>>...Rick does even does not seem to understand the difference between Copyright and EULAs.

The copyright is not in question. The copyright does not say anything about the work that Chen is doing. It is legitimate under the international copyright laws.Chen is not violating them.


The dispute is in EULA and in EULA alone. Since the way the EULA is presented in a way, after the sales, it can be by EU law safely ignored altogether.
There is no clear picture for the US, since so little cases have been brought to court (most likely for a reason).

However, claiming that a US client buying a product that has been manufactured in a country with tools that are in agreement with the laws of that country, to be in legal trouble is so far fetched that even considering it is very unlikely.

More likely is that you have an agenda for bringing this up.







>Microsoft is the copyright holder of the work. They are the entity owning the product, and the one authorizing the EULA. Microsoft holds the rights, and the EULA is an extension of their rights granted unto us for use by license. License holders have no rights. They only have privileges. It's the difference between being an owner and a renter.
>
>

>LICENSE TERMS FOR MICROSOFT SOFTWARE
>
>MICROSOFT VISUAL FOXPRO VERSION 9.0 
>
>THESE LICENSE TERMS ARE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN
>MICROSOFT CORPORATION (OR, IF APPLICABLE BASED
>ON WHERE YOU ACQUIRED THE SOFTWARE, ONE OF ITS
>AFFILIATES) AND YOU.  PLEASE READ THEM.  THEY APPLY
>TO THE SOFTWARE NAMED ABOVE WHICH INCLUDES THE
>MEDIA ON WHICH YOU RECEIVED IT, IF ANY.  THE TERMS
>ALSO APPLY TO THE MICROSOFT:
>