Skip to content

Teamviewer Terminates Perpetual Licenses

Technology
38 26 413
  • I switched to Rust Desk after I got repeatedly flagged for commercial use of Team Viewer and access disabled. I was doing nothing of the sort, but it happened after I accessed my personal computer on my personal phone while at work. They must have IP address checks that are extremely aggressive.

    I followed their process to "verify" I was non-commercial, which was invasive and insulting, and then was flagged again.

    Rust Desk works great, no problems, never using Team Viewer again.

  • Damn, I respect the banner at the top warning people about scams. Fair play.

    Yeah, that's got my attention too. Definitely going to try them out now since I need an alternative for remote support for family.

  • If you're using a remote access product that is as water right as a fishing net, and have years of history of them fucking around with security (account takeover controversy in 2016, didn't have default 2fa until 2018), you're kinda in the neighborhood of getting what you deserve. This is like being on Facebook and complaining that fuckerberg is spying on you and using your data to feed their AI.

    If this was still the mid teens, I'd give people a pass. But TeamViewer has been a trash product for longer than my kid has been alive, and anyone still using it should have done their due diligence on the software they chose (negligence doesn't mean they deserve it, but it's hard to feel sympathy when they chose to not do the research on a service that has direct access to your systems), or already accepted the risks of using it (so they absolutely deserve it)

  • I switched to Rust Desk after I got repeatedly flagged for commercial use of Team Viewer and access disabled. I was doing nothing of the sort, but it happened after I accessed my personal computer on my personal phone while at work. They must have IP address checks that are extremely aggressive.

    I followed their process to "verify" I was non-commercial, which was invasive and insulting, and then was flagged again.

    Rust Desk works great, no problems, never using Team Viewer again.

    I have been flagged three times by teamviewer. Appealing requires writing an email and waiting weeks. This last time my use was consistent and only ever connected to my home computer due about 10 minutes tops.

    They just don't want free users who don't upgrade to a monthly subscription but will never say that.

  • If you're using a remote access product that is as water right as a fishing net, and have years of history of them fucking around with security (account takeover controversy in 2016, didn't have default 2fa until 2018), you're kinda in the neighborhood of getting what you deserve. This is like being on Facebook and complaining that fuckerberg is spying on you and using your data to feed their AI.

    If this was still the mid teens, I'd give people a pass. But TeamViewer has been a trash product for longer than my kid has been alive, and anyone still using it should have done their due diligence on the software they chose (negligence doesn't mean they deserve it, but it's hard to feel sympathy when they chose to not do the research on a service that has direct access to your systems), or already accepted the risks of using it (so they absolutely deserve it)

    negligence doesn't mean they deserve it

    This is why I asked in the first place; negligence == they deserve it seems to be the basis of everyone who has replied to me lol.

    It's also weird to me because everyone is citing awful data protection (numerous data breaches, and even your link to easily compromised credentials) as the reason end users deserves their Licenses being revoked.

    I'd agree if this post was about Teamviewer being breached once again. In that case, yes the end users who have stuck with them throughout numerous data breaches have very little room to complain when it happens again. But this is a Licensing change. It has nothing to do with their shitty data protection practices.

    Further, these are perpetual licenses. It's very likely that many of them were purchased years ago when Teamviewer was a lot more popular. To say that people deserve their perpetual licenses getting revoked because a company enshittified over time is silly buddy.

  • I switched from nomachine to RustDesk, and I couldn’t be happier. It’s very lightweight, very fast, and has all the features I need. And it’s great that it’s cross platform.

  • negligence doesn't mean they deserve it

    This is why I asked in the first place; negligence == they deserve it seems to be the basis of everyone who has replied to me lol.

    It's also weird to me because everyone is citing awful data protection (numerous data breaches, and even your link to easily compromised credentials) as the reason end users deserves their Licenses being revoked.

    I'd agree if this post was about Teamviewer being breached once again. In that case, yes the end users who have stuck with them throughout numerous data breaches have very little room to complain when it happens again. But this is a Licensing change. It has nothing to do with their shitty data protection practices.

    Further, these are perpetual licenses. It's very likely that many of them were purchased years ago when Teamviewer was a lot more popular. To say that people deserve their perpetual licenses getting revoked because a company enshittified over time is silly buddy.

