Linked by Nescio on Mon 9th Mar 2009 08:05 UTC
Permalink for comment 352469
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 06/19/13 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
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 21:03 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2009-03-10
I understand the argument put forward for why Apple should not be able to enforce any restrictions of use from the sale of its stand alone software, in this case OSX. And further more, I agree with your argument. I do not want to be dictated to regarding how I can or should use a product I have legally purchased.
However, your argument does not distinguish between for personal use vs for profit. In the case of Pystar, they are using Apple's software, installed on their hardware, to sell their product and compete directly against Apple.
If Pystar was not using Apple's software in this way, would they still have a legitimate business?
Is it right for a company, like Pystar to use Apple's own software to compete and take further business away from Apple?
I say no, not without proper license from Apple, which it has not given.