On 09/13/2012 12:03 AM, Bob Sneidar wrote:
heh heh a little like, Ask 10 psychiatrists for a diagnosis and you will get 20
opinions.
Roses are red, violets are blue,
I'm schizophrenic, and so am I.
On Sep 12, 2012, at 1:36 PM, François Chaplais wrote:
Put three lawyers in a room and they
On 09/13/2012 02:54 AM, Peter W A Wood wrote:
Richmond
On 12 Sep 2012, at 23:03, Richmond wrote:
A bicycle cannot be used to brew coffee, and I am absolutely sure that anybody
claiming that the
fact that their bike cannot be used as a coffee-maker is in some way unfair
would be laughed out
On 09/13/2012 12:03 AM, Bob Sneidar wrote:
heh heh a little like, Ask 10 psychiatrists for a
diagnosis and you will get 20 opinions.
Roses are red, violets are blue,
I'm schizophrenic, and so am I.
Now get on your bike and make me some coffee, Richmond :-)
Best regards,
Lynn Fredricks
to to it for a zero fee. The same texts are now available online
(at least the recent ones). I do not know if this is true for other
countries, but it makes sense, anyway.
Best,
François
--
View this message in context:
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/OT-EULA
Pay yourself a lawyer, Peter, instead of trolling this list. It's not a judge's
opinion on the law, but it is better than your mixture of ill supported
arguments.
Le 12 sept. 2012 à 14:59, Peter Alcibiades a écrit :
The question isn't whether EULAs are contractually enforceable. As a class,
as far as I understand, and for France only, laws are voted by the legislative
branch, and decrees are issued by the executive branch. Decrees specify (or
attempt to) how the law should be applied in practice. A law which does not
have an applicative decrees will never be applied and is
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 8:59 PM, Peter Alcibiades
palcibiades-fi...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
What is needed is an EU case in which either running the thing in a VM or
on
the wrong sort of hardware was ruled breach of contract and some kind of
ruling made. I don't know of one. Maybe someone else
On 09/12/2012 08:24 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
There are other questions we can answer for ourselves, like:
Do we want to enter into a relationship with a vendor who has already
clearly expressed in writing that they don't want us?
Forcing someone into a relationship just makes for an unhealthy
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:24 PM, Richard Gaskin
ambassa...@fourthworld.comwrote:
That's one question, and it may be interesting to see how it plays out if
Apple ever enforces the Apple branded hardware clause in their EULA.
Why is it assumed that Apple must be the one to go to court to
Kay C Lan wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:24 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
That's one question, and it may be interesting to see how it plays out if
Apple ever enforces the Apple branded hardware clause in their EULA.
Why is it assumed that Apple must be the one to go to court to enforce
it's
The question is whether some particular terms in a contract,
whether entered into by EULA or other means, are enforceable
and lawful in the jurisdiction one lives in.
You bring up a interesting point here, and one I believe to be a growing
problem in the future.
EULAs are granted under the
There is another point which is is maybe overlooked by people whose official
language is English. It seems to me that EULAs suffer from a vice de forme in
the sense that they are often written in a language that is not an official
language of the country where it is supposed to apply.
On 09/12/2012 04:39 PM, Kay C Lan wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 8:59 PM, Peter Alcibiades
palcibiades-fi...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
What is needed is an EU case in which either running the thing in a VM or
on
the wrong sort of hardware was ruled breach of contract and some kind of
ruling made. I
On 09/12/2012 04:44 PM, Warren Samples wrote:
On 09/12/2012 08:24 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
There are other questions we can answer for ourselves, like:
Do we want to enter into a relationship with a vendor who has already
clearly expressed in writing that they don't want us?
Forcing someone
On 09/12/2012 04:45 PM, Kay C Lan wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:24 PM, Richard Gaskin
ambassa...@fourthworld.comwrote:
That's one question, and it may be interesting to see how it plays out if
Apple ever enforces the Apple branded hardware clause in their EULA.
