hjalmar@cbmswe.UUCP (Peter Hjalmarsson) (05/25/91)
In article <17202@chopin.udel.edu> don@chopin.udel.edu (Donald R Lloyd) writes: > > What everyone seems to be overlooking in this discussion is that the >system 7.0 license agreement specifically forbids running it on an >emulator! It will be _illegal_ for emulator-makers to promote products as >7.0 compatible, and it will be illegal to run it even if they are. >This will likely cause problems for not just ReadySoft and the makers of the >ST-based Mac emulators, but also for Nutek with its Mac ROM clones... I dont know about the US, but in Sweden the only license agreement is the stupid "dont-break-the-seal-unless-you-want-us-to-control-your-complete- destiny-in-the-future" kind, which is completely useless here. So, unless Apple changes anything I will be able to _buy_ sys7 from my Apple dealer and use it, legally, on my A-max. Just to give you some insight from other markets than the US. Peter Hjalmarsson, Amiga Support, Commdore Sweden ...uunet!cbmvax!cbmehq!cbmswe!hjalmar [speaking for myself and not for my company]
xgr39@isuvax.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett) (05/27/91)
Has anyone bothered to check to see whether or not MAC System 7.0 works on any of the MAC emulators for the Atari ST? If 7.0 works on the ST emulators but not on A-Max, then it means that the incompatibilities between 7.0 and A-Max are due mainly to quirks with A-Max, and would thus be easy to correct. If, however, 7.0 also does not work on the MAC emulators for the ST, then Apple must have implemented some code to specifically detect whether or not it is running on a genuine MAC. If this latter is the case, then the code could be so tightly woven into 7.0 that getting 7.0 to work on anything other than a genuine MAC could be difficult. It would be nice if someone who has access to an ST with a MAC emulator could overcome their misgivings about the machine long enough to check to see whether or not 7.0 runs on it. The results could yield some light into the question of how easy it will be to get 7.0 running on the Amiga under A-Max. ------------------------------------------------------------- / Marc Barrett -MB- | BITNET: XGR39@ISUVAX.BITNET / / ISU COM S Student | Internet: XGR39@CCVAX.IASTATE.EDU / ------------------------------------------------------------ \ ISU : The Home of the Goon / \ Who wants to Blow Up the Moon / -------------------------------------------------------
don@chopin.udel.edu (Donald R Lloyd) (05/27/91)
What everyone seems to be overlooking in this discussion is that the
system 7.0 license agreement specifically forbids running it on an
emulator! It will be _illegal_ for emulator-makers to promote products as
7.0 compatible, and it will be illegal to run it even if they are.
This will likely cause problems for not just ReadySoft and the makers of the
ST-based Mac emulators, but also for Nutek with its Mac ROM clones...
--
Gibberish May the Publications Editor, AmigaNetwork
is spoken fork() be Amiga Student On-Campus Consultant, U of D
here. with you. DISCLAIMER: It's all YOUR fault.cython@ais.org (Tim Devlin) (05/28/91)
In article <17202@chopin.udel.edu> don@chopin.udel.edu (Donald R Lloyd) writes: > > What everyone seems to be overlooking in this discussion is that the >system 7.0 license agreement specifically forbids running it on an >emulator! It will be _illegal_ for emulator-makers to promote products as >7.0 compatible, and it will be illegal to run it even if they are. >This will likely cause problems for not just ReadySoft and the makers of the >ST-based Mac emulators, but also for Nutek with its Mac ROM clones... > While that may be true, Apple will be hard pressed to make that part of their license agreement hold up in court. It's the same thing as if Sony came out with a license agreement for the music on their new CD's that said, these CD's can only be played on a Sony CD player. The courts are NOT going to go for that! Atari tried somethin like that back in the late 70's with their 2600 game player, they tried to say that THEY were the only ones that could make software to run on THEIR game machine, so they sued Activision....they lost! Tim -- Internet: Cython@irie.ais.org Compuserve: 76217,1372 GEnie: T.devlin2 BIX: Cython
heavy@zip.eecs.umich.edu (Richard Scott Hall) (05/28/91)
In article <1991May27.074112.13293@news.iastate.edu> xgr39@isuvax.iastate.edu writes: > > It would be nice if someone who has access to an ST with a MAC >emulator could overcome their misgivings about the machine long enough to >check to see whether or not 7.0 runs on it. The results could yield >some light into the question of how easy it will be to get 7.0 running >on the Amiga under A-Max. > Why do you assume an ST user has misgivings about their machine? > ------------------------------------------------------------- > / Marc Barrett -MB- | BITNET: XGR39@ISUVAX.BITNET / >/ ISU COM S Student | Internet: XGR39@CCVAX.IASTATE.EDU / >------------------------------------------------------------ >\ ISU : The Home of the Goon / > ------------------------------------------------------- No, I don't own a Mac emulator... Richard Hall University of Michigan -- Standard disclaimer: I am not me, I am who you think you are... so don't blame me.
