WHITE PAPER

SAP® INDIRECT VS. DIGITAL ACCESS

How to make a decision your budget won’t regret
CONTENT

03 Intro

04 A brief history of indirect access

05 The legal background

07 The challenge of indirect access

09 The challenge of Digital Access

13 The Rising Price of the Sales & Service Order

Processing Exception

14 Comparison of the old and new SAP price model

15 Conclusion

16 About the authors

 White Paper   SAP® indirect access vs. digital access  3

INTRO

Indirect access has been a complicated financial and legal headache for
SAP and its customers since its introduction. SAP’s decision to charge for
data exchanged between its software and third-party applications has
strained the business solutions provider’s relationship with its customers,
even as it tries to settle on a price structure and define what counts as
indirect access. The situation is so complex that SAP has even taken its
customers to court, hoping to resolve the issue.

In April 2018, SAP tried solving the indirect access issue by removing the
vagueness, complexity, and uncertainty from the topic by introducing
the Digital Access price model.

BUT HOW DID WE GET HERE?

All too often, indirect access is dismissed as too complicated to effectively

address. In this paper we will clear it up by diving into the history of
indirect access and looking at some of the recent legal background. With
that foundation, the following chapters will consider the pros and cons
of each SAP pricing model and provide some advice on what to consider
when deciding which model to choose.

We will cover how each model works and the challenges you will face.
Each price model is different and poses different challenges for SAP
customers. Better knowledge will help you to handle these challenges
and make a decision your budget won’t regret.
 White Paper   SAP® indirect access vs. digital access  4

A BRIEF HISTORY
OF INDIRECT ACCESS
Since launching its ERP Central Component (ECC) in 1993, SAP has been a success in part
because of its open software architecture. But what began as a tremendous advantage
for SAP and its customers has become a serious point of contention between them.
­Indirect access is key to SAP’s flexibility, a feature that customers rely on, and one
that SAP has decided to charge increasingly more for.

―— SAP partners and SAP customers can extend the But despite their endless usefulness, SAP solutions come
standard functions of SAP software with self-developed at a price. After all, like any other innovator, SAP has the
programs (either as an Advanced Business Application right to receive payment for its intellectual property.
Programming [ABAP] solution in its own name space
or via interfaces such as Remote Function Call [RFC]). When the SAP ERP Central Component was originally
As a result, with SAP technology, almost every business launched, there was no mention of indirect access and
application can be developed by the customer and no reference to it in the general terms and conditions or
third-party providers to meet a vast array of business the Price and Conditions List (PCL). With a few exceptions,
needs, and the SAP standard software’s functional scope customers did not have to purchase additional SAP
can be expanded. This has helped business to avoid data licenses for partner solutions between 1993 and 2014.
silos and redundant data storage. It’s also one of the Since 2011, the General Terms and Conditions have
many reasons why customers choose SAP as their ERP stated that direct and indirect access are sub-ject to
provider, making SAP the market leader in the ERP field. licensing. The PCL did not mention this, but it did offer
the “SAP Platform User” license, which authorizes users
to access and use SAP software via interfaces.

TIMELINE OF SAP ERP PLATFORMS

1999
1973 1979 1993 Business General Terms and
R/1 R/2 ECC Suite Conditions state a license
need for indirect access

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

No mention of Indirect access in PCLs

What does indirect access look like in practice? For But isn't this a type of double licensing? Why should
example: An automobile manufacturer uses SAP software automotive manufacturer and supplier both pay extra
and is sufficiently licensed. An automotive supplier also for systems they already have access to?
uses SAP software and is also sufficiently licensed. They
connect their SAP systems and exchange data. According Whether it’s double licensing or not, SAP had not clearly
to the new Digital Access pricing model, the person who defined indirect access and how to license it. SAP justified
is receiving these documents in their SAP system must its licensing system for indirect access because of the
now also license those documents. Ac-cording to the old economic added value created by the SAP ERP system.
pricing model, the “SAP Platform User” license would For this, the customer must eventually pay. This ambiguity
have to be purchased for each user of the other and insistence on licensing indirect access has made it a
company. legal issue.
 White Paper   SAP® indirect access vs. digital access  5

THE LEGAL BACKGROUND

SAP justifies its licensing system for indirect access with a very broad term ‘access’
in their PCL. Legal experts are, however, of the opinion that indirect access is already
covered by the license fee for direct use. For them, indirect access is part of the
­“intended“ access for which the licensor charges under the Copyright Act and
­therefore cannot require additional, separate license fees.