Why is it assumed that Apple
On 09/12/2012 05:48 PM, François Chaplais wrote:
There is another point which is is maybe overlooked by people whose official language is
English. It seems to me that EULAs suffer from a vice de forme in the sense
that they are often written in a language that is not an official language of
in context:
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/OT-EULA-and-legality-tp4654675p4654897.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url
Bit harsh, eh?
On Sep 12, 2012, at 6:16 AM, François Chaplais wrote:
Pay yourself a lawyer, Peter, instead of trolling this list.
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage
Do you know what the US Supreme Court would say if we brought all this before
them? Has there ever been a case where Apple enforced this part of the EULA
you object to? No? Then get out of our courtroom and stop wasting our time.
Courts in the US cannot rule on something unless there is a case
On the lighter side of things I like this (dark) cartoon.
There is a blind beggar with a sign that says I am blind and my dog is dead.
Somebody passes by and thinks I have worries of my own.
Too bad binaries are off in this list.
Well, let us say that I have worries of my own, and some involve
There is another point which is is maybe overlooked by people
whose official language is English. It seems to me that EULAs
suffer from a vice de forme in the sense that they are
often written in a language that is not an official language
of the country where it is supposed to apply.
there is also this one:
There are two kinds of lawyers: those who know the law, and those who know the
judge.
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
In the English speaking world there are all sorts of legal
systems (just for example, crossing the border between
England and Scotland one moves from some sort of homemade
outgrowth of Anglo-Saxon law to Roman law) and all sorts of dialects.
English EULAs are written in Cockroach, a
On 9/12/12 12:12 PM, François Chaplais wrote:
there is also this one:
There are two kinds of lawyers: those who know the law, and those who know the
judge.
LOL! I was staying out of this discussion but that was too good to ignore.
--
Jacqueline Landman Gay |
No, they are not happy to abide; they don't even know
that they are abiding by anything at all.
Reminds me of this EULA... ;-p
http://hunting.outdoorzy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/deer-baiting-corn-pile-castle-doctrine.jpg
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Richmond
On 09/12/2012 08:19 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote:
On 9/12/12 12:12 PM, François Chaplais wrote:
there is also this one:
There are two kinds of lawyers: those who know the law, and those
who know the judge.
Well, here in Bulgaria the vast majority are the second type.
LOL! I was staying out of
On 09/12/2012 08:34 PM, Roger Eller wrote:
No, they are not happy to abide; they don't even know
that they are abiding by anything at all.
Reminds me of this EULA... ;-p
http://hunting.outdoorzy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/deer-baiting-corn-pile-castle-doctrine.jpg
Lovely stuff: that one
I think Lawyers are really good at what they do, because they have perfected
the skill of ignoring evidence to the contrary.
Bob
On Sep 12, 2012, at 10:12 AM, François Chaplais wrote:
there is also this one:
There are two kinds of lawyers: those who know the law, and those who know
the
Put three lawyers in a room and they will go out with five opinions.
Le 12 sept. 2012 à 22:33, Bob Sneidar a écrit :
I think Lawyers are really good at what they do, because they have perfected
the skill of ignoring evidence to the contrary.
Bob
On Sep 12, 2012, at 10:12 AM, François
I posted it to Sign Smiles, but a clean version of it.
On Sep 12, 2012, at 10:53 AM, Richmond wrote:
On 09/12/2012 08:34 PM, Roger Eller wrote:
No, they are not happy to abide; they don't even know
that they are abiding by anything at all.
Reminds me of this EULA... ;-p
heh heh a little like, Ask 10 psychiatrists for a diagnosis and you will get
20 opinions.
On Sep 12, 2012, at 1:36 PM, François Chaplais wrote:
Put three lawyers in a room and they will go out with five opinions.
Le 12 sept. 2012 à 22:33, Bob Sneidar a écrit :
I think Lawyers are really
What do you mean by a clean version?
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Bob Sneidar wrote:
I posted it to Sign Smiles, but a clean version of it.
