BTW, totally missed this page:
Is that the company behind IPFire?
Yes it is. We need to make that more clear I suppose because some people are surprised by it.
The original intention was to give it a different name instead of using “IPFire” so that the project can remain independent and the company can remain independent.
In these days, we are getting complaints that people are “donating to a company” which is simply what you need to do business in any country in the world. Maybe that wouldn’t be a problem if the company was called IPFire, too.
However, the open source license is an alternative to a donation, because it is quite hard as an IT guy to convince your boss to donate. Donations are optional, businesses are not charities - it’s a simple thing. However, when they pay an (also optional) license, that conversation is way different.
In the end the money is going into the same bucket. No option is cheaper or anything. It is literally the same thing with a different name.
And of course it would be great if more and more people buy these 
3 Likes
I understand, gets confusing.
Thing is legislation differs. You have EU and then you have the US approach and ROW.
Can’t advice you one way or the other, except for clarity and consequence. What is ok and normal in some places, is not in others. This is a global market and as such, and in this sector, bringing in some opinions from US and how similar products approach this, might be valuable in the long run, as long as legal in EU.