Home Forums Discussions General Discussion The EULA debate - Comments Please

Hi Folks,

As Amazing Charts moves toward Version 4, a lot of things are being added or changed - hopefully for the better. I had a long talk with Jon today, and he's been reading the board, even if he hasn't had much time to comment on things here.

We discussed the current EULA, and the concerns that some of our more active posters have had, as well as the needs of a growing software company to protect their intellectual property, etc., as well as the concerns that some of us have had over provisions that maybe sound a little harsh.

Since Version 4 is going to be a major upgrade, Jon is open to the EULA also being "upgraded". He's asked me to ask the group for their specific concerns and suggestions, so that we can have a product that the users feel comfortable with, that still offers the company the protections it needs.

One of the things that he has to be concerned about from his end (at least according to his attorney) limiting his liability if someone prescribes from an old medication database, or somehow uses data that is normally updated if you have a support agreement that hasn't been updated.

Folks, he's open to suggestions - and this is the place to do the suggesting and hold the discussion. There are a couple of other EULA related threads started already - lets move the discussion here. Jon will be following the debate, although probably won't weigh in very often.


Regards,

V.

Thank you for opening up this topic. I was concerned about being considered disruptive, so I have kept quiet about this issue. I am very pleased that we are able to discuss concerns about AC's EULA. This eases my mind about AC.

My concerns are simple.

I don't know how long I'll be allowed to practice family medicine as a solo-physician with the hospitals acquiring and dominating physician practices in our area. "Either you're with us, or against us." was the attitude of one hospital. "Roy, you are going to have to hitch your horse to either our post or their's" was another hospital's CEO's comment to me. In fact there are maybe 4-5 solo FPs in this community of 80,000 people.

I need to know that I will be able to use AC to access patient's records after I close my practice without having to pay a yearly license fee. I'll need access to my patient records according to state law for 8 years plus the age of majority of the patient. It needs to be in a format that is acceptable in the court of law. Data elements in database format is not helpful to use for legal purposes or continuity of patient care should I close my practice. I do want to practice for at least another ten years and I am hoping that I will not be forced out of the market before then.

I suggest that the users be allowed to use AC at their own risk for whatever edition that they last purchased. This would be like what we do with Microsoft Office. Certainly, if we have active practices, it would be stupid for us not to continue getting the latest updates. In fact, even if I closed my practice, I may be interested in continuing a subscription of if it is nominally priced (although the only reason would be to get copies of old records on an occasional basis).

I think that this issue will eventually be sorted out by the courts as I can see ASP-EMR users will be left hanging high and dry without a way to access records without a subscription. Then again, larger clinics can run in perpetuity whereas when smaller clinics close, they are closed for good.

The EULA should specify if there is a shut off mechanism in the software, if annual payments are not made. Shutting off a software will be disruptive and financially disasterous to a practice. I would think twice about purchasing a program that has an automatic time driven shut off mechanism.

"Jettisoning assholes." I felt uncomfortable reading this on the post. Jon has always treated me well and I certainly hope that my posting things about making improvements to AC doesn't make me into an asshole in his eyes. Nobody (with the exception of some attorneys) want to be percieved as an asshole or having a personality disorder.

On the other hand, if there are individuals that disrupt operations at Amazingcharts or is perceived harmful to Amazingcharts or to Jon, it is reasonable that there is a way to discharge that customer. It would be good to specify what action (steps) would be taken prior to jettisoning an AC user. Perhaps there should be language of having graduated warnings (due process) prior to yanking the license written into the EULA. I don't want to see a "user" turn into a "suer." Amazingcharts must stay away from legal issues that could take down the entire company-- there are over 1,400 small practices that depend and rely on this wonderful software to keep them from going belly up.

