This issue is not so much about the individual products, which is why they are not named, but more about the mindset that it can only be good if you pay for it. The school of thought currently employed is that since we have the site license, we can use it without regard to cost (the university wide site license is paid for by someone else's budget).
This is just a minor frustration that I have encountered, and I was wondering what other people have done in this situation.
My fear is that once we start depending on the closed source software, the University will be unable to stop paying for the site license, because there are now actual legitimate users. If they re-evaluated and we were the only people using the tool, then we would incur a real (sizable) cost for everyone.