    It's not really about the data breaches themselves but rather the way the company responded to them. The fact they tried to cover it up and gaslight their customers about it shows how terrible they are, and remote access is a highly sensitive thing that should be treated the same as handing the keys to your house over to someone. Anyone that isn't deeply investigating the company or individual making a remote access product prior to using it does deserve what they get in the same way someone handing the keys to their house to a complete stranger they know nothing about would deserve whatever happened to them.

    At the end of the day Teamviewer has a history of screwing over their customers for their own profit and in that regard this move is very much on brand for them and entirely predictable. Nobody that has looked into the company's history should be surprised that they've done this at all.

  • Do you (or anyone else) have suggestion for software than can control an android phone from pc?

  • Do you (or anyone else) have suggestion for software than can control an android phone from pc?

    Rust desk also does it. But Google makes you jump through a bunch of hoops to get it working because of scams.

  • First heard about this a few hears ago- apparently it's got Wayland support now, including for tiling WMs like sway? Thats super impressive, I'm gonna see if I can get it set up and running real quick because I just gave up on remote access on Sway when I last tried to check out the options.

  • It's not really about the data breaches themselves but rather the way the company responded to them. The fact they tried to cover it up and gaslight their customers about it shows how terrible they are, and remote access is a highly sensitive thing that should be treated the same as handing the keys to your house over to someone. Anyone that isn't deeply investigating the company or individual making a remote access product prior to using it does deserve what they get in the same way someone handing the keys to their house to a complete stranger they know nothing about would deserve whatever happened to them.

    At the end of the day Teamviewer has a history of screwing over their customers for their own profit and in that regard this move is very much on brand for them and entirely predictable. Nobody that has looked into the company's history should be surprised that they've done this at all.

    Anyone that isn't deeply investigating the company or individual making a remote access product prior to using it does deserve what they get in the same way someone handing the keys to their house to a complete stranger they know nothing about would deserve whatever happened to the

    I've already agreed with this opinion:

    I'd agree if this post was about Teamviewer being breached once again. In that case, yes the end users who have stuck with them throughout numerous data breaches have very little room to complain when it happens again.

    But it feels like you may have missed my actual point. Again, this post is about a change to perpetual licensing. People that purchased their license back when TeamViewer was a proprietary alternative to VNC, long before it became obvious that TeamViewer wasn't a great company, (think 2008), don't suddenly deserve licensing changes. Hard stop. These are the users that are affected the most by this change because they've held their perpetual licenses the longest. In addition, TeamViewer stopped selling perpetual licenses years ago, so the bulk of users with one today are likely to be older users. Why do they suddenly deserve this?

  • Anyone that isn't deeply investigating the company or individual making a remote access product prior to using it does deserve what they get in the same way someone handing the keys to their house to a complete stranger they know nothing about would deserve whatever happened to the

    I've already agreed with this opinion:

    I'd agree if this post was about Teamviewer being breached once again. In that case, yes the end users who have stuck with them throughout numerous data breaches have very little room to complain when it happens again.

    But it feels like you may have missed my actual point. Again, this post is about a change to perpetual licensing. People that purchased their license back when TeamViewer was a proprietary alternative to VNC, long before it became obvious that TeamViewer wasn't a great company, (think 2008), don't suddenly deserve licensing changes. Hard stop. These are the users that are affected the most by this change because they've held their perpetual licenses the longest. In addition, TeamViewer stopped selling perpetual licenses years ago, so the bulk of users with one today are likely to be older users. Why do they suddenly deserve this?

    And you missed my actual point. It doesn't matter when they purchased the license because the fact they're still using it means they deserve it. Nobody should be using Teamviewer today because they're a terrible company, and if you aren't then this license change doesn't impact you at all.

  • And you missed my actual point. It doesn't matter when they purchased the license because the fact they're still using it means they deserve it. Nobody should be using Teamviewer today because they're a terrible company, and if you aren't then this license change doesn't impact you at all.

    It doesn't matter when they purchased the license because the fact they're still using it means they deserve it

    Sure it does. I have a Jetbrains perpetual license that I use daily. If they suddenly started enshittifying, and then decided to revoke my fallback licenses in 10 years, they'd be up for a number of lawsuits because that's illegal.

    End users don't deserve to have their licenses revoked because a company went to shit over time. They're in no control of that. And I made 0 arguments about people using Teamviewer today because that was never part of my point.

