To all Works subscribers,

If you have not received it yet, I'm sure you will soon get a letter from Kurt Baker regarding a new approach towards distributing the OpenInsight runtime engines. At first blush, it appears that the only difference is that Revelation will now e-mail developers a runtime engine rather than automatically include one in a development upgrade.

However…[/i]there is a big change in the license agreement where developers must now submit to Revelation Software the names, addresses, and phone numbers of every customer who is using a runtime version of our applications. From page 2 of the new "Runtime License Agreement": II. REPORTING - Licensee must provide (1) the names, addresses, and phone numbers of all customers who have received the Runtime license twice a year as of June 30th and December 31st for as long as this contract is in effect within 30 days after each such date. (2) a semi-annual report on the total number of users of the Applications(s). Unless otherwise authorized, Revelation Software will not use the information provided as part of the reporting process for any purposes other than license verification. Also on the OpenInsight Runtime FAQ: In order for the customer to receive the software, they must read, sign and agree to abide by the runtime license provided with OpenInsight. Secondarily, the users will now be required to report their end users on a semi annual basis. We find this very intrusive and well beyond protocol. The existing runtime license agreement that we have already signed already stipulates our agreement to comply with an already strict and barely useable license. I even wonder if this "modification" can be legally mandated until our current Works subscriptions run their yearly course. Of course nothing we say or do will alter this continued "boiling of the frog" approach Revelation seems to be taking, but hopefully it will cause some to think twice before they renew their Works subscriptions or consider developing in this environment. I know we will. Best regards, SRP Computer Solutions </QUOTE> —- === At 15 OCT 1999 10:53AM Kurt Baker (Revelation Software) wrote: === <QUOTE>Don, Thanks for your note, I appreciate the opportunity to address your questions. I have broken up your posting into two points "Licensing" and "Reporting". Licensing Over the last 12 months, I have personally identified a number of organizations who have improperly licensed Revelation products. The value of the improper licenses has cost Revelation license fees well over $1M. Revelation's business is to sell licenses and we actively pursue each violation. Most of these organizations make immediate restitution, but some cases we are actively pursuing legal action. In the majority of the licensing cases, the situation is memorialized immediately because both parties agree that the license was not simply not read. This sounds pretty remedial, you'd think that a document that outlines product capabilities and affects the pricing of the end product - would be examined at length - but in many cases it is ignored. Improperly licensed software damages both parties, and Revelation has dedicated the past year to communicating our licensing - we have implemented a dedictated licensing web section, rewrote our licenses in plain english - not legal mumbo jumbo and have required all Works subscribers to read and sign the license before obtaining OpenInsight. Some people think this is burdensome or 'intrusive' - but it has caused Revelation and our customers to talk about licensing up-front - not after your product is already developed, priced, or delivered with the wrong license. The change to the distribution of the Runtime license is a natural extension of the need to communicate licensing as early as possible. Reporting When writing the letter you mention in your note, I mentally separated the license (price, capabilities, legalize) from the reporting of these licenses - at second blush, I could have worded the letter a little bit better. License reporting has not been that big of deal - Revelation has required runtime license reporting in the past (this has been a requirement for all Arev RDKs and OpenInsight Lan RDKs). Our customers have never voiced a problem with the reporting requirements EXCEPT they do not want us to contact their customers for marketing reasons. Therefore we added the phrase "Unless otherwise authorized, Revelation Software will not use the information provided as part of the reporting process for any purposes other than license verificaiton". Thanks for the opportunity to address these quesions. If you (or anyone else) have further questions, please feel free to contact me at (978) 247 7165, 800 262-4747 (ext 7165) or via email at kbaker@revelation.com. Kurt Baker </QUOTE> —- === At 18 OCT 1999 02:05PM Jim Vaughan wrote: === <QUOTE>It also says you cannot run the run time version on a LAN. Does this mean any machine connected to a LAN or just the server? </QUOTE> View this thread on the Works forum...