A few months ago I sold Brad a box of hardware for his machine. At that time I promised to throw in a license for Mach for the agreed price. Unfortunately, I forgot to mail him the license key. Brad apparently felt it would be inappropriate to remind me of my promise.
I saw a post from Brad on another forum last week wherein he mentioned not having a legitimate license. I promptly sent him the key and apologized for my oversight.
Assuming you have read beyond the part about transferring the license, let me explain. I purchased three licenses many years ago from Art with what I thought was a clear understanding that I intended to transfer them to customers of machines I built.
I do not recall any mention of non-transferability of licenses, nor can I imagine Art deliberately selling me three licenses that I would not be able to transfer. Perhaps the license terms have changed. That does not change the terms under which I purchase my copies.
It should be noted that claims of non-transferability in software licensing have repeatedly been shown invalid, most notably in the Adobe vs Softman case of 2001. I would hope remarks to the contrary within this forum, as well as claims within the Mach license agreement, are based on misunderstanding and not blatant disregard for this fact.
Please give Brad the benefit of your knowledge and help. He has done nothing wrong.
Doug