, and 64% incurring additional charges for noncompliance. A substantial portion, 35%, had to pay $100,000 or more to achieve compliance with the vendor, while 10% saw $1 million or more in fees.

So, in summary :

Unsurprisingly, given the outcomes haven't essentially changed, the underlying good practice principles have also not changed - Software Asset Management is seen as critical to mitigating the impact of software audits by a significant share of respondents. Close to half, 44%, see SAM as essential to reducing the costs of their software, which is impacted by vendor audits. Another 41% cite the importance of SAM in avoiding compliance issues, with the leading choice being an internal software asset management/IT asset management (SAM/ITAM) team supported by SAM specific third-party tools. Disappointingly, it seems many respondents still remain reliant on vendor resources to support their audit. 

For some of the key underlying data click through the graphs below ...

0 Comments

IBM launches New License Information Site

26/10/2022

0 Comments

 
Picture

A slick new consolidated (and overdue) look for all IBM terms from one convenient site.

The site contains IBM's standard terms, you can access and view online. Below is a summary list of the standard terms hosted on the site:
  • IBM Client Relationship Agreement (CRA) is the single agreement used to procure most IBM offerings.
  • The CRA family of agreements provide Clients with the flexibility to acquire a specific set of offerings with only the terms necessary to support the acquisition of those offerings. The CRA family of agreements, includes but is not limited to, the Cloud Services Agreement (CSA) and the CRA – Services.
  • Attachments to the CRA family of agreements. When a Client uses one of the CRA family of agreements for a prior transaction involving only a specific offering and chooses, at a later time, to expand the terms of their CRA family of Agreement to include other offerings, they may do so by adding an attachment containing those supplemental terms when desired.
  • IBM Data Processing Addendum (DPA) and Statement of Limited Warranty (SoLW) and other standards required to meet specific regulatory, legal and offering specific requirements.
Use the filter function to view specific content by selecting the applicable category, country and language.
Picture
The Software license terms (all post May 1999) are searchable via the 'Licensing & Compliance' filter category, by time frame or license information (Program name/number, document form/part number, License Information (LI) number or License Information (LI) title):
Picture
The (incremental) search then returns a tabular list of qualifying documents (this example for Message Broker):
Picture
Which on selection provides the License Information detail in the familiar (and traditional!) format:
Picture
So nothing new or revolutionary on that front, however the ease of use and in particular the layout, share, download, and notification options provide all of the basic /requisite features you'll need - all in all, a welcome step forward from the IBM licensing team!
0 Comments

Opentext to acquire Micro Focus

9/9/2022

0 Comments

 
Picture

Opentext have announced the cash acquisition of Micro Focus in a US$6B transaction expected to be finalised in Q1 2023.

On completion, the revenue and operating scale is stated as a combined total addressable market (TAM) of US$170 billion

Firstly, lets take a look at the Terms of the Acquisition (all figures approximate)
  • Total purchase price of $6.0 billion, inclusive of Micro Focus' cash and debt
  • Total purchase price is 2.2x Micro Focus' pro forma TTM revenues(1)
  • Total purchase price is 6.3x Micro Focus' pro forma TTM adjusted EBITDA(4)
  • Expected cost synergies of $400 million, including Micro Focus' previously announced cost savings program of $300 million (net of inflation), as well as $100 million in additional cost synergies
  • Targeting to be on the OpenText operating model within 6 quarters of closing
  • Expect meaningful expansion of cloud revenues, adjusted EBITDA and cash flows in Fiscal 2024
  • All-cash consideration for the Acquisition to be funded by $4.6 billion in new debt, $1.3 billion in cash, and a $600 million draw on our existing revolving credit facility
  • The Announcement can be found at https://investors.opentext.com. This press release should be read in conjunction with, and is subject to, the full text of the Announcement.
  • The Acquisition is expected to close in the first quarter of calendar 2023, subject to the satisfaction (or, where applicable, waiver) of the conditions set out in Appendix 1 to the Announcement.

... all very interesting, but what might it mean to us as customers?

