I agree with all your post... It is exactly what I think even part about Steve Jobs Bon souvenir de Paris René
Le 7 mai 2010 à 16:05, Robert Mann a écrit : > > Just.. one more word! > > I happen to have a legal background, my initial idea long time ago was to > set up legal expert systems.. (yes I love lawyers!!). Eventhough lots of > things are purely contractual in the US, there still remains the general > principle in our modern states, that a contract cannot overide some "higher" > rules, like the bill of right in the US which stands clear at the > constitutional level. > > In the Gizmodo case... there was a clear breach of standard laws : it is > straight illegal to buy out a stolen good.. full point. Some guy at some > point has been really dumb and pretentious to rely on the freedom of press > protection. In that case the freedom or press is an inferior right to the > right of ownership. > > In our 3.3.1 case, there would be abolutely no reasonable reason for a judge > to grant Apple the power to check how the hell your Xcode was written except > if... > -- they have proof you jailed a 10 years old genius that you exploit... that > would be illegal. > I think it lies in article 7 oh human rights... (nobody can interfere with > your life unless there is a good reason and to do so..) > > Writing, managing, your xCode librairies in tText (thanks JD) IS NOT > ILLEGAL. Same if you use plugins to auto-update code, or auto generate full > or part of it... this is not illegal. If Apple say so, even if you have > signed, but if you refuse anybody from Apple to come at your home and check, > the judge will have to decide. And your attorneys will object that there is > no reson to authorize this as it would be an unreasonable infringment of > your fundamental freedom... > > And... any provision in an Apple contract saying that this use of a runrev > app somwhere in the line could be challenged at court in view of the yet non > existing, but implied, "freedom of thinking" clause in the bill of right.. > man shall we have to vote that one in???? > > In France many contracts are "OVERULED" by laws that dictacte what clauses > are valid or invalid ab initio, whatever you sign... and this 3.3.1 clause > would not stand a chance in France and Europe. > >> From a technical point of view there cannot be any violation of right.. > where there are no rights! And apple just has not the right to decide how > you think... and has no right to forbid you to copy and paste xcode from a > published source of code that allows it, however "generic" and not original > it is... There are limits to how far in your life a contract can reach. > > Nevertheless, I'm in sympathy with Steve Jobs concern to control the quality > of pieces of software that run on apples machines... !!! > > again the good news is that if flash gets bitten, there maybe be more > opportunities for revWeb plugin and for ON-REV technologie to expand... > don't yu think? > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/How-exactly-does-runrev-for-ipad-iphone-work-tp2133661p2134236.html > Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > _______________________________________________ > use-revolution mailing list > [email protected] > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription > preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [email protected] Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
