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 339329
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

You *are* legally entitled to a refund, since you disagree with the terms of the license. In the EULA, it mentions you get your refund from either the retailer, or if they won't do it, from Apple. I suggest you try it, since you're keen to believe that that would not work. Purchase a copy of OS X, take it home, break the seal, and then take it back. Tell the people at the Apple Store or wherever you purchased it that you were unaware you were not allowed to install it on non-Apple hardware.

If the terms of the EULA are not acceptable to you, then you return the software for a refund. That's the legal remedy if you aren't interested in being bound by the terms of the agreement.

This fanciful bull about how the *law* is going to force Apple to let everyone and their brother install the software on any computer is absurd. The *law* will uphold this EULA, as they've done for others in the past, as there is a remedy in place for those who aren't interested in abiding by the terms.

Here's another idea - try to get together a class-action lawsuit against Apple with as many people as you can find who've actually purchased a copy of Mac OS X and were unhappy that they could not install it, by the terms of the license, on a computer of their choosing. I doubt you could even get such a thing into court, but who knows?

Here's the thing with that EULA - it might be the meanest, most restrictive license to use ever created, but if you do not accept the terms, you're entitled to a refund. It says so in the EULA. Therefore, your choices are to use the software on Apple's terms, or get your money back. I don't see how you can think a judge is going to see that as unfair. If Apple denied your refund, that would be another matter, but they're required to refund your money, even if the retailer won't.

As I said, this isn't a defense of the ethics of the EULA - personally I think it's horrible that EULAs have been upheld that strip people of their 'first-sale' rights, among other things. But what I think doesn't matter - this is about the legal enforceability of Apple's license, and since they will refund your money if you do not agree to their terms, it's going to be upheld.

Reply Parent Score: 1