Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 2nd Dec 2008 22:42 UTC, submitted by anon
Legal The legal back-and-forth between Apple and clone-maker PsyStar continues to develop, with the latest news being a move by Apple - the Cupertino company has invoked something with many already predicted Apple would call upon: the DMCA, or the Digital Millenium Copyright Act. This was done in an amendment to the original suit, filed in July this year.
Permalink for comment 339299
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Soulbender
Member since:
2005-08-18

It is clearly stated in the EULA that you do not own the software


You are right, it doesn't matter if it's licensed or not. However...

You do not own the software. You are purchasing a license to use it


Right. So if I buy OSX, go home, unpack the box a few days later, break the seal, put the CD in my drive, get presented with the EULA and disagree with it, I can pack everything back up again, go back to the store and get a full refund? I'd really like for someone to try that and see what happens.

You buy the right to use the software within the limits set by, in this case, Apple.


And that's exactly what this is about, if the terms set forth by Apple in the EULA is reasonable and in accordance with the law (contract law, consumer law etc).

I'm not discussing the ethics of the situation, merely what rights you are granted by the company that owns the intellectual property.


You seem to think that a company can set forth any crazy contracts terms they want and you just have to accept them or not buy the product but that's just not the case.

Read it for yourself. Psystar is doomed, unless the judge decides to throw out the concept of the EULA.


Nonsense. That's like saying one illegal contract invalidates the concept of contracts. The judge only has to state what, if any, terms in the EULA that are not "legal" and then Apple have to remove those. Granted, the legal wheels may turn quite some time before and after that happens but this case is not about the validity of EULA's themselves. It's about the specific terms in one EULA.

Reply Parent Score: 2