Logos only lets your transfer book Licenses once???

Today I called logos to get some books moved from my account to a new account I wanted to start for my wife. They told me it was not possible because the books I wanted to transfer had already been through a license transfer once. This was truce. I had purchased these book from a another person earlier. But since when did Logos start this policy of only allowing you to transfer book licenses once?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

David Dobbs

And why don't they notify us of policy changes like this? This is very frustrating...

MJ. Smith

Welcome to the forums.

from the EULA:

At Logos' sole discretion you may transfer all your rights to use the Software, Content, and Documentation to another person or legal entity provided you transfer this Agreement, the Software, Content, and Documentation, including all copies, updates and prior versions to such person or entity and that you retain no copies, including copies stored on computer. There will be a processing fee charged on all transfers which is subject to change without notice. As of 6/17/09 the fee is equal to $20.00 per transfer.

To the best of my knowledge, it's been a single transfer for quite some time ... but I haven't had reason to try it.

JT (alabama24)

Today I called logos to get some books moved from my account to a new account I wanted to start for my wife.

I didn't know about this policy, and I would be frustrated with it... I did want to make sure that you were aware that your wife can use your resources already... on your account. There are some disadvantages to sharing your account with your spouse, but it is certainly a cheaper alternative to making multiple purchases.

JT (alabama24)

To the best of my knowledge, it's been a single transfer for quite some time

Did you gain this understanding from the EULA? I don't see any way to read that limitation in the EULA.

Lee

As quoted, the EULA does not expressly state such a restriction, which means that the transferee should get every right available to the transferor, including the (subsequent) right of transfer. If there is a restriction, it's somewhere else. Maybe it is to be found in the "sole discretion".

abondservant

I wonder if they suspect the OP was trying to "flip" the resources, or if the hidden restrictions are in place to prevent people from doing that sort of thing?

Erik

Interesting. I can see this being an issue in a situation like mine where I've specifically called out in my will to transfer the rights to the software to my wife and then told her she can either use it or then transfer it to our (then current) pastor or some needy seminary student down the road as she sees fit. I'd hate to think that she wouldn't be able to bless someone after I am gone and she no longer has a need.

Matthew C Jones

To the best of my knowledge, it's been a single transfer for quite some time ...

This is a new development. And it is a bad one too. Why should I buy any more Logos resources if, when I die, my heir can not receive my resources because Logos changed their policy. NOT a confidence builder!

Matthew C Jones

I've specifically called out in my will to transfer the rights to the software to my wife and then told her she can either use it or then transfer it to our (then current) pastor or some needy seminary student down the road as she sees fit.

Exactly!

Jacob Hantla

I was unaware of this policy. I don't understand how the EULA helps except that it is at Logos' discretion that they do what they do.

I suspect that they want limitations in place so that people don't become Logos resource resellers. But for a situation like this, I do not see why there would be a limitation.

DMB

I feel really sorry for Unix. I just assumed if he didn't need the volumes that I didn't need, he could move them along to another user.

But this sounds a lot like the instructions from Jesus. The 'poor' should choose wisely from the 'rich' since transfer rights occur only once. This may well explain why the rich man was so upset, and the disciples almost blew a gasket.

(I assume; maybe Logos only got its wires tangled up.)

MJ. Smith

Did you gain this understanding from the EULA?

No from some exchanges on the used market ... the EULA simply tells you that there may be limitations. And logic told me that their we keep it updated for free had to have a practical limitation in length.

Into Grace

Hopefully Bob or someone from Logos can provide some clarification.

mike

I dont like this, I'm growing disappointments toward Logos.

I was hoping my children's children could one day use my account someday for the glory of God.

I'm super discouraged of buying future resources.

David Dobbs

MJ, how did you know about this limitation? Is it stated somewhere we can read ourselves?

Matthew C Jones

I was unaware of this policy. I don't understand how the EULA helps except that it is at Logos' discretion that they do what they do.

I have bought Logos resources from other users for several years. This provision of "only one transfer" has never been mentioned until this week. I just sold the SDA Bible Commentary v3.0 and the transfer email from Logos Customer Service had the "one transfer" rule at the bottom of the email.

This is a grave development. My (and your) Logos resources have just lost most of their value. The only way I can see around the policy is to designate the executor of the will to dispose of the transferable resources rather than leave it to someone by name. Now I have to change my will............and delete my CP list.

DAL

To the best of my knowledge, it's been a single transfer for quite some time

Did you gain this understanding from the EULA? I don't see any way to read that limitation in the EULA.

