I love being "told" what to use.

[sld72382]

For the longest time, we were permitted to use anything that would fix the problem.

Life was good until our call center started saying we are only allowed to use certain software to fix a client's issues. They handed out the sheet and we were all like, "WTF? Half of this crap is useless!" But back to that in a moment...

See, they apparently tried to brainwash us in training that they did this for "legal reasons." Apparently, the head honchos fear that if we use a tool that's not "allowed" we could get sued by the developer(s). According to them, reason being is that even though the tool may be freeware, the software says it's free for home users, not companies. Also some softwares say in the licensing agreement that the tool cannot be used for commercial proposes. We charge people for our services and when we use the software, we are making a profit off of it even though we're downloading it to their PCs, not ours.

But here's where both of those statements is made null. We are legally bound to uninstall the software or delete it after we use it to fix the problem, therefore wiping our responsibility off the PC. Seems the head honchos do not want to realize this.

Anyway, back to what I was saying about the effectiveness of those tools. Only about 1/10 of the software on the list is actually effective in mine, or my co-workers testing. By not listing them, they essentially banned these tools:

Smitfraudfix
Killbox
AVG Free
SuperAntispyware
And MANY more....

To make matters even worse, they even banned websites that are not on the allowed list. For example, I have to rely on blind faith when running Hijackthis. Hijackthis.de is not allowed, so I can't analyze the file.

I can semi-understand why they would be paranoid but quite of bit of the software we are no longer allowed to use doesn't even have a license agreement (like the killbox), so those should be allowed regardless. That goes for websites like online DLL repositories (like dll-files.com), or sites like Kellys-Korner.com that host very useful registry scripts. Let's say a client's PC is complaining of a missing DLL file. Instead of going online, getting the DLL file and within 5 minutes fixing the issue, I am supposed to play dumb and tell the client "sorry, there is no way to get this file, you'll need to format."

To make matters worse, most of the items on the list are trialware. Which means if the client gets infected again, that software would detect it was used previously and not install. Because we are restricted to just using those tools, we would have no choice than to tell the client he/she needs to format. Or, we can send an agent out and have him/her look at it for two and a half times the price. However, those agents have the same allowed tools list as us so I bet the client would be pretty PO'ed if the agent came there, got their money, and said "we need to format."

What happens if you say "screw it" and use a tool not on the list or go to a website that is not allowed? You get written up and then fired if they catch you again. And there have been rumors of legal action.

[Rolling Star]

So what happens if you need to use software that's "not allowed?" I guess you're pretty much screwed if you need to fix something.

[earl colby pottinger]

How bad are the rules?

I in-fact can understand the company's reasoning.

But how bad is it really? Can you:

A) Get them to add new software titles that you know works and does not have an anti-commercial clause in it's license.

B) [Don't laugh] Get them to buy a commercial license to any really good piece of software.

C) Are you at-least allowed to supply the customers (the ones with brains at-least) the URLs so the customer does all the downloading themselves? The company I used to work for had a printed list of URLs for a large number of anti-virus sites. It came with a big disclaimer on the top of the list, but pointed out that the list software was free. Half the customers came back for us to do the job, half were never heard of again. WIN-WIN.

[Pedersen]

For the longest time, we were permitted to use anything that would fix the problem.

...snip...

What happens if you say "screw it" and use a tool not on the list or go to a website that is not allowed? You get written up and then fired if they catch you again. And there have been rumors of legal action.

Here's what very likely happened to your management, and they don't want to tell you about it: There's a group by the name of the BSA (Business Software Alliance), see http://www.bsa.org/

This is a very nasty organization in very many ways. Mainly because it can be used as a retaliatory weapon by employees who have been wronged by a company. Now, the reason does not matter. What matters is what happens:

BSA tells people that they get a bounty for turning in employers who violate software license agreements. Pissed off employees (and ex-employees) make a phone call. BSA comes to the front door of the company, and asks to do an audit, in compliance with the license terms for Windows.

Company has two options:
1) Tell BSA to go to hell. BSA leaves. Gets court order, brings back federal marshals, company gets shut down until such times as the audit is complete, and fees are paid to the BSA.
2) Company lets them in, audit is performed, large sum of money is paid to BSA, and company is now in licensing compliance.

Now, how bad can it be? Here in the USA, statutory damages for copyright infringement (which is the technical name for usage of unlicensed software) are $150,000 per violation. That means that a judge could award Microsoft $150,000 for a single home user using an unlicensed copy of Windows.

All in all, the company doesn't have a lot of choice. They either fork over a fairly small sum (usually on the order of $20,000 to $30,000 depending on company size), or go to court, lose, and hand over the same amount plus legal fees. And that's the best result. Worst is one whole heckuva lot more money, putting said company entirely out of business.

Chances are good that the company fired someone. Said someone took revenge by sic'ing the BSA on them. Now you pay the price. Oh, and failure to follow those same rules? Yeah, I'd fire you too. Better to lose one rogue tech than the whole company.

