[chralieboy]

Note that the article only spoke with the COO of Zenefits and no one from ADP.

As has been detailed numerous times, ADP absolutely has a right to cut off access based on violations of its ToS. They want to be put in the same boat as Uber and AirBnB, as white knights against injustice, but they don't have a "right" to use ADP's product however they see fit.

ADP is not an innovative company and if you'd like to build your own payroll provider (hi ZenPayroll) to make a better product, you are welcome to compete. They are simply saying "we have official ways to integrate and choosing to ignore them to do whatever you want is not acceptable."

[dopamean]

I thought the lawsuit in question was about Zenefits allegedly slandering ADP and not the legality of ADP cutting off Zenefits.

[joe_the_user]

Sure, the lawsuit is about Zenefits lying about the situation after ADP cut them off. That is important because the Zenefit/ADP hybrid customers want to know who is at fault and Zenefits is implying that ADP terminated some kind of "partnership", which is both false and casts ADP in a bad light. That, in turn, could cost them money and customers. and these factors together are pretty much the base criteria for slander.

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2015/06/10/adp-sues-zenefits-for...

[gergles]

Eh. I don't think they (ADP) has a right to cut off access. If I am a customer of a financial company and I want to have my accountant deal with them and I give the accountant my password, that is a thing I should be able to do.

I think it is reasonable to disagree with that, but I don't see it as open-and-shut as you seem to.

[rpiguy99]

Probably depends on the "Terms of Service" that the client agreed to when they first logged into the system.

Most online backing systems have specific "Terms of Service" regarding account security that indemnifies them from responsibility if you share your username/password.

I expect that a payroll system's "Terms of Service" would be much more restrictive than that.

[morganvachon]

That's pretty much how I saw it (Zenefits is similar to a contractor working on behalf of an ADP customer), but there are some issues with that point of view. It could be argued that Zenefits is not only profiting off of their own customers, but also profiting off of ADP's hard work. Basically, ADP is only seeing one revenue stream (the client) whereas Zenefits is using ADP's data to generate income via the insurance policies and other HR services Zenefits resells. Whether that's improper or just sly business sense is a matter for the courts, of course.

The downside no matter what is that the innocent clients are the ones ultimately losing access to both services in this brawl.