Almost everyone using a computer is aware that any piece of software can be stolen with sufficient time, effort and expense.

However, it is reasonable to try to protect a product against casual theft, and in fact, it is required of most businesses. Certainly any company doing a multi-national business. If any reader is not yet aware, no nation in Western Europe or the Northern Hemisphere is able to make a legal case for their nation to pursue copyright or product patent theft if they cannot demonstrate that they first exercised "due diligence,"

That is, the large software manufacturers are not able to make a legal pursuit of product theft in other countries unless they are able to demonstrate that they first made a "due diligence" effort to protect their products against theft. In fact, the US will not even allow the raising of an ordinary complaint against another nation if this requirement has not been met.

Case law requires that the "due diligence" effort be in proportion to the value of the product being protected. So, my cheap models require a very small amount of protective effort - in fact, only that a notice of copyright be attached to them in some manner. For an expensive and complex piece of software, I would be required to institute some stronger form of protection.
I cannot get insurance for my small model-building business unless I demonstrate various forms of due diligence. Would the E-On company be under less requirement?

Product activation is increasingly the form of product protection of choice because it is thought to be less onerous to the end user than some other things. (Thought to be so rightly or wrongly.) Product activation generally imposes more cost on the company than on the end user. Users must have a telephone or an internet connection, but the time requirement for a product activation usually is just a few minutes.

It is annoying, no doubt, compared to just installing your software and typing in a simple serial number, or maybe not doing even that. No software protection. But a company doing an international business lacks the option of vending their software products with a total absence of theft protection. And no one in the insurance of software legal field considers a simple serial number to be "sufficient theft protection" these days.

It must be that kyraia uses a MAC or some Linux-type operating system, no?