With regards to the medication database, I have more concerns about liability involved with a sloppy database. I realize cleaning up the FDA database is a gargantuan task for one person. I looked all over the internet to find a source that would provide the "1000 most commonly precribed medications" but I have not found one suitable for use with my practice. It would be nice to have a two-way exchange of database where Amazingcharts can find out what we doctors prescribe, what CPT codes we use, and what ICD-9 codes we use and eliminate codes that the 1400 users never use. Or... I like the idea of "commonly used codes, and medications" that we can check off. The feature to select common codes is available but does not seem to have any pratical relevance.

With the issue of someone suing Jon (or Amazingchart) for using an old (not updated) database, I have no problems signing a paper stating that I won't sue because I am at fault for being stupid enough not to purchase an update. However, if the software is somehow deliberately crippled due to not purchasing an update and that causes disruption of practice or harm to patient care, that is a different issue. IMHO, limiting access to patients' chart notes is more likely to cause legal problems.

I am generally happy with Amazingcharts. Those that come to visit my clinic find Amazingcharts extremely easy to use and very practical. I have encouraged them to adopt the program in their practices.

I ran the first part of this by Vinny before posting it. Then I caught a good creative wave and finished it. It's a bit lengthy, but I think it's pretty good. Thanks for listening....

Vinny,
I want to thank you for taking a positive, open to suggestions and active role on this. And please thank Jon for the same when you speak with him. In the words of donkey, "really, really".

On the other end of this, I believe I speak for almost everyone when I say; we want AC and Jon to be well protected too. AC's continued success is in all of our mutual self-interests. I know that I have been a bit of a thorn here on this topic, and I don't want to be such an irritant. So after one or two basic posts I'm going to step aside for a couple of days and let a few others have the floor.

As I’ve sort of hinted at in the past, we user when we use AC or other similar products create a "shared" intellectual property when we use such tools. This property is shared between the doctor and the patient. And we all know the laws and regs. that we must all comply with under such things as HIPAA, including the continued access to records for various reasons. Somehow while protecting both the vendor and the end users, putting in something about continued use and continued access to the program, and continued access to renewals and updates (at appropriate free market rates for both AC's and our sakes) would be very nice.

Many users I've spoken with have avoided the other programs like the virtual, ASP, internet only model EMR's and PM's because the only way to continue to use and access one's records and intellectual property is to be forever on that vendor's taximeter even if you do need or want to move on. Worse yet, what happens if you wake up one day to find that your ASP vendor has gone belly up??? All your data and charts are created and accessible in a program you do not own or have access to! What a potential horror story. Personally, I’m just waiting for a few of these to hit the newspaper. Watch out.

This is very much in AC's favor! It is one of a number of strong reasons that attracted many of us to AC in the first place. We were buying the rights to the program that we could use and no ASP type situation could take it away from us and therefore neither could our access to our valued charts and other data. So perhaps something more like buying a program like an Excel, Word, QuickBooks and the like as examples. And on AC's side of such things, yes perhaps after a few versions and/or years, they have every right to not to support very old versions. QuickBooks certainly does this and every other year and version we have always updated to stay current. Just as we intend to continue to re-up with Jon and AC for the long haul. Also, we truly like be part of and supporting the underdog in such situations. Go AC!

And as stated in other threads just about all of us are more than glad to regularly re-up as our renewal comes about. Goodness knows that Jon and the folks at AC with such interesting updates and improvements to the program have earned each and every dime of it. Personally we would be glad to give some more if they felt it was needed.

And please do also find wording to protect Jon and AC from bad and needless litigation that I think we would all agree is something we are all opposed to. Personally I do understand the desire and need for protection from old, not up to date lists of Med's and Codes coming back to haunt the company. I'm not sure that the two ideas raised here are in conflict, and I'm hopeful that both goals can be achieved together.

