The license.txt file included with a fresh download of EE 1.6.9 is from 26 March, 2007 and is not consistent with the current product line. You may wish to consider an update to the 10 July, 2010 license or some other updated license as appropriate.
This is an archived forum and the content is probably no longer relevant, but is provided here for posterity.
The active forums are here.
September 13, 2010 2:41pm
Subscribe [3]#1 / Sep 13, 2010 2:41pm
The license.txt file included with a fresh download of EE 1.6.9 is from 26 March, 2007 and is not consistent with the current product line. You may wish to consider an update to the 10 July, 2010 license or some other updated license as appropriate.
#2 / Sep 13, 2010 4:12pm
Thanks, Kurt. I have filed a bug report here.
#3 / Sep 16, 2010 5:04pm
The license.txt file included with a fresh download of EE 1.6.9 is from 26 March, 2007 and is not consistent with the current product line. You may wish to consider an update to the 10 July, 2010 license or some other updated license as appropriate.
Hi Kurt,
EE 1.x is not a current product, so the license from March 2007 is correct. It is also the license that applies to existing Core installations, older Personal licenses, etc… Since EE 1.x is no longer available for sale, the refund policy for it doesn’t really matter.
#4 / Sep 16, 2010 5:32pm
Hi Les,
That makes sense, except that the license in the legacy docs is from yet another vintage:
http://expressionengine.com/legacy_docs/license.html
So you’ve basically got three currently published/distributed software licenses for EE and only one of them specifically addresses that there are different versions of the software, licensed differently (1.x vs. 2.x).
Just thought it might be a little clearer for users who are new to your products if they can’t keep bumping into different licenses when updating and upgrading existing EE-based properties.
With only one exception, every time we’ve been hired as a sub-contractor on an EE project, there either was no license ever purchased for the install of EE (we find this out when we ask them to download an build or version update), and/or there was little or no client knowledge of your license advantages and restrictions.
I just didn’t feel that publishing and distributing older versions of your license’s was doing the Lab any good, and could lead to some folks confusion down the road.
Anyway, while on this topic, we noted today that the footer in the Sever Wizard still thinks its part of EE 2.0.x Public Beta. So perhaps that could get updated.
#5 / Sep 17, 2010 9:24am
Thanks, Kurt. Not exactly a Tech Support issue, though, so I am going to move this to General.
#6 / Sep 17, 2010 2:53pm
Just thought it might be a little clearer for users who are new to your products if they can’t keep bumping into different licenses when updating and upgrading existing EE-based properties.
That’s true and I’ve added “license consistency” to my team’s list to update.
With only one exception, every time we’ve been hired as a sub-contractor on an EE project, there either was no license ever purchased for the install of EE (we find this out when we ask them to download an build or version update), and/or there was little or no client knowledge of your license advantages and restrictions.
I just didn’t feel that publishing and distributing older versions of your license’s was doing the Lab any good, and could lead to some folks confusion down the road.
Do you think the license has anything to do with people stealing EE? This is not a sarcastic or rhetorical question. Every single version of the explicitly states “one installation per license.” I think this is a completely separate issue that has to do more with ethics v. convenience v. an official workflow built in for client handoff (in terms of the license).
Anyway, while on this topic, we noted today that the footer in the Sever Wizard still thinks its part of EE 2.0.x Public Beta. So perhaps that could get updated.
Noted.