Well, what can I say MJ is special. There's no way you can read that from the EULA. However, they have now started including that information as a side note on the email that starts the process when you transfer a license. I had the same issue when I purchased a resource from another user. I'd say if we're paying a $20 dollar transfer fee we shouldn't be limited to transfer it as many times as we want - they're getting $20 bucks each time anyway. What if I purchase something from a user and then want to transfer it to my brother or a missionary? I think that should be changed to transfer licenses as many times as we want or allow it only once, but remove the $20 fee. Just a suggestion.

DAL

MJ. Smith

Okay guys (plural not DAL in particular or in isolation) ... turn on your logical side

Well, what can I say MJ is special. There's no way you can read that from the EULA.

I neither said nor implied that the EULA indicated that the limitation was one transfer. What one can gather from the EULA is that the privilege is unlikely to be unlimited.

Now, turn on your logic processor again. When Logos says that they will update the tagging for the resources for free, do you expect that to be true 500 years (15 generations) in the future? Do you expect the commitment to be kept every time the company changes hands? (my roof guarantee lasted thru one but not two purchases). The point is that you reasonably know that there is some cutoff designed to reasonably support both you and the company. I did appreciate the guarantee that came with my psaltery ... for as long as the craftsman is in the business - I thought that was honesty.

I'm not saying I agree or disagree with the cutoff Logos has chosen - I was merely the messenger pointing out we have good reason to believe that there was a cutoff ... and that the cutoff corresponded to my own perception.

Bob Pritchett

David, I've asked the head of customer service to help you.

In general, we have very few 'policies' -- more like guidelines we put in place to control costs.

Our only real, unbreakable policy is to do the right thing for our customer.

In our team's defense, your account is not the simplest -- it looks like you do much more license acquiring from others than typical users, and the most recent transaction required our developers to get involved to make database changes.

License transfer is something we do as a courtesy,but which requires a lot of manual work on our end. It would be both expensive and undesirable to automate it -- it would take a lot of code, to support a scenario we're not fond of. While most of our users have completely reasonable and legitimate reasons for transfer, as mentioned in this forum, there are always abusive situations which we're trying to keep from making too easy.

(Buying one copy of a book and transferring it through a dozen people in a single class in a single week, for example. The ebook equivalent of buying a dress on Friday and returning it on Saturday. Or buying stuff in bundles and sales and then selling the individual titles one at a time to other people for more than their component price in the bundle.)

I know it's easy to say 'it's just like re-selling a paper book!' But it's not. The business model of bundled sales, the license rates and contracts involved, etc. are all built on an assumption that we're making single sales, not passing around a never-gets-old, never-fades, never-gets-dog-eared, never-gets-marked-up-with-someone-else's-notes, never-has-to-be-shipped digital copy. Paper books simply involve a level of friction in pass-along that digital don't, and the business models reflect this.

I've written a lot about this in the past, and don't want to re-hash it all here. But the bottom line -- now, as always -- is that we'll do the right thing for our users. I don't think that requires us to submit to excessive abuse, and so there still are loose 'policies' our team creates and continually changes to adapt to whatever game / manipulation the worst 'system exploiters' are practicing at the moment, but these aren't announced or published because they barely exist and are ephemeral. If they were published they'd be rules we've committed to, rather than guidelines we use to curb abuse. And, given the creativity of the system exploiters, we'd need a lot of rules that were overly onerous for our legit and valued customers.

I know this requires a bit of trust, but I hope we've earned that over the years. I don't think we've ever let a policy get in the way of doing the right thing for the user; sometimes a person on the front-line is too aggressive in citing/using a policy, but you can always appeal -- as now - and we're pretty consistent about making things right.

(I'm using 'system exploiters' as a way of talking about people who really aren't acting in a spirit of kindness or even honesty -- it's not about you, it's the people who aren't on the forums who are pushing the limits or even stealing. A good example: we don't have any limit on the number of machines you can sign into Logos with. People internally have suggested two or three devices max, but that would unnecessarily punish legitimate users who run multiple laptops, or constantly change machines, etc. But every once in a while someone registers one copy of the software and then SELLS their username and password to others -- once as many as 90 times! This is clearly an abuse, and we watch for it and shut it down with a 'policy' of one user per account. We sometimes even smoke out the person who has done this with just three machines, but clearly three different people not in the same family, based on locations / logins / etc. Having a five machine limit would give 'permission' to the four-unit thief while stopping the 90 unit thief, but it would annoy the legitimate 'many machines' user. We prefer to not have a published policy, and not care if the legit user has twelve machines, but be able to turn off the five machine user who is re-selling their access credentials.)

MJ. Smith

My (and your) Logos resources have just lost most of their value.

Give me a break ... mine still are holding up better than my dead tree format. Not to mention that their real value should be the content not the resale price.

