Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 25th Apr 2008 15:01 UTC
When PsyStar announced they would be offering their own Macintosch clone, pre-installed with Apple's Mac OS X Leopard, they opened up a whole can of worms. Despite the fact that the company itself was shrouded in mystery and dubiousness, the possible implications of their actions sparkled an interesting debate here on OSNews as well as other discussion venues: can PsyStar and its users just discard Apple's End User License Agreement for Leopard? Instead of relying on my own limited layman's understanding of Dutch Common Law, I decided to contact Dutch legal experts, and ask for their opinions on Apple's EULA, and EULAs in general.
Thread beginning with comment 311478
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-02-15
That's what I have been saying also but I am not exactly 100% sure anymore. It is indeed true that if EULA is in conflict with any of the finnish laws, those finnish laws override anything in the EULA ie. you are indeed allowed to make copies of software for personal/backup use, you are allowed to resell your copy of the software as long as you destroy all backups you may have, and so forth. But I started to think a few days ago while reading stuff that EULAs might actually be valid to a degree. I just don't know what kinds of things are allowed there. It seems that mostly any clause that somehow restricts one's freedom is actually invalid so there wouldn't be much left anyway that could be specified in an EULA.
Member since:
2005-07-20
There is actually a decision by the Finnish Supreme Court on EULAs. Their view was that when a consumer goes to a store and buys a product, they buy it and not license. And as such all EULAs are categorically not valid here. Though we need to remember that you can't make copies etc of your programs as they are nevertheless protected by copyright.