There are most certainly T&Cs in the MSA that will 100% have repercussions from any software company with the ability to turn off a customer that unjustly flips the switch. We’re talking huge multiples based on current spend, contract value, personnel investments, as well as revenue impact damages (and even more so if the customer is public ally traded).
The only low impact action SFDC has is to wait for the subscription service term to end, and to not renew the end user, and even that requires that no languages was written into the MSA requiring continued service in out years.
The only way that SFDC could legitimately shut someone off is if they don’t pay the bill, and as ridiculous as it might seem, there are some government regulations that even still wouldn’t allow the software provider to turn them off based on the industry vertical.
On your other comment about on-premise versus cloud or SaaS, I could come up with a million logical reasons why SaaS makes sense 99% of the time.
And for any major corporation with serious security protocols (public companies and private) using open source tech is rarely the right choice. That is unless you’re more interested in job security since you are the only one that knows how the software was designed.
The real problem is SFDC thinking they have a leg to stand on. It’s a baseless threat with serious implications. I’ve got my pop corn ready...
PSA: buy more ammo y’all.
I think you put way too much faith in the ability of anyone not a huge multinational corporation with government backing that follows all the current SJW blowing winds to the letter, to stand up for themselves against the SJW Technocrats that control your life.
For a little light reading, read up on how Oracle treats their customers including ones that thought they were all safe and had bought stuff....
Or SAP and their we've got you now locked in now and you are going to hurt idea of "customer relations".
Read up on the saga of Intuit vs Gunsite.... sure maybe in the end you get a bit of compensation... after they drain your bank account and give all your customers free stuff at your expense....
No the "government regulations" are NOT going to be on the side of protecting any freedom loving types from the SJW technocrats cutting them off. That's there just to protect certain government controlled industries.
And as far as your contention that open source software is rarely the right choice for security.... You really need to get out more and do some reading on the rate of patching problems for closed vs open source. With Open Source software, you can patch it anytime you want as soon as an issue comes up, or write your own patch. VS. Waiting for some vendor to decide they care about releasing a patch instead of forcing you to pay for an upgrade.
Then do a bit more digging and see exactly how many of these big technocrats are doing themselves EXACTLY what I suggested others do.... taking open source software and paying to tweak it to their needs.
Except then they also have fun selling it back to "customers" as a "service".
Or others like Oracle openly just swipe the entire opensource codebase from a competitor, put their own logos on it and resell it with expensive support contracts to their "customers" as a service.
You would probably be quite amazed at how much of the "cloud" runs on open source software and how much that same software is often in so many of your devices.
Also the whole point of open source software is that you or your replacements or anyone else "knows how the software was designed" if they care to look at the code. (Unless of course you are someone like Google that gets around the "Open" part of "Open source" by saying it's a service, not a end product).
Even the great vaunted Microsoft is now busy stuffing Linux into Windows 10 because there is so much development for back end systems on Linux and other open source platforms.
