I was surprised to see that Pixologic has decided to stop facilitating license transfers. I was even more confused after reading the most current license agreement which in no way gives them the right to prohibit sales, especially in the EU. (Also, the previous software transfer fee is illegal in the EU unless specifically written into the license. In the US, the fee can be assessed to certain liberally interpreted limitations without specifying anything in the EULA.)
There is a 9th Circuit Court ruling allowing exceptions to the first sale doctrine, but the clause Pixologic is using in their EULA is boilerplate and ambiguous in this context, “You may not use, copy, modify, or transfer the Program or Documentation or any copy, modification, or merged portion in whole or in part without express permission from Pixologic.”
I’m not so sure why the customer unfriendly change. I was fully expecting version 5 to have an upgrade fee, but to arbitrarily force this policy for people who purchased ZBrush in friendlier times seems like a bad move. The change is at best disingenuous, and I’m sure can easily be the catalyst of a successful lawsuit. What irks me the most is that Pixologic seemingly admits this fact by exempting businesses who obviously declare ZBrush as an asset, but not the common man. They know they will get sued if they tried to force this on their best customers.