On Sep 12, 2012, at 10:53 AM, Richmond wrote:
On 09/12/2012 08:34 PM, Roger Eller wrote:
No, they are not happy to abide; they don't even know
I looked up other graphics and found one that was just a sign, not attached to
anything, like a tree, and really easy to read, and posted that instead.
Bob
On Sep 12, 2012, at 3:48 PM, Roger Eller wrote:
What do you mean by a clean version?
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Bob Sneidar
Richmond
On 12 Sep 2012, at 23:03, Richmond wrote:
A bicycle cannot be used to brew coffee, and I am absolutely sure that
anybody claiming that the
fact that their bike cannot be used as a coffee-maker is in some way unfair
would be laughed out of court.
Are you really absolutely sure?
Whew! I wondered what strange interpretation of the wording had I missed.
lol
~Roger
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 7:13 PM, Bob Sneidar wrote:
I looked up other graphics and found one that was just a sign, not
attached to anything, like a tree, and really easy to read, and posted that
instead.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:22 PM, Peter Alcibiades
palcibiades-fi...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
I think the restriction on use is fine, because its just a product feature.
Rev is perfectly entitled to have whatever features it wants.
So it would then be perfectly reasonable for Apple to leave the
.nabble.com/OT-EULA-and-legality-tp4654675p4654940.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
In this age of digital perfection, legislation as well as digital coding
are applied to personal, private use copies of over-the-air music or media.
Certain devices which are authorized for making personal, non-commercial
copies have already included royalties in the device cost, which goes
will come to that.
--
View this message in context:
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/OT-EULA-and-legality-tp4654675p4654814.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode
.278305.n4.nabble.com/OT-EULA-and-legality-tp4654675p4654814.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage
Peter Alcibiades wrote:
Go into a store and buy OSX or Windows, you bought it. That, I believe, is
what any EU court will rule if it ever comes to that, and that, I believe,
is why it never will come to that.
An unnameable source once told me that an Apple VP leaned over the table
after a
Lynn, the problem is that (I believe) in the EU the EULA so
called license is actually going to be held, should it ever
come to court, as a sale. And that all the post sale
restrictions on use will be thrown out.
Hard for me to add much to Richard's Bring it On ;-)
But to expand on one
I can see in this specific case that it would be problematic for Apple to make
their OS backwards compatible with everything ever produced by them. There has
to be some kind of cutoff. I don't fault them for that. Where they draw the
line is really not an issue of legality, but of expedience.
Le 11 sept. 2012 à 21:47, Peter Alcibiades a écrit :
I also believe that its impossible to enforce post sale restrictions on use
in the EU. You cannot sell someone a chisel, and then when he opens it,
have him discover the enforceable condition that if he uses it with a
mallet, it must be
On 09/11/2012 10:45 PM, Peter Alcibiades wrote:
Snow Leopard still seems to be for sale from Amazon UK, and Amazon France.
What I am saying is that if its sold at retail as a separate item, and there
is no compulsion on anyone to do that of course, I believe that no EU court
will rule that to
On 09/11/2012 11:40 PM, François Chaplais wrote:
Le 11 sept. 2012 à 21:47, Peter Alcibiades a écrit :
I also believe that its impossible to enforce post sale restrictions on use
in the EU. You cannot sell someone a chisel, and then when he opens it,
have him discover the enforceable condition
I think that's the crux of this whole discussion.
If someone accepts an agreement of any sort that contains conditions that
are illegal, then it's highly questionable if they are bound by that
agreement, or at least by the illegal parts. I actually won a small
claims court case on that
On 9/11/2012 5:04 PM, Richmond wrote:
The fundamental question that nobody has answered properly is whether
a EULA is legally
binding.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EULA. While primarily US focused, it
lists a number of court cases. The short answer is a EULA is as
enforceable as the
-EULA-and-legality-tp4654675p4654746.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
It's unclear to me why the fact that I buy a license to use
software versus owning the actual software itself has any
effect on what I choose to do with it. Either way, I pay
money to Apple to be able to use it. That's a different
issue than what the EULA says regarding not using it on
I find it no end of a marvel that any of this works at all! Let's look at what
our data really is: We coat some metal discs with some form if oxide (read
that rust) and then spin it real fast while several magnets turn on and off
at exactly the right instant, real fast. And how do we put this
While I am not a big fan of EULA's, there mere existence is a testament to how
people will, if they are allowed, take something they never paid for, and use
it, giving what they took to everyone they know, or don't know, often for their
own gain, whether in currency or for accolade.
