Well I'm no lawyer, but one legal theory you could argue is the one from MAI vs Peak. This is the one that holds that loading a computer program into ram for ru

Well I'm no lawyer, but one legal theory you could argue is the one from MAI vs Peak. This is the one that holds that loading a computer program into ram for running is a copy that requires permission from the copyright holder. Therefore one would argue that by running this program, they ratified the EULA, or else they blatantly committed copyright infringement, which is probably worse than simple breach of contract. I know there are lawyers who seem to argue otherwise, for example the GPL states "You are not required to accept this license to receive or run a copy of the program". But I don't know if that statement has any legal basis in general, or if it's just the FSF granting permission to run covered software without accepting the GPL. As far as the US goes, I think it's the latter, but it may be different in other jurisdictions. I'm not a lawyer, please go hire someone if you really need to know.