The EULAS used by many software firms in recent years included the terms"If this SOFTWARE PRODUCT was acquired outside the United States or Canada, then local law may apply."Many US EULAS are in conflict with European local laws. This is part of the EU action against Microsoft by the way, see the lovely Ms. Kroes office and her informative website. http://ec.europa.eu/competition/index_en.html

Point of sale is key in what laws do or do not apply regarding EULAs.

Thanks Bob...the OPs thinking makes more sense with that added idea.

Thank you for at least giving my ideas some thought. Even though we may not agree, at least you tried to understand what I was talking about and what clearly not.I'm almost inclined to play the "English is not my first language" card, but just in time I convince myself that it's not me, it's them. Never have I seen such baseless hostility and irrational defensiveness. Channel that negative energy and use it on someone other than your legitimate customer... Last time I checked, you needed us more than we needed you.Finally... There is no horse.:(

Just trying to get my head around the EULA provisions/regulations. Upon my death (and at my age, not just a theoretical consideration!)- all my assets transfer automatically at that instant, to my heirs and assigns- subject of course to probate. My non lawyer brain tends to think that implies the right of software usage DOES trransfer to another person- at least in this circumstance. I would be very surprised if a court was to rule that software usage permission was extinguished by death.I think if the software provider objected to such a rights transfer, he would have to present arguments to the probate court.I wonder if there are other circumstances where right of usage may transfer or be transferred?What happens in a corporate or even personal bankruptcy?Alex Reid

Some developers are in the business of developing, some are more in tune with debating.

I would suspect that the designers dedication to their development business is completely independent of their enjoyment of debate. :( Bob

Thank you for at least giving my ideas some thought. Even though we may not agree, at least you tried to understand what I was talking about and what clearly not.

I credit you for our ability to communicate, as you began to take seriously the need to view the problem from the vendor's point of view, and accept that they will make decisions based on maximizing profit.

I'm almost inclined to play the "English is not my first language" card, but just in time I convince myself that it's not me, it's them. Never have I seen such baseless hostility and irrational defensiveness. Channel that negative energy and use it on someone other than your legitimate customer... Last time I checked, you needed us more than we needed you.

Here, I would argue its a two way street. Several of your posts have blended your anger at the industry with your logic, so its not easy to have an objective discussion. The defensiveness is not irrational when you remember that these people are working hard to eek out an income, and creative thinking about business changes that don't account for the needs of the entrepreneur will evoke unexpected reactions. I would say your first posts did not appear to be helping the business owner with as much benefit as you hoped to gain personally, and this set the wheels in motion for hostile response. Using a tone in which you really attempt to achieve an improved outcome for both the vendor and the customer is a better approach. You did a good job adopting that viewpoint with me later in the thread, but some folks take a long time to calm down.Cheers,Bob

Okay folks, everyone has voiced there opinion and now were going to give this one a break.*LOCKED*