Somehow, this needs to be brought up in the upcoming CF Summit. My current recommendation to anyone asking is to switch to Lucee ASAP before Adobe, and specifically theirĮver increasingly aggressive licensing department finds you. Adobe needs to address this publicly.īased on my experience and the experience of the people coming to me for advice, as much as it pains me, This is the first time I have heard Adobe threatening back-license fees. To my experience, they don't have the same benefit of already paying a lot. Unfortunately from all that have contacted me directly seeking insight the price jump, for us, was manageable. ThisĪrrangement was tolerable cost wise because of how much we were already paying with our individual licenses Their own EULA, we had 20+ standard licenses and the battle resulted in a custom Enterprise agreement. While we still don't agree with Adobe's interpretation of Our case was unique compared to most using CF. Products or services, you are in violation of their EULA and are required to have a custom agreement. Adobe's stance is that their CF EULA only covers the simplest B2C - customer runningĪ single site promoting their ware to an individual consumer, or a blog site. Three years ago on this same issue - a EULA fight with an Adobe licensing rep forcing us to a service provider I started the the "What the heck is Adobe thinking?" thread over Steve Sommers 10:10 AM in response to Charlie ArehartĬharlie and pvandermn, I share your dismay. So it seems time to get behind seeing this more widely discussed. Is all very dismaying to hear, and the news of pursuing back-licensing from people who try to leave is just over What with me being an ACP, speaker at the upcoming CF Summit, and a very long-time cf supporter. Like Brando as Terry Malloy, I realize I risk some relationships (and perhaps worse) by speaking up on this, Who having been a loyal teamster starts to see what's really going on, and can't help feeling the need to take a As the OP indicates, that's waived only if they agree to aīasically, it's a "you can pay us now or pay us later, but you're gonna pay us" kind of ultimatum that smacks ofĪnd after watching the classic "On the Waterfront" just last week, I can't help feeling like Brando's character, They're still pursuing back-licensingĪgainst these folks for 10 years if they threaten that. Someone says cavalierly, "just switch to Lucee", that's not the answer. Which one is it?Īnd of course, for the companies being chased this way (now and in the future), it's of real economicĬonsequence, with tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars being sought from them. It will surely be used by some to assert that CF is struggling and the CF team With all the positive news from the CF team about how well CF isĭoing, I can't see how this jives. I wish someone from Adobe would publicly clarify what point in the EULA is justifying what feels like a shake Violations don't seem in line with the EULA, which is what people agree to before using CF. In each case, I came to the same conclusions as you: the asserted This is so disheartening to hear, and yes I've heard it happening to a few people this past year (either myĬlients or folks writing in the community). If you have dealt with this I’d like to find out what your resolution was. They are also bypassing their resellers by doing Ultimately demand a portion of their revenues. They are trying to convert their perpetual licensed customers to a special license where they’ll Using CF in any B2B capacity is a service bureau and subject to a custom agreement with annualĪuditing/repricing, using some arbitrary and unknown formula for determining the cost. (It runs in open source environment like Lucee). Solution does not provide coding access or delivery of ColdFusion itself. If we don’t sign it, they are threatening to sue us for years of back-license fees. Of the EULA and requiring us to sign a custom agreement that is increasing our costs nearlyġ0-fold. This year under the guise of getting a "better deal" for our existing 3 perpetual Enterprise licenses.Īs a result of what was clearly a bait and switch tactic, Adobe is now claiming we are in violation But the text of that original post and the many replies to it are offered below:Ĭhecking in to see if anyone else out there is dealing with Adobe bait and switch based on havingĪn application developed in CF that other businesses use? We were sent a questionnaire earlier If you want to see the original post in the old Adobe forums, here it is - not sure how long the link will live. Unfortunately, the original links to those how posted are not live, but you will be able to read the entire conversation. The compilation below is the entire conversation Adobe deleted (how convenient) when moving to the new forums.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |