Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 4th Jul 2009 00:40 UTC
Hardware, Embedded Systems Now this is interesting news that hit my inbox at 2:22 AM (don't ask). It seems like the concept of selling Mac clones is more lucrative than many have anticipated, as I've just been informed via email that the German PearC has expanded its business into the BeNeLux (Belgium, The Netherlands, Luxembourg) and France. Together with the news that Psystar emerged from chapter 11, it looks like the market for Mac clones is more lucrative than many of us had imagined.
Thread beginning with comment 371728
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
dmantione
Member since:
2005-07-06


That's my biggest beef with this entire argument; that a vocal minority feel they are entitled to ignore contractual requirements like the End User License Agreement. This isn't just a problem in IT, but in banking, telecommunications, oh… the list just goes on. It may seem harsh and unfair, but the consumer always has the option, nay a right to choose not to sign the dotted line, or click the tickbox confirming that they have read the EULA and agree to it!


Well, it can be explained with a simple analogy. You sell me a television, I can do with it what I want. It's mine, mwuhuhahahahahaaa!!! In other words, a television manufacturer that puts a note in the box that by switching on the television I agree with not watching television on saturday will have wasted its time, he has no right tell what I can do with *my* television. It's only me who has the authority to say who can do what with my property.

For the same reason, Apple cannot tell people what to do with its software. It has no authority at all to do that, after it sold the software, it's no longer Apple's program, it's mine. Sure there is copyright on it, but the copy of the program has been sold and Apple can in no way tell people what to do with the copy.

You are right this is a problem in IT: EULA's are a plague that are being used to take away the consumers rights. IT should become a normal industy that sells software like a supermarket is selling apples: Without 10 pages of legalese.

Edited 2009-07-04 11:58 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5

google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

Not that I disagree with your overall point, but you are not buying a cd that you can do with whatever you want, you are buying a software license, they are two different things.

An example of this is that if you buy a book you are not allowed to photocopy the whole thing and then hand out the copies without the consent of the owner. Or if you buy a DVD, you are not allowed to play it in a movie theater without paying additional licensing costs. These are restrictions on what you can do with the content (not necessarily the media) post sale.

Reply Parent Score: 2

dmantione Member since:
2005-07-06

Not that I disagree with your overall point, but you are not buying a cd that you can do with whatever you want, you are buying a software license, they are two different things.


You are not buying a license, because the seller gives a copy of the software and the buyer gives money in return. Therefore by defition of the law a you have bought a copy of the software (a cd with content) which you become legal owner of. Note that this is a fundamental concept of a law system based on Roman law: A transaction happens that matches a definition in the law, therefore a legal fact is achieved. In this case, because the transaction matches the definition of "buying a copy", it is suddenly legal fact that you have bought a copy. It doesn't matter at all what seller (Apple) thinks it did. It doesn't matter at all what the EULA says, if it says "licensed not sold" this is nonsense, the very fact that interactions between both parties match the definition of a "sale" means it was "sold, not licensed".

Being your property you can do with your CD what you want, including putting the CD into a computer and doing the installation. This is not prevented by any law. Copyright law will prevent you making copies, but installing does not violate any copyright. Therefore copyright wise, nothing of interrest happens.

Edited 2009-07-07 23:01 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2