davewt@NCoast.ORG (David Wright) (05/28/91)
In article <#6PCXP#@irie.ais.org> cython@ais.org (Tim Devlin) writes: >While that may be true, Apple will be hard pressed to make that part of their >license agreement hold up in court. It's the same thing as if Sony came out >with a license agreement for the music on their new CD's that said, these >CD's can only be played on a Sony CD player. The courts are NOT going to go Not quite. In this case it is an OPERATING SYSTEM which they COMPLETELY OWN, and have EVERY right to restrict, that is in question. They most certainly COULD restrict it from being used in "emulators" successfully, since there is no "legal" way for people to buy it WITHOUT agreeing to the liscensing restrictions. As it is, I don't really see how AMax or any other Mac emulator is legal. Even if you have the ROMs (which is only part of the system, much like KickStart on the Amiga), there is MUCH other software required to use the system that is NOT on the ROMs (the system file, finder, icons, etc.) that is needed to run Mac software. I seriously doubt that people using AMax (even WITH the ROMs) actually PAID to buy the Mac OS. This is exactly the same situation as someone who is using an IBM emulator or clone (which has to have some kind of ROM BIOS) using a pirated copy of MS-DOS. Even if Apple is too late to restrict the ROMs (there may be so many out there, and of course there will always be a grey market), they can certainly impose restrictions on the OS itself. >for that! Atari tried somethin like that back in the late 70's with their >2600 game player, they tried to say that THEY were the only ones that could >make software to run on THEIR game machine, so they sued Activision....they >lost! If you keep up with current events you would know that you CAN get away with this. Look at the Nintendo world. EVERY cartridge out there is directly liscensed from Ninetendo itself. In fact, the NES actually contains a system that REQUIRES that cartridges contain a certain chip, which can only be obtained from Nintendo. You can't just whip up an EPROM like you could for the 2600. Now, they have been taken to court over this, but as far as I know, no verdict has been reached. So would YOU stake your companies future on producing something that may or may not be ruled illagal, when the outcome is unknown, and the penalties severe if you lose? Dave
scotte@applix.com (Scott Evernden) (05/28/91)
In article <1991May27.220109.1165@NCoast.ORG> davewt@NCoast.ORG (David Wright) writes: >... I seriously doubt that >people using AMax (even WITH the ROMs) actually PAID to buy the Mac OS. The MAC OS is available for downloading on Compuserve. No special requirements to get except a lot of download patience. I've never had a problem simply walking into an Apple dealer and just making a copy of the system disks. I've even offered to pay, but no one wants my money... -scott
uunix@triton.unm.edu (05/28/91)
In article <1991May27.220109.1165@NCoast.ORG> davewt@NCoast.ORG (David Wright) writes: > If you keep up with current events you would know that you CAN get away >with this. Look at the Nintendo world. EVERY cartridge out there is directly >liscensed from Ninetendo itself. In fact, the NES actually contains a system >that REQUIRES that cartridges contain a certain chip, which can only be >obtained from Nintendo. You can't just whip up an EPROM like you could for >the 2600. Now, they have been taken to court over this, but as far as I >know, no verdict has been reached. So would YOU stake your companies >future on producing something that may or may not be ruled illagal, when the >outcome is unknown, and the penalties severe if you lose? > > > Dave I am not sure if it was this very case, but I saw in the news this weekend that Atari won a case with Nintendo concerining emulation. It was TV news and no details were given. But it said something about being able to play Nintendo games on an Atari. I am sure of that. NCW
awessels@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Allen Wessels) (05/29/91)
In article <1203@applix.com> scotte@applix.UUCP (Scott Evernden) writes: >The MAC OS is available for downloading on Compuserve. No special requirements >to get except a lot of download patience. I've never had a problem simply >walking into an Apple dealer and just making a copy of the system disks. I've >even offered to pay, but no one wants my money... There are appropriate directions to read the licensing agreement included in every system I know that is liscensed to distribute the software. While your dealers may not want to charge you for copying the disks, they will, I'm sure, accept your order for the OS with docs.
