alt Hacker NewsI think this is fair, by both Bear and yourself. He's free to attach any license he likes, you are free to use it or not.
Obviously the goal of Open Source licenses does not include making money. You might, or might not, but it's not a priority.
Equally your goal may be to only support Open Source projects. That's fine. For you removing support for this project makes sense.
Once a project reaches the stage of needing to create an income stream, Open Source licenses are no longer appropriate.
Yes, some developers are naive in thinking Open Source licenses protect their income stream. Yes some users are naive in thinking that projects will remain Open Source forever.
Source-available, or Shipped-with-source of whatever you want to call it is a proprietary license which is just fine. It's not Open Source, nor does it need to be.
Legally it's OK but I think ethically using open source to build up a brand that is then used to sell proprietary software is ethically questionable - just like the free until the competition has been eliminated bait and switch common in tech startups. Not saying this happened in this specific case though.