OSNews

Had to go look up Vernor vs Autodesk.
Vernor wasn't selling a computer with Autodesk pre installed, Psystar is selling computers with Mac OSX pre-installed. Apple vs Psystar isn't about Psystar reselling copies of Mac OSX, like Best Buy, Amazon, etc.. are doing, its about Psystar selling computers with Mac OSX already installed on it.

Do not bother. Myself as well as others have pointed out to him why Vernor vs Autodesk is not similar to Apple vs Psystar. PJ from Groklaw did a pretty thorough analysis and explained why that is not the case, and has offered a more appropriate example (MDY vs Blizzard).
http://groklaw.net/article.php?story=2009081716312060

He still keeps going on about it, like a broken record. And it's quite hard to argue sensibly with someone who covers their ears and sings "Twinkle twinkle little star" loudly. Usually they're not adults.

Edited 2009-10-25 22:35 UTC

Various judges disagree with you on that one, most recently Vernor vs. Autodesk. Whose word to take... "

Vernor vs. Autodesk confirms that you do indeed own the copy of the software. Which means you can shred it, eat it, burn it, whatever you want to that specific copy. The same case also confirms that *use* of the software is governed by the license, which means you must adhere to the terms of the license when you actually install and use it.

Yes, this is true, but it is also true that Blizzard in the WoW case directly contradicts Vernor on this point. Not that it matters outside the US. As to which will eventually become binding precedent in the US, we will have to wait and see.

I'm not sure Thom is right (as I was also not right earlier) to think that the fact that WoW is a service is a decisive factor. The sections of the Blizzard judgment that refer to purchase versus license do not make any reference to the service. The sections which in effect conclude that when you use a product in violation of EULA, such use, because you no longer have permission to copy to memory, are copyright infringing, also do not make reference to the fact that WoW is a service.

I agree with Thom that the case of Psystar has no bearing on the GPL, and PJ has never made any coherent argument that it does.

Only those license terms which are legally valid and binding, of course.

Many EULAs and even paper contracts contain clauses that lawyers can easily invalidate and are only in there to scare people into thinking they have fewer rights than they really do.