The most common licensing question, and the one most often got wrong in the same direction.
The question that decides it
Do the people who end up using what you built pay to use it?
If no, Regular. If yes, Extended. That is the whole test.
What throws people
Charging your client to build the site does not make it Extended. You being paid is not the question. The question is whether the finished thing charges its own users.
So a $20,000 build for a corporate client, where the site is free for the public to use, is Regular. A side project you built for nothing, which later starts charging $5 a month, is Extended.
Some worked cases
- Company brochure site: Regular.
- Internal dashboard for staff: Regular.
- SaaS product with paid plans: Extended.
- Free app with paid premium features: Extended.
- Online shop selling physical goods: Regular, because customers pay for the goods, not for access to the site.
- Membership site charging for access: Extended.
One licence, one project
Whichever tier, one licence covers one end product. Two sites need two licences even if they are the same design for the same client. Development and staging copies of the same project do not count separately, so build and test freely.
Upgrading later
You can. Buy the Extended licence for the same item and the project is covered from then on. Do it before you start charging, not once it takes off. Same files either way, since the tier is a permission rather than a different download.
If your case sits near the line
Ask in the comments on the item before you buy. Sellers set their own exact terms, the answer will be specific to that item, and it will help the next person too.
More in the licences section.
