With respect to the SaaS fiduciary model, experienced clients understand the need for exit conditions that correct the urgency of downtime. However, suppliers do not simply want to release their applications and all of the intellectual property associated with them. As companies, including major international banks, use cloud applications as a preferred technology platform, we are seeing a significant increase in demand for SaaS fiduciary contracts. In the event of a supplier failure, it is possible to access all the materials necessary for the successful reuse of the application through the exchange agreement, in order to avoid service interruptions and allow continuity of service. Although SaaS has fiduciary rules that are becoming commonplace in supplier contracts, the question of their effectiveness remains. While fiduciary service can provide comfort to customers if they run the risk of an onboarding of a SaaS solution, the real and practical change in the application, data center and hosting environment can be more catastrophic than the downtime themselves in the case of an exit condition. It`s time for customers to make sure they `cover their SaaS`. All of this must be reflected in the customer contract, with the customer recognizing the rights of the continuity partner – including the right to obtain data when the continuity contract occurs. And everywhere, specific third-party rights must be granted to ensure that the agreement is linked. Escrows for source code have long been a source of confusion among buyers. The concept is simple: if the software manufacturer has a nuclear meltdown on its critical system, the customer receives a distribution of source code so that he can continue to use the software. Although the concept of software trustees is fairly simple, the process often does not work as well as expected.
The trust process for a SaaS product tends to be even more complex, but if properly implemented, it is more useful and useful for customers. The benefits of Option 3 should be obvious.