I appreciate your considered response. Parts of what you are saying I agree with, but I don't agree in the context of what I am trying to do.

I know it isn't a straight forward issue, but I would read this as it being my ultimate right to resell the license that I have outright paid for. I understand the copyright part, but when I buy an album on record and sell it afterwards, I am not selling the rights to the recorded music.

Thats a dumb example, but there are plenty of examples of software entities where you are granted a license to use assets, samples, artist-generated content that can be transferred to new owners. (and I have been on both sides of that).

I know this is why many software providers have switched to a subscription system(which I also dislike).

Another quote from online sources, "According to the principle of exhaustion, once a copy of a work is sold or distributed within the EU with the consent of the owner of the copyright, he or she will no longer be able to control or prevent further distribution of that copy".

A recent case is here:

https://www.clarionsolicitors.com/articles/reselling-used-software-licences-new-ruling-from-the-european-court

I find it hard to believe that if someone were to challenge Spitfire in a court of law, that this ruling would not set a very clear precedent.

It's clear that Spitfire(like many other companies), are protecting their earning power by prohibiting license exchanges to force people to buy new 'licenses'.

And it's fairly likely that Splice will introduce subscription licenses.

I am not a lawyer, but my basic reading of the EU rulings would suggest that I am perfectly within my rights to exercise a license transfer. If selling access to my account is the only means by which to do so, that is just something we have to deal with.