Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 17th Sep 2008 09:15 UTC, submitted by Andrew Youll
Mac OS X If you want to run Mac OS X on a standard, non-Apple-labelled x86 box, you have various options. You can go all creative and build and install one yourself, and then be weary when installing updates from Apple. You can also buy a Mac clone from PsyStar, and then be weary of Apple's crack team of lawyers. A third option has just become available: EFI-X.
Thread beginning with comment 330563
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Won't fit in my mind.
by silix on Wed 17th Sep 2008 13:22 UTC in reply to "Won't fit in my mind."
silix
Member since:
2006-03-01

this is an oftern heard argument, but it's plain wrong anyway...

If I purchased something from a company, it's mine, not their anymore. Simple as that.
except for SW - a SW product is not a car, when you buy it,
it does not become yours
- its property (copyright, and intellectual property over algorithms and mechanisms the SW implements) remains the company's
yours is the physical media on which the SW is recorded ( which you can do anything you wnat with - including breaking it or using it a coaster) and the right to use it for as long as you comply with the conditions the company has indicated in the EULA ( conditions that you explicitly accept the first time you use the SW or more often during installation)

They can't tell me how to use their stuff, but they're in right to don't provide me support or warranty if I break their EULA.

if you think that the EULA is a contract between the consumer and the supplier of a product and/or service (namely, the usage of the SW to let your computer do what it needs it for, and eventual support covering difficulties that may arise during use and problems on the product's side) then you'll realze it's not simple as that

if i use a product outside the limit of the usage agreement, deliberately violating the agreement, then the agreement becomes void as a minimum
then i am no more using the product as an authorized user, and i am not that different from those who pirate sw or go by means of cracks and warez

EULA is so boring as if you bought some clothes and the manufacturer says that you can't use it on weekends. Why if it is mine?

as said before, because the SW is not yours and will never be, and the only way to use it legitly is with the blessing of the legal copyright owner (who will most likely put whatever rule law allows for in the eula, bu will hardly be so dumb to limit his customers in a way that alienates them and makes them use alternatives...)

@ rajan_R : your posts weren't there yet when i was writing , sorry for overlapping u_u

Edited 2008-09-17 13:25 UTC

Reply Parent Score: -1

RE[2]: Won't fit in my mind.
by tristan on Wed 17th Sep 2008 14:08 in reply to "RE: Won't fit in my mind."
tristan Member since:
2006-02-01

except for SW - a SW product is not a car, when you buy it, it does not become yours - its property (copyright, and intellectual property over algorithms and mechanisms the SW implements) remains the company's


When I buy a television, I don't expect to take ownership of the "intellectual property" of the company that makes it. The designs of the chips inside it aren't mine, and no-one would expect them to be. The design of the menu screens aren't mine, and so on.

But at the same time, I don't expect the TV manufacturer to be able to tell which which channels I can and can't watch, or which DVD player I can connect to it.

How have we managed to get into the situation where people accept -- and in some cases even defend! -- software companies being able to tell us what to do *after we've bought their product*, in a way that would be completely unacceptable for any other type of product?

Reply Parent Score: 9

google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

What about music, books, and videos?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Won't fit in my mind.
by progoth on Wed 17th Sep 2008 20:26 in reply to "RE[2]: Won't fit in my mind."
progoth Member since:
2006-10-28

How have we managed to get into the situation where people accept -- and in some cases even defend! -- software companies being able to tell us what to do *after we've bought their product*, in a way that would be completely unacceptable for any other type of product?


Some of us write software. Some of us respect the law and recognize that we'd be in trouble without it. Sometimes those people intersect, sometimes not.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Won't fit in my mind.
by WereCatf on Wed 17th Sep 2008 14:17 in reply to "RE: Won't fit in my mind."
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

except for SW - a SW product is not a car, when you buy it,
it does not become yours - its property (copyright, and intellectual property over algorithms and mechanisms the SW implements) remains the company's


Indeed. You aren't buying the copyright to a car either. So, this point is moot.

yours is the physical media on which the SW is recorded ( which you can do anything you wnat with - including breaking it or using it a coaster) and the right to use it for as long as you comply with the conditions the company has indicated in the EULA ( conditions that you explicitly accept the first time you use the SW or more often during installation)

You own that particular copy of the product that you have purchased. It is a _product_ you are buying. Just as a car, you buy one and that one particular copy is yours. No other similar car is, though, nor can you claim copyright ownership on it either.

I have no idea where you live but here in Finland if it were true that you were indeed subscribing to a service (buying the right to use the software, instead of buying a product) you'd have to sign a contract. EULA can not dictate what you can do with your copy of the software.

It was a few years ago but there was a court case which made the law very clear: the customer had bought a copy of some cad-like software and sold it then a year later to someone else. The EULA however said that you aren't allowed to sell it and the company behind the software took it to the court. The court ruled however that the customer had bought a product, not a service, and was in no liability to the company and could do as he wishes his own copy.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[3]: Won't fit in my mind.
by silix on Wed 17th Sep 2008 15:10 in reply to "RE[2]: Won't fit in my mind."
silix Member since:
2006-03-01

You aren't buying the copyright to a car either. So, this point is moot.

i perfectly know that you are not buying the copyright to a car, but actually a car doesn't come "with string attached" - there's no eula, and no need to distinguish between the right to use a product and the right to set conditions for the usage of the product (which is something that, in the case of SW, only the copyright owner can legitly do)

I have no idea where you live but here in Finland if it were true that you were indeed subscribing to a service (buying the right to use the software, instead of buying a product) you'd have to sign a contract.

Italy, and i've seen the fact that clicking on "I agree" is equivalent to signing a contract with the SW maker, stressed and remarked often times where i work

It was a few years ago but there was a court case which made the law very clear: the customer had bought a copy of some cad-like software and sold it then a year later to someone else. The EULA however said that you aren't allowed to sell it and the company behind the software took it to the court. The court ruled however that the customer had bought a product, not a service, and was in no liability to the company and could do as he wishes his own copy.

this is only logical, imho
in a contract between two parts, either one can at some point pass on someone else his part of the agreement, "discarding" obligations AND benefits altogether
if there are legal provisions for this, i think not even the conditions set in the EULA by the SW maker, can overcome the right of a licensee to stop using the product, alienating it and letting someone else be the regular licensee of that copy (as long as the new one uses the program as it is intended to be, that is)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Won't fit in my mind.
by Soulbender on Wed 17th Sep 2008 16:17 in reply to "RE: Won't fit in my mind."
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

as said before, because the SW is not yours and will never be,


Of course the software is not mine, but the copy I have is. I can use that ANY way copyright laws permit me to regardless of what the EULA says. Sure, Apple may (or they may not) have the right to void my warranty, not service me etc etc but that is not the same as probihiting me from using their product as I see fit. They cant call on the cops to storm my house and take my copy back. It hasn't gone that far. Yet.

An amazing amount of people seem to think that whatever a company put into the EULA is automagically a valid contract clause. That is, however, not the case. EULA's, like any other contract (if it can even be considered a contract seeing as the user has not signed anything but that's a different discussion) are governed by (aside from copyright law) contract law, and in the case of selling to end-users, consumer law. A company cant put whatever the hell it wants into a contract and say "well, if you don't like it don't buy it". That's not how it works.

Reply Parent Score: 8