Article View: comp.sys.mac
Article #16567Re: Lawyers say: ExitToShell (Quit) is illegal
From: olson
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1987 13:53
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1987 13:53
39 lines
2786 bytes
2786 bytes
In article <3272@sdcsvax.UCSD.EDU> jww@sdcsvax.UCSD.EDU (Joel West) writes:
>Suppose you are with ABC Corporation...
>
>Clause 9 of form TD001-112886 ('Software License Agreement') requires
>that ABC place into 'a conspicuous place in the manual' this statement:
>
> System, Finder, ImageWriter (etc.) are copyrighted programs
> of Apple Computer, Inc. licensed to ABC Corp. to distribute for use
> only in combination with SuperDuper. Apple Software shall not be
> copied onto another diskette (except for achive purposes) or
> into memory unless as part of the execution of SuperDuper. When
> SuperDuper has completed execution Apple Software shall not
> be used by any other program.
>
This, like so much else legalese, is clearly intended to be used against
ABC Corporation in situations not clearly spelled out in the clause. For
instance, if SuperDuper were a program that takes a Mac disk and translates
it into an Atari ST disk (for the MagicSac Mac emulator, say), and it is
distributed with the System and Finder under the terms of this clause, and
it copies the System and Finder to an ST disk, which is then used on the
MagicSac. This violates the above two ways: it copies System and Finder to
another disk for use other than the execution of SuperDuper (i.e., for use
with the MagicSac [apple] ROMs and patches), and after SuperDuper terminates,
Apple software may continue to be used (in the grand scheme of things).
Now, in fact, the MagicSac people don't distribute the Mac-to-ST (serial port)
translator with System and Finder, so they probably don't worry too much.
Also, they either (1) have a deal with Apple whereby Apple dealers will
sell MagicSac owners Mac ROMs, or (2) the situation falls under some
incredibly old anti-trust anti-bundling ruling about how IBM can't refuse
to sell their software to IBM (mainframe) compatible computer owners
(like Amdahls, I think).
One other point I'd like to make is that the owners of Macintosh computers
have a liscense to use the System and Finder (only on one machine, etc., blah,
etc.), so users don't really have to worry about that clause.
-Eric
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<2191@husc6.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!husc6!endor!olsonReferences:
<3272@sdcsvax.UCSD.EDU>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!husc6!endor!olson From: olson@endor.UUCP Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac Subject: Re: Lawyers say: ExitToShell (Quit) is illegal Message-ID: <2191@husc6.UUCP> Date: Thu, 4-Jun-87 09:53:54 EDT Article-I.D.: husc6.2191 Posted: Thu Jun 4 09:53:54 1987 Date-Received: Sat, 6-Jun-87 07:15:09 EDT References: <3272@sdcsvax.UCSD.EDU> Sender: news@husc6.UUCP Reply-To: olson@endor.UUCP (Eric Olson) Organization: Aiken Computation Lab Harvard, Cambridge, MA Lines: 39 Keywords: Believe it, or not