[trustable-software] Fwd: Clarification of restrictions regarding purchase of IEC 61508

[Paul Sherwood]

Dear Ms. Gomez

please see my comments, and further questions, inline below.

> From: IEC SALES DEPARTMENT <sales at iec.ch>
> Date: 30 July 2018 at 09:41
> Subject: RE: Clarification of restrictions regarding purchase of IEC
> 61508
> To: devcurmudgeon <devcurmudgeon at gmail.com>
> 
> Dear Mr. Sherwood,
> 
> Thank you for your inquiries.
> 
> Our replies are as follows:
> 
> 1. Yes, the content may only be read by one person because you bought
> a single user licence.

We had assumed, wrongly it seems, that this was **single concurrent 
user** as opposed to **single named user**. Our assumption was based on 
the statement in the EULA that the printed copy could be read by our 
colleagues.

The purchaser was our CFO. He has no applicable knowledge versus the 
content of the standard. Unless we can transfer this right to another 
member of our team, then we would like to cancel our purchase.

> 2. Yes, the licence you bought (single user) only permits one copy of
> each standard, these printed copies may be shared internally with your
> colleagues, however, they are not authorized to make any further
> copies.

Understood.

> 3. The pdf may be accessed by more than one person if you have a
> licence that will permit this type of access.

As I've said elsewhere, the code of the document seems excessive 
already. We do not intend to spend additional cash just to work around 
an EULA which in our view is unreasonable and unworkable.

> Please note that a single user licence won't permit other people to
> access the files, it will only authorize one person.

Understood. We are not happy with that given that the person who made 
transaction is not in a position to read or apply the contents of the 
standard, and therefore request to cancel the transaction as I have 
said.

> If you want to share the files with your colleagues, you must buy a
> networking licence, in your case, we could upgrade the licence you
> bought to the number of users you need, you would only have to pay the
> difference. Please click here [1] for information on networking.

We are not interested in that. We'll consider re-purchasing, but ensure 
thet the person completing your web-form is able to benefit from the 
document.

> 4. As I mentioned in point 2, if you have a single user licence, you
> may only print one copy of each file, you can share these copies with
> your colleagues, however, they may not print any further copies.

Understood.

> On the other hand, if you buy, for example, an up to three
> simultaneous user licence, you will be able to print 3 copies of each
> file. With this type of licence, you may place the files in your
> intranet so a maximum of three people can access the files
> simultaneously. If you have an up to 5 simultaneous user licence, you
> will be able to print 5 copies of each file and a maximum of 5 people
> can access the pdf files you place in your intranet, simultaneously
> and so on…

We are not interested in that, thank you.

> If you buy a simultaneous user licence, the people accessing the files
> don't have to always be the same, the number of simultaneous users,
> though, must be respected.
> 
> 5. In this case, since a single user licence was bought, the only
> person who is authorized to access the pdf file, is the person who's
> name has been watermarked it. Anybody can read the printed copy
> though.

Yes, fully understood. I think this whole situation is ridiculous, but 
let's move on.

> 6. Single user licences (which has been bought by your company,
> specifically by your colleague Mr. Mr. Stephen Jones), only authorizes
> the person who's name appears in the watermark, to access the files,
> no other person may have access, because it's a single user licence
> (this refers to: ""personal devices whose access is limited to your
> personal use"). When an account is created, the buyer enters his
> company name which will be used by our system when watermarking the
> files, this doesn't mean that the licence is authorizing the whole
> company to access the files. Access is limited to an individual unless
> he/she buys a networking licence which will permit his colleagues to
> access the files he is buying. The total number of simultaneous users
> will depend on how many people need to access the files at a time.

Yup. Got it.

You haven't dealt with the 'personal use vs commercial use' question, 
though. I suggest you pass that to your legal team.

> Please note that Mr. Jones bought a single user licence which should
> only authorize him to access the pdf files, however, if you need to
> share them with other colleagues, there is no problem, we can upgrade
> the licence, you only have to let us know the total number of
> simultaneous users.

No, that's not going to happen.