jnmoyne@lbl.gov (Jean-Noel MOYNE) (05/29/91)
References:<1991May27.074112.13293@news.iastate.edu> <17202@chopin.udel.edu> <#6PCXP#@irie.ais.org> <1991May27.220109.1165@NCoast.ORG> <1203@applix.com> <49577@ut-emx.uucp> In article <49577@ut-emx.uucp> awessels@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Allen Wessels) writes: > >The MAC OS is available for downloading on Compuserve. No special requirements System 7.0 is available by anounymous FTP at ftp.apple.com, as simple as that ! (-:. If 7.0 has some sort of test to know if it's running on an emulator, the next version of these emulators will do something so the test is bypassed. Even if they won't be able to advertise it, they _will_ make the emulators run with sys 7.0 ! And you can be sure that there will be people running 7.0 on emulators, there's no way Apple can do anything about that. It will be 'illegal', but most of the people won't even know they're breaking the law (who ever reads all these boring and depressing texts in small prints before trying this brand new and exiting piece of software you've been waiting for ?). JNM --- #include <std/disclaimer.h> JNM: jnmoyne@lbl.gov - The postmaster allways pings twice (soon in your mailbox!)
zuckerma@aludra.usc.edu (David Zuckerman) (05/30/91)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.emulations Subject: Re: MAC System 7.0 Summary: Lawsuit result (?) Expires: References: <#6PCXP#@irie.ais.org> <1991May27.220109.1165@NCoast.ORG> <1991May28.065027.24134@ariel.unm.edu> Sender: Followup-To: Distribution: Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA Keywords: In article <1991May28.065027.24134@ariel.unm.edu> uunix@triton.unm.edu writes: >In article <1991May27.220109.1165@NCoast.ORG> davewt@NCoast.ORG (David Wright) writes: >> If you keep up with current events you would know that you CAN get away >>with this. Look at the Nintendo world. EVERY cartridge out there is directly >>liscensed from Ninetendo itself. In fact, the NES actually contains a system >>that REQUIRES that cartridges contain a certain chip, which can only be >>obtained from Nintendo. You can't just whip up an EPROM like you could for >>the 2600. Now, they have been taken to court over this, but as far as I >>know, no verdict has been reached. So would YOU stake your companies >>future on producing something that may or may not be ruled illagal, when the >>outcome is unknown, and the penalties severe if you lose? >> >> >> Dave > >I am not sure if it was this very case, but I saw in the news this weekend >that Atari won a case with Nintendo concerining emulation. It was TV news >and no details were given. But it said something about being able to play >Nintendo games on an Atari. I am sure of that. > > > NCW > Yes, Atari did win a suit against Nintendo over Nintendo's "monopoly" of licensing on the NES. Atari's video-cartridge division, Tengen, was producing cartridges for the NES that were not officially sanctioned (i.e. they didn't have that "seal of approval" on other cartridges). Nintendo got upset, and the lawsuit resulted. I have a feeling this won't be the last word on the subject, but as of now, Atari/Tengen can produce cartridges without Nintendo's blessing. -Dave -- David Zuckerman | "There's nothing wrong with my sense | Exercise // zuckerma@aludra.usc.edu | of reality. I have it thoroughly | good \\ // Univ of Southern CA | serviced every fortnight." | taste...\X/ Floyd the Droid Fan Club | - Zaphod Beeblebrox | Go Amiga...
