FileZilla Pro "Perpetual License" – A Warning to All Users

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Scope of the Complaint

  • Original post: bought FileZilla Pro under a “perpetual license,” reinstalled OS later, and found:
    • Support acknowledged a continuing legal right to use that version.
    • Support refused to provide the old installer, citing “security reasons.”
    • Existing download portal reports the license as “expired.”
  • OP later adds: they were already getting updates on the installed copy, and support quickly offered a discount coupon for a new purchase, reinforcing the suspicion this is financially motivated rather than security-driven.

What “Perpetual License” Means in Practice

  • Some commenters point to archived Terms & Conditions:
    • Risk and responsibility for the product transfer at download; user is expected to keep their own copy.
    • Old wording distinguished “perpetual license” (use forever) from a time-limited update/support window.
  • Others argue: users reasonably interpret “perpetual license” as implying the vendor will keep some way to reinstall as long as the company exists.

Vendor Obligations vs User Responsibility

  • One camp:
    • You bought a license and one copy; backups are your responsibility.
    • Expecting unlimited re-downloads is like expecting free replacement CDs, books, or game cartridges if you lose them.
    • Hosting archives, maintaining infrastructure, and supporting old builds are not free; nothing in the deal promised this.
  • Opposing camp:
    • Cost to host old installers is negligible; many vendors (Steam, Apple, Google, etc.) allow indefinite re-downloads.
    • Refusing to “press the button” when they clearly have the bits is seen as bad faith and hostile to paying customers.
    • Even if legally allowed, it’s ethically dubious and worth warning others about.

Security and Legal-Risk Justification

  • Defense: not providing vulnerable old versions avoids security liability and lawsuits.
  • Critique: blocking access without offering the latest version under the same license is not “customer-first” security; it’s effectively voiding practical use.

Broader Themes: Trust, Licensing Models, and Alternatives

  • Dispute over whether “lifetime/perpetual” licenses are inherently problematic vs. subscriptions (SaaS) being better aligned with ongoing service.
  • Others say the real issue is trust and company behavior, not the payment model.
  • Several recommend:
    • Always archiving installers and/or using VMs for licensed software.
    • Using alternatives (e.g., WinSCP, rsync, Transmit) and noting past criticism of FileZilla (e.g., bundled adware, dismissive feature-request handling).