Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 14th Jan 2009 10:16 UTC
Legal And so the court case between Apple and clone-maker Psystar continues. Claims are being thrown back and forth between the two companies, ranging from Apple invoking the DMCA, to Psystar claiming Apple's Mac OS X copyright is invalid. We can add a new one to the list. Court documents reveal that Psystar claims it has bought its copies of Mac OS X fair and square - including some directly from Apple.
Permalink for comment 343810
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Comment by Bernhard
by Bernhard on Fri 16th Jan 2009 07:22 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Bernhard"
Member since:

Please explain explicitly how I am agreeing and disagreeing.

Again, most EULA's (that only prohibit) are meaningless, but the few licenses that grant extra permissions are important and valuable.

Oh. How... convenient. So everything in an EULA that limits your rights is meaningless, while everything that grants you rights is valid?

"If i BUY the software, then it's my PROPERTY. I can do whatever i damn well want to do with it,

That is mostly true with the exception that you cannot violate copyright law -- you own the copy, but not the copyright.
No it isn't. And it's also not what i was trying to say. What i DID mean is that: if software is sold but not licensed, EULAs are meaningless. BUT if software is licensed and not sold, then EULAs are very well binding contracts. Of course single clauses can be ruled out by a judge if they are deemed too restricting or plain illegal, but that won't touch the validity of the rest of the license.

"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?

Our beliefs have nothing to do with a judge's view of the facts of this case nor with what Psystar is attempting.

It appears that the law is plainly on Psystar's side. Of course, such a condition doesn't preclude the possibility that Apple's lawyers could pull off some absurd travesty of law/justice.

Again: NO. The law is NOT clearly on the side of Psystar. It all comes down to the whole "is software sold or licensed" debate.

Reply Parent Score: 1