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.
Permalink for comment 352427
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Uhm...
by alcibiades on Tue 10th Mar 2009 10:26 UTC in reply to "Uhm..."
alcibiades
Member since:
2005-10-12

They are, some of them, at least being consistent. They really do think that any software manufacturer should be allowed to place any restrictions he wants to in the EULA and have the courts enforce them. It is difficult to see their reasoning. Its not clear that such a provision is necessary to the health of the industry, in the way that copyright arguably is. And its not clear that there would be any social benefits to it, though there might be many to a supplier by reduction of competition.

We do in consumer protection law commonly restrict what agreements companies can make with their customers. In the UK, for instance, no agreement which limits the consumer rights you have in law will be valid.

There is no evidence that the ability to restrict what we do with software in way of installation of one authorized and purchased copy is either a necessary or desirable power for companies to have.

Reply Parent Score: 2