Reader Voices: Software Locks

Many readers were shocked by my recent story about how Eaton Powerware uses software locks to force its high end UPS customers rely on it for maintenance. But while the shock for some was that such a large manufacturer would stoop so low, the surprise for others was that anyone would expect anything different. "How is Powerware not supplying full diagnostic and 'tune-up' functionality on the equipment any differ

Many readers were shocked by my recent story about how Eaton Powerware uses software locks to force its high end UPS customers rely on it for maintenance. But while the shock for some was that such a large manufacturer would stoop so low, the surprise for others was that anyone would expect anything different.

"How is Powerware not supplying full diagnostic and 'tune-up' functionality on the equipment any different than modern automobiles requiring a separate computer to diagnose and properly set various aspects of the engine for optimum performance?" wrote one reader. "It was very disconcerting for me the first time I opened the hood and found that I couldn't do the kind of maintenance I was used to doing on my own vehicles. In both cases I think it is a bad business practice which should come back to haunt the vendor. Now that this change in business practices has come to light, bid specifications need to be re-written to include those diagnostic and control components of the UPS which were assumed to be included but not specified in the bid specs."

Some readers opine that in similar cases the courts have long found for the company and against the customers and/or independent service organizations. "This type of problem has been going on for decades, and has been addressed at the US Circuit Court level several times," wrote another reader. "The classic case was Data General v Grumman where Data General refused to provide their system diagnostic software to third party maintainers. Court rulings were all in their favor. Basically, if you engineer a system that way, too bad for your competitors (and customers). Remember that a copyright was intended to ensure that the developer of the material gets the benefit of it. They've certainly been abused before; look at Disney. I do agree, however, that there's an ethical duty in disclosing it at purchase time, but who say they had to be ethical?

Actually, some court cases have gone the other way, such as the StorageTek lawsuit against an independent service provider that had many similarities to Eaton's legal action. But there's also the old maxim that it's not the facts but who can afford the most expensive lawyers that determines who wins in court. "Come on, JT Packard going up against a giant like Eaton?" wrote one reader. "They didn't have a chance. The fact that Eaton is guilty of abusing copyright to tie customers to their aftermarket services doesn't enter into it."