Contracts with multiple identical products with different serial numbers

[Anonymous]

About a year ago one of our customers raised a very valid query with us. They have MANY contracts with Autodesk, many of them switches from maintenance to subscription, that include multiple identical products with different serial numbers. These at the time were still serialized. I addition to assigning the users to licenses in the User Management section of the Contract Manager's account, they also kept track of who is assigned to which serial number internally via a spreadsheet (maintenance licensing legacy). The issue they encountered was that because some identical products shared the contract number and expiry date, Autodesk portal treated the serial numbers as interchangeable (they were all displayed to assigned users under "optional serial numbers" under product name in "Products and Services" on users' accounts). Now, as some of the products were AEC Collections, they included more than one product. When a user successfully signed in and activated the first product with their internally assigned serial number (e.g. AutoCAD), the next product would not ask for a serial number, but detect the Collection license and simply launch. However, upon checking product information within the product via the "Manage license" screen, it turned out different products on the user's computer would "assume" different serial numbers - I'm assuming that's because to Autodesk, it was irrelevant which serial is used as long as the total number of active licenses does not go over the purchased number. This assumption was confirmed by an Autodesk representative's response after logging a support case. Even when a user tried to reset license and change the serial number, the "wrong" one would just reappear after some time. But convinced by Autodesk that all was well, we thought no more about this.

Fast forward to last week, another customer contacted us after Autodesk completed a licensing audit with them. They were found to be compliant (not overusing licenses) but were told to "sort their serial numbers out". Apparently, certain serial numbers were "over-installed". Now here comes the crucial part: they were in the same situation as the first customer - the serial numbers all belonged to the same contract, have the same expiry date, and are all for a PDM Collection, and all randomly allocated themselves among users' computers.

So I am looking for some clarity. If the serial numbers allocate themselves randomly amongst users, how are users supposed to police the activations and remain compliant? Or is this some BS made up by the auditing team? I emailed the auditor, but they haven't replied yet and I have a feeling they might not bother... Has anyone had a similar experience?

[Mark.Lancaster]

@Anonymous 

When it comes to subscription based products and in the past it seem to be crucial what serial # got assigned to what users.   But as time has passed that doesn't seem the case anymore because as you pointed out the combo aspect in a given contract comes into play and when assigning users, you are never sure what serial # went to which user because you can't pick and select what you want.

However I also know that when it comes to audits subscription based products are often flagged sometimes because of these reasons you talked about or its over-licenses.  But in fact the user is okay and basically the report is false.   But I will tag @TravisNave who is an expert when it comes to licensing and audits.

[TravisNave]

@Mark.Lancaster is right.  The serial doesn't really matter so much for the new Subscription model because licenses are assigned thru your Autodesk management account.  This would also be the case for Network Licensed products, if this applied to you.

The auditing software process has changed as of September 1st, 2019.  Therefore, any previous audits using AIA to grab serial numbers from installed products is no longer being used.  If your products are being managed online then the cloud system ensures that you are not overusing your license, similar to how the NLM would do so on your network.  For that reason, you can't effectively be out of compliance. 

I would not worry to much about this if all of your licenses are Subscription or Network based.  This would only matter if you still had perpetual/stand-alone, educational, or trial licenses installed. 

Hope that helps.

[Anonymous]

@Mark.Lancaster, @TravisNave  thanks guys. The audit has been completed on the 19th of August so it seems it was still following the old rules. Given that the customer's subscriptions are likely to be migrated from serial number-based to Autodesk ID (sign-in) based, is it okay for them to ignore the audit's "Next Steps"? These are as outlined in the "Solution & Next Steps" of the audit below:

"Risk Management: D. <CompanyName> must have all the required steps of this resolution, including any required purchases, completed by [date]. If <CompanyName> does not complete the resolution steps in the timeline above, Autodesk may choose to enforce its legal rights."

It does sound somewhat threatening. 

Additionally, could you advise on why they were done for "over-installation" in the first place? Terms and Conditions state:

Note that if You have a single-user Subscription, You do not need Home Use Rights because single-user Subscription permits installation of the Software on up to three electronic devices per Authorized User, and it does not require that the electronic devices be owned or controlled by You.

(Source: https://www.autodesk.com/company/terms-of-use/en/subscription-benefits)

The report shows them having "over-installed" a license for 2 seats on 4 computers, but according to the snippet above, as long as only 2 of them are ever used simultaneously, it should not be a problem?