**EDIT**
Thank you for your response regarding the AppSumo lifetime deal situation. This matter raises significant ethical and legal concerns that extend beyond individual disappointment.
From an ethical business practice standpoint, there are several troubling aspects to consider:
Contractual Good Faith

When AppSumo marketed a "Krisp Pro Lifetime Deal," the reasonable consumer understanding was access to the Pro tier as a living, evolving service - not merely to features frozen in time. The interpretation that this only covered "Noise Cancellation" rather than the Pro plan itself appears to be a post-purchase reinterpretation of the agreement's terms.

Ethical business practices require honoring both the letter and spirit of agreements with customers. This situation raises questions about whether downgrading lifetime Pro purchasers to the free plan constitutes good faith fulfillment of the original agreement.
Industry Standards and Precedent

Across the software industry, reputable companies that offer lifetime tier-based access (like Notion, Airtable, Evernote, and others) typically maintain subscribers within their purchased tier as the service evolves. This established practice creates reasonable expectations among consumers about what "lifetime access" to a service tier means.

The approach of selling "lifetime access" to a plan, then moving all substantial improvements to newly-named tiers while eventually downgrading the original plan to "Free" undermines the entire concept of lifetime software subscriptions. This practice, if normalized, would effectively render all "lifetime" software deals meaningless.

Consumer Protection Concerns
This situation potentially raises legal questions under consumer protection laws in many jurisdictions:

Was the original marketing clear that "Lifetime Pro" meant only specific features available at that moment, rather than ongoing access to the Pro tier?

Would a reasonable consumer understand they were purchasing static features rather than tier status?

Does downgrading paid lifetime customers to a free tier constitute a substantial change to the original agreement?

Building Sustainable Businesses Through Trust

Companies that build lasting success typically do so through trust and good faith relationships with customers. Early adopters who provide capital during crucial development stages should be viewed as partners in a company's success, not as obstacles to future revenue.
While business models must evolve, how a company treats its earliest supporters speaks volumes about its character and trustworthiness. Future potential customers reviewing this situation will likely question whether they can trust long-term commitments from a company that has retroactively reinterpreted the terms of previous agreements.

For Those Considering Krisp or Similar Services
This situation serves as an important reminder for consumers to carefully evaluate:

The specific language in "lifetime" offers
The company's track record of honoring commitments
How the company treats its earliest supporters as its business evolves

Ethical business practices and trust are the foundation of sustainable success. Companies that honor their commitments, even when difficult, build lasting reputations that serve them well in the long term.

-----------------------------
I purchased Krisp's lifetime Pro deal through AppSumo with the understanding that I was investing in permanent access to their Pro tier service. Recently, Krisp has unilaterally downgraded all lifetime deal purchasers to their free plan.
I (we) Purchased a lifetime Pro plan through AppSumo
Recently downgraded to the free plan without consent
Krisp claims we still have "all the features that were there when you purchased"

While Krisp argues we still have the same features as when we purchased, this misses the point entirely. I didn't purchase access to a static set of features frozen in time - I purchased lifetime access to their Pro plan, which naturally evolves and improves over time.
A lifetime deal for a Pro plan should mean ongoing access to that tier of service, not just the specific features available on the purchase date. This is especially important for software services, where the value proposition includes future improvements and enhancements.

This feels like a classic bait-and-switch. We paid a premium price for lifetime Pro access, and now find ourselves with the same free plan available to anyone. The company has essentially rewritten the terms of our agreement after taking our money.

I understand businesses need to evolve, but honoring commitments to early supporters who helped fund your growth should be non-negotiable. This downgrade significantly reduces the value of what we paid for and breaks the trust established when we became early adopters.

Building a sustainable business shouldn't come at the expense of your earliest supporters.