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 97575
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Great!
by AlexandreAM on Mon 20th Feb 2006 17:30 UTC in reply to "Great!"
AlexandreAM
Member since:
2006-02-06

I don't think I can agree with the statement that "Code is meant to be broken by someone". And I sure do not agree with a +4 mod to something like that.

The writers of the software have their RIGHTS to decide how it can be used. You are NOT forced to buy their software, so dont say that "I bought it I can do whatever I want with it".

You can DO whatever you want with it. Whant to burn the disc ? fine. Delete all your copies ? Fine. but if you dont wanna use according to the rules that were there for you to see then return the software and get a refund (which is possible in most places I ever saw an EULA being applied).

I will probably be modded down because of this but... you know what...if such a statement of "My rights are bigger than everyones else" is modded up then being modded down is a compliment.

...
bah.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Great!
by rhavyn on Mon 20th Feb 2006 19:31 in reply to "RE: Great!"
rhavyn Member since:
2005-07-06

I don't think I can agree with the statement that "Code is meant to be broken by someone". And I sure do not agree with a +4 mod to something like that.

The writers of the software have their RIGHTS to decide how it can be used. You are NOT forced to buy their software, so dont say that "I bought it I can do whatever I want with it".


No, the writers of software do not have the right to tell people how it can be used. Just like the authors of a book don't have that right. What writers of software have is copyright law and patent law. EULAs are something software companies made up and are now attempting to make legitimate. But it's definitely not a right.

Furthermore, the "owners" of a copyrighted work don't even own that work. In the system the U.S. uses, the people "own" a copyrighted work. The original author, however, gets a limited time during which he gets exclusive rights to decide who can copy the work, modify the work and redistribute the work. As soon as that time limit is up, the author is no different than anyon else and the work enters the public domain. So stop sitting and listening to the *IAA and the BSA and learn exactly what copyright law is and how it works.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Great!
by Viza on Mon 20th Feb 2006 20:24 in reply to "RE[2]: Great!"
Viza Member since:
2006-02-20

/signed (for accuracy)

The license can't legally tell you what you can do with the software. You can burn it, trash the disks, throw it away, let it swish around in your toilet, install it on as many personal computers as you own, as long as you are the only user. Things get hazy if others benefit from your copy of the software.

The software company, can, however, refuse to give you updates if you don't comply with the agreement. However, they can't pursue legal action unless you violate copyright laws. EULA's are mostly posturing and an attempt to control your activities, that's all it really is legally too.

If you don't make copies and give them to anyone, you are within your rights of the law. I can throw that agreement away. If I don't sign it, and choose not to abide by it, there's no recourse for them to take, other than the above mentioned sanctions.

Just don't violate copyright and everything will be OK, I promise 8) As long as the use is "Fair and Reasonable" there isn't a court in the land that will convict you of EULA violations LOL.

I challenge any of you to find a case where Microsoft was able to make someone uninstall windows for violating the EULA, or because the user didn't "own" the software, excepting copyright violations.

They can sue you if you put an ISO and license code up for download, but they can't do squat without that copyright violation.

They could potentially lock you out of your software with a "control feature" in the software. They'd lose a lot of honest paying customers that way tho... when it went horribly wrong.

-Viza

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Great!
by AlexandreAM on Tue 21st Feb 2006 16:59 in reply to "RE[2]: Great!"
AlexandreAM Member since:
2006-02-06

I dont know about the legallity of a EULA or Copyright Law, and you are right on claiming that (I am no lawyer). But I am not talking about "Copyright law".

I just think that if there is an agreement upon a certain product that you have to accept in order to use it, and if you can return the software for refund if you dont agree with it, then you should just use it according to the agreement or not use it at all.

And I still dont see how can anyone (specially if it is one inside computer software market) agree that "Code is meant to be broken". It just doesnt sound fair use to me.

But you know... opinions diverge...

Reply Parent Score: 1