Well if you've ever been involved in an audit with either of these organisations you would have first hand experience of their approach best summed up in one word - aggressive, so at least they're both well aligned on one core practice.
And as we know, any merger or acquisition tends to generate a lot of audit interest and activity as a quick 'revenue win' to expedite and boost returns from such sizeable change and investment.
So if you are a client of either Opentext or Micro Focus it would seem timely to review your licensing position in detail, ie. collect:
  • evidence of your entitlements (PoE's, PO's, Invoices)
  • current deployment figures (fully accounted, ie. extrapolated metrics etc)
  • contracts, addendums, and any variances that have occurred over time
If you detect any discrepancies deal with them as a priority (remembering of course that there are likely footprints across your IT landscape  over a good period of time), so remediate knowingly and accordingly.
Also review your renewal dates and plans - if it falls into or around Q1/Q2 2023 it might serve well to request a renewal quote early to use as a comparison should the actual transaction occur under any new conditions or contracts.
And as we've said before, keep an active watch on the Account Exec's/Managers you have with these two vendors - where changes are communicated it can be a pretty reliable indicator that there might be an audit letter in the post.
So once again, a market shift that means its time to review, validate, confirm and ... prepare!
0 Comments

A New Look for Software Compliance

24/8/2022

0 Comments

 

Well its 2022 ...

... so we figure its time for a logo upgrade!

Picture
Our first logo dates all the way back to 2015, so we figured it was due a revamp - a bit of modernising, a bit of an uplift, a look that reflects the more contemporary state of the company in 2022. 
While we chose to maintain the colour combination of the prior logo, we've gone with a crisper font and a change from the spiral graphic to a more 'pointed' set of two forward facing arrows, reflecting the journey that is moving a business from an unknown to a controlled state.
It's now deployed across our web presence, and will roll-out progressively through the various documents and other published material, so we hope you like it! 

We'd love your feedback - feel free to leave your comments below.

0 Comments

Oracle Cloud Infrastructure - License Manager

26/7/2022

0 Comments

 

Oracle have announced the availability of a free License Manager tool to assist moves to OCI.

Picture
New optional tool supports Bring Your Own Licensing (BYOL) for Oracle Database products to OCI DB PaaS services, and tracks usage of Oracle DB products or third-party products by Compute resource, with basic management, monitoring and reporting capabilities.

While somewhat limited, the License Manager tool may well suit those organisations that don't run a full featured SAM system (such as ComplianceWare), and still need oversight across their OCI deployments.

Currently, License Manager supports the following Oracle products and options:
  • Oracle Database Enterprise Edition
  • Oracle Database Standard Edition
  • Oracle Database Standard Edition One
  • Oracle Database Standard Edition 2
  • Real Application Clusters
  • Multitenant
  • Active Data Guard
... although Oracle have stated that they are 'are expanding the scope of products and image repositories supported in the coming months', so this list may well soon be extended.
It also provides some further capabilities such as apparently automating the license portability rules and API's that could prove useful for batch loads and integration with related systems, ​so if it might fill a gap in your SAM programme could well be worth a look.
0 Comments

IBM ILMT ... Check-in Time

30/6/2022

0 Comments

 

If you rely on IBM Sub-Capacity licensing its a good idea to check you are meeting the compliance requirements on a regular basis ...

Picture
In order to be eligible for IBM's sub-capacity pricing you need to be aware of, and current with, the compliance requirements IBM stipulate (and change) on an ongoing basis.
... If not, you might find yourself in the unenviable position of being measured at full capacity - across everything.
You no doubt recall that IBM divested the BigFix portfolio of products to HCL in 2019, however maintained ILMT (which remains based on BigFix Inventory), as their free license measurement tool that can be used to meet the reporting and validation requirements under the sub-capacity rules.
There is no escaping the sub-capacity rules -  as IBM states: "the use of ILMT is recommended for Full Capacity PVU environments, and is mandatory for use with PVU sub-capacity licensing". There are some exceptions to this requirement, essentially though, its only where you measure everything at Full Capacity.
So a quick recap of the base requirements for sub-capacity licensing:
  1. You must use Eligible Sub-capacity Products (basically, PVU, RVU or VPC products);
  2. You must use Eligible Virtualization Technologies;
  3. You must use Eligible Processor Technologies; and of course:
  4. You  must use the IBM License Metric Tool or other approved validated tools
The other validated tools? Only Flexera One with IBM Observability IT Asset Management and Flexera One IT Asset Management at this time.
Now there are some 'tricks and traps' in running ILMT that we reported on back in 2020 (refer blog here), so make sure you're aware of and managing those gotcha's, and then you'll need to ensure that your IT team is across the eligible technology requirements - most notably - 'Eligible Operating Systems'. These are regularly updated - with only 180 days notice of any withdrawal - so you might find yourselves exposed to the untenable position of being denied sub-capacity licensing based on the OS you're running - as an example, the earliest eligible version of Windows Server is now 2012 !
It can be very easy to lose sight of these changing conditions, and doing so at best can be very problematic, at worst very expensive, so make sure keeping current is diarized in your (and the relevant IT teams) calendars. Further, ILMT itself will need roles assigned to maintaining versions and your software catalogue, and also meeting the quarterly reporting requirements. Keep in mind ILMT retains historic data, so any late changes might well be contested under audit, so better to keep on top of your situation on an ongoing basis.

