Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 13th Jun 2009 11:13 UTC
Legal We've got some news in the Apple vs. Psystar tragedy that's been unfolding before our eyes for months now. We all know the gist: Psystar sells machines with Mac OS X pre-installed, while the EULA states that's not allowed. Apple then took this stuff to court, and in the meantime, Psystar went into Chapter 11 Bankruptcy protection. The news today is that Apple has filed a complaint stating that this Chapter 11 thing is just a shield that allows Psystar to continue its business practices, which Apple deems as illegal.
Thread beginning with comment 368438
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
kryptonianjorel
Member since:
2006-06-28

I see your point. however the ramifications could be greater than simply calling that clause invalid.

You say the problem the EU will have with this is that it is a "post sale" restriction. What if Apple put the restriction in plain site on the packaging of the product, so that the consumer could be warned of the limitations imposed of the software.

If Apple loses, which I also believe they will, they will just make everything harder for everybody. If they cant make a legal block of "unauthorized installations", they'll make software and hardware blocks, and who really wants that?

Reply Parent Score: 1

alcibiades Member since:
2005-10-12

The question might be put like this: suppose Apple were to reach arrangements with its resellers so that you could only buy retail copies of OSX by signing an agreement which forbade you to install on non-Apple computers. Would this be binding in the EU? How would the courts and Commission react to this?

Don't know. Don't know of any cases, but there probably are lots of analogous ones in sale of goods law. At least if they did this, there would be one transaction, a sale of a copy, and there would be a contract entered into in that transaction, and there would be consideration. So it would not be open to the procedural difficulties with the present method.

Its not automatic that it would be enforceable. For instance, in the UK you cannot, no matter what you sign, give up your rights under the sale of goods legislation. This is why guarantees and other offers always come with the caveat that this does not limit your rights under consumer protection legislation. You have the right, under distance selling regulation, to return a product within 7 days for a complete no questions asked refund. Even if you sign a contract which renounces that right, you will still have it.

So it could be that you'd still be able to install on whatever you wanted with impunity, and if you can do it yourself, you can pay someone else to do it.

Reply Parent Score: 2