I expect I will be purchasing two licences, but am unsure which will suit best.
As a solo developer I develop a lot of web sites, all bespoke but using common libraries of code, some of which are hosted on my server and some on other ISPs. So the developer licence seems to be the best bet except that I use a laptop when away from the home office, but a desk top otherwise. Since these PCs are only ever used by myself and never at the same time does this mean I must licence both? Or perhaps if I purchase a Redistribution licence which allows multiple development machines, would the fact that although the various sites are bespoke to the users, they are practically a single commercial product i.e. my common admin routines wrapped with their specific requirements? $399 seems a fair price for what I require, but I don't want to fall foul of your licence conditions - and I certainly don't want to pay twice.
I also work part time for a national newspaper and think that we should be using your product on the Company Intranet. The IP licence may be best - the intranet is hosted on a single production server but it replicates to a second server in real time which would be used as a hot failover. Does this mean I need an extra license for the second server (which has never been used since the site was configured this way), or in the unlikely event of the first server failing just put up with the fact that the functionality would fail if a user tried to make updates on the second server because the licence was invalid? There is also a proposal at this company to use virtual servers hosted on a number of extremely high spec machines, would this interfere with your licensing methods?