Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 12th Oct 2009 18:25 UTC
Legal Now that all the nastiness of the discovery phase is behind us in the Apple vs. Psystar case, both parties are trying to get the case settled before it goes to court, much like the recent Vernor vs. Autodesk case. Both Apple and Psystar have filed motions asking for a summary judgement.
Permalink for comment 388840
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Suppose?
by jasutton on Mon 12th Oct 2009 18:52 UTC in reply to "Suppose?"
Member since:

It doesn't really matter, as Apple (and pretty much every other software vendor) already claim this. Luckily for us (the end-users), as long as vendors continue to sell us copies of their software, we still fit into the definition of "owners of a copy" as Title 17 Section 117 of the US Code states.

I think this is one reason we've seen such a push from vendors toward a Software as a Service (SaaS) model. It's like the program manufacturer saying "if you don't own a copy of the software, then we can enforce whatever restrictions we'd like on you."

Reply Parent Score: 2