consp03@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu (Kriston J. Rehberg) (06/04/91)
In article <17202@chopin.udel.edu>, don@chopin.udel.edu (Donald R Lloyd) writes: |> |> What everyone seems to be overlooking in this discussion is that the |>system 7.0 license agreement specifically forbids running it on an |>emulator! It will be _illegal_ for emulator-makers to promote products as |>7.0 compatible, and it will be illegal to run it even if they are. |>This will likely cause problems for not just ReadySoft and the makers of the |>ST-based Mac emulators, but also for Nutek with its Mac ROM clones... Where do they see the legality in there? There is no reason why this would be the case. Nothing is being copied illegally. Look at IBM clones, for instance. Apple always has a legal thing (sort of like being the little kid who likes to beat up bigger ones) against its competitors, simply because they are insecure about their inferior products. I don't see anything illegal about running 7.0 on an emulator, as long as you bought the chips and secured a legal copy of the 7.0 upgrade. Apple seems to be stretching its licensing power a bit too far on this one. |> |>-- |> Gibberish May the Publications Editor, AmigaNetwork |> is spoken fork() be Amiga Student On-Campus Consultant, U of D |> here. with you. DISCLAIMER: It's all YOUR fault. +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ |Kriston J. Rehberg, Student Consultant, SUNY Binghamton Computer Services | |consp03@BINGSUNS.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU +---------------------------+ |consp03@BINGVAXU.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU |Opinions expressed here are| |CONSP03@BINGVAXA.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU |my own and do not represent| |CONSP03@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU |those of this organization | +-----> Only Amiga makes it possible! <-----------+--------------------- ;-b -+
consp03@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu (Kriston J. Rehberg) (06/04/91)
In article <1991May27.220109.1165@NCoast.ORG>, davewt@NCoast.ORG (David Wright) writes: |>In article <#6PCXP#@irie.ais.org> cython@ais.org (Tim Devlin) writes: |>[...] I seriously doubt that |>people using AMax (even WITH the ROMs) actually PAID to buy the Mac OS. |>This is exactly the same situation as someone who is using an IBM emulator |>or clone (which has to have some kind of ROM BIOS) using a pirated copy of |>MS-DOS. Even if Apple is too late to restrict the ROMs (there may be so many |>out there, and of course there will always be a grey market), they can |>certainly impose restrictions on the OS itself. You're extrapolating too much. You have no knowledge that all, or even most, AMAX users pirate the system. In the best-case scenario (which all computer makers develop for) in which people get everything through the legal channels, the emulator is LEGAL. By your logic I can say that a Macintosh user who bought a used Mac with no hard disk copies a system folder from a friend, or we can look at the regular Mac user who illegal updates his system and finder versions from friends or even the computer center at school. Also, you are saying (in non-computer terms) that SONY tape players should only be allowed to play SONY brand tapes, which is ludicrous. You can also see this happening with the Nintendo licensing program, where you cannot produce a Nintendo cartridge without securing a license from Nintendo (of course, Nintendo recently lifted this restriction). |> |> Dave |> |> Best, Kris +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ |Kriston J. Rehberg, Student Consultant, SUNY Binghamton Computer Services | |consp03@BINGSUNS.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU +---------------------------+ |consp03@BINGVAXU.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU |Opinions expressed here are| |CONSP03@BINGVAXA.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU |my own and do not represent| |CONSP03@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU |those of this organization | +-----> Only Amiga makes it possible! <-----------+--------------------- ;-b -+
sck@watson.ibm.com (Scott C. Kennedy) (06/04/91)
In article <1991Jun3.183732.3135@newserve.cc.binghamton.edu>, consp03@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu (Kriston J. Rehberg) writes: |> |> I don't see anything illegal about running 7.0 on an emulator, as long |> as you bought the chips and secured a legal copy of the 7.0 upgrade. |> The liscence for System 7.0 FORBADES use on a non-Apple product, so, you cannot legally run it on any machine except an Apple. This is a cheap shot, and probably won't be enforced, but use of System 7.0 on an emulator would be illegal. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Scott C. Kennedy (sck@watson.ibm.com) | This post does not reflect the intent Distributed High Performance Computing | or actions of my employer, and their IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Facility | actions don't reflect mine either.:) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "And there's no more toliet paper - It's gone just like the trees. Do you like the taste of honey - Isn't it best without the bees? Be careful what you're doing - you're messing up my life, And if the world's a cake - then you cut too big a slice!" -P.I.L.
