Autodesk: Difference between revisions

Line 22:

==='''Business Model'''===

Autodesk transitioned their go-to-market model from perpetual licenses to subscriptions and multi-year contracts billed annually<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |date=2025-05-06 |title=Autodesk Fiscal Year 2025 Notice of Annual Meeting and Proxy Statement |url=https://investors.autodesk.com/static-files/5a13740d-d370-40e9-aeac-8ac257ca85ff |url-status=live |access-date=2026-02-05 |website=Autodesk Investor Relations ~~|url-status=live~~ |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20250705192736/https://investors.autodesk.com/static-files/5a13740d-d370-40e9-aeac-8ac257ca85ff |archive-date=5 Jul 2025}}</ref>. As noted in their annual proxy statement: <blockquote>Our go-to-market (GTM) model has evolved significantly and purposefully over the years, from the transition to subscription and multi-year contracts billed annually, through self-service enablement, the adoption of direct billing, and more. In fiscal 2025, we completed the launch of our direct billing model (“the new transaction model”) and are now beginning the optimization phase, positioning Autodesk to better meet the evolving needs of its customers and channel partners. This comes from faster and less complex processes and more digital self-service and automation that enable tighter channel partnerships and less duplication of effort. The new transaction model will further unlock long-term value by strengthening our sales and marketing efficiency.<ref name=":0" /></blockquote>Removal of legacy entitlements (e.g., HSMWorks from Fusion 360), in addition to the refusal to honor permanent licenses (e.g., Product Design Suite 2013){{Citation needed}}.

Autodesk transitioned their go-to-market model from perpetual licenses to subscriptions and multi-year contracts billed annually<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |date=2025-05-06 |title=Autodesk Fiscal Year 2025 Notice of Annual Meeting and Proxy Statement |url=https://investors.autodesk.com/static-files/5a13740d-d370-40e9-aeac-8ac257ca85ff |url-status=live |access-date=2026-02-05 |website=Autodesk Investor Relations |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20250705192736/https://investors.autodesk.com/static-files/5a13740d-d370-40e9-aeac-8ac257ca85ff |archive-date=5 Jul 2025}}</ref>. As noted in their annual proxy statement: <blockquote>Our go-to-market (GTM) model has evolved significantly and purposefully over the years, from the transition to subscription and multi-year contracts billed annually, through self-service enablement, the adoption of direct billing, and more. In fiscal 2025, we completed the launch of our direct billing model (“the new transaction model”) and are now beginning the optimization phase, positioning Autodesk to better meet the evolving needs of its customers and channel partners. This comes from faster and less complex processes and more digital self-service and automation that enable tighter channel partnerships and less duplication of effort. The new transaction model will further unlock long-term value by strengthening our sales and marketing efficiency.<ref name=":0" /></blockquote>Removal of legacy entitlements (e.g., HSMWorks from Fusion 360), in addition to the refusal to honor permanent licenses (e.g., Product Design Suite 2013){{Citation needed}}.

In the End User License Agreement (EULA) for Autodesk products, section 9.7 allows Autodesk to audit a users premises to verify compliance{{Citation needed}}. If the user or company is found to have overextended licenses, Autodesk requires the user to purchase additional licenses to cover the overextended licenses in question. However, the software does not limit the number of machines that can sign in and activate it simultaneously{{Citation needed}}. Autodesk compliance agents threatened to increase fines if legal counsel is hired against Autodesk. <ref>{{Cite web |last=Vondran |first=Steve |date=2023-04-12 |title=Autodesk Internal Getting Very Aggressive in 2023 Beware of Over-Assigning Licenses |url=https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/autodesk-internal-getting-very-7707218/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250730215441/https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/autodesk-internal-getting-very-7707218/ |archive-date=2025-07-30 |access-date=2025-10-23}}</ref>

Line 30:

===Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc.===

In 2007, Timothy Vernor tried to sell his physical copy of Autodesk. Autodesk sued Vernor for copyright infringement in Timothy Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc as Vernor's purchase was for a license. The case made its way to the US Court of Appeals 9th Circuit, where it was decided in Autodesk's favor, limiting the [[first-sale doctrine]]<ref>{{Cite web |title=Timothy Vernor v. Autodesk Inc |url=https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca9/09-35969 |url-status=live |access-date=2026-02-05 |website=Justia ~~|url-status=live~~ |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20210923200001/https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca9/09-35969 |archive-date=23 Sep 2021}}</ref>.

In 2007, Timothy Vernor tried to sell his physical copy of Autodesk. Autodesk sued Vernor for copyright infringement in Timothy Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc as Vernor's purchase was for a license. The case made its way to the US Court of Appeals 9th Circuit, where it was decided in Autodesk's favor, limiting the [[first-sale doctrine]]<ref>{{Cite web |title=Timothy Vernor v. Autodesk Inc |url=https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca9/09-35969 |url-status=live |access-date=2026-02-05 |website=Justia |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20210923200001/https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca9/09-35969 |archive-date=23 Sep 2021}}</ref>.