―— Unsurprisingly, SAP’s legal experts don’t agree. They many customers disagree and have also taken the issue
maintain that SAP has the right to charge for indirect to court (see Case Study).
access. There are exemptions, such as error correction,
but this doesn’t include indirect access. SAP usually tries Eventually the courts will decide whether the practice
to find a business solution with its customers, but it has is legal. From a purely economic argument, it is certainly
resorted to litigation in the past. SAP successfully sued difficult for customers to understand why they are
international drink manufacturer Diageo for outstanding expected to pay additional license fees for use using their
license fees for indirect access, for example, supporting own database to access a third-party application on the
their claim that charging for indirect access is valid. Still, database of the ERP system.
 White Paper   SAP® indirect access vs. digital access  6

CASE STUDY:

In October 2018, the IT-Verband Voice e.V. filed a VOICE urges SAP to make its license terms regarding
complaint at the German Federal Trade Commission indirect access and Digital Access more user-friendly
against SAP. and transparent to avoid overburdening users in
times of digital transformation and exposing them
Voice believes, based on opinions from two legal to incalculable cost risks. This requirement explicitly
experts from the law office Osborne Clarke, that the includes SAP’s audit practice. The market for third-
SAP licensing requirements regarding indirect access party applications must be kept open.
and Digital Access are illegal, that SAP has taken
ad-vantage of its monopoly position within the ERP VOICE demands the audits be legally-binding, and
software market, and that the licensing requirements not be retroactively applied, which is a problem that
are neither transparent nor fair. some users have experienced with indirect access.
When new SAP regulations are retroactively applied
Voice also argues that SAPs behavior would hinder to existing agreements, customers suddenly and
the third-party vendors’ market. Their business model unexpectedly face compliance issues that they did
would not work anymore if SAP requests additional not face in their original agreements. This makes
software licenses. That would be anticompetitive SAP’s licensing policy seem arbitrary.
behavior and could be illegal.
In February 2020, Voice ended its conversation
The SAP customers on the other side have no with SAP due to SAP’s unwillingness to properly
freedom of choice – which could also be illegal, discuss the Voice’s request. The German Federal
according to German law. With reference to Trade Commission is still working on the complaint,
the German law, software must guarantee and the SAP community is waiting for the results.
interoperability and the interaction between
different software components must be free
of charge.

Takeaway:
Until the courts decide, if you’re an SAP customer wrestling with your SAP licensing strategy, a
clear decision must be made: Will you challenge SAP over indirect access fees, or pay them and
move on?

Many SAP customers face a similar choice. You will undoubtedly consider your relationship with
SAP and the possibility that you might resort to litigation. Or you may submit to paying for your
indirect access. If you decide to pay the fees, be sure to get help in navigating SAP’s pricing
models. There are still ways to save money and challenge some of SAP’s measurements. In
this white paper, we’ll give you useful advice for find-ing cost-avoidance opportunities in your
indirect access.

Aspera’s SAP experts can help you find the best

pricing model for your individual circumstances.

Find out how

 White Paper   SAP® indirect access vs. digital access  7

THE CHALLENGE
OF INDIRECT ACCESS
Indirect access is easily explained. In principle, it occurs when a third-­
party application makes use of SAP data. Any individual using that
third-party application, which uses SAP data, needs an SAP license.
­Customers often do not have full transparency on this indirect access.

INDIRECT ACCESS

SAP GUI
Non-SAP-
Applications

SAP Applications

SD MM BW ...

