On Jul 27, 12:24 pm, Michael <[email protected]> wrote: > When the 'offer' side of the equation is complex and/or ambiguous, the onus > just about always falls on the supplier to remedy any controversy. > > A wise web developer at this point won't be debating the point on here - they > will be working out a way to capitalise on the situation, in other words take > commercial advantage of the common market place perception. > > This should ideally take the form of a portfolio of product offerings that is > so simple any numbnuts could understand it. This could be sold over and over > again, taking a few hundred to a few thousand dollars each time.
(goes even further OT): So... smart developers should not attempt complex projects because customers are unable to take on any of the associated risk since they're incapable of understanding the implications of their requirements? Rubbish. @Jochen: To address the original question - we try to stress that we're not selling software. While they might have license to use the developed software, they've purchased the *service* of development or maintenance. It's hard to say where you stand without knowing what your SLA looks like or what the nature of the maintenance was, but I would have through that the specific nature of the license would be irrelevant. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ NZ PHP Users Group: http://groups.google.com/group/nzphpug To post, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected] -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