EULA's
To be fair, I don't think anyone is saying that we can do whatever we want with
what we buy, and still expect the manufacturer to honor it's warranty! No one
here is suggesting that. What we are suggesting is that if I want to put my
iPhone in a blender to see if it will blend, I damn well can,
Yes, I thought of that analogy. The problem is, as others have said on
this thread, I don't believe Apple's EULA is legal whereas car lease
conditions are.
It's not a case of morality, piracy, honesty or any other human traits that
have been mentioned during this thread. I simply do not believe
Or rather parts of it may be unenforceable. I don't think the whole becomes
void if some part is found to be non-binding.
Bob
On Sep 10, 2012, at 10:35 AM, Peter Haworth wrote:
I like Apple hardware and software, use it as my main
platform for programming and personal use. I just happen
An analogous situation exists with medical records. The doctor owns the
physical record. The patient, in theory, owns and controls the information
contained therein.
In theory, when signing a HIPAA release, or other release of information, the
patient authorizes the doctor to release the
You're right, yes I'm referring to the parts about running only on Apple
hardware.
Pete
lcSQL Software http://www.lcsql.com
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Bob Sneidar b...@twft.com wrote:
Or rather parts of it may be unenforceable. I don't think the whole
becomes void if some part is
Off the original topic but taht's interesting. It seems common practice
among dentists to charge for a patient to get their records if they move to
another dentist, but sounds like I could tell them I want to copy them
myself.
Pete
lcSQL Software http://www.lcsql.com
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at
I have no problem with Apple behaving like a business, they
have a responsibility to their shreholders to do so, nor
would I expect them to provide any support if I broke their
EULA terms, nor do I blame them for trying to create a
closed, sanitized environment for their software to make
Or rather parts of it may be unenforceable. I don't think the
whole becomes void if some part is found to be non-binding.
Usually agreements have some statement that says If any part of this
agreement is found to be unenforceable, it shall not void the entire
agreement unless X occurs;
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 2:42 AM, Peter Haworth p...@lcsql.com wrote:
You're right, yes I'm referring to the parts about running only on Apple
hardware.
Pete
What you are saying then is Apple can't even say there is minimum system
requirement for their OS.
There are many people who are very
There are car stereos that have a record button just like the cassette
recorders of the past. Is it dishonest to press record and get a
less-than-perfect mp3 recording that is perfectly acceptable to the
listener (for free)? I don't think so. If I really loove the song,
I'll buy a CD rather
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Roger Eller
roger.e.el...@sealedair.comwrote:
There are car stereos that have a record button just like the cassette
recorders of the past. Is it dishonest to press record and get a
less-than-perfect mp3 recording that is perfectly acceptable to the
listener
In the printing industry, printing plate suppliers often provide trade
shops expensive equipment at no cost. It is the 'consumables' they make
their money from.
So it seems to me that in our software world, apps and media are the
consumables, phones and computers are the machines to process
I actually don't mind the fact that Apple runs itself as if it was a business.
When I worked there (1987-1992) there were a few lay-off occasions, and an
ongoing rumor about being merged with Sony or IBM. There was a joke at the
time: question: What would you call the company if IBM and Apple
Roger Eller wrote:
'Apple branded'... that is their hang up. They want to keep their users
believing they are special because they own an Apple product. Well, once
everybody has an iPhone, or an iPad, who's special then? It's like saying
I own a TV. Uh, ok.
