First, you seem to be going out of your way to pretend the First Sale doctrine exists.<p>&gt; MAI Systems Corp. v. Peak Computer, Inc.<p>That was 1993. Several cases have handled the issue of temporary RAM copies since then. In particular, Cartoon Network, LP v. CSC Holdings, Inc.[1] found that the MAI case didn&#x27;t address how RAM copies only exist for a &quot;transitory duration&quot;, and thus are not eligible for copyright. Using software normally is patently fair use. Again, this supposed license requirement doesn&#x27;t exist in most cases.<p>Besides, this entire line of argument is strange; pretending that normal use of a product infringes copyright sure seems like a claim that the product was not fit for purpose.<p>&gt; those rights also extend<p>Up until the first sale. Generally, anything beyond that point requires a contract.<p>&gt; distribution of copies<p>&gt; creation of derivative works<p>I&#x27;m talking about use; these are not relevant.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Cartoon_Network,_LP_v._CSC_Holdings,_Inc" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Cartoon_Network,_LP_v._CSC_Hol...</a>.