... all good reasons to perform a timely health-check across your IBM sub-capacity licensing.

0 Comments

Broadcom's VMware Acquisition ...

27/5/2022

0 Comments

 

A 'rapid move to subscription licensing' is telegraphed by Broadcom to expedite returns.

Picture
It was only December when we wrote about 2022 potentially being the 'beginning of the end for perpetual licensing', and with Broadcom's announced acquisition of VMware we are surely seeing the telling signs. 
The transaction is expected to add approximately $8.5 billion of pro forma EBITDA from the acquisition within three years post-closing, which, as reported by the Register, is a significant undertaking given VMware currently produces about $4.7 billion. Their strategy to accomplish this? According to Tom Krause, president of the Broadcom Software Group, who stated on a Broadcom earnings call that they would embark on a “rapid transition from perpetual licenses to subscriptions.”

and that can only mean one thing ...

... higher costs to the customer. 

Of course, there will be the usual designs on new customers etc, but fundamental growth can surely only come from the existing client base. The formula no doubt has been carefully crafted, planned for the coming months and years, and be executed slowly and purposefully renewal by renewal.
As we know with any push to a subscription model the initial proposition will be quite compelling - savings on the spot! Existing investments in perpetual licenses will be recognised and applied! No wastage - pay only for what you use! No downside at all - wait hold on - you're adding consumption? That'll be at a different rate - its new workload after all. And the next renewal - well we've had to add some research and development investment there, as well as account for our additional operational costs, so yes, admittedly quite a jump there.
However with CIO's and CTO's promoting the relentless move to cloud and subscription based platforms for the short term ROI, it'll be awhile before those 'would it be more cost effective to run this stuff in-house' questions emerge in the boardroom, and by then, the changes will be irreversible and well ... just too late.
So we will watch with interest what else might develop over the year in this space, be it via M&A or just plain changes in vendor offerings and models. What does seem to be more and more clear though - perpetual licenses are indeed an endangered species.
0 Comments

Microsoft Drops SA Support Benefit

15/4/2022

0 Comments

 

As of 1st February 2023 the SA 24x7 Problem Resolution Support benefit is being ... 'retired'

In an update to the changes announced in 2019 Microsoft will no longer offer any support outside of paid support.
Picture
Original plans had customers entitled to a 24 hour support response time when their Software Assurance spend was more than $250,000 USD - as of next year though, you'll need a Support Contract.
That means either a Unified Support arrangement across your enterprise, or the uptake of pay-per-incident support (also available as a 5-pack option that expire within a 12 month period), which doesn't seem a particularly attractive proposition to smaller organisations. If you do have a Unified Support Contract you can transfer any current Software Assurance 24x7 Problem Resolution Support incidents before February 1, 2023.
And the costs - well Unified Support is customised based on the actual spend, where pay-per-incident is published at Professional Support For Single Incident – $499 USD for 1 user. Professional Support For Five Pack Annual – $1,999 USD for 1 User.
So you might need to revisit those 2023 forecasts just to make sure you've covered any additional costs you might incur - or maybe challenge Microsoft to their commitment that "Our goal is to ensure every customer gets comparable support services at a comparable price, despite the benefit retirement." !
0 Comments

Vendors Performing Your System Installs?