Here is how I think most folks would agree the situation really lays out. The program AC is Jon’s intellectual property and he has all the rights in the world to defend it, the company and himself from real harm. But picture this: Jon created AC using a number of MS based softwares and we all depend on him now to maintain, provide and improve on his software for our daily use in our offices for all the things we depend on it to do for us. I know that AC is quite woven into the fabric of our lives here at Village Medical and I gather it is too at most of the other offices that use it. Unless Jon or some other developer was to commit some truly awful sins against the state (MS) his access to use those tools he purchased should never be restricted or denied. Too many people like us now depend on him.

So now part two: Those of us who now use all sorts of software such as AC as tools to create, maintain, preserve and continue to compile our intellectual property need to be considered and protected in a similar fashion as folks like Jon do. Without the original program that our data (in this case charts) was originally compiled and designed in they become just about useless to us and our patients. Furthermore, this intellectual property is not ours alone; but instead we share it in an on going basis with our patients. It is really their medical records that we have created and now must maintain and preserve for both the provider and the patient. So some how, we must find a way to strike a healthy balance between both of these parties needs and protections. Again, thanks for a really great product. Goodness knows where we’d be without it.


And in closing let me say that I think it is rather big of Jon and Vinny to open this thing up. This is not just an AC issue, but instead it is an issue that will continue to need to be worked on all over the virtual world, but especially in fields such as medicine. Many different software vendors, and not just in medicine are creating, virtual only, ASP model products, or products that are only on a subscription basis. We are probably treading where few have yet to tread and again my sincere praises to AC for being the conduit for such debate. But I think that this is our place, because we in science, academia and medicine tend to think ahead about these types of thorny and ethical issues that surround our trade, protect those that need protecting, and that we are very intolerant of infringing upon another’s intellectual property and ideas. We are the defenders of such things and we are proud of that and we should be. We should always strive to have a zero tolerance policy for such things as plagiarism or harm to another’s intellectual property. Be it in standard written formats of books, journal articles and research, virtual format such as software or in music and the arts.

Developers like Jon need protection for themselves and their intellectual property so they can feel comfortable to bring their products to market, so such useful products can and will be developed for all our mutual benefits. End users who use such great tools like AC, who then design and build our own intellectual property in such products also need similar protections, especially in fields such as medicine. Let’s do this together for all our mutual benefits. If conducted in a positive and cooperative spirit as I see taking form here, I think it can be done. Have a great night and be well.

As one who still prints off encounter notes, I may not really appreciate the dilemma this EULA thing is causing many of you. To me, a simple way of handling the access to patient data should AC go belly up, should one decide or be forced to change to other EMR's or should Jon decide to "jettison assholes", would be to just print to a paper form the data one has stored in a patient file. Yes, after 10-20 years of use this could be a monumental task but, not really any more difficult than those who have been in practice 10-20 years and are now trying to scan into an EMR all of their accumulated data. That hard copy data can then be taken with you to another practice or, heaven forbid, rescanned into another program which has not recognized you as an asshole.

First, we as an AC community along with Jon, since I know he was open to this in the first place, can do our best to stay away from the attonney's medicolegal bul...... I realize it has to be there, but please, worrying about litigation because someone prescribed from an older database that was used "as is." Everyone knows I agree with Roy. I don't want to offend anyone but the databases as they are, are terrible at best, and horrific at the worst. They are basically unusable. My biller can never go into my progress note to see an ICD-9 code as she would't trust it.

I also think the current EULA would be difficult to enforce as far as losing one's license if not upgrading. That is why this forum is helpful and I applaud Jon for doing it.

There are some client programs which are purchased that are run in a subscription service especially those that utilize the Internet on a daily basis. Symantec and other companies, while the software is yours forever, it is useless if you do not purchase the definitions. But, when you take an example such as Adobe, once your purchase it, it is my understanding that it can never be taken away from you (that version). Maybe if the company has an incredibly bad runin with you, they could keep you from purchasing a newer upgrade, but it would be hard.

As far as the ASP's go, I have looked at them since Logician Internet went under. If everyone had an ASP, sharing information would be so much easier. There is a way to use an ASP and not worry and that is by using one which allows one to download their info each day.