USER A USER B
SAP NetWeaver
SAP Professional SAP Platform
User User

Database

―— In the diagram, User ‘A’ works via the SAP GUI So far so good. SAP’s challenge is that their measurement
directly in the SAP system. He/she has an SAP account tool (USMM) is unable to measure the user from the
and logs into the SAP application server. Based on his/her non-­­SAP application. Therefore, SAP does not know
usage, he/she needs a specific SAP license type – “SAP how many users are ‘using’ the SAP system or what
Professional User.” User ‘B’ logs onto a non-SAP (third- license type they need. SAP solved this problem by asking
party) application. The non-SAP application is con-nected customers to self-declare their indirect access. Now SAP
via an RFC interface to the SAP system. If the third-party customers must find out who is accessing and using their
application is using a sales and distribution transaction, SAP systems indirectly.
the user ‘B’ – who started the transaction indirectly –
needs an SAP named user license, in this case the
“SAP Platform User.”
 White Paper   SAP® indirect access vs. digital access  8

It sounds easy, but gets much more complex because • Or is it going back at all?
there are many exceptions to consider: • Is the data coming out of 3rd party system
into the SAP system?
• Does the customer have other licenses like “Sales/ • What kind of protocol is used?
Service Order Processing” that cover the indirect • What’s the trigger event?
access?
• Is the access only for reading data out of the database? Then the customer must decide which license type
• Is the access using the SAP application or just using the should be assigned to the user or application. Finally,
interface to connect to the database? the customer must find out whether the third-party
• What kind of data is read or written into the SAP application user already has an SAP license and if it
database? covers the indirect access.

To solve these challenges, SAP customers must run a Understanding which licenses the user needs requires
project. The project starts with an interface analysis of analysing the user’s usage. If they’re simply entering their
their most used data connection, followed by interpreting timesheets or booking vacation time, an Employee Self
whether the interface’s third-party application is causing Service Core (ESS-Core) license will do. It’s inexpensive
indirect access. Customers should ask themselves a few and covers the basic indirect access scenarios such usage
questions to identify if it’s indirect access, like: creates.

• What are the third-party applications doing? On the other end of the price scale, the previously
• Who is using them? mentioned “SAP Platform User” license covers the
• Is the data coming out of SAP systems to non-SAP indirect access for heavy users of third-party applications
software? interfacing with SAP software, while the “SAP Professional
• If so, is the data going back into the SAP systems User” license has the most comprehensive authorizations
unaltered? for direct and indirect access.

Takeaway:
An SAP license management tool can analyze the interfaces that users access with a non-SAP
application to reveal their usage. This also reveals what named user license they will need. In an
audit with SAP, when you self-report indirect access, you can purchase the correct (and possibly
more affordable) named user licenses, instead of the default (and more expensive) SAP Platform
User.

LicenseControl for SAP can analyze your interfaces

to reveal whether they’re indirectly accessing SAP
software – preventing an expensive surprise during
your SAP audit.

Find out how

 White Paper   SAP® indirect access vs. digital access  9

THE CHALLENGE OF DIGITAL ACCESS

From 2015 to 2017 the definition and challenges of indirect access caused a lot of trouble
within the SAP community. On the one hand, SAP found that charging for indirect access
didn‘t generate as much revenue as expected. On the other hand, their customers felt
they were paying more and had to take on the chore of carrying out their own analysis
to report to SAP.

SAP faced: SAP presented their new Digital Access price model in
April 2018, probably to solve all these issues. The main
• A growing number of unhappy customers worldwide idea was that SAP counts documents created inside the
• A price model that was difficult to explain SAP digital core by a third-party application via interfaces.
• A growing number of exceptions for satisfying their With this concept, SAP could do the measurement
customers, such as ‘read only’ themselves and easily explain it to everybody. For SAP, it
• No license revenue if the indirect access was executed looked like all those issues were solved, apart from the
by a machine (bots, Internet of Things, etc.) legal discussion.
 White Paper   SAP® indirect access vs. digital access  10

Nine kinds of document types are counted:

