• x00z@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    14 hours ago

    That has nothing to do with the end user. In such cases they should sue the original owners.

    • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      13 hours ago

      The new owners mentioned that in the article. They said it would cost more to do than it would to just shut the business down.

      What good outcome do you think the lifetime license owners would get in that situation?

      • lemming741@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        12 hours ago

        I call bullshit. I bet they knew, but saw it as an opportunity for profit and this is all PR spin.

      • x00z@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        13 hours ago

        I have no idea, but the end users should not get fucked because the new owners didn’t know what they were buying. In many countries it is illegal for the old owners to not let the new owners know of such things.

        • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          13 hours ago

          Without being able to offer any idea of a solution though, saying that means nothing. The company either gets shut down and those users get fucked and have no VPN, or the company stays alive and the users have no VPN but have the option to get one again.

          The point is there’s no real way the lifetime licenses get honoured.

          • x00z@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            12 hours ago

            Just honor them and take the loss. The new owners did a bad deal. In many countries it would be highly illegal to cancel these contracts while continuing the business. Either liquidate the company or honor the deals. Fuck capitalism.

              • x00z@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                5 hours ago

                The people operating the company do not deserve to run it. Maybe they should declare bankruptcy and let somebody who will honor the contracts buy it.

                Allowing this kind of anti-consumer behaviour just allows them to juggle the company around to get out of contracts.

                  • x00z@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    2 hours ago

                    Yes I think they should just honor the contracts and make a tiny bit less profit.

                    They could even just add some sane limits if those were not present yet.