License/number of computers question

[itsme28m]

Just checked google for this:

Organisation: 217.000.000
Company: 1.280.000.000
Enterprise: 219.000.000 (i gues the uss enterprise is included )

Maybe the most used word is the best one? it's not always but... ;-)

[admin]

Just checked google for this:

Organisation: 217.000.000
Company: 1.280.000.000
Enterprise: 219.000.000 (i gues the uss enterprise is included )

Maybe the most used word is the best one? it's not always but... ;-)

Searching "inside your ..." etc. then "inside your company" clearly wins and it is the shortest!

[CitizenD]

Drop it altogether. That is:

As an individual person you need one license to use XYplorer. Period. As an employer, you need a license for each employee using XYplorer.

The fact that the employees are using it at work is implied.

Cheers,

D

[itsme28m]

That means we can't use xyplorer outside your company Don?

Ok, all registered users are running to don's company right now
just kidding

[jacky]

As an individual person you need one license to use XYplorer

So.., what would that mean? Can one individual person uses his XY on his computer at home and on another computer where only he will use it (could be another home PC, laptop, at another location, work, etc) ?

[j_c_hallgren]

Yeah, but what part of this didn't you understand?:
As an individual person you need one license to use XYplorer. As an employer, you need a license for each employee using XYplorer inside your organization.

I understood it fine, but given the previous discussion and my understanding of what you're trying to accomplish, I feel there are things that could be interpreted in various ways...

1) The sentence about individuals: This would mean that a husband and wife would both need a license even if the was only one computer so no possible concurrent use (which would require dual lic if concurrent)

2) Similar issue about business use, if only one computer but dual employees.

3) Also, you say employer...what about a church, club or similar where they are volunteers and not paid, thus not technically employees? And individual doesn't work either as that would mean, let's say, all 10 volunteers would need a license even if there is only one computer and they share it, one at a time, when they are on-duty or whatever...

That's a quick shot at what I see as faults...there are others, but you get the idea...I think my last license variant handles all three of these issues adequately...my goal is that I want your rights as a developer to be protected as well as ours as users...without causing us to believe we need more licenses than you intended...

[admin]

As an individual person you need one license to use XYplorer

So.., what would that mean? Can one individual person uses his XY on his computer at home and on another computer where only he will use it (could be another home PC, laptop, at another location, work, etc) ?

I abandoned the idea of computer-based alltogether. The basic rule now is: To use XY you need a license. When you have a license you can do it what you want for the rest of your life.

The sentence about employees is added because employees are slots filled by persons, roles played by individuals. From an employer's perspective, when you have 10 people in your company using XY, you purchase 10 licenses. Now when you fire 2,and hire 2 new, then your 10 licenses still cover the new situation. The 2 fired folks do not take the licenses away home because they belong to the employer. Get the idea?

Now you will ask (and have asked ), what if I have a license and work as a employee, does my employer need to purchase a license for me? The answer now is: Your license does cover it! No need for your employer to get another one.

The other way round, of course, does not work, as I explained above. If your employer buys you the right to use XY at work, this does not imply that you may use XY for non-company work.

[j_c_hallgren]

Going back to the example I've been using...which obviously doesn't apply to me, but commonly to others...so when a husband/wife share a computer but only one can possibly use it at any point in time, then under this newest idea, what happens? Requiring two licenses could have a definite negative effect on sales, as it would make XY essentially twice as costly as some other choices...and although good for income, it would reduce overall sales, I would theorize....

Now if there was text like : "to use XY at same time as another person, each of you needs a license" or similar somewhere in the mix...

Regarding the non-company work...are you saying that employee couldn't use XY to perform a task on his personal files stored on company PC? That's the way it's written...that seems a bit far-fetched...I can see that it would apply to using company XY on his OWN PC at home, for example...

[admin]

Going back to the example I've been using...which obviously doesn't apply to me, but commonly to others...so when a husband/wife share a computer but only one can possibly use it at any point in time, then under this newest idea, what happens? Requiring two licenses could have a definite negative effect on sales, as it would make XY essentially twice as costly as some other choices...and although good for income, it would reduce overall sales, I would theorize....

A license is a license. A cinema ticket is non-transferable either, even if you go one after the other.

Regarding the non-company work...are you saying that employee couldn't use XY to perform a task on his personal files stored on company PC? That's the way it's written...that seems a bit far-fetched...I can see that it would apply to using company XY on his OWN PC at home, for example...

Well... it's a bit like pissing in the pool. It's forbidden but who cares because who will find out?

I have another idea: When you feel guilty buy a license!

[lukescammell]

Hehe, I like that one Don

[jacky]

I abandoned the idea of computer-based alltogether. The basic rule now is: To use XY you need a license. When you have a license you can do it what you want for the rest of your life.

Ok well, then you could also simply state that clearly: XY is a portable application, and therefore its licenses are not computer-based but person-based : You need as many licenses as people are gonna use XY, regardless of the number of computers.

Means one can use his own license at home, work, friend's PC (on his flash drive or alike) ; Husband and wife needs 2 licenses if they want both to use XY ; Employer (or "president" of a club, association, ...) needs as many licenses as they need employees/volunteer/etc to use XY.