New licensing rule has a hidden cost

matttrax

Yeah, as far as I'm concerned it should be like how the application servers were licensed. With ADCS you could have multiple hand held devices accessing the system through a queue. If users were waiting too long to get what they need you added more application servers to balance the load.

It accomplishes the goals of forcing external users to be licensed (well, go through a licensed server) and lets them get the data they need. Seemed to work just fine...I guess it wasn't making enough money.

generic

MS needs to allow per Socket (CPU) license for CDO that is reasonable.

p.willemse6

generic wrote:

Yes those users that use CRM will need to be licensed CDO, since they are accessing NAV Data.

Licensing of DCO is about accessing data via the service tier...

generic

p.willemse6 wrote:

generic wrote:

Yes those users that use CRM will need to be licensed CDO, since they are accessing NAV Data.

Licensing of DCO is about accessing data via the service tier...

You are wrong. It has nothing to do with service tier. And by Service tier, you mean webservice, because you can't connect to service tier directly, and you still would be wrong.

FAQ: How do I know if a user has “access” to Microsoft Dynamics NAV
and needs to be licensed, for example via DCO?
If a user has a connection of any sort to the Microsoft Dynamics NAV business logic or data, either
directly in the application or the database or indirectly via a server (or any other setup), then he has
access and must be licensed for use of Microsoft Dynamics NAV. Examples of this can be scenarios
enabling: inputting of data (e.g. from employees or customers), puling or automatic publishing of
reports, displaying product info or availability, EDI connections, web shops, etc. Licensing options are
DCO for internal users, DCO for external users that can be named and External Connector when there
are either many external users or the external users cannot be named.

Please get informed first.

jlandeen

Just incase there are new people tuning into this thread I...there is a FAQ document on Partnersource that generic is siting above. The document is called: FAQ_PricingLicensingChanges_NAV_Partner_Nov08.pdf and you should be able to search it out on Partnersource quite easily.

As it's Partner Confidential I won't post it here, but you should check it out yourselves.

themave

jlandeen wrote:

Just incase there are new people tuning into this thread I...there is a FAQ document on Partnersource that generic is siting above. The document is called: FAQ_PricingLicensingChanges_NAV_Partner_Nov08.pdf and you should be able to search it out on Partnersource quite easily.

As it's Partner Confidential I won't post it here, but you should check it out yourselves.

As an end user, trying to determine the direction to go regarding upgrading, having licensing terms hidden is not very helpfull.

And having licensing terms that have even the partners such as yourselfs, not able to figure it out is also a little disheartning. I am concerned that a decision could be made, and half way into the process I find out someone misunderstood the licensing, and now I have to spend a small fortune to continue with my upgrade, or find out things I though I would be able to do, are now cost prohibitive.

Just saying I think licensing should be a little clearer then this.

David

jlandeen

I feel your pain and hopefully this is more a misunderstanding of new licensing terms then anything else. I currently am working to try and find some clarity on this issue as it can affect end users greatly as you said.

p.willemse6

generic wrote:

p.willemse6 wrote:

generic wrote:

Yes those users that use CRM will need to be licensed CDO, since they are accessing NAV Data.

Licensing of DCO is about accessing data via the service tier...

You are wrong. It has nothing to do with service tier. And by Service tier, you mean webservice, because you can't connect to service tier directly, and you still would be wrong.

FAQ: How do I know if a user has “access” to Microsoft Dynamics NAV
and needs to be licensed, for example via DCO?
If a user has a connection of any sort to the Microsoft Dynamics NAV business logic or data, either
directly in the application or the database or indirectly via a server (or any other setup), then he has
access and must be licensed for use of Microsoft Dynamics NAV. Examples of this can be scenarios
enabling: inputting of data (e.g. from employees or customers), puling or automatic publishing of
reports, displaying product info or availability, EDI connections, web shops, etc. Licensing options are
DCO for internal users, DCO for external users that can be named and External Connector when there
are either many external users or the external users cannot be named.

Please get informed first.

Don't be smart, I visited the pricing team many times and can dream the pricing guide including all acceptions. My PAM call's me when there are questions from other partners.

Microsoft can state what ever they want, local legislation is always leading. You own your data, not MS. You are allowed to acces your data directly if you don't use the application to do so. If you use NAV or any of it's components, like a webservice talking to the dynamics server or a NAS, then you should.
And no, I don't mean the webservice. I mean accessing the data of NAV via the Dynamics Server, the second tier of NAV. and yes, by using NAV webservices. Reason why webshops etc. need a DCO is because most of them use a NAS or a webservice, because they want to use business logic.

