To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I want to mention here that German law also invalidates EULA parts which state that you are not allowed to resell the software -- this was tested in court with the back-then EULA of OEM MS Office versions.
But I assume it's true that this still excludes modifying the software and then selling it, which can be forbidden by the EULA.
p.s.: to clarify: If Apple is sueing Psystar over the EULA (End-user License Agreement) it is obvious that Psystar is buying these end-user licenses from Apple and therefore is a customer like everybody else.
Edited 2008-08-01 01:15 UTC
But I assume it's true that this still excludes modifying the software and then selling it.
If you took the time to read, the issue isn't the reselling of the operating system - I've sold old copies of MacOS X without any repercussions from the auction site I did it through.
The issue at play is the fact that this vendor is selling a MODIFIED VERSION of Apple's software - that is the issue. They have hacked up a copy of MacOS X and resold it. Unless they have a special OEM agreement with Apple (which they don't), what they did was illegal.
"But I assume it's true that this still excludes modifying the software and then selling it, which can be forbidden by the EULA.
p.s.: to clarify: If Apple is sueing Psystar over the EULA (End-user License Agreement) it is obvious that Psystar is buying these end-user licenses from Apple and therefore is a customer like everybody else."
I agree mostly. This is going to be interesting to see how it goes. According to Apple, OS X on the shelf is sold as an upgrade to an existing system, not as an end product. This will finally answer that question also I think.





Member since:
2005-12-02
The customer has the preserved right of using the software the way it fits her most, including modifications on the software...."
This is where the break down is actually. If you were a customer of Apple and used the software for your own purposes, doing this would not be an issue. In this case we have a company reselling Apple software without permission, as well as modifying the software to distribute it to others, and make a profit on it. Big difference from the scenario you mentioned.