What Is the Issue in the Psystar Case?
Linked by Nescio on Mon 9th Mar 2009 08:05 UTC
Apple Numerous irrelevant issues and feelings about them are ventilated in comments on the case. However, there are only two important issues. One is what the law is, the other is what we think the law should be.
E-mail Print r 12   · Read More · 113 Comment(s) http://osne.ws/ga8
Permalink for comment 352340
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Uhm...
by gcbirzan on Mon 9th Mar 2009 21:37 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Uhm..."
gcbirzan
Member since:
2009-03-09

Whether the license grants or removes rights is completely immaterial, the concept is respecting the license. If you feel that you have a right to infringe on Apple license, regardless of the reason, then you should have no qualms about someone else infringing on the GPL, regardless of the reason.

Actually, if the Apple license falls under copyright misuse, then Apple is prevented from enforcing it until they take care of the misuse.
Finally, you're going to have to do a lot more than simply state that Apple's EULA in some way harms consumers. I'm afraid that your opinion carries no weight with me or many other people on this planet. Such comments sound more like hyperbole attempting to appeal to fear than a rational, coherent argument.

Limited monopolies, enforced through the abuse of copyright, can do nothing but harm the market. Competition is known to improve the market, not allowing it hurts the market.
You tell me, how does Apple EULA _help_ consumers? By limiting their choice of hardware to one?

Reply Parent Score: 2