DAL

I don't think we've ever let a policy get in the way of doing the right thing for the user; sometimes a person on the front-line is too aggressive in citing/using a policy, but you can always appeal -- as now - and we're pretty consistent about making things right. I can attest to this. Logos has been flexible on a couple of occasions as far as returns and one transfer that involved the case mentioned by the OP. They did the right thing and I believe they will do the right thing for those of us who are legit, loyal customers.

(I'm using 'system exploiters' as a way of talking about people who really aren't acting in a spirit of kindness or even honesty -- it's not about you, it's the people who aren't on the forums who are pushing the limits or even stealing. A good example: we don't have any limit on the number of machines you can sign into Logos with. People internally have suggested two or three devices max, but that would unnecessarily punish legitimate users who run multiple laptops, or constantly change machines, etc. But every once in a while someone registers one copy of the software and then SELLS their username and password to others -- once as many as 90 times! This is clearly an abuse, and we watch for it and shut it down with a 'policy' of one user per account. We sometimes even smoke out the person who has done this with just three machines, but clearly three different people not in the same family, based on locations / logins / etc. Having a five machine limit would give 'permission' to the four-unit thief while stopping the 90 unit thief, but it would annoy the legitimate 'many machines' user. We prefer to not have a published policy, and not care if the legit user has twelve machines, but be able to turn off the five machine user who is re-selling their access credentials.)

I think abusers like these should be banned from using the software, since it's illegal to do what you just described. The only time I change machines is from iPhone app to iPad to laptop and then a different laptop when my old one crashes (which I'm afraid I'll be changing laptop again sometime soon - which is expected - a laptop every 2 years or 3 tops).

Matthew C Jones

Give me a break ... mine still are holding up better than my dead tree format. Not to mention that their real value should be the content not the resale price

Logos knows I am a collector. I do not buy resources to resell. I have been building a library I enjoy, but more importantly, hope to leave to a younger person. My diabetes has taken a toll on my heart, liver, kidneys, eyes, and nervous system. If my library dies with me, it constitutes a very expensive lease. I number that lease in days and months, not decades.

I suggested to Dan Pritchett a few years back to offer a lease-license that expires with the user upon death. Dan said it would be difficult to market such a morbid license. If there is no portability of resources, we have just such a license. The only difference is the higher price.

JT (alabama24)

To the best of my knowledge, it's been a single transfer for quite some time

Did you gain this understanding from the EULA? I don't see any way to read that limitation in the EULA.

Well, what can I say MJ is special. There's no way you can read that from the EULA.

For clarification: I never meant to imply that she did. And yes, MJ is special. [:)] Maybe ST too. [:)]

Mike Childs

I suppose this means you may leave your library to your son in your will, but he cannot leave will it to his son.

This is disappointing. And it is disappointing that to find this out in this way. Not many of us had a clue this was true.

Very bad form by Logos. Worse than they think.

Mike Childs

Bob: (Buying one copy of a book and transferring it through a dozen people in a single class in a single week, for example. The ebook equivalent of buying a dress on Friday and returning it on Saturday. Or buying stuff in bundles and sales and then selling the individual titles one at a time to other people for more than their component price in the bundle.)

That really seems like a red herring. Since Logos gives a no question asked 30 day money back guarantee, there is nothing to stop the dozen students from all buying the book on Monday and returning it on Friday anyway. And that would be a lot cheaper than a dozen $20 transfer fees. Gee Whiz. I don't think you thought that one through.

Also, I don't think the company has ever allowed buying something in a bundle and transferring individual books from that bundle. I understood the rule was you must transfer the whole bundle. Is that not right?

Mr. Bob is a good Christian business man. I know that. But this response was not his finest hour.

I think this decision loses more credibility that it makes in profit. There is a trust element between Logos customers and Logos. It is a unique company in that they really do go out of the way to do the right thing. And I bet you, with a little reflection, this decision will be reversed. Don't know anything, but just basing that on my long experience as a Logos customer.

toughski

That really seems like a red herring. Since Logos gives a no question asked 30 day money back guarantee, there is nothing to stop the dozen students from all buying the book on Monday and returning it on Friday anyway.

Also, I don't think the company has ever allowed buying something in a bundle and transferring individual books from that bundle. I understood the rule was you must transfer the whole bundle.

I thought the same thing and I agree with Michael that this response by Bob is not legitimate. This kind of "decision" only hurts loyal customers that have been with Logos for years.

you see, thieves will always find an easy and elegant way around any such limitations. It is super easy to create a disk image of the entire computer and pass that along (of course, one would have to be offline to safeguard resources).

abondservant

Disk Image ran as a virtual machine for instance. Your main computer could still have internet, but your vm could be isolated.

