You miss the point, you only encrypt an item ON their hard drive if you intend on controlling it's use and charging a subscription for it's use. There is no other reason to do it. and they say well the EULA stops it, no the company can change the EULA at will. it is not binding.

Actually there are a few issues with this statement.

Companies can not change the terms of sale after a sale retroactively. So what that means is that if you purchase an item under a specific licensing agreement. Any changes to the licence agreement only apply to new items sold under the new agreement. An EULA is in effect a contract that is agreed on by both parties and is protected by law. So in effect an End User License Agreement is binding. (1) (2)

You miss the point, you only encrypt an item ON their hard drive if you intend on controlling its use and charging a subscription for it's use.

This is speculation and I can point to dozens of incidences of encryption that haven't led to the situation you're describing. Like the fact that this webpage is using encryption on your hard drive. Even in a content scenario like games on Steam. (3)

I feel you may have missed the point, if you purchase an encrypted product from Daz 3D you will have made a contract with Daz 3D under the EULA for it's usage, changing the terms after the fact to retroactive purchases would leave them open to legal recourse. Any new Eula conditions are not valid until you agree to them. The EULA currently in place does not allow for the situation you are describing.

What your suggesting is the equivalent to Apple saying you know all those $1.99 song you bought? We decided that we are going to change our terms and now charge you $4.99 for each one retroactively, you have bought 1500 songs in the past. So here is your bill for $4500 dollars.

It's not only unethical it would be a breach of contract. (4)