If you look at data directly in SQL, and you pay for the usage of SQL, than you don't have to buy a DCO. Can not speak for foreign countries, but that's the situation here in the netherlands... for example make a webpart in Sharepoint which shows data from SQL directly, without using NAV logic or components, that's perfectly legal.

bbrown

Don't count on it.

Microsoft's argument is that the database is a integral component of NAV. Therefore if you are access the tables you are using NAV regardless of your access method. If NAV shipped as "executables only" and each customer designed and created their own database, then your argument might be valid.

p.willemse6

Good point, which could be valid for the native database because it is shipped with, and can only used with NAV. However, if you read the Dynamics licensing terms this is already discussible.

There is jurisdiction (waht's the english word for this???) for this here, where software suppliers which shipped their database with the solution and have ending licenses refused customers access to their data because they ended their support contract. Judge ruled they have the right to access their won data. Imagine you already are using SQL for a custom solution, and allow NAV to access this database to store data. That would mean that suddenly some tables would be "owned" by Dynamics....

generic

If you read their FAQ, they explicitly mention using SQL reporting services to do a sql query to extract the data to be displayed, or extracting the data for a cube requires DCO license.

This has nothing to do with business logic.

MS is not saying they own the data, they simply say that in order to access NAV you need a license,

I know it sounds stupid, but they are making the rules, and if you want to risk it and take it to court be my guest.

Good luck with getting support or any upgrades after that.

bbrown

Specific case details matter in situations like that. I think a situation of accessing data when NAV is no longer in use may be viewed differently then accessing data in a live systems. Just because a judge decided one way, for a particular case, don't make that general assumption. Keep in mind, that if push comes to shove, Microsoft (and other large software firms) have much deeper pockets to fund litigation compared to the typical NAV customer.

generic

If anybody is going to convergence next week in new orleans, Please ask them to change this ridiculous licensing rule.

Allow per processor license at reasonable price 10K for CDO and only apply if you are using business logic. A standard SQL Server is cheaper for 6k than this for gods sake and you get much more valuable software. They are ripping customers off with this rule, and hurting all Solution Centers.

I think a lot of customers will not upgrade to 2009. It will be too expensive.

p.willemse6

Generic, you are right, fortunately we discuss our architecture designs for integration with MS before we use them. Microsoft has proven to be reasonable. They want to prevent customers using NAV logic because they put time and effort in building it. So, as to accessing a NAS or using NAV webservices, they are right in my opinion. There should be price breaks for internal users, or an internal connector or so, ligh users whatever. However accessing your own data, stored by NAV or not, is another issue.

Keep in mind that if you build an external solution, this will cost a tremendous amount of work because you can;t use any of NAV.

Solutions who do use NAV logic, Like ITIS or tradepoint, do pay for DCO's and so do we....

kine

For me the licensing is done in this way to prevent "ways around" the session licensing by publishing all pages as webservices and creating own "client" which will go around the standard licensing. It is why MS needs to license somehow any access to the data. Else there will be x "NAV clients" with own licensing using only the middle tier to connect to the system etc.

If there is another way than the used one is another question. I hope that there will be some changes in the current system, mainly in current economics situation. But still, if company have 200 employees which needs access to the data somehow (one on-line report etc.), we can assume that paying the DCO for each employee is worth the money for the company...

generic

kine wrote:

For me the licensing is done in this way to prevent "ways around" the session licensing by publishing all pages as webservices and creating own "client" which will go around the standard licensing. It is why MS needs to license somehow any access to the data. Else there will be x "NAV clients" with own licensing using only the middle tier to connect to the system etc.

That's fine that you would need to license since you are using business logic. But they need allow per cpu licensing.

If there is another way than the used one is another question. I hope that there will be some changes in the current system, mainly in current economics situation. But still, if company have 200 employees which needs access to the data somehow (one on-line report etc.), we can assume that paying the DCO for each employee is worth the money for the company...

So you are saying that the company that will upgrade to 2009, will have to pay an additional 40000$ for 200 employees for licensing because they run one on-line report? Or they post just their time?

They won't they'll change the process, and worser solution to save money, and hire a monkey to run the report for the employee.
And as far as time entry, it will become disjointed, and a user has to sync the data. All these because you cannot use NAV data.
In any integration NAV data will need to be untouchable. Try to sell that on your next deal and explain that your customers if they upgrade.

jlandeen

Yes I see that's why they've done that - but as pointed out earlier in this forum....they're essentially tryihng to force everyone to pay for every internal user that wants to access data that they already own.

