Hesitant to Use Academic Discount Due to Lack of Transferability

2»

Comments

  • Milford Charles Murray
    Milford Charles Murray Member Posts: 5,004 ✭✭✭

    The question is, is Logos prepared to take this route, given it will NOT please the Lord?

    Peace, Robert!           *smile*                               and ..              Always Joy in the Lord!

                               How can you possibly know and be confident about such things?                Logos is indeed first of all a business, a great business for which I have been grateful for around 19 years with Logos.                               Why would Logos even put God and His Glory in second place???

                                              I think you might want to "re-work" your post???

    Philippians 4:  4 Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. 5 Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand..........

  • George Somsel
    George Somsel Member Posts: 10,150 ✭✭✭

    Given that the Word makes it clear that God demands to be first among His people 100% of the time, I'm far from pretending.  Aside from that, I know my Father.  His Spirit in me cries out as to what is pleasing to Him and what is not.  

    In other words, what is pleasing to God is what you want.

    george
    gfsomsel

    יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

  • Robert Wazlavek
    Robert Wazlavek Member Posts: 326 ✭✭

    Peace, Robert!           *smile*                               and ..              Always Joy in the Lord!

                               How can you possibly know and be confident about such things?                Logos is indeed first of all a business, a great business for which I have been grateful for around 19 years with Logos.                               Why would Logos even put God and His Glory in second place???

                                              I think you might want to "re-work" your post???

    Confident of what?  That God demands first place in our lives and that He is not pleased when He is not first?  The Word makes this clear.

    And I have no idea why Logos would put God is second place.  I wasn't supposing that.  I simply presented the evidence of the situation and made clear the choices that Logos has in the matter.  This is a very bad policy that harms customers.  And on top of that, Logos does not make it clear that it even is their policy.  What's worse is that the customers in this case are God's people looking to spread the gospel.  So Logos can either change the policy and/or make the policy very explicit so that they no longer deceive anyone, or they can choose not to do anything and blend in with the world.

  • Robert Wazlavek
    Robert Wazlavek Member Posts: 326 ✭✭

    In other words, what is pleasing to God is what you want.

    No.  And I'm not foolish enough to play your games.  So you might as well stop baiting and instigating.  You don't know anything about my beliefs, so please do not put words in my mouth.

  • George Somsel
    George Somsel Member Posts: 10,150 ✭✭✭

    No.  And I'm not foolish enough to play your games.

    No, you have your own foolish games to play.  You try to sound oh so pious, but I think it's a fraud.

    george
    gfsomsel

    יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

  • Rev Chris
    Rev Chris Member Posts: 570 ✭✭

    Are you pretending to know what would or would not please God?  I think we are admonished to obey the law.

    Given that the Word makes it clear that God demands to be first among His people 100% of the time, I'm far from pretending.  Aside from that, I know my Father.  His Spirit in me cries out as to what is pleasing to Him and what is not.  Nice try though. You can believe that it's not possible to know what pleases God if you want.  But that's pure foolishness, and it is obviously so to those who truly know the Word.  And I'm not going to argue with you about it.  (Nor will I argue any semantics if they are brought up.)

    Not sure why this has turned into a theological discussion, but let's not get so high and mighty that we pretend to know how God is speaking to us about the particulars of how academic discount transferability should be handled, something that does not appear in the Bible.  Issues of ethics in business are far from black and white, and Logos has proven (in my opinion) to be far more ethical in its treatment of customers than many businesses out there.  Being a Christian company does not mean they should behave the same way as a non-profit would, nor does it mean customers should have higher ethical priority than publishers or authors.  We are called to serve the world, not just ourselves.

     

    Pastor, seminary trustee, and app developer.  Check out my latest app for churches: The Church App

  • Robert Wazlavek
    Robert Wazlavek Member Posts: 326 ✭✭

    No, you have your own foolish games to play.  You try to sound oh so pious, but I think it's a fraud.

    [Y]

    (I will note however, that in your last few posts you've done nothing but question/criticize me and have not made any effort in the slightest to address the issue at hand in the process.  So your own actions and words prove that you probably shouldn't tell me that.  Seems like there might be a log in your eye.)

