issues
It's been a long time since I shared this information, and I'm not sure if anything has or has not changed in the years regarding this. Correct me if you know something that I am not aware of on this issue.
When you buy software, it comes with a license to use. Now, as best as I can remember from my Law School days, and common knowledge of the land, a license means you do not possess ownership.
A license allows you to use something contingent upon various stipulations. And when those stipulations cease to be honored, the license can be rescinded, or it is automatically null and void at that point, as the general rule.
But here's the interesting thing: The government taxes software like it is a commodity, or an item for purchase, which then means, according to law, that the item is owned. And an item that is owned, it is not subject to the rules of a license.
This is the dilemma that was faced by the courts when software sales for the PC began to get enormous back in the early 1980's, and the government said, "Hey, we need to get our paws on that money, too!"
It was a unique issue that had not yet been resolved - the digital medium called software, and in truth, it has still not been resolved satisfactorily.
Either it's a license and you do not pay taxes, or it is owned in which case you do pay a sales tax.
In the early years, the government attempted to justify the "tax" by saying that the consumer was buying a book (because in those days, all software came with owner's manuals, by and large). But that was ridiculous because nobody was paying hundreds of dollars for an owner's manual. And, as an example, Adobe Photoshop, regardless of the year and version, always sold near $1,000. Nobody was paying for a book and it was all a scam for the government to tax software which was a license. People screwed again by the government.
And then, as time progressed, companies put the owner's manual on the disk itself, which annihilated any idea that people were paying a tax for a book.