Document type Payment level Multiplier

Sales document line items 1

Invoice document line items 1

Purchase document line items 1

Service & maintenance document document 1

Manufacturing document document 1

Time management document document 1

Quality management document document 1

Financial document line items 0.2

Material document line items 0.2

UPDATE

Existing SAP customers have the choice to use the old named user-based
price model – “Do nothing” – or switch to the new price model, through either
a license or contract conversion. As of August 2020, SAP has said that Digital
Access is not mandatory for a product conversion in an S/4HANA migration.
This means that licensing indirect access is still possible according to the old
licensing model – named users or Sales & Service Processing Order.
 White Paper   SAP® indirect access vs. digital access  11

CONTRACTUAL OPTIONS

Option 1: Option 2: Option 3:

Do nothing License Exchange Contract conversion

• Credit of up to 100% of the value of the existing • Credit of up to 100% of the value of the existing
NUL and/or order licenses for "new" document contracts for "new" S/4HANA contract
licenses • comprehensive configuration possibilities

Solutions Solutions Solutions Solutions Solutions

Order License* Order License* Documents Order License* Documents

NUL NUL NUL NUL NUL

DB DB DB DB SAP HANA

License Value $ License Credit $ Contract Value $ Contract Credit $

Current Contract Current Contract Current Contract Current Contract Converted Contract
with Addendum

Source: SAP ERP Pricing for the Digital Age, Addressing Indirect/Digital Access,
PDF: SAP Pricing Update 180420 PKL 02/2018, S. 11 / 23 von 29

Many customers did not make the switch to document created in the 12 months by external applications. The
licenses for indirect access, opting for the “Do Nothing” price model is new, so there’s no experience guiding the
option – the devil they knew was better than the devil estimations. Your first step in the Digital Access Adoption
they didn’t know. So, SAP sweetened the deal and began Program will be checking your system requirements to
promoting the new Digital Access price model with the find out which options you have to estimate your
‘Digital Access Adoption Program’ (DAAP) in May 2019. documents.

SAP customers are now seriously considering making SAP has provided two estimation notes (2644139 for
the switch to document licensing, despite the risks of ECC and 2644172 for S/4HANA) to help you with the
double-licensing users and over-licensing for document assessment. The other option is to update your SAP
creation. In other words, SAP has sweetened the deal systems to use the SAP Passport tool. The drawback
enough that customers are ignoring the risk of higher is the Passport tool doesn’t account for past indirect
than expected costs. access, so it must run for at least a month, which when
multiplied by 12, gives you a rough annual estimate
If you are an existing SAP customer and want to switch to of your document license demand. Ideally, you would
the new price model, you must buy the licenses up front. measure with the Passport tool for a full year.
The challenge is estimating how many documents will be
 White Paper   SAP® indirect access vs. digital access  12

SAP MEASUREMENT TOOLS

PRO CONTRA

Estimation Note • Pre-analysis needed for technical

• Installation effort: small users
Tool for SAP to determine an
• Review measurement immediately • Estimate only: Counts high
approximate number of documents • Past measurements is possible • Only high-level view
per system based on entered user • Ignores delections and cancellations
names.

PRO CONTRA

Passport-Tool • Measurement is more precise

• Installation effort: high
• Can’t measure until system is
Differentiates between SAP-to-SAP • Low preparation effort
updated
and non-SAP-to-SAP communication • Detailed info for document
• No user info available
based on a “passport” exchange numbers
• Ignores deletions & cancellations
between SAP tools.

Fig. 1: The first step in the Digital Access Adoption Program is choosing a measurement option

The second step in the DAAP is choosing a financial document count and get a 90% discount. A thorough
incentive (see fig. 2). Customers can choose between analysis might reveal that, after the measurement, the
licensing 115% of their demand and then only paying DAAP is the best option because, depending on your
for the 15% overflow. Or they can license 100% of the indirect access, you could receive a 90% discount.

DAAP INCENTIVE OPTIONS

A
100 % +15 %

Customer licenses at least 115 % (15 %

growth) of current estimated document 1.150.000 150.000 No additional
Standalone
documents documents that discounts
use and the license fee charged for this licensed are actually
order form!
negotiable!
transaction is only for such licensed overall paid for
growth**.

