Does Your Vendor Issue Gag Orders? 210
Presto Vivace writes to tell us that CIO has an interesting article about customer "gag orders" that some ERP vendors are trying to impose contractually. "The effect: customers will be prevented from working with peers and others in the software company's "ecosystem" to help with technical issues or compare pricing options. 'In addition,' Wang adds, 'the customer now lacks the proper checks and balances in pressuring a vendor to deliver on promised capabilities or address severe security issues, and cannot go to the media as a last resort, if needed.'" What other questionable practices (and potential solutions) have others had to work with?
Let them sue (Score:4, Insightful)
Let them sue you and let them watch gag orders get thrown out as unconscionable.
Right?
Why would any one? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why would any major company agree to such arrangements?
Of course such insane arrangements with respect to investments lead to a portion of the financial meltdown.
The blank check is in the mail. (Score:3, Insightful)
"Presto Vivace writes to tell us that CIO has an interesting article about customer "gag orders" that some ERP vendors are trying to impose contractually. "
Contracts aren't blank checks. There are limits.
Intelligence is needed in software companies... (Score:5, Insightful)
In all seriousness, trying to force the consumer to do anything to save your business will ultimately drive them away. If you want to safeguard your business, stop making a poor product, work with your customers to fix issues, give decent support, and stop trying to legally tie their hands behind their backs.
This is akin to legal DRM. All it does to legitimate customers is push them away; software piracy seems like the only recourse. Companies have to learn that this is the kind of stuff that we won't stand for if it is ever to change.
Re:Let them sue (Score:2, Insightful)
For those of us who are employees, exposing your employer to legal action is generally a CLM.
What sign those contracts? (Score:4, Insightful)
The software and services fees for an ERP installation often run into the millions on dollars.
And support contracts come up for renegotiation occasionally.
Can't the customer just cross out the relevant lines in the proposed contract and say, "fuck you"? And if they can't, because the vendor has so much control over the relationship, *that* along should be a cause of nightsweats for the CIO, CEO, and the board of directors.
Answer: PHB (Score:4, Insightful)
Because a Pointy Haired Boss says "I don't care what the end user license agreement says! Install the software!." After five or ten rounds of that, the admin doesn't even ask his/her manager anymore. They just click "I Agree" in the box without asking.
Now if it's an actual paper contract that goes through a legal department, the story might be different; but it rarely is.
Re:Customers force a need for these (Score:5, Insightful)
It is not your customer's responsibility to make your business model work. If you can't get business the way you're doing things, then don't do things that way.
Re:All we need now is a homeland security tie-in (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Consumer law (Score:3, Insightful)
Usually these agreements contain "void where prohibited" in there somewhere. This, obviously, leaves knowledge and interpretation of the local over-riding laws up to the consumer. It's a problem and a responsibility we shouldn't have to be saddled with.
Re:Customers force a need for these (Score:4, Insightful)
What pferdmerde!
Getting yanked around on the front end is not what the discussion is about. NDAs during negotiation are meaningless, because the potential customer knows the quotes from all vendors, and can simply say "lower. no, lower", without specifying anything from the proposal.
This is about telling everyone who will listen that "feature X, though documented, doesn't work; the company denies the problem and isn't fixing it. if it's important to you, don't buy this software.", or, "if you buy this software, the price quote doesn't include the 200% additional cost for \"consultants\" to get it to actually run.".
Downloads are needed in software companies... (Score:3, Insightful)
How about option three? Don't use their product at all?
Wikileaks to the rescue. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What sign those contracts? (Score:3, Insightful)
> Can't the customer just cross out the relevant lines in the proposed contract and say,
> "fuck you"?
I would think that the fact that a vendor would even attempt to impose such terms would be sufficient reason to look for an alternative.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:All we need now is a homeland security tie-in (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:All we need now is a homeland security tie-in (Score:3, Insightful)
Almost ALL Microsoft partners sign this.
So the CIO's of most american comapnies need to be fired.
READ the contract for being a Microsoft partner, it's full of that kind of language.
Re:Let them sue (Score:2, Insightful)
I wasn't involved in the actual negotiations with credit card processing companies, the owners of the restaurant did that themselves. All I know are the details of the deal they negotiated for us (and knowing how cheap the owners were, I'm sure they got the best deal they had available to them and they took 6 months from the time they decided to take cards until actually having a reader in the restaurant, so I don't think they went with the first processor).
To the AC below, we were charged just the transaction fee on debit cards, not the percentage, so it was a flat 75 cents for all debit transactions. That still puts us a quarter in the hole on a $1 candy bar.
CLM explained (Score:3, Insightful)
CLM may mean:
Cthulhu Love Manouever ...or permutations thereof.
Crazed Licentious Muppet
Coccyx Liberating Moose
Custom Lined Meerschaum
Coconut Lapidary Mount
Carnivorous Lemur Molester
Chilton's Lada Manual
Cretaceous Labradorite Mineralology
Chicken Lusting Madmen
Customer Lip Management
Cheeky Little Morons
Re:Let them sue (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:What sign those contracts? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:All we need now is a homeland security tie-in (Score:3, Insightful)
So the CIO's of most american comapnies need to be fired.
Yeah....now you're getting it....