  • It doesn't matter when they purchased the license because the fact they're still using it means they deserve it

    Sure it does. I have a Jetbrains perpetual license that I use daily. If they suddenly started enshittifying, and then decided to revoke my fallback licenses in 10 years, they'd be up for a number of lawsuits because that's illegal.

    End users don't deserve to have their licenses revoked because a company went to shit over time. They're in no control of that. And I made 0 arguments about people using Teamviewer today because that was never part of my point.

    If they're not using it, why does it matter what happens to the license? There's a "it's the principle of the thing" argument sure, but practically speaking this is irrelevant. Shitty company does shitty thing that should have no practical impact on anyone because nobody should be using their product. What exactly would change for people not using TeamViewer if they hadn't revoked those licences? The argument is that anyone still using TeamViewer deserves this, and anyone who isn't isn't actually impacted by this change so it's irrelevant.

  • Yeah, that's got my attention too. Definitely going to try them out now since I need an alternative for remote support for family.

    I switched when team viewer had me sign up for fixing my aunts laptop. After that wasn’t working properly I found rustdesk and threw teamviewer straight from both systems.

  • If they're not using it, why does it matter what happens to the license? There's a "it's the principle of the thing" argument sure, but practically speaking this is irrelevant. Shitty company does shitty thing that should have no practical impact on anyone because nobody should be using their product. What exactly would change for people not using TeamViewer if they hadn't revoked those licences? The argument is that anyone still using TeamViewer deserves this, and anyone who isn't isn't actually impacted by this change so it's irrelevant.

    The argument is that anyone still using TeamViewer deserves this, and anyone who isn't isn't actually impacted bym this change so it's irrelevant.

    That's your argument, and I disagree with it. I've already shared why.

    and anyone who isn't isn't actually impacted by this change so it's irrelevant.

    This is also wrong. Having the license revoked means the people who had one can't use it at all whether they were using it or not. Let's set aside that you shouldn't advocate or endorse a company selling a product, shitting the bed, then revoking the product from those that already paid for it.

    You'd be surprised, but there's tons of small companies and organizations that rely solely on viewing software, some ancient version of Windows Server, and a remote toaster for administration still to this day. Those people are directly impacted by this.

    I don't think they deserve a license revocation because I don't think any company should be able to take back a product that a user has purchased for no cited reason. Which is the case here.

  • The argument is that anyone still using TeamViewer deserves this, and anyone who isn't isn't actually impacted bym this change so it's irrelevant.

    That's your argument, and I disagree with it. I've already shared why.

    and anyone who isn't isn't actually impacted by this change so it's irrelevant.

    This is also wrong. Having the license revoked means the people who had one can't use it at all whether they were using it or not. Let's set aside that you shouldn't advocate or endorse a company selling a product, shitting the bed, then revoking the product from those that already paid for it.

    You'd be surprised, but there's tons of small companies and organizations that rely solely on viewing software, some ancient version of Windows Server, and a remote toaster for administration still to this day. Those people are directly impacted by this.

    I don't think they deserve a license revocation because I don't think any company should be able to take back a product that a user has purchased for no cited reason. Which is the case here.

    You might have a point if those people had no choice, but there are several good or at least better alternatives to TeamViewer and at least one of them is free. Nobody has any excuse for being negatively impacted by this change. Hopefully this is a wakeup call to those people that have been either too lazy or too incompetent to replace TeamViewer to finally do so. TeamViewer is a shit company making a shit product that has just made yet another shit anti-consumer decision (and potentially illegal but I'm sure there's some sneaky license clause they claim makes this legal).

  • If anyone is still using teamviewer after the many breaches they had, they deserve this 😉

    Yeah even Windows has Quick Assist built in.

  • Anyone know how I can get remote access with my monitors off while using Wayland ? Everytime I log in if I have my monitors off I just get a black screen. I bought one of those dummy HDMI plugs no dice. Works fine with x11 but I don't want to have to relog every time I get to my computer.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Teamviewer is such a scummy company.

