Here is what I am on about:
A few years ago I bought a licence in perpetuity (it says so in the contract document) of the then SDRC I-DEAS. I then used it for a few years, paying for the maintenance and updates, the maintenance being getting help with the numerous bugs the software had, really. Over the years I paid them a fair amount of money and then I reduced the use of the software considerably and decided not to renew the maintenance and updates payments. Since then, I have had to change the hardware a couple of times and, when I do that, I have to ask the present owner of I-DEAS for a new password to make the licence work. They will not issue a permanent password, to protect their interest.
The first time I had to change the hardware, the then owner of I-DEAS, EDS, charged me some £250 ($387) just for an operator to enter my new lmhost id in a programme and issue a new password. I thought it was excessive then but I decided to bite the bullet as I had already promised an old client to modify an old job.
A few weeks ago, someone asked me to do work with I-DEAS again and I had to change the hardware again. This time it is Siemens who owns the software and they are trying to charge me an extortionate £880 ($1364) just to do the little job of issuing the password again. I complained and they fobbed me off. I spoke to a software re-seller and he confessed that Siemens do not like people who don't continue to pay for the annual maintenance and they catch them when they need help with something like this. Siemens's argument is that I have not been paying the maintenance and update fees every year. My argument is that I have had no technical support, maintenance or updates during the time I have not paid the maintenance fee, so it's not like I have been getting a free ride.
I cannot see anywhere in the original contract that I commit myself to pay the yearly maintenance fee in perpetuity. This is not leased software, it is purchased outright and I believe they should not be able to prevent me from using it with a charge that amounts to extortion. I further think that they should give me a password that works on any machine if they do not want me to bother them with a new password when I change the hardware.
What I believe is that Siemens are trying to terminate the use of my licence outright by giving me an unreasonable charge to let me have a password because I will not pay for all the maintenance years I have not paid just to get the software working again. They keep putting me through to sales people to try and convince to pay for expensive software (NX, Solidedge).
What particularly annoys me is that Siemens must know that I-DEAS (and its successor) is being beaten out of the market by the likes of Solidworks and they are trying to make me pay a high price for a software package that is just about to become obsolete. One of the reasons I started to phase out I-DEAS is because I started having trouble finding work, using this package, when most people are using Solidworks, Inventor, still Proengineer, etc.
Have I got a (legal) argument here?
A few years ago I bought a licence in perpetuity (it says so in the contract document) of the then SDRC I-DEAS. I then used it for a few years, paying for the maintenance and updates, the maintenance being getting help with the numerous bugs the software had, really. Over the years I paid them a fair amount of money and then I reduced the use of the software considerably and decided not to renew the maintenance and updates payments. Since then, I have had to change the hardware a couple of times and, when I do that, I have to ask the present owner of I-DEAS for a new password to make the licence work. They will not issue a permanent password, to protect their interest.
The first time I had to change the hardware, the then owner of I-DEAS, EDS, charged me some £250 ($387) just for an operator to enter my new lmhost id in a programme and issue a new password. I thought it was excessive then but I decided to bite the bullet as I had already promised an old client to modify an old job.
A few weeks ago, someone asked me to do work with I-DEAS again and I had to change the hardware again. This time it is Siemens who owns the software and they are trying to charge me an extortionate £880 ($1364) just to do the little job of issuing the password again. I complained and they fobbed me off. I spoke to a software re-seller and he confessed that Siemens do not like people who don't continue to pay for the annual maintenance and they catch them when they need help with something like this. Siemens's argument is that I have not been paying the maintenance and update fees every year. My argument is that I have had no technical support, maintenance or updates during the time I have not paid the maintenance fee, so it's not like I have been getting a free ride.
I cannot see anywhere in the original contract that I commit myself to pay the yearly maintenance fee in perpetuity. This is not leased software, it is purchased outright and I believe they should not be able to prevent me from using it with a charge that amounts to extortion. I further think that they should give me a password that works on any machine if they do not want me to bother them with a new password when I change the hardware.
What I believe is that Siemens are trying to terminate the use of my licence outright by giving me an unreasonable charge to let me have a password because I will not pay for all the maintenance years I have not paid just to get the software working again. They keep putting me through to sales people to try and convince to pay for expensive software (NX, Solidedge).
What particularly annoys me is that Siemens must know that I-DEAS (and its successor) is being beaten out of the market by the likes of Solidworks and they are trying to make me pay a high price for a software package that is just about to become obsolete. One of the reasons I started to phase out I-DEAS is because I started having trouble finding work, using this package, when most people are using Solidworks, Inventor, still Proengineer, etc.
Have I got a (legal) argument here?
![[peace]](/data/assets/smilies/peace.gif "[peace] [peace]")
![[pipe]](/data/assets/smilies/pipe.gif "[pipe] [pipe]")
![[wink]](/data/assets/smilies/wink.gif "[wink] [wink]")
