Apparently using elaborate licensing terms to extend the rights granted under copyright and patent law are not a new idea, nor are they limited to the software industry. From a record manufactered before 1909:
This record which is registered on our books in accordance with the number hereon, is licensed by us for sale and use only when sold to the public at a price not less than one dollar each. No license is granted to use this record when sold at a less price. This record is leased solely for the purpose of producing sound directly from the record and for no other purpose; all other rights under the licensor’s patents under which this record is made are expressly reserved to the licensor. Any attempt at copying or counterfeiting this record will be construed as a violation of these conditions. Any sale or use of this record in violation of any of these conditions will be considered as an infrinement of our United States patents, Nos. 524543, dated February 19, 1895, and 548623, dated October 29, 1895, issued to EMILE BERLINER, and No. 739,318, dated September 22, 1903, and No. 778,976, dated January 3, 1905, and of our other U.S. patents covering this record, and all parties so selling or using the record, or any copy thereof, contrary to the terms of this license, will be treated as infringers of said patents, and will render themselves liable for suit.
I don’t know enough about copyright history to be sure, but my guess is that the reason they talk so much about patent law is that I believe “mechanical reproductions” of music were not covered by copyright law until the 1909 Copyright Act. So record companies apparently attempted to use patent law plus some creative contract terms to create the contractual equivalent of copyright.
The Technology Liberation Front is the tech policy blog dedicated to keeping politicians' hands off the 'net and everything else related to technology.