Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 18th Nov 2007 15:28 UTC, submitted by JCooper
Mac OS X "Ever since I got the eeePC I've loved how easy it is to tinker with. Since I'm not a Linux guy, I dumped the Xandros preload and opted for Windows XP so I could use my EVDO USB datacard and blogging software easier, but I wondered could I install OSX on it? And, after trial and error - you can! The only problem is that the eeePC only supports SSE2 instead of the SSE3 that Leopard is coded for. Kind of a bummer, and will require some extra tinkering to coax the OS on the eeePC."
Thread beginning with comment 285161
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Illegal?
by jal_ on Mon 19th Nov 2007 12:27 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Illegal?"
jal_
Member since:
2006-11-02

It is legal in the US for Apple to sell me computer software but deny me the "right" to run it on a machine that I own?

The thing is, software companies don't seel you their software, but the right to use the software. And in that way, they are allowed to dictate what the terms of use are.

I wonder if the US would next consider a law that allowed a bicycle manufacturer to forbid me to ride on my own property a bike I bought from a bicycle shop.

It's better to compare it to a rent or lease: if you lease a bike, it's not yours. You may use it, but only to the extent of your contract with the one who rents the bike. The same goes for software.

"The European Software Directive (adopted by the UK in 1992) gives users the freedom to copy, run, modify, and reverse-engineer lawfully acquired programs."

Yes, but there are additional laws describing what "copy", "run", "modify" and "reverse-engineer" means. E.g. you can only make a copy for back-up purposes, not to run it on a different machine (at least not simultaneously). And the "freedom to copy" does not mean the "right to copy", so software manufacturers are perfectly withint their rights from preventing you to do so.


JAL

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Illegal?
by mallard on Mon 19th Nov 2007 16:11 in reply to "RE[3]: Illegal?"
mallard Member since:
2006-01-06

The actual text of the European Software Directive is available here: http://wiretap.area.com/Gopher/Gov/Other/copyrigh.ec .

The relevant articles are 4 & 5.

(5)(a) States that
"In the absence of specific contractual provisions, the
acts referred to in Article 4 (a) and (b) shall not require authorization by the rightholder where they are necessary for the use of the computer program by the lawful acquire in accordance with its intended purpose, including for error correction."

Meaning: Unless expressly forbidden by a legally binding contract you may perform the acts in (4)(a) (copy) & (b) (translate) for the purposes of running the program.

The only issue therefore, is whether or not a EULA is a contract.

There are three key elements to the creation of a contract:
These are offer and acceptance, consideration (usually payment), and an intention to create legal relations.

In the case of a EULA:

Offer: The usage of the program (under certain conditions).
Why it is not valid:
Since you almost always encounter a EULA after purchase, you already have the right to use the program under the ESD. The ESD give provisions for contracts that forbid the usage of a program, but do not require a contract to allow id.
You cannot be offered something you already have.

Consideration: None. You have already purchased the software.
Why it is not valid:
No consideration == no contract.

Intention to create legal relations: Yes.

Since EULA's fail 2/3 of the requirements of contracts, the ARE NOT CONTRACTS. Thus, they cannot forbid usage of software.

Note, IANAL. These views are based on UK law.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Illegal?
by Adurbe on Tue 20th Nov 2007 23:55 in reply to "RE[4]: Illegal?"
Adurbe Member since:
2005-07-06

"In the absence of specific contractual provisions, the
acts referred to in Article 4 (a) and (b) shall not require authorization by the rightholder where they are necessary for the use of the computer program by the lawful acquire in accordance with its intended purpose, including for error correction."


can you legally acquire OSX to run it on a system other than a mac?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Illegal?
by lemur2 on Mon 19th Nov 2007 23:37 in reply to "RE[3]: Illegal?"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

The thing is, software companies don't seel you their software, but the right to use the software. And in that way, they are allowed to dictate what the terms of use are.


This is nothing other than an excellent reason for not purchasing that software.

If I have a need to run software (especially if I am going to make my living from running such software), then I will obtain software that I am free to run, thankyou very much, without any reliance on the good graces of some other company.

End of story. Any other choice is business insanity.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Illegal?
by jal_ on Tue 20th Nov 2007 09:11 in reply to "RE[4]: Illegal?"
jal_ Member since:
2006-11-02

If I have a need to run software (especially if I am going to make my living from running such software), then I will obtain software that I am free to run, thankyou very much, without any reliance on the good graces of some other company.

End of story. Any other choice is business insanity.


Well, I admit that nowadays, good alternatives to most MS software are available. But that hasn't always been the case, and still FOSS for e.g. Visio (heavily used by my company) or Outlook/Exchange is not available.


JAL

Reply Parent Score: 1