From the OP I gather that he is not currently doing the acts he described. My conclusion is that he should refrain from putting those acts into effect since they may well be illegal.
I am not familiar with Swedish law at all; my remarks are based on general legal concepts and a few specific laws and directives. There could be specific laws or treaties that lead to different results under Swedish law. You should consult a Swedish lawyer if you want a reliable result. The following remarks do not add up to more than an educated guess.
- Applicable law
The DMCA is most certainly not applicable in Sweden. Copyright laws are as a matter of course only applicable to the territory on which the alleged infringment takes place. Assuming the network does not extend to the U.S., and the OP is not using his laptop on a flight into the U.S., the U.S. courts nor U.S. law would have jurisdictions on the actions mentioned in the OP.
There is a slight snag: if you are dealing with criminal law matters may be different and countries may cooperate to extradite inhabitants who are suspected of illegal actions. Some of the cases cited by others were, AFAIK, dealing with criminal law (cryptographic technology etc.). As I am not specialized in criminal law, I cannot inform you further on this matter.
With respect to the WIPO treaties: these in themselves (AFAIK) are aimed primarily at states, not at citizens. Therefore states may be negligent in not adopting the laws necessary for implementing the treaty, but that does not make the citizens liable. Article 11, which deals with technical measures, specificall says states have to implement legislation. Other copyright treaties (Bern Convention) have no specific provisions for technical measures to circumvent protections. I couldn’t find any in TRIPS either, when perusing it just now.
- Copyright law
From the above it follows that only national Swedish law is applicable. Matters are, however, further complicated by the fact that Sweden as of 1995 is a member of the European Union. The EU has issued a Copyright directive (2001/29/C of May 22nd 2001, Publ. L 167 of June 22nd 2001). All member states should have implemented it as of 22 December 2002. I do not know whether Sweden has implemented it yet. A quick Google didn’t help me.
Article 6 deales with technical measures:
The thing is, it is unclear whether the measure described by the OP can be qualified as a technical measure in the sense of the Directive. In itself the OP states he owns a valid CD. You may use technical measures if these are necessary to use the program, but only after (simply put) you have asked the copyright holder to help you. Furthermore, the measure may be used for illegal copying of the data of the CD and running the program without having the CD. Furthermore it may be used for running it with more than one person at the same time.
I cannot easily see how this would work out. It would take me more time than I can spend at the moment to give a proper reasoning on this matter. For me it is as yet unclear whether the OP is acting in violation of article 6 Copyright Directive.
Another possible infringment might be basic copyright infringment: if the OP has not acquired the right to make specific digital copies for use, he is infringing copyright by doing that. For programs the legal mechanics are that the OP is not allowed to make any copies except those that are necessary for using the CD for its lawful/intended purpose (Copyright Directive recital 28, read in conjunction with article 4.2 and 5.1(b)).* While it is allowed that the computer makes the cache copies and possible installation copies that the program requires, I doubt whether the copy on the network qualifies as a copy necessary for use. There is therefore a fair case to be made that the copy on the network is illegal.
The conclusion of this section is that the OP could indeed very well be in violation of copyright law in two respects. I therefore must strongly suggest him to refrain from acting in this manner. I can understand that this may seem unfair to most people, but the OP didn’t ask for an opinion on fairness.
- Contract law
Regardless of copyright law, if the OP has entered a contract which limits his rights of use (for example stating that he is only allowed to run the program directly from CD), he would be in breach of contract. Whether he has accepted such a limitation depends on whether
- there is a ‘shrink-wrap license’ or similar which contains such a provision, and
- whether he has accepted this license or whether the license otherwise binds him.
The former question is a matter of fact which can be answered by reading the license.
The latter question is much debated. Generally speaking in Europe the opinion of lawyers divided, but courts have been adverse to finding such a license binding. I recently defended the latter position.
Judging from what the OP said, the proposed actions could indeed be in violation of copyright law. I therefore must urge him to refrain from acting in this manner. If you really think that the law does allow this (and such a possibility does exist), the legally proper way would be to inform the software company that you are planning to do this and that you believe it legal for specific reasons. Then they can tell you whether they agree or not. This course has drawbacks, since you may get involved in costly proceedings. Therefore I would suggest you do nothing and refrain from the acts described.
Standard disclaimer applies: I am not the lawyer of the OP or any of the other posters; the opinions presented herein are not based on a proper investigation of the facts; I don’t know anything about Swedish law and am not specialised in U.S. law either; if someone wants trustworthy advice I strongly advice him to consult a lawyer.
- This matter is much more complicated; I’m only summarizing the result of an intricate argument which I’ve developed elsewhere.