I probably shouldn't write this, but if my AC was taken away, the databases are such that the info would be fairly easy to retrieve.

As far as printing out notes (and Leslie this is nothing against you -- to each his/her own, and I certainly understand), but I simply refuse to print out a note. Completely paperless. Of course, the backups are extremely redundant.

But, getting back to the main point, the EULA is concerning to me, but if it stayed in its current state, it would make more sense if certain things were spelled out. Such as is this a subscription service or a one-time license program (for the current version).

Bert,
No offense taken. I realize that one of the main reasons to have an EMR is to be paperless. However, as one who lost ALL ELECTRONIC DATA when my SoapWare crashed (and my back up data was corrupted right along with it),I am still too gun-shy to fully trust my records again to any program. Until we have case-tested legal precedence, I will continue to protect myself and my patients' data. It's sort of like having a terminal patient with a Living Will on a ventilator. In my state (Indiana), the laws are still a bit too hazy for me to simply march in and pull the plug based on that one piece of paper. If there is one family member opposed to this, watch out. Also, as an old codgerette, I truly can find things more quickly flipping pages than I can clicking back and forth through screens. If I were just starting out, I suspect I would aim for a totally paperless office. Unfortunately, once again, the lawyers continue to hold physicians by the proverbial "microtrichia".

Has anyone looked at the EULA with the new upgrade?
Is there disclosure of a shut off valve?
Does the program cease to work without a subscription?
Can my clinic be shut down by having our license pulled out by the vendor?
Do I have to get an attorney to understand the EULA?

Would like to know if there's someone that has already used the program and have read through the EULA before I venture into the new version.

This may be a better site to continue discussion about the EULA as it gives a little bit of a background. I see that there is no specific coherent thread for the EULA controversy and collecting the comments from various users would be helpful in bringing newcomers closer to issues that was discussed previously.

Super. Here's a link to the other discussions.

http://amazingcharts.com/ub/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=6756#Post6751

http://amazingcharts.com/ub/ubbthre...ber=6757&page=0&fpart=1#Post4693

I'd like to see this question settled.

Jon and Vinny,

I think your EULA is fine.

Since you are asking for users' opinions, my opinion is that you keep it the way it is. I have no problem with it, and it seems fair.

I know this has been beaten to death, but does anybody know the status of the EULA debate? I had my credit card out and was all ready to update my version of AC until I read the Eula stating that, if terminated, I have to remove all copies from my computer. I am not willing to do this. Is this topic going to be discussed at Branson? I have not often felt the "updates" were all that useful to me so I have not updated regularly. Now that I am willing to do so, I find the EULA to be prohibitive.

Leslie

Leslie,
So nice of you to bump this thread, I always felt you were a kindred spirit. That was the single cause, that one Clause that started all my warnings and all this talk about this long drawn out subject. It is the one that tasted so bad going down. The annual reup of you are termed also, and therefore have to remove all copies as in the first bad issue isn't much better either. Really folks, think about all this for a moment....

Actually Roy was even saying that from where he sat, it seemed that the EULA for the download of 3.7 didn't match the one on the regular retail side of the AC website... Very strange. Not sure what to make of that...

Sure wish this could be resolved in a fair and level manor, one that could leave us all feeling safe and secure in our access to our data and ownership of a program that is openly promoted as "nothing else to buy" as Roy likes to remind us all....

Welcome aboard, Lasse... Shiver me timbers
Paul

Paul,
I have never liked that part of the EULA debate. I likened it to buying copy of Quicken and then, after you have used it for years and entered in all your vital data, electing not to buy the updates, then have the whole program, including your data impounded. Just does not seem right to me. Never did
Until this issue is resolved, I will not update AC.

Leslie

Leslie,

Sorry if I ruffled your feathers there. That is an excellent analogy there, very well put. Really Leslie that has been my one real pet peeve here all along. Any of the others really are just tangents to this one very sore spot of bad sportsmanship. It's just so plainly and obviously wrong.

