injunction my as-s.....
Teleflora is taking a step backwards, and believe it or not, I think they are correct in doing so.
Whether a company owns, bought, or developed a software to access and interface, it "controls" access to the network, and CAN, and SHOULD!!
there is nothing wrong with "open" platform as FTD has adopted (my choice) and TF is now adopting a "closed" platform, which I do NOT favour, HOWEVER, please remember, that TF cost FTD, and it's members, a BIG pile of money when they challenged access to the Mercury Network, and Teleflora paid a large stipend to FTD for "use" of propriety access to the merc, and "propriety" is the key word.
IF ANYONE writes script to access ANY network, without consent of the network rights holders, they SHOULD and MUST be held accountable.
This is the continuing pissing match saga between FTD and TF, and frankly, I'm sick of it.....and as the "users" of these networks we are too complacent about how we deal with this nonsense!!
Having said all that, I think Teleflora is making a terrible mistake, BUT, at least Teleflora is FINALLY making some bold moves, that MAY or MAY NOT survive the "process" of time, and frankly, it's the FLORISTS that "pay" for this either way, in TF's case.
SO, again I say, buying, leasing, or "borrowing" order platforms form ANY WS needs to be thought through very carefully, and BEFORE jumping on board, look at ALL your options, and expenses of ALL available platforms.
George has stated that FlowerSoft works with both WS's networks, and they BOTH helped him, and FlowerSoft adopt the "scripts" to do so, and THAT'S a BIG PLUS.....FlowerSoft has "permission" to access both, and GOOD FOR FLOWERSOFT...it's the way it "needs" to be done........
Mike