Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 12th Oct 2009 18:25 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 388995
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-10-12
rhavyn,
In all your comments on this matter of transfer you fail to address the critical point that Psystar may not have been the lawful owner at the time the installation copies were made. The customer may have been.
They may have transferred everything, hardware and retail copy, to the customer before doing the installation.
If they did this, I don't see how they are in violation of S117, which permits the copies to be made by the owner, or for him to authorize others to make the copies (those essential to use with a machine).
They will not have transferred anything, and so cannot be accused of having transferred copies in an unauthorized way.