Marco . Fioretti wrote:
Assuming the organization is not SoHo sized, or smaller, unless the person negotiating with
Microsoft for licenses is a complete idiot, the license will allow for each employee to install
MSO on their home computer, for the duration of their employment, or the corporate license
expires, whichever comes first.
may I ask you one real world case where this actually happened?
I'm aware of three companies that did that, of which only one is still around, having been bought
out by a competitor. (A Candian outfit whose DBA was Telemart, but whose corporate name was
something else, and whose employees identified themselves by a different moniker, and whose local
business license was yet another name.)
One SoHo sized business I had a contract with, did have a policy of allowing employees, but not
independent contractors to install the software on their home computer. I don't know if that was
through their license, or if it simply bought the package from Costco.
That practice is occasionally discussed in the trade rags, usually given as a justification of why
Microsoft bases the number of licenses that are required, upon the total number of employees, and
not the number of employees whose job requires a desktop computer, or the number of employees who
use MSO as part of their daily work routine.
I will grant that in some, perhaps even most cases, neither the IT department, nor HR will tell
employees about this "fringe benefit".
There also is the "academic license" option, which, with some effort, is fairly easy for most
people to qualify under.
jonathon
--
Sent from the eating establishment at the far side of the Universe, at the begining of time.
--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscribe@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Context
- Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Cost of MS Office relative to LO, was: Fwd: Re: moving to new version of MS Office (continued)
Re: Cost of MS Office relative to LO, was: Fwd: [libreoffice-users] Re: moving to new version of MS Office · Don Myers
Re: Cost of MS Office relative to LO, was: Fwd: [libreoffice-users] Re: moving to new version of MS Office · John Kennedy
Re: Cost of MS Office relative to LO, was: Fwd: [libreoffice-users] Re: moving to new version of MS Office · M. Fioretti
Re: Cost of MS Office relative to LO, was: Fwd: [libreoffice-users] Re: moving to new version of MS Office · James Knott
Re: Cost of MS Office relative to LO, was: Fwd: [libreoffice-users] Re: moving to new version of MS Office · Virgil Arrington
Re: Cost of MS Office relative to LO, was: Fwd: [libreoffice-users] Re: moving to new version of MS Office · James Knott
Re: Cost of MS Office relative to LO, was: Fwd: [libreoffice-users] Re: moving to new version of MS Office · Tom Davies
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.