B
90 % 10 %

Customer licenses at least 100 % 90% discount

1.000.000 100.000 Combine’able
only for Digital
of current estimated document documents documents that within otherwise
access within
use and receives a 90 % discount licensed are actually used order
this order form!
overall paid for forms
on Digital Access.

Fig. 2: The second step in the Digital Access Adoption Program is choosing a financial incentive
 White Paper   SAP® indirect access vs. digital access  13

Takeaway:
We recommend analyzing your actual use of third-party access and then choosing the license
model that is right for your organization. With an SAP license management tool, determine
your actual volume of digital evidence with objective data to make a forecast that reflects
historical and current developments without SAP. With this foundation, you can begin to
negotiate the exact number of required digital documents with SAP.

Know the risks and rewards before you sign a Digital Access contract.
LicenseControl offers a clear, flexible overview of all documents created
through indirect access. You can check each users’ document creations
and decide if you agree with SAP’s findings.

Find out how

THE RISING PRICE OF THE SALES &

SERVICE ORDER PROCESSING EXCEPTION
―— When SAP announced their new license model (Digital Access) in April 2018, they told
their customers that they have a choice between staying with their existing contract or moving
to Digital Access. Existing contracts include two license types for indirect access:

• Named user licenses

• Order licenses (e.g. Sales & Service Order Processing)

Sales & Service Order Processing licenses cover externally through an electronic data interchange. In this case,
created documents, like sales quotes, service contracts, because they’re external, you wouldn’t assign them a
Option 1: Option 2:
and other business documents. This license is needed named user license, so a different type of license for
Option
Do 1:
nothing Option
License 2:
Exchange Contr
when an outside source, like a customer, creates or processing is needed for this activity. Think of it as an
Do nothing License Exchange Contr
changes a business document in your SAP systems early version of the document license.
• Credit of up to 100% of the value of the existing • Credit of up to 100
NUL and/or
• Credit order
of up to licenses
100% of the for "new"
value document
of the existing contracts
• Credit forto"new
of up 100
licenses
NUL and/or order licenses for "new" document • comprehensive
contracts for "newco
licenses • comprehensive co

Solutions Solutions Solutions Solutions

Solutions
Order License* Solutions
Order License* Solutions
Documents Solutions
Order License*
*Sales & Service Order Processing/
OrderNUL
License* OrderNUL
License* Documents
NUL OrderNUL
License*
Option 1: Option 2: Option
Execution and Purchase 3:
Order/
NUL
DB NUL
DB NUL
DB NUL
DB
Do nothing License
DB
Exchange Execution
DB
Contract conversion
DB DB

License Value $ License Credit $ Contract Value

• Credit of up to 100% of the value of the existing • Credit of up to 100% of the value of the existing
Current
NUL and/or order Contract
licenses for "new" document Current
LicenseContract
Value
contracts Current
$ for "new"
License Contract
Credit
S/4HANA $
contract Current
ContractContra
Value
licenses Current Contract Current •Contract with Addendum
comprehensiveCurrent Contract
configuration possibilities Current Contra
with Addendum

Solutions Solutions Solutions Solutions Solutions

Order License* Order License* Documents Order License* Documents

NUL NUL NUL NUL NUL

DB DB DB DB SAP HANA
 White Paper   SAP® indirect access vs. digital access  14

Until Q4/2016 the price for 1,000 orders was €100. The only buy licenses for Digital Access.
price increased in the PCL for Q1/2017 by 200%. The
price for 1,000 orders is now €20,000. By raising its Existing SAP customers can still buy Sales & Service
pricing for these licenses so sharply, SAP clearly indicated Orders, but they face two important questions: “What
that it wanted to move customers to the new Digital price will I pay for ‘Sales & Service Orders’” and “Do I still
Access model. get a discount?” SAP prefers its customers move to Digital
Access, so they will likely look for similar ways to nudge
Starting with the German PCL for Q2/2018, SAP removed existing customers towards Digital Access.
this license type completely, so new SAP customers can

