Better than having to stump up £54.5m in back payments
SAP is to offer feedback on anonymised indirect licensing as concern and confusion about the rules grows among customers.
The German firm’s rules on indirect access mean customers can be hit with licensing fees to cover any and all software that connects – even indirectly – to data stored on SAP systems.
Following a high-profile court case in which booze multinational Diageo was ordered to pay SAP £54.5m in additional fees after introducing two Salesforce.com systems, there were fears others would be pursued by SAP sparking calls for clarification on the terms.
In response, SAP promised to simplify the rules, and published a white paper that aimed to offer more clarity on three common scenarios – Order to Cash, Procure to Pay and Static Read.
It also promised not to pursue back maintenance payments for customers who “proactively engage with us in good faith”.