    Rev Chris said:

    Not sure why this has turned into a theological discussion, but let's not get so high and mighty that we pretend to know how God is speaking to us about the particulars of how academic discount transferability should be handled, something that does not appear in the Bible.  Issues of ethics in business are far from black and white, and Logos has proven (in my opinion) to be far more ethical in its treatment of customers than many businesses out there.  Being a Christian company does not mean they should behave the same way as a non-profit would, nor does it mean customers should have higher ethical priority than publishers or authors.  We are called to serve the world, not just ourselves.

    You're right.  The issues are tough, and not totally clear by any means.  I apologize for presenting them as 100% clear, as I've never even had that in mind.  However, I did present good evidence for my position.  Evidence that should be considered.  It's good to claim the unclearness is there.  It's not good to claim the unclearness makes evidence invalid and a certain position isn't supported better than the others.  (I'm not in any way saying that's what you're doing.  Just making a statement.)

  • Sogol
    Sogol Member Posts: 255 ✭✭

    I think this thread has generated many good points and concerns, and I hope Logos will consider and respond to them. Some of my takeaways include the following:

    - Some longtime Logos users appear to have been unaware that the academic transfer restriction existed prior to reading this thread. Accordingly, they purchased resources not knowing that part of their libraries were non-transferable, and they are now very disappointed with the situation. Might Logos allow such previously purchased resources to be grandfathered into a status which allows them to be transferred?

    - Along the lines of the previous point, it appears that it would be good for Logos to provide significantly greater disclosure to academic buyers about the transfer restriction so that more users are not caught off-guard by it.

    - There were several mentions of people being okay with a compromise that requires a long-term holding period before academic purchases could be transferred (1, 2, 5, or even10 years).

    - I should probably restate how I feel and how I think most of us on this thread feel: though we would like the ability to transfer resources purchased with the academic discount, we really have little or no desire to give up any of the Logos resources own (at least for as long as we are alive). Thus permitting academic resources to be transferred is very unlikely to generate a lot of (if any) new transfer requests from us. It is far more of an ideological issue - having the option to transfer all the resources we own gives us a significantly stronger sense of ownership of our libraries, and knowing that we are restricted from doing so hurts our experience as Logos users and lowers our perceived value of our Logos libraries.

    - There still appears to be some lack of clarity about whether or not academic resources can be left to others via one's will. Perhaps Logos could provide final clarity on this one more time.

    - I believe there were some interesting mentions of viewing academic purchases as more like renting than ownership (perhaps a very long-term rental with one upfront payment, but still a rental). Though I'm guessing that the publishers would probably be strongly opposed, Logos may want to consider allowing academic users to rent resources for a finite period at a fraction of the purchase cost. This would provide a much closer experience to what students currently have with physical textbooks - you buy textbooks and use them for a semester and then sell them and recoup some of your costs.

    One final point from me.....

    When I decided to abandon my physical library and replace it with Logos resources (a VERY scary decision for me), I did not approach it as if I was replacing physical books with digital books. Instead, I saw it as replacing physical books with a service. Like any service, it's only as good as the service provider, and my research showed that Logos was about as trustworthy a service provider I could find.

    A particularly important aspect of Logos for me is that they provide a service which looks a lot more like traditional ownership of a library. I think all signs from this thread and others is that many Logos users feel the same way. And though I understand and respect Logos' decision to not allow transfers of academic resources (and I do not think they are being unreasonable nor unethical with this decision), I think that policy is unfortunately a blow against one of the most important aspects of Logos' value proposition to its customers....... the sense of owning one's library.

    Thanks again to Logos and everyone else who is participating in this thread. Please keep the helpful comments coming!

  • Doc B
    Doc B Member Posts: 3,651 ✭✭✭

    I really don't understand what all the whining is about.  I knew academic purchases were not transferable, and I really didn't have to look very hard.  The academic rep let me know, and it was clearly stated in whatever agreement I saw at the time.

