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.”Several readers also pointed out that Eaton Powerware is not the only UPS manufacturer with locking software that isn’t always disclosed to the customer before purchase. “I passed the gripe about Eaton Powerware software on to our power person and he told me that MGE has the identical feature,” another reader wrote. “He knows because that is what he bought without any awareness of the proprietary maintenance software. So, he is stuck with a sole source maintenance contract cost. My response to him was that in the future, any bid that includes non-disclosure of the maintenance software should be considered non-responsive and simply tossed out. The federal government is required to consider past contractor performance when awarding contracts. I would consider this behavior an immediate black mark against a contractor. They should be disbarred but they probably have protectors in high places.”Another reader who has run into MGE’s locking software says that they are almost as inflexible as Eaton Powerware. “I’ve heard that MGE will release the software to a customer, but usually only if you threaten to sue,” the reader wrote. “It is obvious the manufacturers will try to control the service business because it is a rich source of income and in some years past has been the business that made their UPS company operation profitable. In other words, the hardware business had a loss and the service business made enough to make the whole operation profitable. I suspect we will see more and more of this type behavior from manufacturers as long as it is unchallenged.” But how can these practices be challenged? Doing so in the marketplace won’t be easy, because customers often don’t find out about the locking software until years after they buy the equipment. And if the courts really are as stacked in favor of the big fish as some readers suggest, the only real shock will be if more companies in more industries aren’t soon following Eaton’s lead.What’s your take? Post your comments on my website or write me at Foster@gripe2ed.com.Read and post comments about this story here. Technology Industry