OSNews

In the case of a retail copy of OSX, they are not selling a license. They are selling a copy. This sale is just like the sale of a book or CD or other copyright item.

Then the user is invited to enter into a license agreement when they install the OS. Or, alternatively, they may not use the installer, and so will not even see the license agreement, but may install manually.

When you sell anything at retail you cannot set whatever terms and conditions you want. You used to be able to, but in the 20c lots of consumer protection and sale of goods legislation was passed. The result is that a great many conditions apply to retail sales. Is this free trade? Probably not. But who cares? You want to sell stuff at retail, you are bound by the applicable legislation. You don't like it, don't sell. There is no way around it.

And again, another fanboy has overlooked the fact that software is the product actually being purchased -- the product is not some restrictive declaration by Apple.

Software was once sold without "licenses." The nature and essence of a product (software) doesn't change just because the manufacturers of the product suddenly started making declarations in the form of "licenses."

Software is a mass-produced, copyright-protected product, just like music CDs, books, mp3 songs, sheet music, etc. Software differs from other copyright-able items in that it can also be patented. However, if one purchases a music CD, the manufacturer of that CD has no right to dictate on what machine the purchaser plays the CD.

Of course, the CD manufacturer is protected by copyright law in that no one is allowed to mass produce the music CD without permission from the copyright holder.



How can a company's restrictive declaration (which contradicts consumer protection law) be automatically considered valid?

Apple could declare in their license that "OSX can only be used to kill babies," but that declaration would not be valid just because Apple says so in their "license."

Furthermore, nobody is trying to dictate to Apple to whom they can and cannot sell OSX. Psystar is merely buying and reselling boxes of OSX which are openly offered at retail outlets.

Edited 2009-06-14 16:01 UTC

It saddens me that there is a growing population who are concerned only with their "rights" without accepting the RESPONSIBILITIES that go along with them or give the RESPECT that is due those who invest their time, effort and resources in creating new products and services, and for whom the concept of selling and buying a license to use a product is beyond their intellectual grasp.

Fortunately I grew up with parents who respected me enough to teach me that all three of those R's are equally important, and that if something belongs to someone else it is THEIR right to set the rules for its use. I was taught that it's fine not to like the rules but if I decided to use that item I still had to RESPECT and abide by those rules. Sadly - which is very evident in today's "me" society - most people didn't have that advantage...

Edited 2009-06-18 23:03 UTC