Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 14th Jan 2009 10:16 UTC
Permalink for comment 343677
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 06/20/13 6:17 UTC, submitted by MOS6510
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/19/13 23:02 UTC, submitted by M.Onty
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/19/13 22:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Anonymous on 06/18/13 22:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:25 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2008-11-12
Of course, they don't.
There is no need to jump to conclusions.
Keep in mind that countless provisions in EULAs and other private contracts have been ruled to be invalid by the courts, but these rulings don't affect other provisions in the rest of the contract, nor do these rulings affect other private contracts that exclude the invalid provisions. "
How can you agree and disagree to the question at the same time?
If i BUY the software, then it's my PROPERTY. I can do whatever i damn well want to do with it, including but not limited to using it on non-Apple hardware, using it for the construction of nuclear weapons and so on. It would really invalidate the whole point of writing an EULA in the first place!
And to make my point clear again: I can't believe that any judge would EVER rule towards something like that, so Psystar can't be trying to get one to do so. Right?