    • If you sign up for a TeamViewer license, you have 7 days to cancel and get a refund. This does not apply to renewals.
    • Licenses are only available in annual installments.
    • TeamViewer's license recommendation tool may suggest a license that is greater than your actual need. In my case, the cheaper license that best fit my business use case (one session at a time) was not presented during onboarding.
    • TeamViewer does not offer mid-term downgrades, but does allow mid-term upgrades.
    • You will get a renewal notice 30 days before renewal. TeamViewer requires written notice of cancellation 28 or more days before renewal.
    • TeamViewer does not offer the option for mid-term cancellations and will not grant a prorated refund for the remainder of your unused license time. When you cancel, you are only cancelling the next renewal.

    We got totally boned when our renewal notice went out just before a three day weekend. PayPal and our bank sided with TeamViewer. Apparently, someone tried to sue over this shady practice in California and the court also sided with TeamViewer.
    Probably would have dodged this bullet if I had thought to scroll through the TeamViewer subreddit, I went with them because I had positive experiences using the free version for personal use.

    Been using RustDesk for years with great success. I especially appreciate the responsible disclosure banners on the main site and GitHub warning users that they might be on the phone with a scam artist.

    IMO, all the proprietary remote access software (Teamviewer, Ultraviewer, Anydesk, Etc) companies are profiting from and therefore complicit in the use of their software to scam people.

  • 14 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    tal@lemmy.todayT
    data centers and supercomputing facilities, which consume voracious amounts of electricity and water Memphis is on the Mississippi. Evaporating the volume of the Mississippi at Memphis with graphics cards would be a pretty impressive feat. kagis https://snoflo.org/flow/report/tennessee/ TENNESSEE FLOW REPORT August 22 2025 Streamflow levels across Tennessee are currently 92.0% of normal, with the Mississippi River At Memphis reporting the highest discharge in the state with 354000cfs 345,000 cubic feet of water per second is a pretty substantial amount of water. EDIT: Water has a heat of vaporization of 2.23 kJ/g. 345k ft³ water is 9.7×10⁹ cm³, so 9.7×10⁹g That's about 2.2×10¹⁰kJ to vaporize it (disregarding the specific heat of water, just the heat of vaporization). 1kJ ≈ 0.28 Wh. So 6,160,000,000 Wh to vaporize the water going through in a second. 3,600 seconds in an hour. So at a flow rate of 345k ft³ that'd sink about 22 trillion watts through vaporization alone. https://www.e-education.psu.edu/egee102/node/1925 In 2024, the world wide energy consumption was about 186,000 TWhs 8760 hours in a year. So global average power usage is about 21 TW. If we put the entire world's generated electricity towards heat to vaporize the Mississippi at Memphis, it'd still fall a bit short. EDIT2: I also inadvertently transposed two digits (should be 354,000 ft³/sec rather than 345,000 ft³/sec) in transcribing the initial flow rate, so it'd fall slightly shorter.
  • 41 Stimmen
    13 Beiträge
    30 Aufrufe
    M
    I mean, no you don't given that they're being used in virtually every call centre and help desk these days.
  • A leap toward lighter, sleeker mixed reality displays

    Technology technology
    9
    1
    41 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    68 Aufrufe
    E
    I actually think this is the only way forward past phones. All the AI assistant tools, voice controlled speakers, foldable devices don't really change how we use 99% of the software. VR/AR, when (if?) finally done right will change that.
  • Medical AI Systems Are Moving Too Fast for Safety Rules

    Technology technology
    6
    1
    47 Stimmen
    6 Beiträge
    84 Aufrufe
    T
    We're not just doing this for money. We're doing it for a SHITLOAD of money!
  • 181 Stimmen
    16 Beiträge
    176 Aufrufe
    P
    I really want to know the name of the contractor who made that proposal.
  • 150 Stimmen
    23 Beiträge
    289 Aufrufe
    D
    I played around the launch and didn't realize there were bots (outside of pve)... But I also assumed I was shooting a bunch of kids that barely understood the controls.
  • 396 Stimmen
    24 Beiträge
    344 Aufrufe
    devfuuu@lemmy.worldD
    Lots of people have kids nowadays in their houses, we should ban all of that and put them all in a specialized center or something. I can't imagine what all those people are doing with kids behind close doors under the guise of "family". Truly scary if you think about it.
  • 0 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    42 Aufrufe
    thehatfox@lemmy.worldT
    The platform owners don’t consider engagement to me be participation in meaningful discourse. Engagement to them just means staying on the platform while seeing ads. If bots keep people doing that those platforms will keep letting them in.