Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 23rd Jun 2008 22:13 UTC
PsyStar introduced its Mac clone to much media attention back in April, causing many discussions about the company's legal status, the validity of the Mac OS X EULA, and even PsyStar's very existence. It soon turned out PsyStar was a real company, and was actually shipping the OpenComputer Mac Clone to its customers, to generally rather favourable reviews - not stellar of course, but acceptable, with the biggest downside being the inability to use the Software Update tool, forcing users to download OS updates straight from PsyStar's servers - to prevent updates from Apple hosing the OpenComputer. We're a few months later now, and a few things have changed.
Thread beginning with comment 319643
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Apple Won't Go After Them
by StephenBeDoper on Tue 24th Jun 2008 03:32
in reply to "RE[3]: Apple Won't Go After Them"
Member since:2005-07-06
Unless of course the EULA itself is found to be illegal.
That's possible, but I don't think it's likely. Just from a financial point of view, I imagine that it would be cheaper to challenge specific stipulations of a particular contract - as opposed to challenging the legality of all contracts of a certain type.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2006-01-14
Unless of course the EULA itself is found to be illegal. Remember, many states have laws about how a contract (and thats really what the EULA is) can be entered into, what it can specify, and other such limitations. EULA's for the most part have never been tested. Frankly, its about time they are.
Edited 2008-06-24 03:21 UTC