🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <hendersoDoy5yx.6GF@netcom.com> henderso@netcom.com (Mark C. Henderson) writes:
>
>I'd rather there were no licence managers, and that vendors trusted
>their paying customers.
>
>[...]
>
>So, what I'd really like is the best of both worlds. A licence 
>tracking scheme that would allow the users to continue to use the 
>application if too many licenses were being used, but one that would 
>notify me of the situation so that the appropriate corrective action 
>can take place. In the case of too many users, either we buy more 
>licenses or ensure that their are fewer users.
>
>Licence tracking without denial of service in the case of licensing 
>problems would provide a service both to the vendor and the customer. 


The compromise I came to a long time ago was to get the best of both
worlds, in a sense.

The license manager warns the user and the administrator of any
violation, and sets a clock running.   After 14 days, it will then
deny the offending user the service they are not licensed for.
This includes violations of change in hardware, number of users,
etc.

This gives plenty of time to get new license keys etc., which are usually
available over the phone within 2 or 3 days.

Solves the security problem, but doesn't leave the customer in the
lurch unless they ignore the warnings or try to get around them.

p.s. the extra benefit is that this can also be easily modified to
     allow demonstration use of the software.   The same mechanism keeps
     track of demo time left (instead of 14 days, the counter starts at
     say, 60 days), and if the customer wants to buy, they call up,
     order the software, and get new license keys allowing them to keep
     their existing installation by converting it to real software.

-- 
   Andy Dunn           <amdunn@adscorp.on.ca> or <uunet!mongrel!amdunn>    
:-------------------------------------------------------------------------:
   "Don't drive faster than your angel can fly"