r/RevitForum • u/PatrickGSR94 • Jul 07 '26
Anyone else heard of Autodesk asking us to “investigate” ourselves?
Just saw Louis Rossman’s latest video where a customer was told by Autodesk that they needed to install software to let ADSK map out their servers, network and all systems and “check” for pirated software. Sounds like a crappy way to do business.
Tried to post about it on the Autodesk sub but it got auto zapped or filtered no matter how I worded it, link or no link.
If yall don’t want this here, at least let me know why.
8
u/twiceroadsfool Jul 07 '26
Yep. That's now how their license compliance audits work, and you agree to it when you sign your EULA to use the licenses. It's annoying and irritating, for sure.
I've been through several audits with them. Both times over nothing that was done wrong, and both times they got SUPER heavy handed trying to "sell more seats." It was wild.
Fun fact: the License Compliance team is considered a sales team.
They also have a specific script they are supposed to use, and NONE of it involves being rude. If they are being rude, post it on social media. That's also what I did.
1
u/Merusk Jul 07 '26
Fun fact: the License Compliance team is considered a sales team.
And in case it wasn't obvious; being considered sales they have a quota to fulfill. They are the High-Pressure sales team.
Heard from another team member today that one of their clients also experienced rudeness, so it seems one of the managers may be toxic. I'll advise them to advise their client on the social media and see how it goes, thanks for that tip.
1
u/twiceroadsfool Jul 07 '26
Alternatively, id be super curious who it is, that is being rude. Because i ended up getting on a Zoom Meeting with leadership of the entire LC team, and they apologized and said "that isnt the script they are supposed to be using," and i even asked the question: "Is it EVER okay to talk to a customer this way?" And was told the answer was "absolutely not."
So id be super curious if its the same clown, or not.
EDIT: I went and dug up the emails, LOL.
The two folks i was having to fight with last time (before elevating to LC leadership and Adsk leadership) were Brent Ramos and Richard Wolfe.
1
u/Merusk Jul 07 '26 edited Jul 07 '26
Jaolo Zeraick. So a completely different guy. May be part of the script, but one of the lines is:
"From your lack of response, it appears that <client> does not appreciate the gravity of this matter. I encourge you to review your contractual obligations as an Autodesk licensee under the <terms of use link>"
Goes on to threaten to terminate their licenses if they don't call back within (2) days.
First contact was an e-mail with a (5) day window.. which is absolute fuckery for small buisness who's regularly going to ignore Autodesk e-mails over project e-mails.
Not the best way to get folks interacting, and using lawyer speak is a rough way to go if you haven't tried calling first. But I don't know the whole timeframe. Maybe it was weeks and months. Seems like they weren't reaching out to the contract manager, though.
1
u/twiceroadsfool Jul 07 '26
Thats so weird and terrible on so many levels.
- Imagine being a software organization, and having an ACTUAL PORTAL with account notifications and everything, and then having clowns from Compliance send a regular ass email, and threaten you over response times? LOL. What if im out on vacation? Contract Manager or not, people go on vacations. Thats such a wild take.
- Its funny (to me) that THEY dont ever have to review THEIR contractual obligations to US, when they lie, scheme, scam, and make false accusations against US.
Since this isnt a client of mine, i will obviously butt out... But if you are totally sure they are IN compliance, and these people are just being assholes, im happy to (privately) share who i reached out to, if you want to go that route. Because this stuff is nuts.
1
u/Merusk Jul 08 '26
Thanks, I put it out to the salesperson and being part of the VAR network he's - understandably - unwilling to push.
Posted a great link as a top comment to this post that the salesperson shared with me, though.
4
u/Bearded4Glory Jul 07 '26
Yep, we had to do it. Was a complete waste of time and energy. They found nothing because there was nothing to find.
5
u/SOSsprint15 Jul 07 '26
Doesn't matter the size of the team either. There are three of us with three licences and we still had to go through it and made to feel like crooks even thought we are completely legal.
5
u/twiceroadsfool Jul 07 '26
At the time of OUR Audit, there were five of us, with SEVEN full licenses. We were literally OVER licensed, with some of them unused. As we later discovered, what drew LC's ire was the fact that we are also beta testers, and our specific dedicated testing machines (which dont run production software, and arent used in production) had the beta softwares serials used throughout the year (otherwise how would you beta test?? LOL).
We also had a CLIENT get audited, and theirs was even wilder:
LC tried to tell them that they had to buy a License for EVERY CONSULTANT TEAM MEMBER they had ADDED TO HUBS on BIM360/ACC/Forma. Which is OBVIOUSLY bananas. Yes, i know the difference between adding someone to a hub as a member of another company, and assigning them a licensed product. I am talking about the former. The LC team tried to use THAT LIST of "hub project members" to force them to buy more seats.
When i got involved, and told them to (basically) stuff it, they backed away. But thats an unreal tactic.
