Earlier this year, with no fanfare (which is perhaps unsurprising), Microsoft implemented a significant change to its Product Terms pertaining to Software Assurance (SA) benefits that likely will have a significant licensing impact for companies that have taken advantage of the Self-Hosted Applications benefit accompanying SA. For several years now, Microsoft has allowed customers with…
Companies that have long relationships with Microsoft know that the company’s form licensing agreements have steadily evolved over time, and typically for the worse. If software licensing can be said to have any “natural laws,” certainly the First Law could be paraphrased to something like: “If you agree to an inch, be prepared to give…
The Services Provider License Agreement (SPLA) is Microsoft’s preferred licensing option for businesses wanting to use Microsoft products in support of hosted software solutions made available to end users over the Internet. For many companies, SPLA is a good fit, in that it incorporates a monthly reporting mechanism, rather than an up-front license purchase, and…
Most businesses seeking to license Microsoft software for the purpose of delivering hosted software solutions over the Internet turn first to the company’s Services Provider License Agreement (SPLA). SPLA is Microsoft’s flagship licensing model for commercial hosting services, and it offers the primary benefit of permitting a licensed hosting company to pay on a month-to-month…
Many online service providers are well aware that Microsoft’s Services Provider License Agreement (SPLA) entails a licensing framework that can be difficult to manage. SPLA may be a great model for businesses seeking to “float” their license expenditures from month to month based on usage. However, what Microsoft considers “usage” and what most companies and…
Licensing Microsoft server products in any environment can be a challenging undertaking, given the complexity of some of Microsoft’s licensing rules. However, licensing Microsoft products for commercial hosting environments under a Services Provider License Agreement (SPLA) can be especially daunting, due to the different use rights and license metrics available under that model. Licensing SQL…
In a typical Microsoft audit of software licensed under perpetual licenses, the auditors usually will compare installations of Microsoft products against licenses owned, and Microsoft will require the audited business to purchase additional licenses required to cover any gaps discovered by the auditors. An audit under a Services Provider License Agreement uses a similar framework,…
With the April 2014 versions of the Product Use Rights (PUR) (for volume licensees) and the Services Provider Use Rights (SPUR) (for services providers under SPLA), Microsoft has implemented significant changes to several usage rights associated with fail-over or disaster-recovery (DR) installations of its server products. As many IT professionals know, Microsoft’s fail-over rights always…
Hosting services customers often want to use licenses that they have acquired to deploy Microsoft software on a service provider’s servers. Those customers need to be wary about such deployments, as applicable license terms may restrict their ability to deploy the products offsite. However, the service provider needs to be doubly cautious. After all, the…
One of the first steps we typically recommend to businesses facing software audits from any source is to try to estimate the financial exposure related to those audits. Doing so allows a company to allocate its resources more efficiently and to set aside reserves or make other financial preparations in advance of settlement, when auditors…
