You can see that Google sets its “monthly uptime percentage” of at least 99.95% with financial credits that the customer receives if this goal is not met. It is clear that Google Cloud is a service and that Google is responsible if the service does not work. What would be the big drawback of having both a license and some kind of service component? Just the fact that it is not necessary to keep the software? At first, it was wise to treat the contract as a subscription, but on reflection, I try to determine the true practical benefits of the paradigmatic preference of the transaction as a service and licensed. In other words, the customer receives a service in a SaaS deal, not software. The provider only uses software to provide the service. Overall, the best choice for a SaaS product is an ALS or a ToS or both. AN ALS generally covers service levels in detail, including performance targets, response times and escalation procedures. When it comes to software, lawyers and legal contracts, it can be easy to mix license agreements. There are a number of agreements, and the type of agreement you want depends on what you want to achieve.