Right, reasonable activity. What if there’s something in there whose reasonablity can be reasonably contested? Not something preposterous that is ridiculous by most measures, just something that one would reasonably and generally find to be an acceptable use of the product, but according to the terms, is not.
I’m sorry if I’m hijacking this with my specific concern. Okay, I’m not sorry, but I’ll stop if this line of questioning drives things off track.
If “one would reasonably and generally find it to be an acceptable use” then I would suspect it would be an unconscionable contract/license term (i.e. it wouldn’t be enforced by the courts as a violation of the EULA).
(here, i’ll help you out. A contract term in MS Word’s EULA stating that “you can’t use this product to type of Advertising copy which supports a competitor’s product” (ignoring antitrust laws, if any) would not be universally unreasonable in the sense of kiddie porn, but it would be objectively unreasonable and thus struck down as an unconscionable contract term. (At this point I really have to say that this is my opinion of how this would get resolved. And it’s only my [hopefully decently reasoned] opinion). )
It’s private property owned by the purchaser according to U.S. District Court Judge Richard Jones
http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=114662
Obviously the reality that it’s undecided and different jurisdictions have different laws regarding EULA’s, but you seem to be presenting information as if it’s clearly decided in favor of a license.
One thing I have noticed recently is a sneaky thing they are doing now. They/many are having a box already clicked/filled in which allows some extra “toolbar” added to your browser. I think that is wrong and I watch very closely when downloading anything. It use to be you always just checked ok, ok, ok, but now watch at each window because you may be downloading something else you didn’t expect.