And I get sick when some of the others here talk about comparing an EMR to a subscription anti-virus programs, as though access to patients charts can be compared to the choice of Norton over Trend Micro, verses Kaspersky or what have you. Our data, our charts, which are the intellectual property of the docs that created those notes and the patient whose chart it is. No less all the legal implications for the doctor who always needs to be able to supply those charts and notes to all sorts of players for years and years past the patient's last visit.

I know that some of you are sort of sick of hearing and reading all this, and there is a simple solution, a positive change in this important document that affects us all. This is all too important to be thrown under the rug, blown off, ignored or anything else besides being dealt with effectively and fairly.

Now I know we got a post a while back from Vinny saying that this is supposed to be addressed in a positive manor sometime soon, but I would ask, since it is such a sore spot, if the solution is there already, then were is it so we can all see it and put this stupid thing to bed once and for all.... Right?

Quick, FYI for any and all users of the AC Back-Up services.

1) If you don't reup every year on your anniversay you are considered "Terminated", so

2) If terminated AC can and will delete any and all back-ups of your data!!! So you only have off-site back-up until you part ways with AC possibly one day. So would one have to continue to pay almost indefinitely, let's say post retirement just to make sure your off-site back-ups are there just in case five years post retirement you are having data issue while trying to comply with a patients legal request for for their records.

3) If terminated even simply for lack of payment and not reupping (like retirement or now with new practice and new charting system)under all conditions of termination, as Leslie said, you must remove all copies of AC from all of your machines. So how are you going to access your old records just to comply with the records requests that are certainly going to come over and over again? With pediatric patients, if one were to treat a newborn today and retire 6 months later, you would need to keep your charts active and available for like 17 plus 7-10 past that patient's 18th birthday. That's a whole lot of extra time there, just for what basically amounts to an electronic, archive filing cabinet; wouldn't you agree???

On this note perhaps we should all discuss other possible off-site back-up services so no matter where we are in our professional lives and relationships we can all feel confident that we have properly protected our valuable data and charts. I'm sure just like AC and charts, most of us have other important data that could use similar levels of protection, like QuickBooks, Practice Managment and claims data, so on and so forth.

I'm just a messenger here folks.... It's in the contract, really.

Thanks Leslie,

This will be my only comment, I hope.

Nearly every software company has a EULA. And, nearly all are written in legalese slanted greatly toward the vendor. Most, state that if the user does not use it properly, or distributes it against the rules of the EULA or does not continue to pay for it, can have the software removed from the program. In reality this does not happen.

I have no qualms with any of the EULAs and would even buy the product if the EULA stated it could blow up my computers if I didn't follow it. (not to belittle anyone about the EULA concerns). While it is in there, there is absolutely no way, that AC is going to come to your office in white coats or suits or whatever and remove your software. Besides, you have backups of your data and can download or copy literally hundreds of versions using the email address x@x.com. Most companies force you to use your correct email address. I have never seen a company so lenient as with Amazing Charts. But, you are correct in that we all have a choice either way.

Again, please don't take this as a personal attack or anything. I think Roy left (maybe) due to this issue, and he is missing out on the best, all-in-all EMR there is.

Bert

I think I have an idea. There are probably three types of users:

1. Those that are comfortable with the EULA (not necessarily right or anything) that will purchase the new versions as is.

2. Those that are so uncomfortable with th EULA, that they will not purchase the new versions as is.

3. Those that are on the fence. My recommendation would be (if you liked AC and wanted to upgrade) to just email Jon directly and tell him your concerns. Tell him you have always liked AC, want to upgrade, but are nervous (rightfully so for that user) and would like further information or reassurance from Jonathan, himself.

What do you think?

@ Bert: Some might recall that I made this actual comment about your computer blowing up in jest, Roy even repsonded in jest. He then WENT OFF on me about all kinds of stuff and subsequently left the message boards.

