> I hope they have very good lawyers, then. I'm not sure how they could enforce that.
Why? Like I said, unless someone has a copy obtained with the original license, then any subsequent copies are accepted with the new license. There's nothing in the law that says the copyright holder can't change the license.
> unless someone has a copy obtained with the original license
See my comment about "configuration management."
I'm sorry. If someone wants to call themselves an "engineer," then they need to act like an engineer, and that means things like good configuration management. In my opinion, and I'm just an unlettered redneck, self-taught cowboy, so I guess my opinion ain't worth squat, the term "engineer" connotes things like rigorous self-discipline, process discipline, and personal integrity.
Just the thought of someone releasing commercial, or commercial-grade software, without CM, sends chills down my spine. I guess that it's a statement on the current state of the industry, that people assume that CM is something that is "optional."
Why? Like I said, unless someone has a copy obtained with the original license, then any subsequent copies are accepted with the new license. There's nothing in the law that says the copyright holder can't change the license.