consp03@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu (Kriston J. Rehberg) (06/05/91)
In article <1991Jun4.064325.11852@watson.ibm.com>, sck@watson.ibm.com (Scott C. Kennedy) writes: |> The liscence for System 7.0 FORBADES use on a non-Apple |>product, so, you cannot legally run it on any machine except an Apple. |>This is a cheap shot, and probably won't be enforced, but use of System |>7.0 on an emulator would be illegal. |> I must say that the money you pay for the emulator should be permission enough to use the system software. Apple won't get anywhere with this. They're paranoid and sound like they are ashamed of their own products. Remember, they can't emulate the Amiga or ST, and do a bullish job of emulating the PC. |>---------------------------------------------------------------------- --------- |>Scott C. Kennedy (sck@watson.ibm.com) | This post does not reflect the intent Kris +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ |Kriston J. Rehberg, Student Consultant, SUNY Binghamton Computer Services | |consp03@BINGSUNS.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU +---------------------------+ |consp03@BINGVAXU.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU |Opinions expressed here are| |CONSP03@BINGVAXA.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU |my own and do not represent| |CONSP03@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU |those of this organization | +-----> Only Amiga makes it possible! <-----------+--------------------- ;-b -+
sck@watson.ibm.com (Scott C. Kennedy) (06/05/91)
In article <1991Jun4.205151.1058@newserve.cc.binghamton.edu>, consp03@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu (Kriston J. Rehberg) writes: |> In article <1991Jun4.064325.11852@watson.ibm.com>, sck@watson.ibm.com |> (Scott C. Kennedy) writes: |> |> |> The liscence for System 7.0 FORBADES use on a non-Apple |> |>product, so, you cannot legally run it on any machine except an Apple. |> |>This is a cheap shot, and probably won't be enforced, but use of System |> |>7.0 on an emulator would be illegal. |> |> |> |> I must say that the money you pay for the emulator should be permission |> enough to use the system software. Apple won't get anywhere with this. |> They're paranoid and sound like they are ashamed of their own products. |> Remember, they can't emulate the Amiga or ST, and do a bullish job of |> emulating the PC. |> Kris, Buying an emulator of a product does not give your any rights to the original product. If you own a clone of Lotus 1-2-3, then you should have permission to use Lotus. (I don't think so.) And yes, Apple is paranoid about their products. That is one of the reason we don't see Macintosh clones. When Nutek releases their ROMs for the Macintosh, we should have a fun price-war for Macintoshes. And we can watch Apple's profit share plummet . -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Scott C. Kennedy (sck@watson.ibm.com) | This post does not reflect the intent Distributed High Performance Computing | or actions of my employer, and their IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Facility | actions don't reflect mine either.:) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "And there's no more toliet paper - It's gone just like the trees. Do you like the taste of honey - Isn't it best without the bees? Be careful what you're doing - you're messing up my life, And if the world's a cake - then you cut too big a slice!" -P.I.L.
dingebre@imp.sim.es.com (David Ingebretsen) (06/06/91)
In article <1991Jun5.154510.19316@watson.ibm.com>, sck@watson.ibm.com (Scott C. Kennedy) writes: > In article <1991Jun4.205151.1058@newserve.cc.binghamton.edu>, consp03@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu (Kriston J. Rehberg) writes: > |> In article <1991Jun4.064325.11852@watson.ibm.com>, sck@watson.ibm.com > |> (Scott C. Kennedy) writes: > |> > |> |> The liscence for System 7.0 FORBADES use on a non-Apple > |> |>product, so, you cannot legally run it on any machine except an Apple. > |> |>This is a cheap shot, and probably won't be enforced, but use of System > |> |>7.0 on an emulator would be illegal. > |> |> > |> > |> I must say that the money you pay for the emulator should be permission > |> enough to use the system software. Apple won't get anywhere with this. > |> They're paranoid and sound like they are ashamed of their own products. > |> Remember, they can't emulate the Amiga or ST, and do a bullish job of > |> emulating the PC. > |> > > Kris, > Buying an emulator of a product does not give your any rights to the original > product. If you own a clone of Lotus 1-2-3, then you should have permission > to use Lotus. (I don't think so.) And yes, Apple is paranoid about their products. > That is one of the reason we don't see Macintosh clones. When Nutek releases > their ROMs for the Macintosh, we should have a fun price-war for Macintoshes. > And we can watch Apple's profit share plummet . > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Scott C. Kennedy (sck@watson.ibm.com) | This post does not reflect the intent > Distributed High Performance Computing | or actions of my employer, and their > IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Facility | actions don't reflect mine either.:) > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > "And there's no more toliet paper - It's gone just like the trees. > Do you like the taste of honey - Isn't it best without the bees? > Be careful what you're doing - you're messing up my life, > And if the world's a cake - then you cut too big a slice!" -P.I.L. It's more like if I have a clone of Lotus 1-2-3, then I should be able to buy and use Lotus macro packages and transfer data files.
