Peter Beruk has been in the Software Asset Management (SAM) space for over 25 years. During that time, he has worked for software vendors including McAfee (now Intel), and vendor focused trade associations including BSA. Peter has advocated throughout his career that there must be a better approach to software management as vendor SAM programs are designed only to benefit vendors. During his time at BSA, Peter was instrumental in creating their ISO-aligned SAM programs that were first to bring the concept of audit forbearance to the marketplace if organizations committed to standardized SAM. While with BSA, he also joined the ISO working group responsible for the SAM standard (ISO 19770), where he advocated a simpler, tiered approach to SAM. At 1E, Peter is a SAM Subject Matter Expert working to assist organizations with ISO SAM implementations and audit defense. He continues serving as secretary of the ISO SAM working group and editor of the standard on SAM vocabulary and overview. Peter lives outside of Washington, DC and enjoys travel, getting out and walking with his two dogs.
I had the opportunity to speak at the IAITAM ACE Dublin conference earlier this month. My session was titled, “The Hidden Cost of Unused Software: What is unused software costing your business?” The session was on the final day, and on the final afternoon of the conference, so I did not expect a full room
When it comes to software vendor audits, most people rattle off the likes of IBM, Microsoft, Oracle or SAP. Rarely do people mention Attachmate audits. However, when the Attachmate name comes up, you tend to hear how aggressive they are when it comes to enforcing their license terms and conditions. First, a bit about Attachmate.
Why should ISO standards be of interest to any end user organization? Peter Beruk: Standards are created to solve a problem. In the software asset management space, the problems are one of risk and cost associated with the management of IT assets. Contributors of ISO standards collaborate to create industry standard, globally accepted solutions, to these
At a recent IAITAM conference, two SAM colleagues asked what I knew about the rumor of Adobe ending its audit program. Given the propensity for vendors to conduct audits given their rights and financial gain, I dismissed the rumor. Earlier this week, I was asked by Jason Keogh of 1E, who heard the same rumor
Having returned from the IAITAM ACE conference in New Orleans, I was struck by the number of times I heard, “I am not sure what to focus on when starting a Software Asset Management program.” The question seems simple and this recent blog from John DeVito outlines some key considerations to take into account when
Microsoft recently announced its intention to end its Software Asset Management competency. The SAM competency, in addition to 11 other competency subjects, will be retired in 18 months. The news spread like wildfire within the SAM community. Folks that I spoke to asked me my thoughts in my capacity on the ISO SAM working group
On March 3, I posted an article on what SAM managers need to know about Oracle licensing. In that article, I spoke about a licensing dispute between Oracle and candy manufacturer Mars from alleged nonpayment of licensing fees by Mars. Perhaps more interestingly, the lawsuit in part had to do with Oracle’s definition of hardware
A recent licensing dispute between software giant Oracle and candy manufacturer Mars has been making headlines in the Software Asset Management community. While this case was settled before going to trial, Mars was facing massive licensing fees that could arise for any company running Oracle’s premiere database and VMware’s virtualization software. Oracle is targeting users
When Microsoft launched Office 365 in 2011, the use of software in the cloud was previously focused on likes of Google and Salesforce. Since that time, other large vendors, notably Adobe, had started to experiment with the cloud licensing model, but had not yet fully committed until later. What does this mean to enterprises? More