Originally Posted by lifterus
I'm glad you now seem to understand somewhat, but not completely. You can be sued for any reason, by anyone. The EULA does not give someone special permission to sue you. It simply shows that the software maker expected you to read it and is operating under the assumption that you agreed to it. That's all. It has no legal authority over someone who buys a copy of the software, and like you said you are not breaking any laws by violating any restrictions that are not laws. And breaking that assumed contract (again, nobody can prove you read it and actually agreed to it, which is why EULAs are joke compared to real contracts) in a manner which does not violate any laws does not give anyone legal precedent to claim damages they otherwise couldn't claim with or without an EULA.
EULAs are mostly just "you can't sue me if we deny you warranty or tech support for doing xxx" and "if you sue us we can use this to say we warned you." It's about denying liability. It has absolutely zero legal authority over you. If they want to sue you for non-illegal violations, it doesn't help them at all, nor do they require it just to file a lawsuit.
I NOW seem to understand? That's actually funny! I haven't changed what I said, only explained it more completely to you, so that now YOU seem to understand somewhat. But, not entirely.
The EULA does give the holder the right to sue you. The EULA is a binding document, as are all contracts. Or don't you believe in contract law?
Most states even have the "shrink-wrap" contract law, in which you agree to the EULA (contract) as soon as you open the wrapper, without even having seen it, much less read it!
It's not that you are breaking the law, in the way you seem to think some of us are saying, but that the law does back the legality of contracts. Otherwise, there would be no civil couart system in place where it could be inforced. It would simply be a provate agreement, with no penalties possible.
You can go to trial, where a real judge, and a real jury decides whether the contract was violated. And, as the case, the EULA is recognized as a valid contract. If it weren't recognized by law, that wouldn't be the case.
As you are so set against this, why don't you provide some legitimate links proving your point, as you seem to be avoiding reading the information provided by mine, which contain the actual laws in question?