Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 14th Jan 2009 10:16 UTC
Permalink for comment 343832
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 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
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
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2008-11-12
1. I'm not a Mac fanboy. I don't own a Mac, and i never have.
2. If the case were so clear as you state, why are we even seeing something like Apple vs. Psystar?
3. From the POV of software vendors, including but not limited to Apple, software IS NOT (i repeat: is not) sold. It's licensed. And since the customer didn't buy it, fair use doesn't apply. The license applies instead.
I'm not saying that this POV is correct. In fact, i never have and i apologize if i gave you that impression. But you and i have neither the competence nor the authority to to say it is or is not. That is to be ruled by a judge.