Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 20th May 2009 13:27 UTC
Hardware, Embedded Systems Hot on the heels of the Russians, we have another clone maker popping up, this time in fish & chips country: Freedom PC. "Powerful and versatile, environmentally friendly yet inexpensive computer systems compatible with any and all of the main operating systems: Mac OS X, Linux or Windows. So YOU can decide which one to use for what YOU want to do. And we give you a choice of models, too - from the low priced and good looking office machine, the ideal choice for business, to the high powered, sleek, gaming media centre. All, with the operating system of your choice pre-installed - or none at all - at prices accessible to all." They offer various models pre-installed with Windows, Linux, or Mac OS X.
Thread beginning with comment 364668
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Comment by darknexus
by PowerMacX on Wed 20th May 2009 23:53 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by darknexus"
Member since:

With a name like PowerMacX you're obviously biased about this subject and grasping at straws trying to make it seem like Psystar and others are clearly wrong.

The fact is the issue is about a single clause in the EULA that has nothing to do with upgrades or making the whole EULA in applicable.

I don't know whether the clause is enforceable or not. And my opinion on whether it should be or not is just another opinion of a non lawyer so I won't even go there. But please stop trying to muddy the waters by bringing up a bunch of irrelevant points.

First, I'm not trying to say they are *clearly* wrong, just describing why *I* think that single clause isn't necessarily invalid. As for the whole EULA, previous articles on this very same subject have mentioned that very same point: whether EULAS are enforceable at all or not.

Second, if you only care about what lawyers have to say, then why bother commenting at all? Let's just wait until the judge decides. But, where is the fun in that? :-)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by darknexus
by Gunderwo on Thu 21st May 2009 00:07 in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by darknexus"
Gunderwo Member since:

I don't have an issue with discussing your opinion on what the verdict should be regarding fair usage of a product you bought and whether those rights can be withheld in an EULA. I won't comment on them because my opinion has been stated dozens of times by others. I would suggest that any opinion you have has also been said dozens of times already to.

My issue is with your initial comment is that it is addressing a whole bunch of other points like whether EULAs are enforceable, whether it matters if it's an upgrade copy, or the completely ridiculous statement that finding one invalid clause will invalidate the entire EULA.

The case against Psystar has nothing to do with these issues so discussing them in regards to this case is irrelevant. All your trying to do is bring up a bunch of strawman arguments that have absolutely no bearing on what is really going on.

It's a classic example of feeling like you are in a a weak position in your argument so you bring up a whole bunch of other irrelevant crap. I've seen it several times and this time I've decided to feed the troll and say how silly you sound.

Reply Parent Score: 2