@ Bert: Obviously the EULA bothers some and doesn't bother others. I don't think there is a fence though. You either are bothered or not. Some people that are bothered will renew despite the warnings, and others that are bothered will not renew and simply use an older outdated version of AC.

@Leslie: Despite what the EULA says about removing the AC program from your computer, no one can actually do this. I hope you can take some comfort in knowing that your program will not blow up, it will not self-delete, and AC cannot hack into your network and remove it from your computers. They would literally have to break into your network to do this, and this is illegal. I am 100% certain Dr. Bertman would not commit a crime in order to remove AC from anyone's computer.

Clearly some people have valid concerns. Other people have no concerns. Whichever an AC user's stance on the EULA, we all have one thing in common: We are the smartest collection of doctor's on the planet because we are using the single best all-around packaged EMR in existence.

Adam,
Yes they can cause it to stop functioning. They may not be able to remove it from my machine but they can keep me from adding additional information. I know this from personal experience. I was using a software program which will remain nameless. It was licensed and this license had to be renewed yearly. One year I was late in renewing and when I did a routine update, my license info was hijacked and the program stopped functioning on that computer. My copy of that program on that computer could not be accessed until I paid the renewal fee. Believe me, the technology is there. I take no offense from comments made by either you or Bert and I have no intention (at this time) of getting all huffy and leaving the board. However, I think you are being too naive and trusting. If this were not something Jon believed strongly in then why was the EULA changed from the original which did not have this wording to the present one which does? If he is being influenced by lawyers to put in this "legalese" then those same lawyers certainly have the power over him to encourage him to enforce it. I would like to hear the discussion about this at the AC conference. I plan not to upgrade until I return from there and what I hear or don't hear there will likely influence that decision. I love the product and I believe Jon deserves every penny he asks for for its use. But I will not risk the integrity of my patient data in order to give it to him. Again, in my mind (small as it might be) I feel the best approach is one of "Pay as you go". Purchase the product for a given price and then pay for any and all updates/modules you desire when you desire them, not necessarily annually. If there are no worthy updates then why pay for something you already paid for?

Leslie

Leslie

I am not sure that I am adding anything helpful here, just my two cents. I have met Bertman on a couple of occasions and he makes a good impression, he seems a genuine, stand-up guy. AC has gotten bigger than in the beginning, (9 employees now?), and I think he was a little naive on some points. (Observation, NOT criticism) To wit: The latest update you have to verify you are who you are to prevent the bad guys from using AC to write scripts. I am sure that some things are delegated, and some of the EULA may be 'boiler-plate' legalese that he has been persuaded must be there.

That said, BEFORE the last update we had a 7 day hiatus from any internet connection, (can you hear me NOW Verizon?) and AC was almost unusable. It seems to me, (remember my lack of IT savvy) that AC starts out by checking the license before it does anything else. I would best describe it as functioning in 'LIMP' mode for those seven days. You could get your data out, but you would never keep seeing patients with this software.

I don't suspect Jonathan of any evil intent at all. Nor do I suspect that he views this as his life work and something that he would never ever sell to anyone. (My fantasy is that the grass roots users will be so strong and organized, that when he is ready to sell, we are the high bidders.) I know, now who is being naive?

Sounds like us and our QuickBooks, I tend to upgrade every other year. First time I actually liked a certain new feature, mileage tracking and the like. It adds up after a while. Where as my last update to 2007 was because of compatablity issues. When I replaced a failed drive about a year ago, I couldn't activate and update 2005 as it didn't work with IE version 7. 2008 was nothing all that special so I'm holding my cards for the moment, if 2009 has something worth considering I'll make that call then.

Now with AC one of the main reasons I renew each and every year to to have access to AC support. Our recent issues between Trend Micro and AC come to mind. After AC had a "trend" showing of enought offices with the same problem they could days later advice to take appropriate action. Second reason is to at least access the various code updates, as flawed as they may be as pointed out much better by others than myself. And lastly, as Leslie quoted me, Jon certainly derserves each and every dime of it. And lastly, we do use one or two interfaces and so renewing is the simpliest and easiest way to keep all of that current. Again thumbs up to Jon and AC for such things.

