Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 2nd Dec 2008 22:42 UTC, submitted by anon
Legal The legal back-and-forth between Apple and clone-maker PsyStar continues to develop, with the latest news being a move by Apple - the Cupertino company has invoked something with many already predicted Apple would call upon: the DMCA, or the Digital Millenium Copyright Act. This was done in an amendment to the original suit, filed in July this year.
Thread beginning with comment 339008
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Apple stinks!
by jefro on Wed 3rd Dec 2008 04:57 UTC
Member since:

"paid to apple for copy of Mac Osx being used."

I agree. They are being paid, nothing is being stolen. What is their beef? Wish I was on the jury.

I doubt they are loosing money on the software so they can sell the hardware scheme.

Apple is a bunch of crooks it looks like to me. Sure the nice kid selling against the Big Bad Microsoft ads on TV. What a crock. Big Bad Apple in fact.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Apple stinks!
by Kroc on Wed 3rd Dec 2008 08:41 in reply to "Apple stinks!"
Kroc Member since:

No nothing is being stolen. Apple are not saying that, that is not their charge.

Their charge is that their software is being circumvented which, in North America, *is* illegal, as per the DMCA - like it or not.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Apple stinks!
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 3rd Dec 2008 09:06 in reply to "RE: Apple stinks!"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:

Except that the DMCA also states that protection mechanisms may be circumvented if for the purpose of interoperability - so no, this case is not as clear-cut as it seems.

Which kind of sums up this case. Lots of people in the comments making absolute statements about something they have absolutely zero knowledge or experience of.

The best you can do - like I did in my article a while back on the legalities of EULAs in The Netherlands - is contact legal experts. And even what they say is just an interpretation - only probably better than the ones in this comment section.

Reply Parent Score: 6