Guys, all those links that have been pointed to are from the 6.1 release of BD. As has been noted by others, the license agreements has simply changed (like someone said, any company can and does do at times). The change was as of the 6.2 release. As someone else said, if you still have a 6.1 release of the product you can certainly still use it for commercial use. It's just that going forward the new license agreement stands.
Like you said, Matt, you can't fault us for wanting to "make money from the results of the hard work". That's really all this is about. Not anything about being an "unhealthy company". Indeed, we've gone from strength to strength and each quarter's sales have exceeded the previous. This isn't a move of desparation, nor was it made without consideration about the very issues of concern some have raised. Things change. The free Server edition is still free, just not for commercial use. It's been discussed on our interest list, so it's not like we're hiding it. Should we have put out a press release? Written an article in the CFDJ, or perhaps a retraction of the previous ones? We've changed the web site, which is really all we really should be expected to have to do. Sure, some will want more, but put yourself in our shoes. As a for-profit company, our focus is more on solving the problems of folks who have a need for a need for our commercial products. We still offer the free version to satisfy the needs of a subset of the rest of the community. And the get all the benefits of the commercial edition (not a single tag is held back.) Can you give us credit for that sort of contribution? And to clarify, as some miss this, *all* the editions (including Server JX, and the enterprise-class J2EE and .NET editions) are free forever for single IP development use (after a 30 day trial that's not IP restricted, just like CF). /charlie *arehart* (someone spelled it Arendt) >Really I can't fault New Atlanta for wanting to make money from results >of their hard work, but pretending this is a "clarification of the >original intent" when they originally sung "free for production use" to >the heavens; as often as they could at the time -- as I'm sure most >people do remember -- strikes me as a mistake. Not the sort of move you >expect from a healthy company. > >-- >--mattRobertson-- >Janitor, MSB Web Systems >http://mysecretbase.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:230174 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
