While I'm not contesting the principle behind all of this and everything like that, but in my experience what happens in real life with this is "nobody cares". Of all the software audits I've seen and heard of the worst that happened was Adobe gave them a bill for the 200 licenses that where missing (the company had well over 1000 I believe) to bring them in line...and that was it. They had no interest in trying to fine them or take them to court, they just said "your out by quite a lot, here is your renewed contract" the only down side was it had to be paid in 30 days, but considering they where off by quite a way and where simply paying what they *should* be paying, it was no real problem.Do most of you realise that almost all copies of Windows, and many of Windows Server, are contractually tied to the hardware? You can replace the motherboard only if the original is unobtainable, you cannot simply buy a new computer and move the OS to it. Not under your EULA, anyway. And yet again, we're talking money. A portable copy of Windows will cost twice the price of the tied OEM version, so few people outside the IT business bother. And you wouldn't believe the virtualisation licensing, some versions of Windows not being permitted to run virtually under any conditions.
I've seen letters from lawyers stating a previous company had illegal software, we got them in, they tested and saw we where out by one or two and again just brought it in line as it was more a human over sight then anything else. Going further then that to hardware restrictions (replaced motherboards etc) and all that stuff, I've never heard or seen anything of that being enforced, from my experience as long as you have the correct license for what your running and you about 95% compliant, nobody cares that much (though I'm not saying it doesn't happen)