We’re all familiar with license agreements on software tools that limit what you can with the product. But what about a license agreement on a real tool limiting what you can with the product and the things you make with it?

“Shrinkwrap licenses are showing up everywhere,” a reader recently wrote. “I just bought a jig for making dovetailing jigs -- this is woodworker talk if it's unfamiliar to you. The master jig contained a license that says I've licensed the master jig, not bought it. The license says I can't lend or sell the master, and furthermore I can't lend or sell the jigs I make with the master.”

The reader was referring to Stots Corporation of Harrods Creek, KY, and the user agreement for its TemplateMaster product. Sure enough, the Stots license says TemplateMaster may be used “in only one shop by the original purchaser only” and that “you may not allow individuals that did not purchase the original Product (to) use the Product or any templates produced using the Product…”

A FAQ document on the Stots website explains that the license is necessary because “the purpose of the TemplateMaster is to clone itself. Therefore we are verifying your honesty that only you will use the tool and you will not be passing it around to others to use for free. It is exactly the same as the ‘shrink wrap’ agreement that comes with almost all computer software. Please help us fight ‘tool piracy’.”

Challenged as I am to even hammer a nail, I certainly can’t judge the uniqueness of the TemplateMaster product compared to other woodworking tools. The reader doubts it’s particularly novel, in that the template or jig one creates with it will be virtually identical to “Keller” jigs that have been around for many years. “The key difference is that the instructions that came with the Keller jig said, in not so few words ‘here, use this jig to make a dovetail joint’,” the reader said. “The Stots jig, which is geometrically equivalent, comes with instructions that say ‘use a duplicating router bit to copy this jig to make a jig that looks almost exactly the same as me -- and exactly the same as the Keller jig -- then use that jig to make a dovetail joint.”

But even assuming the Stots tool is a wonderful innovation, does that give its inventor the right to restrict how you use the tool? The patent law doctrine of exhaustion would seen to overrule such restrictions, but that doctrine took a hit in one recent case. And then what about the idea of restricting how customers use the tools they make with the TemplateMaster? Don’t let the software companies hear about that one, or next thing you know there will be usage restrictions on who we can share our data with.