Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 19th Feb 2006 16:26 UTC
Legal This week, one of the most-commented stories on OSNews was the story about how 'Maxxus' cracked/hacked (take your pick) the Intel version of Apple's OSX once again. This sparked a lively debate over whether we should encourage Maxxus, or condemn his actions. I made myself clear from the get-go: I condemn his actions. Note: This is the Sunday Eve Column of the week.
Thread beginning with comment 97323
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Thom_Holwerda
Member since:
2005-06-29

Where exactly does it say that on the box?

The box only says that when using this product, you are subject to the license agreement (contrary to what many people think, namely that opening the box subjects you to the license agreement).

But indeed, it says nowhere that it is an upgrade version (I have a German box, because I bought Tiger in Berlin).

Reply Parent Score: 5

NeoX Member since:
2006-02-19

(contrary to what many people think, namely that opening the box subjects you to the license agreement).

Why would people think that? The outside right spine at the very bottom of the box states this:

"Important: Use of this product is subject to acceptance of the software license agreement(s) included in this package."

It says Use not "by opening the box". Actually Apple's EULA is like MS's or some other companies that I have actually read and if you do not accept the terms you are free to return the product.

From the first page of Apple's EULA included with the software:

"IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS LICENSE, YOU MAY RETURN THE APPLE SOFTWARE TO THE PLACE WHERE YOU OBTAINED IT FOR A REFUND." (caps theirs)

Seems to me this implies that it would have to have been open for you to have read the EULA and not agree with it before you return it.

Regards,
NeoX

Reply Parent Score: 1