COMPARISON OF THE OLD

AND NEW SAP PRICE MODEL

Pros Cons

Lots of exceptions for potential Complex to evaluate

savings

Legacy SAP Price Model Interpretations and gray zones Difficult to manage

INDIRECT ACCESS Potentially at a reduced rate Difficult to understand

Grey zones might lead to

unwanted discussions with SAP

Transparent Difficult to estimate cost

Easy to understand Potentially expensive

More process automation, more

SAP measures it, so no self-reporting sensors in the future leads to
New SAP Price Model unexpected costs
DIGITAL ACCESS
Initial setup for measurement
migh  take a lot of effort (system
updates in case of Passport tool
or note implementation and user
determination in case of Estimation
Note)
 White Paper   SAP® indirect access vs. digital access  15

CONCLUSION

If you want to reduce your financial risk of indirect access, there is no choice: you must
analyze all interfaces in the SAP landscape and decide per application whether they
­cause indirect access. Also, the transition to the new licensing model should be carefully
considered.

As a customer, you can choose between the old pricing model or the new one. If you
choose the new one, you must be careful: being charged per document generated by
­e­xternal applications in the digital core can be significantly more expensive than the
old user-based licensing model.

Even though the DAAP seems like a good deal, you won’t know for certain. Analysis of
both pricing models is required before deciding to move to the new document licensing
or to stick with the old licensing model. Only that will show if the DAAP is a good deal
for you, so you can make a decision that your budget won’t regret. Aspera can run the
analysis with you and give you independent advice on how to handle negotiations.

ABOUT ASPERA

At Aspera, we simplify the complexity of your software licenses. For

nearly two decades, we have helped hundreds of enterprises and over
50 Fortune 500s to assess cost and risk within their IT environments.
Aspera is part of USU Software AG (ISIN DE 000A0BVU28), which is
­listed in the Prime Standard segment of the Frankfurt Stock Exchange.

For more information, please visit www.aspera.com.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Guido Schneider is the CEO and founder of Software License

Compliance 365, which specializes in SAP® licensing. Guido founded
SecurIntegration in 1996, which was acquired by Aspera (USU) in 2016,
and was the Senior Product Management Advisor on Aspera’s SAP
license management tool, LicenseControl for SAP®. His expertise spans
SAP NetWeaver Identity Management, SAP Governance, and Risk and
Compliance (GRC). He has pub-lished three books on SAP security
and is a regular contributor to ComputerWoche, E-3 magazine, IT
Management, and SAPInsider.

Myrja Schumacher is Product Manager of LicenseControl for SAP®.

For more than a decade Myrja has specialized in License Management
and Optimization on SAP. She joined Aspera in March 2020. Her role
at Aspera is to work with global organizations to help them realize the
full benefits of implementing effective SAP license management and
optimization. Her practical experience covers consultancy, license
management, contract management, and all kinds of SAP®-related
projects.

Vera Vianden joined Aspera in 2014 as a Consultant and Account

Delivery Manager. In her current role as team lead of the LicenseControl
for SAP consultants, she and her team work closely with enterprise
customers in the auto-motive, financial, healthcare, and manufacturing
verticals to deliver optimized software license positioning.

© 2020 SAP SE or an SAP affiliate company. All rights reserved.

SAP and other SAP products and services mentioned herein as well as
their respective logos are trade-marks or registered trademarks of SAP
SE (or an SAP affiliate company) in Germany and other countries. All
other product and service names mentioned are the trademarks of
their respective companies. Please see www.sap.com/trademark for
additional trademark information and notices.
 IMPRINT

Aspera Technologies Inc.

119 Braintree St, Suite 602
Boston, MA 02134, USA

Phone: +1 617-307-7733
Email: info@aspera.com
www.aspera.com

Picture Credits:
Title: © gettyimages.com

Authors:
Guido Schneider,
Software License Compliance 365 Ltd
Myrja Schumacher, Aspera GmbH
Vera Vianden, Aspera GmbH

© Aspera GmbH, 2020

All rights reserved