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 352515
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Uhm...
by IkeKrull on Tue 10th Mar 2009 18:50 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Uhm..."
IkeKrull
Member since:
2006-01-24

CDs and software require making 'ephemeral copies' in device buffers, RAM etc. in order to support most 'use' models.

Rightsholder groups maintain that this copying requires a license. Preventing such use is considered to be unenforceable, but it is actually one of the key supports for this interpretation of the law - i.e. 'You need a license to use software and digital media products.'

This is how they differ from a sandwich or a car engine, and why EULAs and restrictive terms of use can be attached to software and digital media when there seems to be no such phenomenon in the 'physical' world.

I'm not saying that this is a good thing - in fact its pretty egregiously overreaching and stupid - but this is the situation that is being codified into laws around the world.

Reply Parent Score: 1