consp03@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu (Kriston J. Rehberg) (06/06/91)
In article <1991Jun5.154510.19316@watson.ibm.com>, sck@watson.ibm.com (Scott C. Kennedy) writes: |>In article <1991Jun4.205151.1058@newserve.cc.binghamton.edu>, consp03@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu (Kriston J. Rehberg) writes: |> Buying an emulator of a product does not give your any rights to the original I am talking about buying the official Apple system software. Read my message carefully. I said that when you buy the original system software from Apple, THEN you have full rights to use that system software as you wish. Note that the emulated product is mostly original code that you buy, legally, yourself. Re-read my message. |>product. If you own a clone of Lotus 1-2-3, then you should have permission |>to use Lotus. (I don't think so.) And yes, Apple is paranoid about their products. I didn't say a 'clone of the system software', I said buying the REAL system software and REAL ROMS from Apple. In that way, everything is legal. Re-read my message. In this way you secure the rights to use the software privately in any way you choose. You can even reverse engineer the product for your own uses. Note the word 'privately'. If you give it out, you are in violation of the contract. |>That is one of the reason we don't see Macintosh clones. When Nutek releases |>their ROMs for the Macintosh, we should have a fun price-war for Macintoshes. |>And we can watch Apple's profit share plummet . Of course. But I know good hardware when I see it - and that's why I have an Amiga and emulating a Mac. |>Scott C. Kennedy (sck@watson.ibm.com) | This post does not reflect the intent Kris +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ |Kriston J. Rehberg, Student Consultant, SUNY Binghamton Computer Services | |consp03@BINGSUNS.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU +---------------------------+ |consp03@BINGVAXU.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU |Opinions expressed here are| |CONSP03@BINGVAXA.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU |my own and do not represent| | |those of this organization | +-----> Only Amiga makes it possible! <-----------+--------------------- ;-b -+
bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce D. Becker) (06/09/91)
In article <1991Jun4.064325.11852@watson.ibm.com> sck@watson.ibm.com (Scott C. Kennedy) writes: |In article <1991Jun3.183732.3135@newserve.cc.binghamton.edu>, consp03@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu (Kriston J. Rehberg) writes: ||> ||> I don't see anything illegal about running 7.0 on an emulator, as long ||> as you bought the chips and secured a legal copy of the 7.0 upgrade. ||> | | The liscence for System 7.0 FORBADES use on a non-Apple |product, so, you cannot legally run it on any machine except an Apple. |This is a cheap shot, and probably won't be enforced, but use of System |7.0 on an emulator would be illegal. Just because a licence asserts some use restriction does not in and of itself constitute illegality. It serves mostly as a warning that the legal staff of the licensor may attempt to harrass those who do not agree. This may in some cases lead to a court action in which legality may be determined. Note that the licensor doesn't always win: "shrink-wrap" clauses have been adjudged to be without force in several jurisdictions, for example... -- ,u, Bruce Becker Toronto, Ontario a /i/ Internet: bdb@becker.UUCP, bruce@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu `\o\-e UUCP: ...!utai!mnetor!becker!bdb _< /_ "Ferget yer humanity, do the poot" - devo
thad@public.BTR.COM (Thaddeus P. Floryan) (06/09/91)
In article <107298@becker.UUCP> bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce D. Becker) writes: >[...] > Just because a licence asserts some use > restriction does not in and of itself > constitute illegality. It serves mostly >[...] Precisely. For example, I used my (developer) CD-ROM copy of MacOS 7.0 as a hub-shim on my neighbor's son's tricycle, and he's now the Pride And Joy of the neighborhood with his trike rainbow-glistening in the sun! Who said CD-ROMs were good "only" for music and/or computer data? :-) That copy was MINE to use how-so-ever I saw fit, and that tricycle was most definitely not made by "Apple". BTW, can that Cupertino company still use the name "Apple" and/or did they buy-out The Beatles? Not much word about the lawsuit recently in the press.