Discussion on:

What to do when a client won't properly license antivirus

... is especially stupid, considering that there are some good cost-free alternatives that can be used by corporate clients, such as ClamAV. It's GPL-licensed, but you're not building a product on it, so it should be OK for corporate clients to use.

I have yet to encounter this in the business world but I don't know how anyone with half a braincell could think it would be a good idea to use security software which has been pre-broken for their convenience. use a free AV or pay the money, trust me it is worth the cost in most cases.

I gotta wonder where you keep digging up these clients that are such skinflints that they refuse to pay $50/workstation for A/V. If I had a client base like that, I'd wonder if they were going to pay my invoice!

J.Ja

Unfortunately, we see a lot of firms that have been managed improperly by the previous IT providers. Many clients have been told they can reinstall Microsoft OEM Office licenses and free antivirus applications by the previous providers, so in addition to having to tackle the technical issues we're engaging in educational efforts, too.

If you had not noticed yet, the user to whom you are replying makes it a habit of posting criticism and seldom if ever constructive information, feel free to ignore him.

... if you go back to a recent discussion on this exact same topic a few weeks ago, I offered plenty of useful information. I'm just trying to figure out why Erik's consultancy seems to keep ending up with these clients who are simultaneously lawbreakers and skinflints.

I know what it's like to be in the business that Erik is in, it's not easy to make a dollar. At the same time, it seems like his customer base is *really* bad. It's a tough bind.

J.Ja

Point me to an example or two, if you please.

I find this rather hard to believe.

That's really sad. Not only does it make your job harder, because the customers are wondering why things are so much more expensive when they work with you, but it means that you have to lose a lot of time to things that don't generate billable hours.

Ever consider reporting these other consultants to organizations like the BSA, SPA, etc?

J.Ja

Oh, it's billable. Time spent on the client site, whether performing repairs, spotting errors, or providing advice and recommendations, is typically billed by most IT consultants. Our office is no different. We believe there's value in our knowledge, expertise and experience.

Justin,

I believe it's a function of providing IT services to a broad range of small and medium size businesses. What's interesting to me is how many show evidence that the previous IT provider told them incorrect information. I understand the client's confusion, in that respect. Maybe if other IT practitioners were more professional and knew what they were doing, the problem wouldn't be as pervasive.

...I feel your pain.

Sometime the previous "IT Provider" is a crook. Sometimes he/she/they is/are not up on licensing themselves. Sometimes the client lies about who told them it's OK.

I literally have had one business relatively recently tell me they were going back to their previous provider because they "couldn't afford" all that software licensing I was talking about. And another did the same, but simply didn't vocalize it, a few years ago. Since the last discussion we had was about the need for them to properly license software, it was obvious why they left.

I have a very simple policy. I don't support bootlegged software. Period.

Don't be so quick to assume their IT providers told them wrong though. IT, as I'm sure you know, is the quickest, easiest scapegoat for everyone's ills.

And given any teenager who can click a mouse can call himself a consultant, it's not hard to find someone who will do what you want for very little money. Oh so often Joe BusinessOwner is conveniently unaware of software licensing.

I've been evolving my business to rid myself of these folks though. Time wasters who value neither your time and have NO DESIRE to understand copyright issues are people you don't want to do business with. I'd rather not get the call to being with.

The truth is IT's ubiquity makes it a very tough way to earn a living. Add doing it as an independent consultant to the mix and it's beyond tough. I sure don't encourage kids to get in to this business, either as an employee or a private businessman.

Why would you treat an anti-virus app differently from any other? If it's free for personal but not corporate use, or if it's single-seat being installed multiple times, the purpose of the app shouldn't make any difference in terms of license compliance.

I think the first answer to the question of what difference does it make if the app is AV is, since vendors make free antivirus versions, many businesses believe it is OK to install those versions in commercial environments. I haven't seen free versions of Adobe Creative Suite, for example. We do see free versions of AVG and Avast all the time, however.

The second answer is we see AV pirated more often than any other type of software application. And, in most cases, the client isn't even aware that they're violating a license agreement.

I think those are the two reasons AV requires special treatment. Good question, though, certainly.