Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 08:03:00 -0400
Reply-To: "Richard A. DeVenezia" <radevenz@IX.NETCOM.COM>
Sender: "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From: "Richard A. DeVenezia" <radevenz@IX.NETCOM.COM>
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises
Subject: Re: Big SAS Job
"John Whittington" <John.W@MEDISCIENCE.CO.UK> wrote in message
> At 23:17 20/07/02 +0000, Barry Schwarz wrote:
> >Why do you think it would violate the license for a service bureau to
> >run SAS on behalf of a paying customer? My license allows me to run
> >on my CPU without qualification for the duration of the license. It
> >does not say that I cannot accept outside work.
> Barry, this is one of those occasions on which I'm rather glad I'm not a
> lawyer, because I can see (and partially sympathise with) both sides of
> this argument.
> My first inclination was to reply exactly as you did. Almost all of
> who license SAS and who are involved in 'consultancy' (in the broadest of
> sense of the word) run SAS code on their machines, and provide the
> of that SAS processing to their paying clients/ customers (many/most of
> whom will not have licensed SAS), presumably legitimately in terms of
> licenses (that's why they pay for the licenses!). One can therefore
> that the situation is not really any different if the code is provided by
> the client in question, rather than developed in-house, or obtained from
> third-party source, or whatever.
> Although I am still inclined to the above view, I can see (and have some
> sympathy for) the opposing one - particularly if the client/customer in
> question does not license SAS. If you had ('exclusively') licensed SAS
> allowed members of other organisations to come and sit at one of your
> workstations (or to log in to your system, from wherever) and run code of
> their own (probably for 'commercial gain') using your licensed SAS
> then I think that would be a violation of your license, wouldn't it?
> clearly to the potential financial disadvantage of SI). If so, then why
> would it become different if it were your finger which ('for a price',
> of which would benefit SI directly) pressed the 'submit button' (to run
> their code)?
> This is perhaps an even greater issue (in the eyes of SI's lawyers) in
> of the ongoing discussions here about 'SAS LE'. The more I read of that
> thread, the more it seems (to me) that at least some people are thinking
> LE as something very different from (and 'more' than) simply a 'learning'
> edition - and (particularly if one wore an SI hat!) one might envisage
> people/organistaions developing code using LE and then buying a small
> amount of time on some other organisation's licensed SAS installation to
> run it, for their 'commercial gain', without having licensed SAS.
Actually, I think this is just the type of venue/customer SAS is going
after with their SAS Hosting Partner Program. While the main thrust of the
program is for perhaps letting Company A outsource it's data warehouse/mart
to Company X, I don't think it precludes Company X from satisfying a
business request of 'run my code'. If SAS can't get the money from Company
A, they get at least a piece from X and it's upto X to make itself
All things being liquid, maybe in a X units of time there will be SAS
versions named Learning Edition, Personal Edition, Professional Edition,
Enterprise Edition, Alacarte Edition and Full Service Buffet Edition.
> Maybe if I read the SAS licence's T&C's carefully it would become more
> clear to me - but it looks to me as if their could well be scope for
> lawyers to make a lot of money from debating this one!
> Kind Regards,
> Dr John Whittington, Voice: +44 (0) 1296 730225
> Mediscience Services Fax: +44 (0) 1296 738893
> Twyford Manor, Twyford, E-mail: John.W@mediscience.co.uk
> Buckingham MK18 4EL, UK email@example.com
Richard A. DeVenezia