Apple has responded to Psystar's new lawsuit today, stating that it is nothing but a stall tactic on Psystar's end. While I could just paraphrase whatever the filing reads, I decided to take this opportunity to address a number of sentiments and analogies often made in comment threads (not necessarily on OSNews).
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-01-25
Who said rubbish ?
Kochise
The problem is that Apple doesn't sell the "water", they _license_ it. When you buy software what you are actually doing is entering into a contract with the maker of the software. I'm not saying I like it, but that is the way it works (or at least that is the way the software company's want it to work, and the legality of it has not be directly challenged yet). Until people simply stop buying software which is licensed as opposed to sold then this will probably never change.
The point is that since Apple is simply licensing the use of their product - they absolutely CAN tell you what you can and cannot do with it (up to a point - there are limits and they vary by state law). The crux of the matter is you do not own the software itself.
It is hard to imagine licensing water, but to use your analogy Apple doesn't sell water at all. They put the water in a box with a license agreement on it that says by purchasing the product and opening it you are allowed to drink the water contained inside, but only if do so using an Apple Glass. If you agree to this license then you are obligated by law to comply with it. Its that simple. Like it or not it is all nice and legal (so far).
Member since:2005-07-12
A number of courts have agreed that whether or not a software company calls it a license and not a sale is completely irrelevant. The manner of the sale is what is important, and buying software is just like buying a cheeseburger, no matter what Apple has to say about it.
Member since:2005-07-06
Who said rubbish ?
Kochise
The problem is that Apple doesn't sell the "water", they _license_ it. When you buy software what you are actually doing is entering into a contract with the maker of the software. I'm not saying I like it, but that is the way it works (or at least that is the way the software company's want it to work, and the legality of it has not be directly challenged yet). "
MDY v Blizzard. Yes, the legality has been challenged (repeatedly, in multiple circuits). Yes, EULAs have been held valid (repeatedly, in multiple circuits).
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2009081716312060
Read that article. Then read it again. Then stop posting that EULAs haven't been challenged and/or may not be valid.
Member since:2008-12-16
Member since:2006-06-12
Well, it may be strange but it isn't rubbish. You are comparing one of the most advanced pieces of software ever created with a ubiquitous natural resource. It's within Apple's rights to sell licenses of their software and go after companies that break that license just like it's within Microsoft's rights to deactivate a copy of Windows if it determines it's not on the same machine of its original activation.
All software comes with licenses, and they ask you to read the license before you install. If you bought a copy of Mac OSX to install on your PC, and only notice after the purchase that you can't install it, you can still sell that single user license to someone else (or potentially return it to the store, depending on the vendor). Pystar is trying to take advantage of court delay tactics to make money illegally.
Member since:
2006-03-03
I sell Apple's mountain spring water and Apple glasses. Drinking Apple's mountain spring water from anything than Apple glasses is strictly forbidden !
Who said rubbish ?
Kochise