==Controversies==

@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 ==='''Business Model'''===
-Autodesk transitioned their go-to-market model from perpetual licenses to subscriptions and multi-year contracts billed annually<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |date=2025-05-06 |title=Autodesk Fiscal Year 2025 Notice of Annual Meeting and Proxy Statement |url=https://investors.autodesk.com/static-files/5a13740d-d370-40e9-aeac-8ac257ca85ff |url-status=live |access-date=2026-02-05 |website=Autodesk Investor Relations |url-status=live |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20250705192736/https://investors.autodesk.com/static-files/5a13740d-d370-40e9-aeac-8ac257ca85ff |archive-date=5 Jul 2025}}</ref><!-- Cited Autodesk's annual proxy statement from their investor relations website. A "archived" copy should be available at sec.gov, but I'm struggling to find it since the search feature there is awful. A copy is almost certainly held on the Nasdaq website as well.  -->. As noted in their annual proxy statement: <blockquote>Our go-to-market (GTM) model has evolved significantly and purposefully over the years, from the transition to subscription and multi-year contracts billed annually, through self-service enablement, the adoption of direct billing, and more. In fiscal 2025, we completed the launch of our direct billing model (“the new transaction model”) and are now beginning the optimization phase, positioning Autodesk to better meet the evolving needs of its customers and channel partners. This comes from faster and less complex processes and more digital self-service and automation that enable tighter channel partnerships and less duplication of effort. The new transaction model will further unlock long-term value by strengthening our sales and marketing efficiency.<ref name=":0" /></blockquote>Removal of legacy entitlements (e.g., HSMWorks from Fusion 360), in addition to the refusal to honor permanent licenses (e.g., Product Design Suite 2013){{Citation needed}}.
+Autodesk transitioned their go-to-market model from perpetual licenses to subscriptions and multi-year contracts billed annually<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |date=2025-05-06 |title=Autodesk Fiscal Year 2025 Notice of Annual Meeting and Proxy Statement |url=https://investors.autodesk.com/static-files/5a13740d-d370-40e9-aeac-8ac257ca85ff |url-status=live |access-date=2026-02-05 |website=Autodesk Investor Relations |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20250705192736/https://investors.autodesk.com/static-files/5a13740d-d370-40e9-aeac-8ac257ca85ff |archive-date=5 Jul 2025}}</ref><!-- Cited Autodesk's annual proxy statement from their investor relations website. A "archived" copy should be available at sec.gov, but I'm struggling to find it since the search feature there is awful. A copy is almost certainly held on the Nasdaq website as well.  -->. As noted in their annual proxy statement: <blockquote>Our go-to-market (GTM) model has evolved significantly and purposefully over the years, from the transition to subscription and multi-year contracts billed annually, through self-service enablement, the adoption of direct billing, and more. In fiscal 2025, we completed the launch of our direct billing model (“the new transaction model”) and are now beginning the optimization phase, positioning Autodesk to better meet the evolving needs of its customers and channel partners. This comes from faster and less complex processes and more digital self-service and automation that enable tighter channel partnerships and less duplication of effort. The new transaction model will further unlock long-term value by strengthening our sales and marketing efficiency.<ref name=":0" /></blockquote>Removal of legacy entitlements (e.g., HSMWorks from Fusion 360), in addition to the refusal to honor permanent licenses (e.g., Product Design Suite 2013){{Citation needed}}.
 In the End User License Agreement (EULA) for Autodesk products, section 9.7 allows Autodesk to audit a users premises to verify compliance{{Citation needed}}. If the user or company is found to have overextended licenses, Autodesk requires the user to purchase additional licenses to cover the overextended licenses in question. However, the software does not limit the number of machines that can sign in and activate it simultaneously{{Citation needed}}. Autodesk compliance agents threatened to increase fines if legal counsel is hired against Autodesk. <ref>{{Cite web |last=Vondran |first=Steve |date=2023-04-12 |title=Autodesk Internal Getting Very Aggressive in 2023 Beware of Over-Assigning Licenses |url=https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/autodesk-internal-getting-very-7707218/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250730215441/https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/autodesk-internal-getting-very-7707218/ |archive-date=2025-07-30 |access-date=2025-10-23}}</ref>
@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 ===Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc.===
-In 2007, Timothy Vernor tried to sell his physical copy of Autodesk. Autodesk sued Vernor for copyright infringement in Timothy Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc as Vernor's purchase was for a license. The case made its way to the US Court of Appeals 9th Circuit, where it was decided in Autodesk's favor, limiting the [[first-sale doctrine]]<ref>{{Cite web |title=Timothy Vernor v. Autodesk Inc |url=https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca9/09-35969 |url-status=live |access-date=2026-02-05 |website=Justia |url-status=live |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20210923200001/https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca9/09-35969 |archive-date=23 Sep 2021}}</ref>.
+In 2007, Timothy Vernor tried to sell his physical copy of Autodesk. Autodesk sued Vernor for copyright infringement in Timothy Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc as Vernor's purchase was for a license. The case made its way to the US Court of Appeals 9th Circuit, where it was decided in Autodesk's favor, limiting the [[first-sale doctrine]]<ref>{{Cite web |title=Timothy Vernor v. Autodesk Inc |url=https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca9/09-35969 |url-status=live |access-date=2026-02-05 |website=Justia |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20210923200001/https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca9/09-35969 |archive-date=23 Sep 2021}}</ref>.
 ==Controversies==