Now, if you give the customer the information on where to find those tools, that's different. You're telling the customer how to fix it himself. You can not violate any license agreement by telling the customer where he could download the tool.

All in all, it sucks, but I do understand it. I'm just sorry innocent techs (like you) get caught in the crossfire of it all.

[Broomjockey]

I'm betting they're not allowed to mention anything on the list, because if some poor semi-computer-literate user tries to do something with the information, messes up somehow, and then contacts the company and says "Your tech told me to do this, and this happened, now what?"

The response would be "I'm sorry, we're not allowed to help you with that program, and he shouldn't have told you about it."

Uh-oh! Tech violated policy! He's responsible for my computer being even MORE broken! I'm going to complain until I get something.

*End result: tech fired, company fixes computer free, rules become more draconian.* (And that might be a best case scenario)

[sld72382]

I'm betting they're not allowed to mention anything on the list, because if some poor semi-computer-literate user tries to do something with the information, messes up somehow, and then contacts the company and says "Your tech told me to do this, and this happened, now what?"

Exactly. We are not allowed to make recommendations over the phone for that very reason. We can give them general advice, but we can't "brand" a product. And giving URLs is the same thing.

[sld72382]

I in-fact can understand the company's reasoning.

But how bad is it really? Can you:

A) Get them to add new software titles that you know works and does not have an anti-commercial clause in it's license.

B) [Don't laugh] Get them to buy a commercial license to any really good piece of software.

C) Are you at-least allowed to supply the customers (the ones with brains at-least) the URLs so the customer does all the downloading themselves? The company I used to work for had a printed list of URLs for a large number of anti-virus sites. It came with a big disclaimer on the top of the list, but pointed out that the list software was free. Half the customers came back for us to do the job, half were never heard of again. WIN-WIN.

For A and B: All they say is "we're working on it."

[Shabo]

For a big corporation like that, it's just a disgrace that they don't give you all the tools you need to work on the computers. While some of the time it will be infinitely easier and faster to clean infected computers by reformatting, it's not always the case. I mean, it's not like the company can't afford to buy the licenses for software, especially at the rate they charge for the service vs. the rate they actually pay you.

And yeah, I remember when that story came out on the news. Kind of surprised me that the companies that made the software didn't say something sooner.

[SpyOne]

Let's say a client's PC is complaining of a missing DLL file. Instead of going online, getting the DLL file and within 5 minutes fixing the issue, I am supposed to play dumb and tell the client "sorry, there is no way to get this file, you'll need to format."

1) I don't think the legal issue here is fiction: on the ones that say they can't be used commercially, it doesn't really matter that you're installing it on the PC of a private user; by charging to install it, you are using it commercially. By using it to do a job you are charging for, you are using it commercially. Even, perhaps especially, if you remove it when you're done.

But, and this is a big but, you are NOT required to play dumb.
You are totally covered if you say, "It looks like your system needs a new DLL file, and for legal reasons I can't go get that for you. But I can give you a website where you can download that yourself, and I can explain to you how to do that and install it."
Or, "It would be helpful if you ran (program X) on your system, to help diagnose this problem. For legal reasons, I can't install that on your computer, but it's freeware, so I can give you a website where you can get it, and I can talk you through the installation process, and if you'd like I can even remove it for you when it's done."

This actually has 2 benefits from the company's viewpoint:
1) They get their butt covered, legally.
2) The customer feels like he's being treated special, and getting an under-the-table deal.
Which in their view outweighs the fact that it makes your job harder and means you're spending a fair bit of time explaining how to install SpyBot to a guy who has trouble finding the ON switch on his PC.

[earl colby pottinger]

Never tell a customer

You never tell a customer verbally what to do. They will always change it around and claim/remember you saying something else.

Including that you never said anything about backups!!! We always wrote all the instructions to a customer on the repair order that way we had a carbon copy if we were taken to court. Plus after reviewing the statements the R/O had to be signed.

And there were very few R/Os where we did not say to backup *ALL* important files first to cover our butts.

Always do it in writing, and think about it as a court document if things go wrong, so leave out nothing just because 'the customer already should know this'.

[Lehk]

B) [Don't laugh] Get them to buy a commercial license to any really good piece of software.

THIS

put together a list of what you consider vital and ask corporate to contact the developers, provide justification with the functionality needed and time it will save or improved fix rates on customer computers.

the concern over misused trial and personal software is valid, but the right way for corporate to deal with the issue is for them to get the licenses.

many of the software developers for the best tools are fairly small and would be thrilled to cut a deal with a big company for what, to the big company, would be a small amount of money.

working to get around the letter of the rules will make you look bad in the eyes of corporate even if you technically followed the rules, OTOH putting together a bit of documentation and requesting the right software to do your jobs shows A) you care about doing your job right and B) you are a "team player"

[Irving Patrick Freleigh]

Here is one problem with getting acceptable tools added to the list; the OP's company has been caught engaging in software piracy.

related thread