Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 25th Oct 2009 12:51 UTC
Editorial A couple of years ago, a professor at my university had a very interesting thought exchange with the class I was in. We were a small group, and I knew most of them, they were my friends. Anyway, we had a talk about language purism - not an unimportant subject if you study English in The Netherlands.
Permalink for comment 391104
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Thom has a point...
by wirespot on Mon 26th Oct 2009 09:08 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Thom has a point..."
wirespot
Member since:
2006-06-21

There's an established law stating that an OS vendor can legitimately use an EULA to enforce post-sale restrictions on the brand of computer that can be used to run their OS?


No and please don't try to twist things around. Apple is not placing restrictions on the "brand of computer used to run their OS". They're placing restrictions on WHO can bundle OS X with ANY computer and WHAT they can and cannot do with it. And for that yes, there is legal precedent. Look up MDY vs Blizzard.

Don't look now, but Psystar doesn't seem to be having much problem dealing with the consequences.


Has the lawsuit ended? We'll talk when it does. But I suggest in the meantime you look at how well troll lawsuits worked out for SCO. They're currently bankrupt and the pieces are being taken apart by a judge-appointed overseer.

Reply Parent Score: 2