This is something that completely fell beneath our radar as it isn’t exactly fresh news. In fact, this is something that happened around 3 years ago and many (including ourselves) never caught it. This is why it is just now making its way to a story. But, mIRC Co. Ltd, a software developer behind a certain software solution called “mIRC”, had quietly ended its lifetime license agreement with all who had purchased it “more than 10 years ago.
A bold move that kind of goes against the terms of a lifetime license. Unless specified that this could happen within said terms, or a company changes ownership (which, typically, also has to be written in the terms).
However, one of my colleagues purchased the software back in 2009 and recently came across the expiration of his license and shared his findings with me. This got me thinking. I took a look at the Internet Archive (Wayback Machine) for the end of 2009 to see what the website read. You could see that the website said “this is a one time, life-time registration which will work with current and future versions of mIRC“. Nothing else was mentioned to the contrary.
However, looking at the website now, you can see this language has changed. Claiming that the license is only good for three years. Looking at the FAQ section, you can find the following explanation of why this has changed:
“Question: I have an old registration that is not working, can you help?
Answer: When I originally offered a lifetime license in 1995, it seemed like a kind and fair thing to do. However, I did not expect that I would still be working on mIRC twenty-five years later. The lifetime license means that I am still supporting and providing updates to every user that has ever registered. This has become gradually more difficult and has reached the point where, sadly, it is just no longer possible. If your registration is over ten years old, if you can, please consider registering again. Your continued support for mIRC would be really appreciated. If you register again, you will receive an updated registration automatically. If you cannot afford to register again, or would rather not, that’s okay, just email me. However, please be aware that it will take time for me to reply.”
Again, this a bold move that doesn’t quite walk the line of honesty. Keep in mind, I’m trying to see it from both sides as I myself have developed a few things and completely understand the amount of time that goes into writing all of that code. However, I also understand the thin line of user agreements and how they are executed on either side.
So you have a lifetime license with no terms stating that the developer reserves the right to change them at any time, which is suddenly revoked with a simple “never mind, I changed my mind” statement from the developer. They do, thankfully, leave an exclusion that you can reach out if you just can’t afford it. However, this is risky business nonetheless.
If a lifetime license with no other terms other than “it’s for life! Including all future versions” can be pulled at any time, what does this say about the risk of buying into any lifetime license with any other company? This turns into a high-risk investment as all rules would be thrown out the window.
I find this to be an extremely fascinating and concerning topic, which is what led me to discuss it here. I would be interested to hear what your own input on the topic would be. Do you think this is fair? Do you think it is not? Do you think it creates a legal situation? Are you a licensed customer that ran into this or didn’t know about it until now? Please do share your thoughts below in the comment section.
120 Comments
Khaled sucks
“Didn’t see that coming…” is insufficient to unilaterally terminate a contract. It’s been some years since law school, but the developer argues that he didn’t think he’d be support the app for 25+ years–so he’s arguing under the theory of “mistake” in contract law. Under the theory, if one or more parties have a misunderstanding with respect to what the contract says/requires the contract may be voidable.
His argument fails on many fronts. First, he wrote the contract–and many license contacts are non-negotiable (not that anyone would’ve here). How could he have a misunderstanding about the contract that he wrote? Second, it’s short, precise, and clear what he is saying. There are no parameters, no qualifiers, just upfront easy to understand language. Third, is the reasonable person test–how would a reasonable person (doesn’t have to be a lawyer) take the language of his contract? The reasonable person doesn’t think the lifetime in question was that of their pet at the time of purchase (Damn, dog died… have to get a new license for my IRC app…). The reasonable person thinks it’s their lifetime.
A business decision must be made. If the app no longer produces the funds justify further development, sunset it and let people continue using the legacy version. Better yet, innovate and find was to upsell. If they do, continue development.
That said, I have a lifetime Plex membership and have no clue if I’ll have it for life. Don’t really care, if they discontinued the product I can continue to host my own server on the most recent build. One that got me though was Overwatch. I purchased the game to play with my brother, but never used it much. Now Overwatch 2 is out, it’s free, and they discontinued the first version. I cannot even access it. Kind of gets me, but whatever they are letting me play the next one for nothing.
As a lawyer and a software engineer, I think it’s prudent for devs to have business people around them to make business decisions. Do what you do, and get others around you to do the things you don’t.
Manycam pulled this same BS. Way back machine shows no clauses for change of ownership or other clauses. I don’t see how these companies get away with it.
The newer versions removed the security features of the past versions, so I was forced in to pirating the last version that had those features.
You could use a bouncer to add those back in the middle, but then the connection from the bouncer to you is still vulnerable.
Haven’t updated my client in ages, what specific features where removed? sorry but i’m kinda busy to ready ears of changelogs now lol.
if he is still providing updates, then it should be fair game to charge even existing owners new fees. if you opt out of updates, then they shouldn’t be charged anything for usage of a lifetime product they already bought.
it does create a bit of a legal situation, but all he had to do to avoid that was rename newer versions of the software to something like mIRC-II… I say this as a dev/publisher with experience in doing exactly that. sometimes (especially starting out in the biz) you don’t realize your projects are going to go on 10+ years with more users and more updates but no more money to pay the bills. when I renamed my software went from one-time purchase to subscription so I wouldn’t make that mistake again haha.
of course, you still need to put in some fairly revolutionary new features to get away with a rebranding like that, and to start charging more money to existing customers, that’s the “fair” part, as far as life is “fair” or should be…
I’ve also been the consumer too, I was told a few years ago that my lifetime corporate 3 user Teamviewer license (I think v9?) was going to expire, and they came up with some terms/agreement that said as much (though I’m positive these terms didn’t exist originally) and that I would be forced to upgrade to a new version. I don’t want or need a new version, but they said they are shutting down servers for the older versions, for “security purposes.” uh huh. I realize they have servers that make the connections possible, but it would be fair at least provide the capability to run your own server for the connections if you purchased a lifetime. I’d even pay a small monthly/annual to avoid maintaining my own server, but I mean small… I raised some hell with them and got a free v15 or newer license through 2025, and that was the last they would speak to me. in 2025 I’m going to raise more hell but I doubt it will do any good.
all in all, having been on both ends of the issue (and been sufficiently screwed by on both ends I’d say,) I can’t really blame the guy IF he continues to provide updates to the same users. but like I said, if no updates, then he needs to suck it up and let ppl keep what they bought without extra fees.
It costs him nothing to provide updates to existing users … software distribution is free. His work is to aquire new users, and he can do whatever terms he wants with them. His move is illegal and if I had purchased it, you better believe he would be hearing from my lawyer.
I agree this is a bold headed, illegal move. But it doesn’t cost him nothing to distribute. Time cost of development