Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 14th Jan 2009 10:16 UTC
And so the court case between Apple and clone-maker Psystar continues. Claims are being thrown back and forth between the two companies, ranging from Apple invoking the DMCA, to Psystar claiming Apple's Mac OS X copyright is invalid. We can add a new one to the list. Court documents reveal that Psystar claims it has bought its copies of Mac OS X fair and square - including some directly from Apple.
Thread beginning with comment 343537
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[2]: Legislative suggestion
by joshv on Wed 14th Jan 2009 19:23
in reply to "RE: Legislative suggestion"
Member since:2006-03-18
It's mostly a legal requirement for when/if the software manufacturer ever chooses to sue. If the user sells the software but keeps the initial installation, they would not be protected from a copyright claim.
More likely though, whatever validation scheme the software manufacturer employs would not allow two installations that use the same product key.
That would be ideal for the end-user of course. But from a software company's perspective, how could this (for example) be enforced?
"1. Re-sell the physical installation media for any software that they've purchased as long as the original software is uninstalled.
"1. Re-sell the physical installation media for any software that they've purchased as long as the original software is uninstalled.
Just wondering... "
Member since:
2006-01-27
That would be ideal for the end-user of course. But from a software company's perspective, how could this (for example) be enforced?
Just wondering...