26/3/2022

0 Comments

 

A caution when relying on vendors to deliver projects with software installs.

Picture
Many projects require the expertise of vendors to install, configure and productionize their software and systems, however as the client and end-consumer you need to be aware of what exactly is making its way into your environments.
All too often following discovery we'll find unaccounted for vendor software, which typically after an onerous investigation is found to be remnants from the vendor-led project, anything from desktop clients to entire VM's, each of which can have dire compliance implications and cost.
But "hold-on - we didn't install it - the vendor did" is the common response, however a quick pointer to the relevant contracts will soon expose that this does not offer any defense - the customer is always responsible for compliance, even if it is the very vendors software in question.
At a more concerning level is when a vendor installs another vendors software - while this is not uncommon with the extent of partnerships and interoperability in the modern industry, it still needs to be clearly and formally covered, ideally contractually or by reference to the vendors right to distribute and use any IP they don't own. These artefacts need to be registered and retained in the event of an audit that questions your usage rights - in the worst case scenario  if the vendor has breached another parties IP rights you too could end up subject to an infringement claim, and that's no place you want to be.

So, while the vendor might be responsible for the project, you'll still be accountable for the end product.

That means ensuring your project team stays across all vendor activities - enforce your BAU practices and protocols for distributing and installing software - in all environments - for traceability and tracking purposes. The project shutdown then needs to include a close-out phase where what's been installed (anywhere) is reconciled to what you've acquired, and also what you're actually entitled to use (aka Read The Contract). Where there are gaps you'll need to either recalibrate, purchase, decommission, or have the vendor explain and resolve - all before the project can be declared finished and complete.
And never rely on the vendor's personal emails or assurances that 'all is well' - none of that will hold-up under audit (even if they are still there). When it comes to IP all bases need to be formally covered, and if that's proving to be a problem, well you might want to be even more wary.
0 Comments

IBM's Compliance Relaunch

25/2/2022

0 Comments

 

Hats Off to IBM for it's new dedicated Licensing and Compliance site.

Picture
​Covering everything from licensing basics through measurement to managing SAM assets, IBM's new site is a welcome source of information ​... and serves to reiterate that licensing and compliance is still a serious matter with vendors.

​Launched on the 17th February
the site is a comprehensive, easily navigated resource for both SAM beginners and experienced personnel alike.

Quoting Wes Mantle from the Licensing and Software Sales division: "​We hope our Licensing & Compliance website will be a go-to resource for IT executives and SAM/license managers, providing clear guidance for measuring deployment effectiveness and navigating software verification process in an efficient, fair and timely manner."

The 'Licensing' section offers a good starting point with links to related subjects and material, and also provides particularly good graphical representations of IBM's many agreement structures along with key terms and clauses, while the 'Measurement' section covers the array of metrics and topics across on-premise, cloud and mainframe platforms.
If short on time, on everyone's list should be a read and review of the new licensing Guides that include:
  • Licensing guides, which aim to inform clients about the detailed licensing rules commonly encountered in licensing IBM software
  • and User guides, aiming to help clients manage their deployment of IBM software.
The guides have been re-written in a much more readable and informative style covering all fundamental licensing subjects including the often misunderstood virtualization, backup and recovery, and non-production environment rules and obligations.
Of course the site wouldn't be complete without covering IBM's Verification  approach, which includes audits, self-declarations and the IASP program. Interestingly, the section doesn't make reference to IBM's new, hosted, software management tool ESMT.  The Enterprise Software Management Tool is described as an enhancement over the functionality currently provided by PA Online, providing "a full software inventory which details the number of licenses currently deployed and the number of licenses available to deploy. This can be updated in real-time to reflect any changes in requirement, meaning you always have a contemporaneous view of your IBM license position". 
What's not clear is how  the tool will actually operate in order to provide the view of "how many licenses have been used, where and by whom". This seems to imply some degree of discovery across the client landscape - on an ongoing real-time basis - which would come with its own complexities and certainly, concerns. We'd be keen to hear from anyone who has or is looking to adopt this approach - please comment below or get in touch!
What's not raised cynical eyebrows though  is IBM's view of the benefits of being in compliance:
  • Maximizing the business value of your IT investment - purchase what you need and when you need it to optimize license procurement and deployment
  • Better awareness of your entitlements, the terms relating to these, and a better ability to avoid unnecessary software spend such as 'shelfware'
  • Reduced risk of unbudgeted license compliance expenditure
  • Being better prepared for corporate events such as M&A, reorganizations and outsourcing
  • A more positive and engaged relationship with vendors

