Nike offered to pay the lower amount in September 2017, but Quest rejected the offer. Nike did not have to pay for free/trialware, or limit where it was used.It was based on all potential users, rather than actual users.Licenses for everyone with access to servers running Quest software, not just actual users. A multiplier of three times applied to alleged use by NIKE of “pirated software.”.Charges for licenses for access to freeware and trialware versions of Quest software.Four years of interest calculated on the Oregon prejudgment interest rate of 9%.Nike have countered and said that in fact they owe Quest just $348,664.74 – a 98% reduction. Nike reveal that the bill presented to them by Quest was $15,646,191.55 – that’s 68,210 pairs of Jordan XXX2 “All Star MVP” trainers. In particular, it helps highlight the difference an audit defence strategy, and managing the audit process, can make to the amount of money on the table for a non-compliance settlement. Nike have submitted a counter claim and it is full of very interesting details, many of which can apply to the wider ITAM community. We saw a few weeks ago that Quest Software have taken Nike to court over their refusal to settle up for license non-compliance discovered during an audit ( article here).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |