These packages are useless without a license (cannot be compared against other tools). I'm assuming this means Brain Innovation B.V. is using NITRC to advertise it's product as well as to free up costly bandwidth on their own servers by utilizing free bandwidth on NITRC, something NITRC was not created for. Does anyone else feel this way?

NITRC is agnostic with respect to commercial or non-commercial
resources for neuroimaging; NITRC's mission is to help the community
find ALL options available to them. All resources at NITRC are, in
some sense, 'advertising' themselves, and that is exactly appropriate.
All resources are treated equally with respect to the bandwidth, disk
space and other resources that is available to them at NITRC; and at
this time, no project (commercial or non-commercial; well-funded or
not funded) is abusing that infrastructure.

While resources with commercial licenses may pose an additional factor
in execution of inter-resource comparison, it is only one of many
factors that make proper, valid and useful comparisons between
resources challenging. That said, I have every confidence in the
neuroimaging community, that through direct or indirect collaboration
and teamwork, the potential benefits of commercial products can be
directly compared to their non-commercial counterparts.

In fact, just by listing with NITRC makes each resource more 'findable'
(with respect to the features that are offered) and 'comparable' (with
respect to other resources offering similar functionality). This promotes
comparison and cost benefit assessment, and hence moves the overall field
forward.

[Note, as this thread is more NITRC-specific, as opposed to
BrainVoyager-specific, further community conversation on this point
is encouraged, but better suited to the NITRC open-discussion forum:
http://www.nitrc.org/forum/forum.php?for...