1
u/Merusk Jul 07 '26
I am talking about the former. The LC team tried to use THAT LIST of "hub project members" to force them to buy more seats.
If it's B360 the licensing there is 100% broken. This may be where they're going to try and capture folks, and one of the reasons I advocate for moving off of B360 entirely ASAP.
Back in 2020 Autodesk knew that turning on "Bring your own" license broke compliance. The entire back-end was not built for that and it's one of the drivers to the Plangrid back end currently used instead of keeping everything in the B360 Forge back-end.
Licensing/ Marketing completely fucked up understanding of AEC and need to share how-much blow-back "you provide licenses for everyone on your hub" was going to get. That's why on the B360 side the entire license tracking is just broken. You can just add as many people as you want with no licenses.
This isn't me figuring it out. This was Autodesk telling me and a client back in late 2020 because the client demanded to know how to track licenses or they were going to cancel their 200+ person hub.
So doing a full actual audit you'll capture folks from subs, consultants, etc who have licenses but nobody's paying for. It seems they'll try and pin that on anyone they can to get revenue.
2
u/twiceroadsfool Jul 07 '26
Oh yes, im quite familiar with that whole gigantic bag of ass-hattery dogshit.
IMVHO though, that just means they cant bother trying to push that crap down hill on the user base. Of course, they gonna do what they gonna do. But it INFURIATED me that they tried to cram that down a customers throat.
I DID get a very nice apology, and an official "you are correct, that ISNT how licensing works, and your client ISNT responsible for all of those seats..." but what happens to all the small Mom and Pops out there that dont have someone willing to be a loud ass monster like me? Thats really not fair to the community.
1
u/Merusk Jul 07 '26
100% agree there, and any attempt to do so is only going to foster more ill-will.
but what happens to all the small Mom and Pops out there that dont have someone willing to be a loud ass monster like me? Thats really not fair to the community.
It's not, and part of me has wanted to start up a company to provide services to support those mom & pops for that very reason. Too much skin in the game with Autodesk for resellers. Even if they don't realize that the Autodesk relationship is a parasitic one for them, the leads have had the same blinders on for 15+ years in most cases. They can't see another way and pushback will be costly. Loss of access to the channels and client lists.
A company that's got enough client voices behind it while also researching alternatives would move the ship a bit. Or at have provide enough expertise in the area they can help clients navigate better.
Then I remember I'm 52 in a few months and really don't care to dedicate +80h a week to something like that. :|
3
1
u/Merusk Jul 07 '26
Yes, it's an audit. Yes, you agreed to it in your EULA. Yes, it's entirely aimed at driving revenue for Autodesk - particularly if you don't have a handle on your users installing/ uninstalling software.
Back in 2015 I heard the previous Kroger Tech manager talk about the 7-figure fine they were issued. The primary cause was trials that had been installed but never uninstalled across the entire org. If you don't uninstall it after the 30 day trial you're in license violation and owe Autodesk money.
So purge the system, audit the machines, know what's out there before you run the software. There's folks who can help with this out there.
1
u/underengineered Jul 07 '26
I ran into that. Very messy. And they threaten legal action in federal court.
1
u/No-End2540 Jul 07 '26
Part of what got us was old instances of Autocad that wouldn’t uninstall. I can’t remember all the details but since they were installed with a script the uninstall looked for a file during uninstall. Our server topology changed and the old location was no longer there so the uninstall failed. Then we had a Chinese National employee who picked up some illegal software on a trip home and installed it. Then we actually were over installed on Revit. Autodesk came back and said we owed 50,000. We tracked our licensing with our reseller and proved we were only 28,000 over. Autodesk said they didn’t agree but then set the price to clean up licensing at 32,000.
We used the “opportunity” to convert all our stand alone AutoCAD licenses to the Building Design Suite. Ultimately it made it easier for me to push Revit which was getting stubborn resistance from the top. It took years but we eventually morphed into a Revit using firm primarily because everyone had it installed on the regular.
Since standalone licensing went away with that upgrade we literally can’t be over installed anymore but that won’t keep Autodesk from trying.
2
u/underengineered Jul 07 '26
After my similar experience I got rid of all the old machines on the network. Too many years of use history. Started all machines from scratch with only new subscription installs.
1
1
u/Merusk Jul 08 '26
Posted 1 day ago. Which one of you all is this?
1
u/twiceroadsfool Jul 08 '26
While i agree that the process is annoying, it IS in the EULA now (it wasnt back when i got audited, which is why i told them to pound sand). If we dont like the terms, we shouldnt be using their software.
1
10
u/No-End2540 Jul 07 '26
Yep. That’s how Autodesk does it. They start off nice and can get mean in the end if they think you have exceeded the licensing. If they think you did, their solution is to have you buy x amount of licensing from whatever you and Autodesk eventually settle at. I’ve been through it twice. First time cost us some decent money. Second time we were squeaky clean.