×
The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.
I'm interested in comments about the following comment about an Apple
clone maker's claim and the reference to the Appeals Court decision,
also and especially as related to the IBM i....
---Alan
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9084319
Psystar Challenges Apple Computers In Court
<
http://www.computerworld.com/comments/comment/view/9084319/64494#comment-64494>:
Psystar has an open invitation to Apple Computers
to formally charge it with a violation of the Mac OS X licensing terms
in a court of law.
Those terms, Psystar argues, are in violation of antitrust laws -- an
argument for which the clone maker may have a precedent working in its
favor. According to TechNewsWorld, a 1984 U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
decision held that a software publisher can't require consumers to run
an operating system on a specific type of hardware.
The Supreme Court reportedly refused to review the case.
It's up to the courts to decide if the public is protected from
"monopoly" like practices (i.e. Apple Computers). This is a complex
issue and long overdue to be challenged in court. Regardless, of the
"emotions" of Apple friendly consumers.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact
[javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.
midrange.com
