View LISTSERV archives

ITPSM@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU


View:

:

[

|

Previous Message

|

Next Message

|

]

:

[

|

Previous Message

|

Next Message

|

]

:

[

|

Previous Message

|

Next Message

|

]

:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ITPSM Home

ITPSM Home

ITPSM  2017

ITPSM 2017

Subject:

Re: I Retract my Label of "Obnoxious."

From:

Ruth Ginzberg <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

The EDUCAUSE Software Licensing Issues Constituent Group Listserv <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Fri, 16 Jun 2017 15:48:55 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (1 lines)

Well, thanks.  I will tentatively insert Foot in Mouth until I've at least had a chance to review the document (which I haven't yet).  So I apologize for jumping the gun.



I apologize for labeling it "obnoxious" without getting more info first.



Instead I'd like to relabel it: "Concerning."



I guess what I reacted to initially was the precedent. 



I've been doing this for 10 years now (Enterprise I.T. Procurement) and I haven't ever yet had a vendor offer a significant incentive to induce us to accept its contract Ts & Cs completely unchanged.



But I truly shudder at the thought of this becoming a regular practice.



While you may have meant well, and gone about this in an upstanding and responsible way, "Vendor X, Inc." -- i.e., the next vendor with an aggressive sales organization which is aggressively trying to drive a wedge between I.T. leaders and their procurement departments -- as many of them already try to do -- may not have anywhere near the good intentions that you had in doing this.



I liken it to legitimate suppliers who send e-mail messages to all our employees that are indistinguishable from Phishing messages.  I.e;, I'm sure that supplier of Wellness Programs or the administrator of Flex Spending accounts (etc., etc.) also means absolutely no harm whatsoever, and would be shocked to find that anyone was upset over their friendly e-mail encouraging employees to "click here" to log in and access their personal account information... but every time one of those well-intended vendors sends something like that, what it does is unintentionally train our employees to ignore messages that look like phishing and just "click here."



That's kind of the basis for my reaction to this -- if it weren't in the environment of an already existing practice that is already a source of consternation (i.e., the practice used by many vendors less upstanding than I2 of trying to drive a wedge between I.T. folks and their own purchasing folks) it probably wouldn't be problematic all by itself.



But the problem is that it does enter the picture against that already-existing backdrop... and that may make it problematic in unintended ways.



At any rate, please accept my apology for prematurely labeling it "Obnoxious."  I should have obtained more information first.



Regards,





Ruth Ginzberg, CISSP, CTPS

Sr. I.T. Procurement Specialist

University of Wisconsin System

608-890-3961



-----Original Message-----

From: The EDUCAUSE Software Licensing Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Kevin M. Morooney

Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 10:15 AM

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: Re: [LICENSING] Obnoxious.



Ruth,

 

Thank you for sharing your concerns about the eduroam registration fee. We apologize that this came across in any way other than offering greater transparency to our costs. As a membership organization, our intent is always to be fair and equitable, and to cover our services' costs.

 

We are charging an eduroam registration fee to recover the costs of administering the initial expenses of program subscription. We could choose to bundle the costs into an annual fee, but we chose to separate the costs to more accurately represent expenses. The rationale for waiving the registration fee for those institutions requesting no changes is meant to acknowledge the resulting cost savings in a transparent manner and to pass those along to the subscribing organization. There is no malice intended. 

 

Internet2 went to great lengths to involve the community in the development of the eduroam Connector Agreement. We had more than a dozen campuses provide both technical and legal review of our draft agreement, and we incorporated a number of changes based on that feedback. 

 

When a campus asks for changes to the agreement, Internet2 technical and legal staff need to consider those requests in light of eduroam policy standards (overseen by an international governing board), and international privacy regulations, risk, and equal treatment among our members. This consumes time and resources, which is a concern and challenge for a member-owned organization like Internet2.  

 

As the U.S. operator of eduroam, Internet2 has actually absorbed the costs of this wireless service for a number of years. As the service has grown, it became necessary to both have campuses begin to cover the costs of the service, and to have a standard agreement that outlines the duties and responsibilities of all parties. 

 

I would welcome any further questions you might have. Feel free to continue the discussion here or follow up with me off-list (to which I've only subscribed this morning - and - I will be driving for the next many hours so I won't see e-mail for some time).

 

Thanks. 

 

-kevin



Kevin M. Morooney

Vice President, Trust and Identity Services

Internet2



**********

Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/discuss.



**********

Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/discuss.



Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Join or Leave ITPSM

Join or Leave ITPSM


Archives

2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998

ATOM RSS1 RSS2