Sun: “GPL FUD is not a standard business practice.”

9:32 pm digital

A few weeks ago I wrote a post about an acquaintance that had been given some very strange legal advice from a Sun sales rep. It generated a lot of interest, from both people inside Sun and those outside. Here’s what I have learned since:

1). Many people think that keeping your sources’ identities private makes the resulting information lies or FUD. They should talk to Woodward and Bernstein.

2). Many people cannot interpret a question mark at the end of a sentence. I was not making an indictment with my previous post, I was asking a question.

3). Most Sun employees do not make mistakes 1 and 2.

The third point is what prompts this post. Thanks to some concerned people inside Sun, the person who received the bad information now has a clear line of communication to get it resolved. I hope they do so.

Also, Sun has asked that anyone that feels that they have been given bad advice by a Sun sales representative contact a sales manager to get the straight dope. You can find a list of worldwide contacts on Sun’s worldwide MySQL sales team page.

Sun employees have also assured me that the sales rep mentioned in my previous post was incorrect, and was giving advice contrary to Sun’s policy. It seems clear that some re-training or better training is in order. I hope Sun takes this opportunity to better educate their sales staff.

One Response

  1. Arjen Lentz Says:

    Kurt, you’re too kind here – really.
    With the MySQL sales team it’s endemic if not defacto policy. I know specific cases across continents, and I know the names of the sales people responsible. This both from when I was at MySQL as well as after (including after Sun acquisition), including very recent incidents.

    When following up, it was put down to the freedom a sales person must have to be able to make a sale. This is straight from VPs. Apparently sales must be allowed to lie to extract $ or more $ from a prospect.

    That is IMNSHO a dishonest and disrespectful business practise, and I vehemently object to any statement denying or deminishing this.

    Also, people really get weazled. How are they to know it’s incorrect? That already presumes a level of knowledge that many if not most don’t possess. By the time it gets figured out somehow, if it ever does at all, it’s way too late.

    Assurances and followup procedures don’t cut it. It just shouldn’t happen, and where it happened in the past it should’ve been followed up on but has not. So it’s effectively condoned if not sanctioned. In this case one has to judge by actions, not words.