... we can all agree on that! ​

So set aside some reading time and work your way through the site - it will be a valuable use of time, and ensure you bookmark it as you'll no doubt have cause to return on numerous occasions!
0 Comments

Adobe Reader Distribution Rights

10/1/2022

0 Comments

 

Does your company distribute Adobe Reader to employees? ... if so, make sure you have a valid Distribution License.

Picture
Many companies are unaware of their obligations when they distribute Adobe Reader software within their organisation, that is ...
 ... even though it's free it still needs a license arrangement with Adobe.
Now it's not as onerous as it sounds - it can all be done online, so lets look at some of the detail.

When do I need it?

A Distribution License Agreement is required for:

  • ​Corporations and organisations that want to distribute Acrobat Reader or the Acrobat Reader mobile app on a company intranet site or local network.
  • Commercial vendors that want to bundle Acrobat Reader or the Acrobat Reader mobile app on physical media such as a CD or DVD, on OEM hardware such as computers and mobile devices or with OEM hardware such as scanners.
Individuals interested in the software for personal use can download it free without applying for a Distribution License.
​

Note: You do not need to apply for a Reader Distribution License if you prefer to direct users from your website to Adobe.com to download Reader.

What does the Agreement allow me to do?

You will be authorised to:
  • Distribute the current version of Adobe Reader within your organisation, for internal use only, from ​a copy of the software installed on a file server for the purpose of downloading and installation to computers within your internal network.
  • Distribute the software on a standalone basis on physical media including a hard drive.

What are the key restrictions?

You must:
  1. Only distribute the version of Adobe Reader stated in your confirmation email.
  2. install only one copy of the software on a file server for the purpose of allowing use via NFS, Citrix or other virtualisation technologies.
  3. Within 6 months of the release of a major new version by Adobe, cease distributing the current version and move distribution to the new version.
  4.  Not configure or distribute the software for use without installation, other than as provided for under (2) above.

Ok, got it ... what do I do now?

You'll need to apply for a desktop license which will take just a few minutes and is required to determine how you intend to use Reader. After you complete the short online form, you'll receive an email with a link to the installers. You'll also need to mark a renewal date 12 months from receipt to reapply - the agreement is only valid for one year.
0 Comments

Will 2022 be the beginning of the end for Perpetual Licensing?

28/12/2021

0 Comments

 

The Software Landscape is now ripe for vendors to lock-in Subscriptions and eliminate what (to them) are much loathed Perpetual Licenses ...

Picture
If your organisation - like most - is relentlessly moving workloads to the Cloud have you taken stock of your revised licensing position, or are those changes masked by the attraction of those fully provisioned platforms?
What you might find is the staple of perpetual licenses that you have acquired over the years are now in the throws of obsolescence, to be forever replaced by subscription only licensing.
And worse, all of this might erase your investments, and all be happening by stealth.
please complete our Quick Poll as you go ...
Perpetual licensing - loved by customers, loathed by vendors. Loved by customers because their investment is largely that - theirs. Loathed by vendors because their investment is - to a certain extent - lost. How is it lost? When a customer decides not to continue with maintenance and support, but is entitled to keep running the software.
Submit
Submit
Its not only the investment factor though, its also control.
​Vendors are way less comfortable sending their valued IP off to those reckless customers who might copy and over install their software - and the only way to keep across that issue is to enforce the much detested regimes of self-reporting and audits. Then, with the emergence of alternative support providers, other companies are taking revenue away from those vendors - all on the back of their own IP!

So what could be done to solve their predicament - enter Subscription Software!