But as Leslie said, as someone with loads of experience in business of all sorts, one does not put in contracts things they do not intend to use. How successful that attempt can or will be used, is a matter that could be debated til the end of time. But none the less, the insersion of such clauses and terms in all of our contracts with the company, show beyond any and all doubt that this is the official position and intent at the corporate level. Nothing more, but also, nothing less.

This is why we design and create contracts, to lock in what each parties rights and responsiblities are. Why any of us would ever switch from secure paper charts to something based in software that at any moment a company that can and does create a totally one sided contract that totally favores them and their interests, while beasically ignoring and destroying our own is beyond me. With a traditional old fashioned paper chart, difficult as it may be to live with these days on a day to day basis, it is none the less yours to have and to hold and your access to them can never be restricted. Just as with Me, Roy and Al and our Railing against CCHIT, this is really no different. If the entire world and gov't wants us to blaze boldly into this brave new "E" charting world, then the contracts and laws that encase them must fit our industry and the laws that we all have to function in. How this was never properly covered by blanketing federal law is still beyond me, but yet here we are.

Unlike my lease agreement that I actaully "hammered out" between my landlord (he's a lawyer so he represented himself) ourselves and our lawyer and reached a very nice mutual meeting of the minds, this contract was very much changed on us, with out so much as a single conversation, exchange of memos, emails, or meetings of any kind. It was just totally re-written and inserted in the software without so much as even a real honest "notice posted" anywhere. Heck we all get the update and newsletter emails, why was there not at least a notice posted via email that this has or was about to change? Many of us started under a totally different set of terms and conditions then we are now contractually under today? Where was our sides input, warning, or any sort of recoginition that we are the other side in this two sides relationship?

It's as though I went out and sold our house and bought a new one in a new city none of my family had every visited before, without discussing it at all with Nancy no less our two young kids. "Ahh, sure like thanks for including me, us in your choices and changes there... aand you didn't ask me for my perspective on any of this, why???" Why most of you are not offended by this radical change without any input or conversation is beyond me.

The idea that we responsibly and with good intent paid for our annual renew to access our codes, or support, or simply because we do feel that Jon and AC are entitled to fair pay for a great product, and to then have the most important terms and conditions of our contract changed and sort of just done, without notice or discussion is extremely rude and bad business form.

Yeah, sure for some reason we have grown to accept Bill Gates policies as the contract law in this one industry but it still doesn't make it right. We have grown complacent over a number of issues and laws lately, it still doesn't make it right. And AC was promoted to all of us, ever the newbies today, go to the website, as the "different" company that doesn't do these kind of things, and will treat us fairly. Will treat us as they would want to be treated themselves. Well this is not fair, this is not good sportsmanship, this is not how business is conducted in just about any other form of business, only in software licensing and for some reason many are just willing to allow it to continue... No Thank-You Please.

In closing, if any of us really wanted to, we may have half a leg to stand on, to fall back on the old contract that we all signed on with. It was a hoot. Now perhaps we can't exactly have that old contract with all the foul language anymore, but the intend and equitable policies that it represented is something we will not back down on attempting that we return to. That contract was the reason many of us did sign on in the first place, it was the whole package, the product, the friendly support, and the pro-consumer end user policies, terms and conditions.... And simply accepting that those days are gone in such a brief period of time, is just unbelievable. I almost can't believe what I am reading some times.

