"And if you want to argue that even a minor release would have sold more than a product expressly marketed as unnecessary to most of the customer base (despite the fact that P5 ultimately incorporated may ProPack features), be my guest." If P4PP was more of an "upgrade" than an add-on, I am sure that it would have been marketed as such. Say anything you wish about CL, but their marketing skills seem to be well above par, regardless of the failures in other areas. P5 does not incorporate the main consideration (and most likely, the biggest push) for purchasing P4PP - import and export, from what I have been reading. Although that is forthcoming, CL did not state that they would not release that as P5PP or offer it as a "patch" to the general populace of P5 users. "Ah, yes, I was waiting for the unsupported attack on my credibility." No attack on your credibility, supported or not. Basically, you are asking Jack to defend himself and the statements, opinions, etc, in his posts. However, I would surmise that neither you nor Jack personally know one another, yet you continually attack his character and motivations. So, is this a case of "pot calling the kettle black"? "Again, one of my major points, should you bother to read my posts, is that people should base their opinions on what they know, and if they want to go public with their opinions, they should expect that people might ask for the basis of those opinions." And get labelled as "unsupported[ly] attack[ing] [someone's] credibility" when you ask them to clarify? To me, it seems your keyboard has two outputs as well. "If Jack's opinion is based on information gained under an NDA, he probably shouldn't be writing thinly veiled screeds against CL based on that information, should he?" That presumes his post was entirely concieved and written based upon what he learned by way of agreeing to the NDA; which his long involvement with Poser and the community would dispute. Also, it depends on the verbiage and intent of the NDA. As a lawyer (or so I gather from your EULA posts), you should know that any agreement has inherent loopholes, which lawyers and certain individuals can use to their advantage until they are patched. If people can circumvent the laws legally, why not a simple NDA; if that is the case at all?