18. MONITORING/PERSONAL INFORMATION
The Program may contain technologies that monitor, record and report to Sage information regarding the installation and use of the Program, including but not limited to information concerning the Client Device with which the Program is associated; the frequency, type and manner of use to which the Program is put; the updating of Programs and conversion of data, and the data inputted to or through the Program by You or on Your behalf, such as company data, payroll data, check data, and other transaction-identifying information (collectively, the "Transaction Data").  Sage collects and uses the Transaction Data to support, maintain, and improve the Program, and to enforce Sage's rights under this Agreement.  To the extent any of the Transaction Data is personal information within the meaning of applicable law, You hereby: (a) consent to Sage's collection, use and disclosure of such Transaction Data for these purposes; and (b) represent and warrant that You have obtained the consent of any individual to whom such Transaction Data relates to Sage's collection, use and disclosure of such Transaction Data for these purposes, or that the consent of any such individuals is not required to be obtained under applicable law.

Yes, that's troubling, except that we users of Sage 50 have only consented to the use of that data for those specific purposes - I think the intent is that neither you nor any client can sue them because their support person remote connected, and saw your payroll screen, or helped you fix a payroll problem. 

If you are using Sage 50 to support clients, you'll need to add this to any disclaimer you currently use.

Other than payroll updates, I can't think of any functionality improvement between the 2012 and 2015 program that I would part with my own money, to have.  There have been noticeable, steady improvements in stability since 2008.  It's a surprise when there's a crash, it used to be the other way 'round.

It's not Clause 18, it's Clause 19. as follows:

19. MONITORING/PERSONAL INFORMATION

The Program may contain technologies that monitor, record and report to Sage information regarding the installation and use of the Program, including but not limited to information concerning the Client Device with which the Program is associated; the frequency, type and manner of use to which the Program is put; and the data inputted to or through the Program by You or on Your behalf, such as company data, payroll data, check data, and other transaction-identifying information (collectively, the "Transaction Data"). Sage collects and uses the Transaction Data to support, maintain, and improve the Program, and to enforce Sage's rights under this Agreement. To the extent any of the Transaction Data is personal information within the meaning of applicable law, You hereby: (a) consent to Sage's collection, use and disclosure of such Transaction Data for these purposes; and (b) represent and warrant that You have obtained the consent of any individual to whom such Transaction Data relates to Sage's collection, use and disclosure of such Transaction Data for these purposes, or that the consent of any such individuals is not required to be obtained under applicable law.

So Sage, please explain how we should obtain the consent of Banks, Credit Card Companies, Employees and Customers, to the disclosure of personal information to Sage and any third party or parties which Sage deems appropriate, to disclose such personal information.

This is completely unnecessary and I suggest, utter nonsense. Legal opinion pending.

Ferrum said:

It's not Clause 18, it's Clause 19. as follows:

I didn't type that, it's pasted in from the license text file in the program directory for the 2015.1 release, where it's numbered '18.'

Presumably Sage uses this information to make sure that a single company license is not being used for multiple companies.

If you're working with Sage 50 data that a Sage 50 customer has provided, that customer would definitely have had to agree to the license agreement to enter any data.

"Sage collects and uses the Transaction Data" is fairly chilling, all on its own.  As Richard says, someone from Sage should 'splain that, and how it relates to shutting out some users between May 11 and May 25.

Maybe I should go back to using the 2007 release.   As a bonus, the data entry screens will be readable, and they work properly, no funky flashing and redrawing, and the text isn't half hidden or below the bottom of fields.

Ferrum said:

It's not Clause 18, it's Clause 19. as follows:

I didn't type that, it's pasted in from the license text file in the program directory for the 2015.1 release, where it's numbered '18.'

Presumably Sage uses this information to make sure that a single company license is not being used for multiple companies.

If you're working with Sage 50 data that a Sage 50 customer has provided, that customer would definitely have had to agree to the license agreement to enter any data.

"Sage collects and uses the Transaction Data" is fairly chilling, all on its own.  As Richard says, someone from Sage should 'splain that, and how it relates to shutting out some users between May 11 and May 25.

Maybe I should go back to using the 2007 release.   As a bonus, the data entry screens will be readable, and they work properly, no funky flashing and redrawing, and the text isn't half hidden or below the bottom of fields.

I received a PM from Sage and I'm not sure it should be posted here. The PM reiterated the terms of the subject clause which I understand is Clause 18 in release 2015.1 but Clause 19 in Release 2015.0, the trial version I was using.

The PM did not change my opinion. Basically Sage has the right, through the EULA, to collect personally identifying information for their and their associates'  use and by accepting the EULA terms, the end-user provides full indemnity for Sage, against any third party liability arising from Sage's use of that information.

I took a legal opinion on the issue and was told "they" can include in the EULA, anything they want, providing it's not against the criminal code to do so. It's up to the consumer to decide whether the terms and conditions are acceptable. It was also said if pursued, this could prove an interesting legal challenge since there was a possibility that basic Charter rights were ignored regarding the end-user's reasonable expectations of confidentiality, privacy and the protection of private information. For the same reason, I was told, one should be extremely cautious when storing information "in the Cloud".

So I'm done with this. I will continue to use my 2012 version until something better comes along.