🚀 go-pugleaf

Re: Scenario 1

Would not the fact that the software had been modified by an outsider be an
adequate defense?  If Joe Random put down a libelous statement in a copy of
one of say, Larry Niven's books, and gave the book to a friend, Niven could
hardly be held responsible for that statement.  To protect itself, all Apple
needs to do here is to say "don't give out modified versions of the software"
or "if you give out a modified version, you must tell the person receiving it
that it has been modified".  And probably "you must get the person that you
give it to to agree to this agreement".  But not "if you give a copy of the
software to someone, you lose your copy" or "you can't modify the software".

Re: Scenario 2

Did you see me objecting to the provisions that limit use of the software
to Apple computers?  There is an intermediate point between making things
so restrictive that they cause problems for Apple owners, and leaving the
software completely unrestricted, and Scenario 2 does not raise any valid
objections to the points that I made.  For example, one could change

    1.  Use the software only on a single Apple computer.  You must obtain
    a supplementary license from Apple before using the software in
    connection with systems and multiple central processing units, computer
    networks or emulations on mainframe or minicomputers.

to

    1.  Use the software only on Apple computers.  You must obtain a
    supplementary license from Apple before using the software in connection
    with non-Apple computers or emulations on mainframe or minicomputers.

which would allow one to use the same System disk on machines at home and at
school without making the System prey for use on an Amiga or an Atari ST.

                                        -- Thomas Newton