    This isn't that hard folks...if you bought resources at an academic discount and want to transfer them, call Logos and offer them the difference in price to 'upgrade' your resource to the non-academic level.  Then transfer them.  Some have complained in this thread that if they'd known about the transferability issue, the wouldn't have used the academic discount.  So undo it.  Call Logos and pay what you would have paid in the first place (since you said that's what you'd have done.)

    To demand Logos allow you to transfer a resource at the significant discount that some other person may not have earned smacks of theft to me. I'm not a fanboy, but to read the talk about Logos not pleasing God because their policy costs someone some extra money is nuts.  If (big if) the Holy Spirit is involved in any way in how Logos is priced or how policy is made, I'd bet my lunch money for the next three months that the Holy Spirit speaks to those responsible for the administration of Logos rather than to some random customer!

    If I ever choose to transfer any of my resources to anyone, I'll call Logos and ask them what I need to do to get that done.  If it is more expensive than is worth the trouble, I won't do the transfer.  I don't anticipate that happening...if my kids ever get to the point they want the software, they'll buy their own copy, I'm sure. I don't know of any software on my computers that I'm seriously worried about transferring to anyone...if I up-and-die, I have no idea what they'll do with all my software, but I'm really not concerned that it'll be a worry to me once I've assumed room temperature.

    I've bought academic-priced software since I was an undergrad...and have *never* expected to pass it on to anyone.  To expect Logos to be held to a higher standard than other software companies, especially in the name of something vaguely spiritual, is bizarre.  If they were charging folks to hear the gospel, we'd have a legitimate complaint.  To gripe about their policies with regard to a software product is immature and selfish, in my opinion. But then, a perusal of these forums ruins all novelty when it comes to the level of selfishness of believers.  (At least I know I'm not the only one with too high a self-esteem and desperately in need of hearing the gospel.)

    Eating a steady diet of government cheese, and living in a van down by the river.

  • Bob Pritchett
    Bob Pritchett Member, Logos Employee Posts: 2,280

    I'm sorry for the concern this thread has caused. It seems like issues like this one erupt every once-in-a-while as a side-effect of our desire to not have policies.

    I hate policies. Policies are straight-jackets that prevent organizations from doing the right thing for individuals. Policies force organizations to treat individuals as a single, adversarial entity, rather than as people with special needs and concerns. Policies empower front-line staff to avoid listening and to shirk the responsibility of making decisions.

    We try to have as few policies as possible.

    Dan did not outline a policy. Dan said that the program was not "designed" for license transfer. He explained the logic, and the specific scenario we were concerned about. We do disclose that we license a single user, but he didn't say anything about inheritance, he didn't say there were no exceptions. 

    For 20 years we have been trying to do the right thing for our customers, trying to be generous and flexible. I believe we have established a great track record and a strong reputation for excellent customer service. (If you don't think so, please email or call me immediately. bob@logos.com; 360-527-1700. I'll take care of whatever you're concerned about.)

    We're not throwing that away with a single forum post, or phone conversation. (And it's frustrating to me how quickly people take one small statement and jump to amazingly distant conclusions -- as if, after 20 years of customer-first orientation, we've suddenly had a personality change and decided that throwing away that reputation is the way to be even more profitable! I think some people are watching too many Hollywood movies where the businessman is the bad guy... <smile>)

    We have well-over one million user accounts. While the majority of our users are among the greatest people on earth, there are some people -- out of over one million! -- who try to take advantage of us (and, I imagine, other businesses). Many companies create policies in response to, or to defend against, specific abuses. For example, a clothing store might require tags to be attached when clothing is returned in order to ensure people aren't "borrowing" clothes for a one-night event and returning them the next day. An electronics store might charge a re-stocking fee on opened flat-screens TV's to discourage their purchase for just watching the Super Bowl.

    But these policies, designed to prevent abuse, always catch a few "innocents" too. That's why we prefer guidelines to policies, and discretion by our customer service agents. We want to always do the right thing for the customer. (Sometimes this means an agent will make the wrong call -- they're people, and make mistakes -- but we back that up with a policy of easy access to managers and the president of the company. Nobody ever gets unfairly caught by a policy at Logos.)

