Well, I’ve just noticed that while I don’t see any problem with the idea of having a program or a game installed on two computers but using only one at a time (e.g. an online computer and an offline one, a laptop and a desktop etc), the literal reading of some EULAs prohibits this.
As a lawyer, I consider it grossly abusive that e.g. a child that wants to play a game on either an online computer or practice on an offline one (e.g. a shared online computer in the house), should be forced to pay for two copies of that game, even if he uses one at a time.
The problem is further made absurd by the fact that uninstalling on the one and installing on the other computer before each use would solve the problem with literal interpretations. So it would be all right if you uninstalled and reinstalled all the time, but not all right if you just used one at a time…
Why I’m asking is that I’m starting to experience a certain discomfort about this and feel bad about the idea of violating an EULA, even if it’s an absurd one. At the same time, just how much absurdity do we need to tolerate?