Linked by Nescio on Mon 9th Mar 2009 08:05 UTC
Apple Numerous irrelevant issues and feelings about them are ventilated in comments on the case. However, there are only two important issues. One is what the law is, the other is what we think the law should be.
Thread beginning with comment 352262
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
The right question
by sonic2000gr on Mon 9th Mar 2009 11:24 UTC
sonic2000gr
Member since:
2007-05-20

The right question to ask is:

Will the action of installing MacOSX in a non-Apple machine constitute a copyright breach?

Having legally purchased the OS at a shelf, without agreeing to anything, the EULA is simply an agreement with me and Apple. They can deny to support this installation, but they cannot get me to court for copyright reasons. In more than a few countries even EULA means next to nothing: you didn't read it before buying, you did not sign it, there were no witnesses and the event was not recorded anywhere.

Reply Score: 4

RE: The right question
by lurch_mojoff on Mon 9th Mar 2009 11:49 in reply to "The right question"
lurch_mojoff Member since:
2007-05-12

It's not about breach of copyright, it's about breach of the terms of the license you purchased form Apple. And, yes, Apple can ask a court of law to force you to stop using their software because you breached the license terms. They won't, because it will cost them significantly less to just let you do whatever the hell you want with the software, but technically they absolutely can get you to court over that.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: The right question
by Soulbender on Mon 9th Mar 2009 11:57 in reply to "RE: The right question"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

it's about breach of the terms of the license you purchased form Apple.


Am I, the customer, being clearly informed about the EULA and it's contents before purchasing? No, thus it is not a valid contract until I actually install and read the EULA, if even ten.

Reply Parent Score: 3