If the DCO only applied to any interation with Navision Business Logic or the Service Tier that doesn't use the Real Time or Classic client - that would make sense to me. But in this case it appears that even if you go directly to the tables for reporting, to mine your own data, or integrate with another tool you have to pay this additional license fee.

kine

What I wrote doesn't mean that I am voting for that solution... I do not like it too.. I just want to say that I understand the purpose of this, but the effect of this is not positive and not good for sales and I know that and it is pain. (I just want to make clear my position regarding this licensing...) 8)

I will be vary happy when the WebServices would be free of charge (best solution :-)) or there will be some limit or "per CPU/connector" solution.

matttrax

GP and AX also have web services ability and three tier environments from what I understand. Does anyone know if licensing is similar on those systems? If it is surely there would have been the same uproar that's going on here. Either customers of those systems have accepted it (not likely in my opinion) or they have better licensing terms.

I'd think Microsoft would be going towards the same model for all the ERPs. :?

matttrax

I may have missed some things in these long licensing threads, so my apologies if these have already been answered / covered.

Your license comes with 10 web users (at least ours has 10 and I'm pretty sure we didn't buy them). Does the same rule apply as it does to normal sessions, in that these are concurrent users? I don't think DCO for internal users are named. So unless you're integrating with a ton of applications that should be enough to cover it.

If Microsoft is arguing that the database is an integral part of NAV, to me that means that their table designs and objects are the integral part, not the data. After all, they supplied you with those, they didn't supply you with your own data. 99.99% of the data is not part of their product.

Once that data is transferred to a data warehouse for other purposes, it is no longer the same structure that they gave you. We've used SSIS forever to move our NAV data into a warehouse for BI and have never had to be licensed for this. Reports or anything else that accesses this warehouse data is not accessing NAV, regardless of where that data originated. Under the scenarios described even if you had reports that accessed "non-NAV" data they would have to be licensed.

I completely agree that anything that accesses the service tier should be subject to those licenses, but if you're building an application that talks directly to the SQL server, you have already paid for that ability when you purchased SQL. Double charging the consumer is just wrong. Bad Microsoft [-X

The whole argument is ridiculous and on top of it there's no way to enforce it. SQL doesn't know a NAV database from any other database and Microsoft isn't going to waste resources checking every customer for license compliance.

Ok...I'm done

p.willemse6

matttrax wrote:

I may have missed some things in these long licensing threads, so my apologies if these have already been answered / covered.

Your license comes with 10 web users (at least ours has 10 and I'm pretty sure we didn't buy them). Does the same rule apply as it does to normal sessions, in that these are concurrent users? I don't think DCO for internal users are named. So unless you're integrating with a ton of applications that should be enough to cover it.

If Microsoft is arguing that the database is an integral part of NAV, to me that means that their table designs and objects are the integral part, not the data. After all, they supplied you with those, they didn't supply you with your own data. 99.99% of the data is not part of their product.

Once that data is transferred to a data warehouse for other purposes, it is no longer the same structure that they gave you. We've used SSIS forever to move our NAV data into a warehouse for BI and have never had to be licensed for this. Reports or anything else that accesses this warehouse data is not accessing NAV, regardless of where that data originated. Under the scenarios described even if you had reports that accessed "non-NAV" data they would have to be licensed.

I completely agree that anything that accesses the service tier should be subject to those licenses, but if you're building an application that talks directly to the SQL server, you have already paid for that ability when you purchased SQL. Double charging the consumer is just wrong. Bad Microsoft [-X

The whole argument is ridiculous and on top of it there's no way to enforce it. SQL doesn't know a NAV database from any other database and Microsoft isn't going to waste resources checking every customer for license compliance.

Ok...I'm done

Mattrax, you don't get 10 webusers for free, sorry. maybe you have ten NAS'ses in your license, which ship with a webuser?
As to your question: yes, an internal DCO user is named...

bbrown

The vast majority of license agreements are not "technically enforced". That does not make them any less binding. Many software violators are discovered thru independent reporting to the SPA. In my career, I have seen more then on situation where an employee, dismissed under less then friendly conditions, has turned a company in.

generic

if you move to 2009 the web user license will be changed to DCO users. They do not sell those granules any more.