We're way OT here, but that
Colin Holgate wrote:
I actually don't mind the fact that Apple runs itself as if it was
a business.
As a shareholder I rather like it.
As a customer I use the dividends to shop at NewEgg and build my own
systems. ;)
Of course I honor the Apple EULA, so the more I learn about hardware and
Roger Eller wrote:
A great deal of design consideration (on the inside) makes this case very
desirable for gamers, and other high-end computer enthusiasts that build
their own tech, regardless of what OS it will contain. The familiar
MacPro-like handles make it desirable on the outside. It's
On 9/9/12 9:31 AM, Colin Holgate wrote:
About the $20 to upgrade to Mountain Lion, I suspect that doesn't
fully pay for the development of OSX, and that's with Apple just
having to support a handful of computers. Imaging their costs if they
had to support every conceivable PC configuration.
On 09/09/2012 08:40 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote:
On 9/9/12 9:31 AM, Colin Holgate wrote:
About the $20 to upgrade to Mountain Lion, I suspect that doesn't
fully pay for the development of OSX, and that's with Apple just
having to support a handful of computers. Imaging their costs if they
had to
On 09/09/2012 12:45 PM, Richmond wrote:
I'm sure there are many factors involved, but I think one of the
primary reasons Apple doesn't want the OS used on other hardware is to
avoid the mess that Microsoft got themselves into by licensing to any
PC distributor. By retaining control of both
On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 4:09 AM, Richmond richmondmathew...@gmail.com wrote:
What me? read a EULA? Unfortunately I'm not that wierd, at least in that
respect I am like
other people: I mumble Yeah, whatever and hit the ACCEPT button.
As an attorney, I've written a simple program to take an EULA
On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 8:38 PM, Richard Gaskin
ambassa...@fourthworld.com wrote:
I would venture to guess that Apple's justification for not allowing
purchasers of OS X to run it on hardware of their own choice is that the
price of the Apple-branded computer effectively subsidizes part of the
Warren Samples wrote:
Richmond, you must be aware that there are all kinds of hardware
compatibility issues one has to consider when contemplating putting
Linux on any computer.
Very true, Linux has to work harder than OS X or Windows because very
few hardware vendors design their systems
On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Richmond richmondmathew...@gmail.com wrote:
Funny how Linux distros don't seem to get in the mess regardless.
Why, I once even had a thinkpad for which Linux power management
worked. Well, sort of . . . .
An OS licensed only for apple branded hardware means
On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Ken Corey k...@kencorey.com wrote:
We all know companies make the T's C's to suit themselves as much as
possible, giving as little as possible while gaining as much as possible.
While we're at it:
http://search.dilbert.com/search?w=shrinkwrapx=0y=0
--
The
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 1:40 AM, J. Landman Gay jac...@hyperactivesw.comwrote:
By retaining control of both software and hardware, it just works -- at
least, most of the time.
I think this is it in a nutshell. Although Apple has definitely used the
'underdog' tag, from my reading of the
As Richard mentioned earlier, the underdog tag was a fair description of
Apples humble beginnings, but this is currently FAR from the case. I
believe the real underdogs today are just regular people (techie people)
who would like to run a great OS on hardware they can hand pick for
themselves.
On 9/9/12 11:01 PM, Roger Eller wrote:
Why can't a G5 owner take out the motherboard and
install an i7 on an intel-based motherboard and then install OS X? The
machine would still be Apple-branded, still able to connect to iTunes,
still can purchase media and books, etc. But nooo! You have
Roger Eller wrote:
If a technically skilled user wants to build their own system and buy
OS X
for it, it should be allowed. A PC owner can continue to use most system
components for ages, and just change out the parts as they break (or
upgrade on occasion). Why can't a G5 owner take out
I wish somebody would tell Netflix this! I would live in Ubuntu if I could
have my media too. I'm glad Android finally got it.