    Every policy we do have (few) and every restriction we promote (the end user license agreement, etc.) exists as a backstop against abuse; on our side, though, none of these is a handcuff that prevents us from doing the right thing, and it is in our continuing interest to do that.

    I don't want to open another long discussion on how digital licensing is different from the purchase of physical goods, but I'll hit the highlights:

    Physical manifestations of intellectual property (books, DVD's, etc.) are resell-able because the physical object is purchased, and thus can be re-sold. This fact is priced into the original purchase price of the object, and transaction "friction" prevents the whole world from just buying one copy and passing it around. It has to be physically transported, moved between parties, accumulates actual physical wear and tear, etc.

    Digital intellectual property is rarely sold; it is licensed. Most licenses are for limited use by the original purchaser only. This is because there is little to no friction in sharing something that doesn't have to be physically moved; there's no technical reason that 50 people couldn't share one Netflix license, and all watch streaming movies off one $8.99 /month subscription. It is a license which prevents this. (This is also why you can have thousands of movies streamed for $8.99, but pay $15 or more for a DVD of a single movie.) 

    In the same way, we're able to offer many expensive reference works in bundles with list-price discounts approaching 90% because the publisher knows that the content is licensed to a single user. Everyone knows that some of these books have limited use, and that people may be "done" with some of them shortly. That's priced into the deal. If you could immediately transfer the book you were done with to someone else digitally, without even the friction of taking it to the used bookstore, we'd sell a lot fewer copies of the expensive reference works. Theoretically a single license to a book could be owned by a college library, and students could check it out digitally in blocks of 5 minutes, allowing an entire class to use the same book in one evening.

    This is why we don't license libraries, why we discourage re-sale, etc. And it's why the few publishers who do license digital books to libraries introduce "artificial friction" in the form of limits on the number of lends per license, or a two-week minimum check-out period for a digital check-out, etc.

    My long-term dream is that Logos can offer something like the $8.99 / month Netflix subscription -- all the Bible study materials you could want for an incredibly low monthly price. In that model we wouldn't allow account sharing or content resale, But we'd offer incredibly inexpensive access to everyone. You wouldn't need a used-copy at half price; you'd get everything for less.

    We aren't there yet, though, and presently we sell things at varying discounts. Some prices are close to print, some are 90% less than print, and sometimes (academic discount) we offer certain users / scenarios special deals.

    In general, we license individual users. In general, we price on the expectation that we're selling to one person without transfer. (Remember, we're offering ongoing service, support, software upgrades, etc. We have ongoing costs, and if every copy was actively used forever we couldn't sustain that. Most users do not transfer their licenses, and many eventually -- by change of interests, profession, school, or vertical-status -- stop needing ongoing support.)

    We recognize that some users, however, are making a large investment. It may be objectively large -- thousands of dollars in resources -- or relatively large -- a big investment for them, based on their income.

    These users want to know that their investment is wise, and that they can transfer it at death, or in other necessary circumstances. They aren't trying to "borrow" the books for a class, they aren't trying to re-sell the same copy five times, they aren't passing a copy of a single text around a class, etc. And so we try to always do the right thing for these users.

    The bottom line is we have the minimum policy to protect ourselves from expensive abuse. We have some policy to avoid creating a legal entitlement to abuse. But we are driven by doing the right thing, and even our policy enforcement tends to be after-the-fact and in response to the worst abuse. (We had a user who returned _every_ purchase a few months later, for years. We eventually -- in my opinion, long after every other company would have cut him off -- stopped selling to him, with an apology that we couldn't make a product he was happy with.)

    In some ways it would be easier to just make some policies and post them. "No refund after x days. No resale until y years. No installing on more than z machines." etc. But while they might give clarity on the web site, the policies would turn into straight-jackets for our users. They would turn into excuses our staff could use to end calls quickly and avoid listening to individual customers. They would turn us into the big, monolithic, money-driven, people-insensitive organization everyone seems to worry about.

