Echoing the sentiment of other users here - I would happily pay a steep up front price for this software. I will not pay a monthly subscription for software that runs on my machines using data on my machines.
Please reconsider the rent-seeking price model, or at least move it somewhere appropriate like an enterprise support tier.
I wasn’t confused by your post, I disagreed with it. OP expects that their software will continue to deliver value over time, and so has chosen a payment model that reflects that. This is not “rent-seeking”.
If that's true, OP's pricing model could reflect that by charging for updates or having a fallback license for current version. As long as it does not, it is in fact, rent-seeking by definition.
I’m not sure which definition of rent-seeking you’re using here, but I encourage you to revisit it. Rent-seeking doesn’t just mean “charging an expensive subscription fee”.
Please reconsider the rent-seeking price model, or at least move it somewhere appropriate like an enterprise support tier.