> We will then prepare a pro forma for the upgrading of the licence that
> was already bought, so you pay the difference.

We're not upgrading. Please arrange cancellation and refund, so that we 
can consider re-purchasing with one of our relevant people completing 
the transaction.

I have a further question on that:

Depending on where we purchase, the "First Sale Doctrine" may apply. 
Please can you confirm that once our purchase is complete, you accept 
that our purchaser has the right to re-sell the CD?

> We're looking forward to your reply.

And now you have it.

br
Paul

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine

> 
> Best regards,
> 
> MARCELA GÓMEZ
> 
> Customer Service Representative
> 
>  [2]
> 
> IEC - International Electrotechnical Commission | 3 rue de Varembé
> [3] | PO Box 131 | CH–1211 Geneva 20 | Switzerland | T +41 22 919
> 0211 | e-tech magazine [4] | website [2] | webstore [5]
> 
> FROM: devcurmudgeon <devcurmudgeon at gmail.com>
> SENT: 29 July 2018 17:23
> TO: IEC Sales Department <sales at iec.ch>
> CC: trustable-software at lists.trustable.io;
> paul.sherwood at codethink.co.uk
> SUBJECT: Clarification of restrictions regarding purchase of IEC 61508
> 
> To whom it may concern
> 
> I refer to my public correspondence with your representative Guilaine
> Fournet on Twitter recently [1] in which Ms Fournet referred me to
> your EULA (presumed to be [2]) and suggested that I address my queries
> via this email address (hence this email).
> 
> As context, my employer Codethink Limited recently purchased a
> document from you. I was not the person who performed the transaction,
> but as Codethink's CEO I confirm that I authorized the payment.
> 
> After further consideration of the EULA, and particularly in light of
> Ms Fournet's comments I have several questions:
> 
> 1) Is it your expectation that the purchased PDF/digital content may
> be read only by the person named at purchase time?
> 
> 2) I understand that the licence permits one physical copy to be
> printed. Is it your expectation that this printed copy may only be
> read by the person named at purchase time?
> 
> If the answer to either of the above questions is yes, then Codethink
> will seek a return and refund since this restriction was not apparent
> to us at the point of purchase, and normally our technical staff (who
> are our expected audience for the document) do not handle purchases.
> 
> If the answer to either (preferably both) of the questions is no, I
> have further questions:
> 
> 3) If the PDF can be accessed by one person at a time, which is what
> we gathered from the EULA originally, what criteria are you expecting
> us to apply to our reader(s)? For example, must they be employed or
> contracted by Codethink? And if so, on what basis?
> 
> 4) Repeat of question 3) but for the printed copy.
> 
> 5) Are we correct in concluding that one person is permitted to read
> the printed copy while another person simultaneously reads the PDF
> content? This was our understanding based on "Paper copies may be
> borrowed by other employees for their internal use only within your
> organization" but Ms Fournet's comments seem to suggest otherwise.
> 
> 6) The EULA expressly refers to "personal devices whose access is
> limited to your personal use" however the document was purchased by
> Codethink Limited (a company), for commercial use. Please can you
> clarify what is your intent in this wording?
> 
> br
> 
> Paul Sherwood
> 
> CEO, Codethink Limited
> 
> [1] https://twitter.com/gnf_iec/status/1020318471194849281 [6]
> 
> [2] http://www.iec.ch/webstore/custserv/pdf/Licence.pdf [7]
> 
> 
> Links:
> ------
> [1]
> https://webstore.iec.ch/Webstore/webstore.nsf/xpFAQ.xsp?OpenXPage&id=GFOT-7NPP8H
> [2] http://www.iec.ch/
> [3]
> https://maps.google.com/?q=3+rue+de+Varemb%C3%A9&entry=gmail&source=g
> [4] http://iecetech.org/
> [5] https://webstore.iec.ch/
> [6] https://twitter.com/gnf_iec/status/1020318471194849281
> [7] http://www.iec.ch/webstore/custserv/pdf/Licence.pdf
> _______________________________________________
> trustable-software mailing list
> trustable-software at lists.trustable.io
> https://lists.trustable.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/trustable-software