What better way to secure your IP than run it solely on your own infrastructure (or infrastructure under your control) - think no leakage of software, auditable at will, chargeable based on actual consumption, and easy to scale up for more revenue! (or down you say? well that's a completely different proposition!)
Submit
Submit
And by offering some nominal discounts to get rid of (sorry - convert) those pesky perpetual licenses problem solved! No more residual entitlements in the hands if customers - just ongoing annuities, even when the next wave (aka cycle) of 'we need to get off the Cloud' thinking hits the boardroom and management - a simple move to on-premise subscriptions with integrated remote management and portals will be just the ticket!

So make sure your cloud strategy includes a proper evaluation of licensing - ask where will I end-up following that journey from a commercial perspective? 

Everyone will say 'Better-off' ...

but you might find in the long term that's not necessarily the case.

0 Comments

Free Open Source Software  + Compliance?

26/11/2021

0 Comments

 

The Software Freedom Conservancy sues Vizio, Inc. for alleged violations of the GNU GPL covering software incorporated into certain Vizio smart TVs.

Picture
Companies are often unaware of their obligations when it comes to Open Source licensing with solutions they develop that include distribution of software built on the likes of the GNU General Public Licensing terms, and that can leave them exposed to lawsuits just as it can with commercial software ...
An early and widely publicised example of the impacts of such non-compliance was the 2008 lawsuit initiated by the Free Software Foundation (FSF) against Cisco Systems that alleged several of Cisco's consumer network routers used GPL licensed code. The litigation was settled with Cisco releasing the source code, making a contribution to the FSF, and appointing a compliance officer. Quite the kicker.
In this latest action SFC asserts that all consumers of copyleft code deserve the opportunity to know, access and modify the code on their devices and is seeking the release of the complete, corresponding source (CCS) for all GPL’d components on Vizio TVs. The benefit? Well much as it was with the older analogue hardware TV's that would be repaired by technicians, coders would have the option to repair the software when the supplier potentially stops support for their older models (surely not from 'built-in obsolescence'?) 
And lets not forget the ethics involved given the FOSS history and the principles that underpin it. From its fruition in the 1990s and early 2000s when Linux and other GPL’d software was considered nothing more than experimental. From those curious beginnings grew the community of enthusiastic developers whose software has benefited and furthered the rights and freedoms of individual users, consumers, and developers around the globe. It is a culture worth preserving and that means keeping organisations who benefit from that culture honest.  (SFC refers to this as 'Ethical Technology' meaning technology that serves its users rather than the corporations who profit from it and preserves and promotes the rights of those impacted by it). 
So if you are an organisation using open-source software, and in particular, incorporating it in proprietary commercial products, make sure you understand your compliance obligations with the relevant open source licenses. If you don't, you might soon find that letter arrives requiring you to release all of the IP you've built on top of the most excellent Free and Open Source Software that we all benefit from.
The Software Freedom Conservancy is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that is supported largely by individuals who care about technology and advocates for software that has been designed to be shared (using copyright licensing that allows users to freely use and repair it, and, in particular, forms of software licensing that use the restrictions of copyright to promote sharing called “copyleft”, such as the GPL).
0 Comments
<<Previous
    • ​+
    • +
    • +
    <
    >

    Categories

    All
    Adobe
    Agreements
    Appliances
    Audit
    BCP & DR
    Cloud
    Compliance
    ComplianceWare
    Contracts
    Forums
    HCL
    IBM
    Intel
    ITAM
    Licensing
    Mainframe
    Marketplace
    Microsoft
    Negotiating Deals
    Open Source
    Oracle
    Partnering
    Red Hat
    Roles
    SAM
    Software Metrics
    SQL Server
    Support
    Windows Server

    Archives

    November 2023
    October 2023
    September 2023
    August 2023
    July 2023
    June 2023
    May 2023
    April 2023
    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016

Unravelling license complexity for Business
ACN 623 529 751

Privacy Policy | Terms of Use
Copyright © 2016-2024 (SWC) ​​

  • Home
  • What We Do
    • Services
    • Tools
    • Experience
    • FAQ
  • Resources
    • Company >
      • About Us
      • Careers
    • Agreements
    • Documentation >
      • Brochure
      • Datasheet
      • Security Measures
      • ComplianceWare >
        • Software
        • Hardware
        • Cloud Configuration
  • Contact Us
  • Latest
  • Search