I think Alcohol's "high and mighty" position on unlicensed software is laughable. Talk about hypocracy. We don't know if this user has unlicensed software or not. Let's assume he does. Does that give Alcohol a right to hose his OS? Does Alcohol deliberately build this issue into it's software in hopes of punishing unlicensed users? If so, that puts Alcohol in bed with the likes of Sony, which comes as no surprise. In any case, if Alcohol was truly interested in creating a licensed user out of an unlicensed one, I suggest that hosing his OS is not the way to do that. If it's a built-in issue designed to punish unlicensed users, then the solution should be to simply buy a license, NOT reinstalling the OS. If it's a "bug" and not deliberate on Alcohol's part, then there should be a fix offered - again in exchange for buying a license.

So yes, this is a typical Alcohol response, based on my experience. And just one more in a series of reasons to avoid this software. Let me add a couple others:
1) Broken virtual drive drivers that can no longer be removed safely and effectively while keeping the software installed.
2) "Phone-home" activation policies that were instituted without user notification, knowledge or consent.
3) Arrogant and ineffective support staff.