I personally do not agree with the suspension of a developer. UNA could have simply marked the product as incompatible with newer versions of UNA or labeled it as #abandoned. Ultimately, it is the buyers who decide how to spend their money and how to use the product, regardless of whether it includes support. Everyone should have the freedom to use the product as they see fit. Every product has value and can be repaired. Often, the idea behind a product is worth more than its price especially when there are no alternatives.

If someone is dissatisfied with a product, they can hire another developer to fix it or contact the payment provider to request a refund under reasonable terms, which may vary depending on the provider. UNA is not responsible for the commercial agreement between the client and the third-party vendor, and in my opinion, they should not interfere in that process.

Developing a module can cost several thousand dollars or even tens of thousands depending on its complexity. The license price is usually symbolic and only covers development costs and make profit if there are enough sales. If a product doesn’t work, it won’t sell, so the developer has every reason to fix the issues in order to recoup their investment and earn a profit. There's no need for additional pressure financial pressure alone is enough.

That said, UNA has the right to act as they see fit. It is their platform, and they are free to set their policies as they choose.