This last situation is one that _developed_ in the US due to a law suit (or several) that took place around the time when VisiCalc was a "big deal" in and around 1980. Prior to this time, software was bought and sold and the older US laws regarding rights followed that legal lagacy. If you BUY the software, you can loan it to others, etc. What happened is that some software manufacturers (using the term, loosely) decided that they didn't want that legal legacy and tried hard to pony up some "new idea." That new idea was selling licenses to use, not direct ownership. This really didn't have a lot of legal history to it and there was a debate as to whether or not one could "sell" a product over the counter, on a wide spread basis.
(By this, I mean, sold just like a hammer is and NOT like the usual 'licence to use' was before, which was strictly done between two eyes-open parties who represented themselves on a professional and fully informed basis and wrote a contract which was duly signed by appropriate authorities. Up to that time, there were licenses... yes. But they were strictly done on a written contract basis and done 1-on-1. This was new in the sense that merely "opening" a package was to be taken as a fully-informed legal contract. Which is a very different thing.)
A court (in my opinion, wrongly) decided this issue and opened the door that we now find ourselves completely on the other side of.
Hardware is as it always was, though. Software went through a dimensional door and we are now in another universe.
Yes.
I think this is a really interesting topic and I'm glad there are different opinions on it. It makes for some fun. I will read the arguments, but I'm sure like most of us over the age of 40 we aren't likely to make profound changes in our hard-won opinions. But it will be intriguing to see if someone does come up with a solid argument that changes an opinion here or there.
Jon