But frankly, I don't see true followers of Christ behaving in such a way.

Bob Pritchett

I suppose this means you may leave your library to your son in your will, but he cannot leave will it to his son.

This is disappointing. And it is disappointing that to find this out in this way. Not many of us had a clue this was true.

Very bad form by Logos. Worse than they think.

There has not been a change in policy -- this thread did not start with a Logos announcement, it started with one user sharing what they heard from one customer service agent. And every user's situation is a little different; the scenario that started this thread isn't really like the scenario of your heir leaving your library to their heir -- something we'd love to support! And we've already reached out to address the scenario that started the thread.

I am sorry for the confusion.

Bob Pritchett

That really seems like a red herring.

I'm sorry if my returned dress example doesn't make sense to you, but I can assure you we've seen exactly that scenario at Logos, and many more creative abuses of our return policy, generous multi-machine login, license transfer, etc. (We've seen someone set up a paid service where you dropped your laptop off with them on a school campus and they installed our software for a fee, using the same license and serial number -- just copying files, licenses, everything over to your machine.)

I think this decision loses more credibility that it makes in profit.

There isn't really a 'decision' here, as I've explained in my other posts. There's more a specific scenario with a specific user, who posted their story and from which others have extrapolated a whole new world of policies and changes. But this is really about just one of thousands of weekly customer service interactions that might have been handled better, and which was addressed within three hours

Please don't take from this any new policy; you suggest that with reflection 'this decision will be reversed', but in a sense it already has been. There wasn't a policy decision, there was one customer service agent declining to do something, and that was reversed already.

Bob Pritchett

I thought the same thing and I agree with Michael that this response by Bob is not legitimate. This kind of "decision" only hurts loyal customers that have been with Logos for years.

As I've mentioned in the other posts, there isn't really a 'decision' here -- we're handling the transfer for the customer.

Yes, people can and do abuse the money back guarantee. On rare occasions, with serial abusers, we have had to decline to do any more business with someone, usually by saying "I'm sorry that we just can't seem to deliver a product you're happy with. You've made many purchases, but returned all of them very quickly. It seems pointless to keep engaging in transactions when you aren't happy with any of them, and we just incur cost and inconvenience for both of us in processing returns, so we're going to decline to sell you anything else. We're sorry we weren't able to serve you better."

It's discretion and empowering our front-line people that allows us to do the right thing -- both when the right thing is to do whatever is in a good customer's interests, and also when the right thing is to cut off a serial abuser. (A label we don't apply lightly, and only use after lots of warning / communication.)

On days like this -- when the forum explodes into fear that Logos is suddenly reversing everything good, making bad policy decisions, hurting users, etc. -- I wish we did have a 300 page policy book that covered every scenario. And it seems like some users would like it too -- then we could cite it chapter and verse, quote it to make points and arguments, etc.

But then we'd be hamstrung in helping you, too. I just wish I could clearly communicate how our occasional ambiguity or apparent inconsistency is actually the secret of how we serve you well. Because there isn't a big policy book to get in the way.

Unix

No need to feel sorry at all, Denise. I have use for the volumes and love them. I will remember the transfer, it was very kind of You:

I feel really sorry for Unix. I just assumed if he didn't need the volumes that I didn't need, he could move them along to another user.

The rest of this post is not related to the OP. Dan Francis mentioned the dilemma of how to present Logos to people. Today (the last day of returning a valuable resource) I'm considering whether my solution for that should be using the extra Logos account I have, for that purpose. The few items that account contains consists of what I think anyone would be grateful to receive plus a few free books, and eventually I want to get rid of the entire account. I tried to very briefly express my idea at seminary last week to about three dozen people and have talked to six persons about what Bible Study software is and to three of them I told more about the most valuable resource in the account. So there has been little interest. The New Testament senior lecturer told the class that everyone will be introduced to the Bible Study Software alternatives a year from now - so perhaps I'll have a better chance later on to explain to more people and/or guide them. But at that point I will be focusing on Greek and postponing taking the rest of the seminary program, so my best bet will be to talk to one person at a time. This is legal but the value of the extra copy of the resource (which I have myself as well of course) doesn't make me a better Logos customer, I'm only sure that one person at Logos's office at Accounting knows that I presently operate two accounts.

To just return the item (the reason I bought the extra copy in the first place was mostly because of the high discount % on the website) would free money for other things and save interest rate costs as I will be paying off my Accordance and Logos purchases this Autumn with my cheque account. What should I do? I was hoping that someone would for example want to study with me at seminary or study Greek with me, or be my friend, and that that would give me a chance to give or sell the person that account.