Your analogy is wrong. When you purchase paint, you purchase paint. When you purchase software, you are purchasing a license to use the software and a handy CD that contains it. For your analogy to be accurate, it must be viewed this way: You do own the physical CD - you can use the CD as a coaster, or a frisbee, or as siding on your house, and Apple couldn't do a thing about it. As for the software ON the CD, you don't own that. You simply have a license to use it and even then just under the terms of the agreement. If you don't agree, you are under no obligation to purchase the license or install the software. You may, however, use the CD to level your table. Whether or not you "couldn't give two fucks" about anything is irrelevant.

No, they purchased a physical disc, and a license to use the software on that disc according to the license agreement. By spending the money for the license, they are bound by the agreement that comes with the software, period. Signed contract not required. For example, when you buy a ticket for a sporting event, you are merely purchasing a license to view the game. It is revokable for any reason (read the fine print). When was the last time you signed a contract for a game ticket? The law - I do not think it means what you think it means.

Photog. Written by a lazy d-bag.

Why didn't he just follow the orders, leave, then file a complaint? I'm not defending Amtrak here, since it sounds like they were in the wrong, but it's like getting pulled over by the police. The side of the road is not the place to argue your case. The officer is not a judge, and you aren't the jury. The bottom line is that arguing with the officer almost never results in you "winning", and can often hurt your chances of winning a lawsuit later on if the jury thinks you were provoking a response.