Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 2nd Dec 2008 22:42 UTC, submitted by anon
Permalink for comment 338972
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-01-14
Depends on what Psystar did. If all they did was modify the hardware to run OS X then I don't think Apple has a case. Other case law supports Psystar reselling OS X however they wish. Even if they modified the software, I think Psystar is ok. No law says I can't sell Windows computers with Stardock preinstalled, which is basically what this covers. So I guess the real question comes down to what is someone allowed to do with the software they purchased.