~Roger
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:27 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
Want the security of a Unix-like OS with a modern UI, but one that can run
on any hardware you
On 09/08/2012 04:35 AM, Mark Wieder wrote:
Richmond-
Friday, September 7, 2012, 11:55:01 AM, you wrote:
I am running software I own
Really?
Didn't actually read that EULA, did you?
What me? read a EULA? Unfortunately I'm not that wierd, at least in that
respect I am like
other people: I
I would suspect that until the populace of the hackintosh community reach a
number which either threatens sales of Apple-branded hardware, or that
community becomes a support burden on Apple, they will likely be ignored.
Even the hackintosh community, in their own way, discourage software
piracy.
Subject: Re: [OT] EULA and legality
Good point Mark.
Looking at my Snow Leopard EULA (as it differs from current
EULAs) it says:
1 General. The software... are licensed, not sold, to you...
You own the media on which the Apple Software is recorded...
So I guess Richmond you are free
Speaking of bigger fish... I was wondering, just as Apple attacked Samsung
for using proprietary 'rounded corners', and looking like something Apple
designed, will they go after computer case manufacturers for being similar?
What will these lawsuits do to the generic product industry?
LiveCode
Subject: Re: [OT] EULA and legality
Good point Mark.
Looking at my Snow Leopard EULA (as it differs from current
EULAs) it says:
1 General. The software... are licensed, not sold, to you...
You own the media on which the Apple Software is recorded...
So I guess Richmond you
On 09/08/2012 09:34 PM, Peter Haworth wrote:
It's unclear to me why the fact that I buy a license to use software versus
owning the actual software itself has any effect on what I choose to do
with it.
Why is it unclear? Because you don't understand it or because you don't
like it? You are
Peter Haworth wrote:
It's unclear to me why the fact that I buy a license to use software versus
owning the actual software itself has any effect on what I choose to do
with it. Either way, I pay money to Apple to be able to use it. That's a
different issue than what the EULA says regarding
I am asking this question for a number of reasons:
1. If I buy a book I can, if I want, use it for lighting a fire,
throwing at the cat, and so on. As the book
is my property I can do what I like with it. The intellectual
property contained within the book is,
generally, restricted by
Can't really answer your questions, but I've had a similar situation in the
other direction. In order to use Vista on my Mac I had to buy the Ultimate
version. At that time only the Ultimate version came with the permission to use
on virtual machines. So, it's the same deal as with using OSX on
Frankly, I ignore these kinds of considerations in an EULA. Send the software
police after me. If I buy a PC that has XP on it, and later decide to switch to
a VM because the old PC died, I do not have a problem importing that OS into a
VM and using it. I am only using the thing I purchased on
In the case of Windows, it's sensitive to the machine it's running on. A couple
of times I've had to get in contact with Microsoft because I had increased the
size of my hard drive, switched from using Fusion to Parallels (or vice versa),
or upgraded my Mac. In those kinds of cases the OS stops
.nabble.com/OT-EULA-and-legality-tp4654675p4654679.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
From what I gather in some cursory searches, this is only for ARM processors
running Windows 8 Mobile. Nothing stopping them from expanding on the concept
though, except perhaps maybe the PC manufacturers refusing to go along with
it, in which case consumers will need to reward those
And people complain that Apple is a walled garden. I've never had that
happen with any Apple products.
As Peter said, unless you live in the State of California, then this
portion of the EULA would apply:
i. The laws of the State of California, excluding its conflicts of law
rules, govern this
Richmond-
Friday, September 7, 2012, 11:55:01 AM, you wrote:
I am running software I own
Really?
Didn't actually read that EULA, did you?
1. General. The Apple software, tools, utilities, sample or example
code, documentation, interfaces, content, data, and other materials
accompanying this
Good point Mark.
Looking at my Snow Leopard EULA (as it differs from current EULAs) it says:
1 General. The software... are licensed, not sold, to you... You own the
media on which the Apple Software is recorded...
So I guess Richmond you are free to use the DVD for lighting a fire,
throwing at
97 matches
Mail list logo
