🚀 go-pugleaf

Actually, I just thought of something that may even have a negative effect on
those who are willing to put up with the restrictions I singled out.  One 
clause reads "YOU MAY NOT MODIFY ... THE SOFTWARE, IN WHOLE OR IN PART ..."
Now what constitutes modifying the software?  What about:
    (1) Installing or removing fonts
          I don't think of this as modifying the software, but some lawyer
          might, since it certainly changes its behavior (the bits you see
          on the screen will reflect whether a requested font and size are
          present in the System file or not, etc.)

    (2) Installing or removing desk accessories such as MockWrite which
        can be characterized as "taking snapshots and leaving footprints"

    (3) Installing or removing desk accessories such as SkipFinder, Control
        Panel, or the Dvorak keyboard layout DA which are meant to have some
        direct effect on the way in which the system operates.

    (4) Installing INITS, FKEYS, drivers for SCSI devices (like hard disks),
        etc. which may have effects as in (2) or as in (3).

Assuming that any one of these things count as "modifying the software" (and
I haven't yet heard of a Mac owner who doesn't customize their System file),
this makes the electronically-distributed System useless even on a single Mac.
Does anyone still believe this is a perfectly reasonable license?  Any bets as
to what happens when a court finds out just what the chances are that anybody
can obey all the points of the license without using the System disk only as a
paperweight?  Ephraim's point is well-taken.

                                        -- Thomas Newton