Rhino Marine being dropped

The order itself makes interesting reading, because it explains the logic behind distinguishing a "sale" of software from a "license" for software use. In my opinion, Alion sold RhinoMarine, because there was no limitation on customer time of use (physical possession), as is always the case with a license. I've attached a copy of the order below.

This issue has interesting implications. If I purchase software that proves defective, do I have recourse through the plethora of consumer protection laws (lemon laws) that already exist? I've been bit by the "Bugs for Bucks" approach of many software vendors often enough to really want an answer to this question. Software vendors generally have had a free ride with their "it's only a license" claim.

BillyDoc

 

What is Alion Science and Technology?

Alion has 3,400 employees and received revenues of $739,500,000 in FY 08, 86% of which was from the Department of Defense, 7% Commercial, and 7% Civilian Government.

http://alionscience.com/

From Alion's code of ethics:

"Alion's interests are not served by unethical practices and activities even in the absence of a technical violation of law. When no legal requirement applies directly to a questionable situation, employees shall conduct Alion business in a manner protective of Alion's tradition of integrity and ethical conduct."

BillyDoc

 

I am not speaking for Alion or DRS here.

Personally, I would rather have my fingernails pulled out than deal with "drooling lawyers," no matter which side of a case I was on.

But more to the point, as I said earlier, we will try to provide Site Keys to RhinoMarine users for as long as necessary, even if that stretches beyond the end of 2010. And I would say that you have a better tech support resource than you've had for the past two years, so in reality as a RhinoMarine user it could be argued that your situation has improved. Finally, I think Alion would argue (and I am not a lawyer) that they have, in good faith, implemented a third-party, widely used, licensing system, with the reasonable expectation that it would function properly, and so they are not doing anything to stop you from using the software forever.

I think it's important to stay focused on what we're here for (boat design) rather than legalities of software licensing. I'm happy to give you my personal email address so that you can ask for support any time you need it, because for me, design is what I'm interested in, not lawyering.

BillyDoc, my concern here is that if you were to somehow drag Alion into this thing, you would actually make the situation worse for everyone (e.g., they would agree to provide the support that they have been providing for the past two years, which is really only new site keys, and no real tech support), and we would be pushed out. I don't think that serves anyone's purpose.

Again, just my personal 2 cents. Sorry you couldn't make it to IBEX. I would have enjoyed meeting you here.

 

You make a very good point, Bruce, about the quality of support DRS may provide. And although I have not needed any “support” from Alion other than site keys (and that required some research and several phone calls to accomplish) I can well believe from Alion's behavior here, or lack thereof, that support above and beyond site keys was hard to come by. This point of view is supported by the fact that Alion has made no effort to either explain their position or to act according to their own code of ethics, the irony of which is inescapable.

You speculate that Alion would say: “they have, in good faith, implemented a third-party, widely used, licensing system, with the reasonable expectation that it would function properly, and so they are not doing anything to stop you from using the software forever.” That third party being DRS, I presume. But you also say that DRS is under no legal obligation to provide those services, and that DRS is doing so charitably and to obtain new business. All of which seems quite reasonable, except for one thing: there is no legal basis for the claim that third-party support has been implemented. DRS can decide that such support is more trouble than it is worth at any time and just stop providing it. And they would be well within their rights to do so!

Remember, though, the problem goes away completely if Alion simply provides their RhinoMarine customers with the keys to the property that was sold to them. Keys that they claim to have no further use for. Then, those who require support that is beyond merely gaining access to their own property, currently held hostage to Alion's self-serving DRM, can go to DRS for that support and you may well gain their business as a result. I wish you success in that!

I don't think, however, that even if forced to finally act by the courts, Alion will opt to resume their half-hearted “support.” The reason is that their “support” would be far more expensive for them than to simply provide the keys and be done with it.

Besides, Alion may yet decide to do the right thing. I remain hopeful, in any case. The sentiment expressed in their Code of Ethics is quite nice. And litigation is, as you imply, a last recourse not to be taken lightly.

BillyDoc

 

Again, my personal feelings here:

The third-party licensing system that I was referring to is Crypkey, which is a widely used system (http://www.crypkey.com/). Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Again, I would only say that RhinoMarine users currently have support, both for license keys and technical questions. As you say, we're not legally obligated to provide support, but I believe it is in our interest to do so. I have been in the business of providing marine design software for over 25 years, and many of the RhinoMarine users have become colleagues and friends, and I will personally do what I can to see that they are taken care of.

Enough time on this issue; I'm going to focus my time on answering RhinoMarine support questions, and getting the next release of Orca3D ready to go! Remember, if you have any RhinoMarine questions, just contact us at rhinomarine at orca3d dot com.

 

Hi Bruce, let me see if I understand all of this. Alion has embedded what amounts to a destruct mechanism into their software that requires their constant attention to keep it from activating and destroying MY PROPERTY. You point out that this system is "widely used" and seem to be saying that "wide use" makes it above board and ethical. I don't think you need to examine that position very hard to see that it is seriously fallacious. Just consider the fact that murder is "widely used" to settle disputes of all kinds.

And now Alion has abandoned their software, with it's embedded destruct mechanism intact even though it would be easy to remedy this problem, and it is only by the good graces of DRS that our software, our property, may be recovered after Alion's destruct mechanism activates.

I suppose that as long as DRS fills this niche those of us that bought RhinoMarine cannot complain legally. On the other hand, as soon as DRS decides it isn't worth the trouble to provide Alion's required maintenance service the situation changes dramatically. At that point, Alion's RhinoMarine customers definitely have a legitimate complaint, and one that very probably lends itself to an expensive (for Alion) class-action law suit as well.

So, Bruce, why is DRS covering Alion's stern for so little? You could and should be collecting some serious money for the service you are providing.

If Alion reads their email they are aware of this thread, yet they continue to hide. I think they are simply hoping the problem will go away, their cute "Code of Ethics" notwithstanding. And, in fact, Americans have proved that they will put up with just about any insult, so Alion is probably right to just wait it out . . . if ethics has no meaning for them and money-grubbing at any cost is their only goal.

I suppose we will know Alion's position in all this eventually, probably by their continuing absence.

BillyDoc

 

It has now been three months since I started this thread. Alion continues to hide, apparently not giving a damn about their customers. Maybe it would get some sort of response if a few others posted comments here. So far it's only been me complaining, and they can easily ignore me, but a whole bunch of YOU is a little harder to ignore. They apparently don't care about their "public" software business (Rhino, FastShip and VisualSMP) and are cutting back on that in favor of their place at the government trough. But they do have to consider the fact that their government contractors also use the web to check up on potential suppliers, and ethics, or the lack of them, does indeed often play a role in whether or not a contract is issued. So please step up and let Alion know what you think. Who knows, maybe it will break through their indifference.

BillyDoc