    But we aren't that yet, and I don't want to be that. So instead I'll just keep coming back here to the forums (and to my inbox!) to put out the occasional fires, and hope that our persistent, continuing, excellent, one-on-one service will win out over paranoia about what might happen in the future when the people at Logos lose their minds and retreat to an evil corporate lair on a hollowed-out volcanic island where they plot ways to antagonize the million users who built the company. :-)

    -- Bob

  • JT (alabama24)
    JT (alabama24) MVP Posts: 36,523

    macOS, iOS & iPadOS |Logs| Install
    Choose Truth Over Tribe | Become a Joyful Outsider!

  • Milford Charles Murray
    Milford Charles Murray Member Posts: 5,004 ✭✭✭

    Thank you, Bob!                               *smile*                                                      You are truly -- and much! -- appreciated!

                         Peace to you!                             ... and ..........             Always Joy in the Lord!

    Philippians 4:  4 Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. 5 Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand..........

  • Kristin Dantzler
    Kristin Dantzler Member Posts: 111 ✭✭

    Thanks for providing an excellent clarification. As a member of the Board of Trustees of a University and Seminary, I am always concerned for our students.  This clarification removes this as an issue from my perspective.

  • Into Grace
    Into Grace Member Posts: 692 ✭✭

    http://www.TrinityExamined.com

  • ChelseaFC
    ChelseaFC Member Posts: 730 ✭✭

    Thank you Bob. This is what I needed to hear. Thank you for your clarity and for looking out for your customers. I can confidently and happily move on now.

    Cheers,

        Marcus

    Chelsea FC- Today is a good day!

  • Sogol
    Sogol Member Posts: 255 ✭✭

    Thank you so much for the great reply, Bob. This is why I was willing to give up my much beloved physical library in exchange for Logos. I really think you run a first class operation.

    However, if you will allow me to play devil's advocate for a moment, I wanted to make a couple points:

    1) The landscape is littered with technology/media/retail companies that were once very cool but eventually turned lame, thus leaving formerly loyal customers feeling angry and betrayed. Just look at the fiasco Netflix created when they announced their big 60% price increase last year - people who absolutely loved the company and had been happy subscribers for the past decade felt that the company had turned greedy and betrayed them (I believe they lost somewhere around 1 million subscribers after this). And there's plenty more companies in technology, media and retail that were once loved and are now loathed or in the process of being abandoned by formerly loyal customers - Yahoo, Palm, MySpace, Gateway, Research in Motion (Blackberry), Hewlett Packard, Motorola, AOL, Nokia, Sony, Barnes & Noble, Netscape, Best Buy and on and on and on. The ultra-competitive and rapidly changing nature of these industries means that it's extremely difficult for such companies to simultaneously grow and stay on good terms with customers. Of course, Logos has the advantage of being privately held, as well as being owned and operated by believers who value their integrity more than just their P&L. However, my point is that people have good reason to be skeptical that a technology company can remain a good partner in the long-run. If anyone can buck the trend, I'd put my money on Logos, but again, I hope you understand why Logos' customers might be cautious.

    2) Though the subscription based model is becoming increasingly popular in the technology and media worlds, and I'm sure many people would love such an option, I suspect that many still feel drawn to the idea of owning their own library rather than renting it. Just as owning one's own house is often not as economical or practical as renting, and paying off your entire mortgage may not be the most financially optimal thing to do, many people still prefer to own their own homes and pay off their entire mortgage (even Warren Buffett says this). Let's face it - people who love books own them for reasons that are not always entirely practical. I'm betting that one of the big attractions that many of your customers have to Logos is that, through Logos, you really can feel like you own your own digital library. I think this point is relevant for the whole discussion of the transferability of academic purchases - not being able to transfer feels much more like a very long-term rental than ownership, and that detracts from the overall user experience with Logos.

    Again, I truly appreciate your post, Bob, and my intention is not to drag this thread out forever. Furthermore, I believe that Logos can be trusted to do the right thing in the end. However, I think it's important that all sides of these issues be discussed so that Logos customers, employees, owners and content providers all win in the end.

    All the best.