You will need to get DCO licensing for anybody accessing your Data warehouse. It specifically mentions this question in the FAQ.

bbrown

In the U.S. the fine for software piracy is $150,000.00 per violation. This means a company with 10 unlicensed NAV users would be facing a possible 1.5 million dollar fine.

matttrax

I wasn't saying people should disregard the licensing agreements, just that companies probably will, even unintentionally. How many companies out there are going to want to build a BI solution and not even think that it needs to be licensed with other software outside of what it is using? My guess is 99% of them. If they've paid for SQL licensing they're not going to double pay NAV. When there's no enforcement by the application it's easy to overlook. If it hadn't been for these posts we certainly would have.

Take my company for example. We're currently on Navision 3.7 (for about 4 years I think and have used Navision for about 10) licensed for 155 users. They all have access to a BI system that uses a data warehouse which is populated with NAV data and did not cost anything in terms of licensing before. We pay close to $50,000 / yr for our Business Ready Enhancement Plan (or the "right to upgrade" plan as I call it). So now that we've paid $200,000 for the right to upgrade to NAV2009, Microsoft is saying we have to pay another $30,000+ ($5000 in yearly licensing) in order to continue using a solution that we built ourselves and did not previously cost us any money. Since the only DCO exceptions are for users from other Dynamics ERP/CRM systems, and every internal user we have accesses the data in multiple ways, the users have to be licensed for every application they use the data in (unless I missed something which is entirely possible). I can understand paying for new features and functionality, but being charged for something you were previously allowed to do for free is unacceptable. Maybe have NAV client access gives you "permission" to access the data through any application since it is the highest prices, but I didn't see that anywhere.

I'm sure everyone could go on and on about this, and obviously I have, but it just really bothers me. Despite my long posts, all I can think is "Wow" and "Can we have our $200k back and remain unsupported?" ](*,)

generic

Mattrax, you are probably one of the 10 customers that have realized this.

There is another 60,000 customer that haven't. :roll:

p.willemse6

matttrax wrote:

I wasn't saying people should disregard the licensing agreements, just that companies probably will, even unintentionally. How many companies out there are going to want to build a BI solution and not even think that it needs to be licensed with other software outside of what it is using? My guess is 99% of them. If they've paid for SQL licensing they're not going to double pay NAV. When there's no enforcement by the application it's easy to overlook. If it hadn't been for these posts we certainly would have.

Take my company for example. We're currently on Navision 3.7 (for about 4 years I think and have used Navision for about 10) licensed for 155 users. They all have access to a BI system that uses a data warehouse which is populated with NAV data and did not cost anything in terms of licensing before. We pay close to $50,000 / yr for our Business Ready Enhancement Plan (or the "right to upgrade" plan as I call it). So now that we've paid $200,000 for the right to upgrade to NAV2009, Microsoft is saying we have to pay another $30,000+ ($5000 in yearly licensing) in order to continue using a solution that we built ourselves and did not previously cost us any money. Since the only DCO exceptions are for users from other Dynamics ERP/CRM systems, and every internal user we have accesses the data in multiple ways, the users have to be licensed for every application they use the data in (unless I missed something which is entirely possible). I can understand paying for new features and functionality, but being charged for something you were previously allowed to do for free is unacceptable. Maybe have NAV client access gives you "permission" to access the data through any application since it is the highest prices, but I didn't see that anywhere.

I'm sure everyone could go on and on about this, and obviously I have, but it just really bothers me. Despite my long posts, all I can think is "Wow" and "Can we have our $200k back and remain unsupported?" ](*,)

Mattrax, i don';t know if I understood you right, but if the 155 users covers the employees that are using the DWH, they are already licensed for NAV and the data. No discussion there, you are covered...

generic

I don't think so. Nav users are concurrent users. DCO is named users.

p.willemse6

Nice point here. the users are licensed for NAV via a concurrent mechanism, so they are allowed to use the data. MS told me that if there are enough licenses to cover all internal users, you would never have to buy DCO's. You're correct that for accessing webservices etc. you formally need named users. However, these users are already present and licensed in NAV.... Don't think we'll get through this one

generic

kine wrote:

What I wrote doesn't mean that I am voting for that solution... I do not like it too.. I just want to say that I understand the purpose of this, but the effect of this is not positive and not good for sales and I know that and it is pain. (I just want to make clear my position regarding this licensing...) 8)

I will be vary happy when the WebServices would be free of charge (best solution :-)) or there will be some limit or "per CPU/connector" solution.

Well MS disagrees with you on pricing being free. MS thinks that having the price will be a great revenue opportunity.

Partners can benefit from the new license in a number of ways. First, it provides them with a great
revenue opportunity

They keep mentioning that this pricing model is completive against SAP and Oracle.
Nav can barely handle more than 150 users.