Voted Best Answer
Jan 05, 2016 - 12:01 PM
In the meantime......to address your 'click through' questions...
The 'right to audit' is all based upon whether or not a legally binding agreement/contract ( consisting of a series of Terms & Conditions in which audit definitions, processes, methods, etc) has been established between the Vendor and the 'company'.
If there is no umbrella contract ( which infers a volume lisence agreement) that binds a company to terms and conditions of a 'audit' then the only audit mechanism that a vendor has is a court-ordered subpeona/injunction/writ.
If there no such 'VLA', then - typically - a corporation can not be bound by the actions of an employee who is not an 'officer' of the company. In other words, your company can not be audited by Adobe because a part-time employee downloaded Adobe Reader ( which has a click-through EULA).
From a vendor perspective, most EULA ( End-User License Agreements) are typically declarations where the end-user agrees to indemnification laws were the end user understands that there is no warranty or level of fitness of the software ( i.e. 'as is'). All of this is separate from any audit terms and conditions that would be found in the Master T&Cs of a VLA
That being said, most of the above is in context to 'stand-alone' software at the consumer or desktop level. It may NOT be relevent to your situation.... which probably is all about the reflection 'emulation' software and the possibility that you have deployed way more ReflectionX desktop clients than you have concurrent licenses for (possibly due to re-imaging?)
That being said, Microfocus has been known to be -shall we say - agressive in their approach to help customer determine their fair use.
From this point, if you need legal advise, it's more in context with 'negotiations' to resolve their right to 'audit'. If you need legal defense, it's a completely different approach..... please let us know, Cheers