Jim,

>I hope that you're right, Joe.
>But there have been replies here that talk about 'nothing to worry about if you are 'in compliance'" referring to a BSA "audit", inferring that such audits are "matter of course", in the same class as an EPA audit, IRS audit, etc. And good old copyright law is (apparently) the basis for such audits.
>Others simply say that "it is in the interest of the shareholders" and so is legitimate. I can see institutional shareholders being all for this, cause they just look at "the numbers" and see more profit, not to mention that they never work with this stuff (install/reinstall) themselves.

You have a good point, and even on optimistic days I have to admit I worry about this too... So much is being done on behalf of the consumer, or for consumer rights, etc. when no consumer ever _asked_ for it. The vendors are driving the market, not the consumers. Well, some consumers drive their own little corner of the market, but as a whole, it seems to be very top-driven. Throw in the threat of special-interest (read: in the interest of one specific company) lobbying and and it can really get you down if you let it...

The way I keep a bright outlook is by realizing how much power the consumers really have. Yes, as a whole consumers are largely ignorant. As a whole they tend to move slowly. And as a whole they tend to take it up the yahoo a lot. BUT, as a whole they can react in ways that will make big corporations turn on a dime and completely change their tune. Once pushed too far, I have faith that the consumer will win out just by standing up for themselves. SOLIDARITY! *grin*

>So we have "any audit is justified" and "for the shareholders' benefit" and I'm afraid that there may NOW be more in those camps than in the "I'm doing it right so leave me alone" camp.

It is a definite mind-shift, I will give you that. Makes it take two steps to get back up the hill...first need to realize that we have the RIGHT to be outraged, and then we can actually PARTAKE in the outrage. *smile*

JoeK