In this report I will shortly present and introduce you to the case of S&T v BankSoft, software house, and also I will try to represent to you if there were some dilemmas or issues involved in this case.
Table of Content.
Analysis of the scenario 4.
Smith and Todd (S & T) was a large financial service company which work was based on old mainframe computers and also used batch processing. They decided to upgrade their network and their program. They needed two batch programs, one to perform share analysis and the other to manage client transactions. Once they visited Chamberlain Company and saw the BankSoft program, they decided to take it but with additional corrections and fixes. BankSoft never tested the program on larger network. The both companies made contract which specified that the program would cost £ 8000, payable on delivery and for maintenance and upgrade £ 600 per month. Also into the contract was specified that S&T is aware of the conditions of the software, BankSoft will provide S&T with upgrades for the program, BankSoft will not guarantee for the safety or accuracy of the program and BankSoft is responsible to fix the program if some errors occurs. After S&T took the program, they assembled a team of 12 programmers to test the software on their network. After small amount of time after the programmers tested the software, the company realized that only one part of the program suit them. S&T spent £ 4800 for maintenance beside the cost of conversion and they receive updates for FairShare but none of it fixes the CLIENT program. After all this the manager of S&T decided that he will reduce the fee for maintenance on £ 300. When BankSoft's manager heard of this he instructed the programmers to put virus into the next upgrade. When S&T receive the update and lunch it, the virus deleted all the files of the program even the SHARESTAT program.