I guess we shouldn't care to return to the time when we only allowed real judges to rule on warrented searches either? Just because certain standards have rolled backwards in a negative direction, doesn't mean that any of us should accept such things, and simply allow them to continue or accept their continued insersion in new places; that is the weakest arguement of all, and yet it continues here regularly. And all of you are smarter than that, you are doctors and scientists with some of the best critical thinking skills going, and so when I see such happening, it disappoints me greatly.... We can and should do better then this. It was that old policy and philosophy that had many of us first thinking a long time ago about how to pull off something as cool as community as Branson. My personally, I'm still hoping to return to Waterbury Vt.... Any of you care to tag along or join???

File Assistant Pro EULA.

Henceforth the File Assistant Program shall be used as is...anyone against the AC EULA or talking about the EULA shall lose all future support.

Just kidding with you Paul.

Good for a moment I thought I was really screwed. Just kidding too....

I kept looking at it knowing I needed to come up with a great snappy reply but I just couldn't pull one out. You my friend got the best of me there. Well Done...

Gonna PM right now.

Every

User

Loves

Ac

You keep Kicking my butt here....

Thanks for all the comments and help.

As we get closer to releasing V4, I'm revamping the EULA and adjusting it based on your concerns here as well as the conversations I've had with a number of you.

Please check out this draft and let me know your thoughts and if it addresses the major concerns.

Most of the substantive changes are in the Good Standing, Patient-Related Data, Termination, Confidentiality, and Miscellaneous sections.


Thanks again!
Jon

Good Standing?
Now we are going to be evaluated by our emr company?

Nothing in the proposed revision seems threatening or imposing.

The EULA looks okay to me.

Jon,

As you know, I have never really had a problem with the EULA, given that a) it seemed fair and b) it wasn't all that different than most EULA that I never read -- just click on Accept as there really is no other choice.

But, since the draft was posted, I am just surmising that "non-constructive criticism" will be hard to define. That may need to be more specif. Just my thoughts.

"Examples of such inappropriate behavior include users who don’t pay the required licensing fees, users who behave in a manner that our staff finds to be inappropriate or threatening, users who post non-constructive criticisms about Amazing Charts or related services, and users who use our software or services in a manner other than which they are intended."

I still will stick with my overall feeling of EULA, whic is,

Every
User
Loves
Ac

Thank you, Jon. You took care of the issues I had with the EULA...bless you.

Leslie

Jon,
Life has thrown me some heavy curve balls and I have personal issues that are keeping me from attending to business as much as I would normally care to. That being said, even without reading it yet, thanks for being a good sport and working with us all here. I will attempt to read thru it in the next few days since you were kind enough to work on it for all of us, it is the least that I should do.

I think Roy has been very upset about this and a few other things. Someone should attempt to contact him and let him know that there may be something here to calm his concerns. I for one miss him both as an AC board friend as well as for his insights and good posts....

Paul

The revised version appears to be quite fair for both parties.

Thanks. I've now updated it again, and added a preamble of sorts which I hope encourages users to actually review it... Work okay for you guys?

The latest vesion is here.

From the postmaster

Nirvana!

Now you can get back to doing what you do best. Building the best EMR in the country.

Thanks Jon.

Jon,

It is that kind of down-to-earth, tell-it-like-it-is, non-legal mumbo jumbo that attracted me to your program in the first place. I think the preamble stands out as one of the most clever, personal and reasonable EULA's I have ever read. Perhaps as you have done with AC, your new EULA will set the standards in the industry.

I bow before you,

Leslie

Very nice preamble-sets a nice tone and captures the spirit of AC. It's such a nifty program that now has a nifty EULA

Preamble is right on target and should be well received.

Sounds fine, yet I'm a newbie who didn't have too many issues with the EULA to begin with. Preamble keeps the irreverent, informal tone which (like others) attracted me to AC. One nitpicking point (to show I read the whole thing :)) is you might wish to elaborate how strongly Amazing Charts Inc. safeguards its data (p 6 first paragraph of the Confidentiality section). Although I believe you have systems in place to protect confidentiality, it would be nice to know some general details about them. I also think elaborating on this point might help reduce any liability you may have if there was a breach. Oh,and thanks for developing and maintaining this wonderful program.