61–70 of 132 posts
If I'm just 'borrowing' El Capitan, then that means the copy I'm running belongs to them. Therefore, any intellectual property I develop using my copy could technically belong to them?
English isn't really a better exchange format for licenses than legalese. Arguably it's even worse due to the lossy conversion. What we really need is a common legal markup language[1]. Sadly, the few efforts that I've heard about seem to be stagnating. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_XML
The problem with legal markup is the same as with FIX, the financial data protocol (which is widely used). Lawyers (finance people) will never stop innovating (increasing complexity), and they will not be one moment delayed by a protocol which falls short of their aspirations for sophistication (bamboozling). Therefore, the only adoptable protocols are mere transports. They might rigidly specify some commonly used th…
If all exchanges have invented a liquidity-field, then there's a good chance the next version of FIX will standardize it, no?
Imho the legal system is very much ripe for digitalization. Both on the low-end (where it pretty much consists of overhead), and even more so on the high-end, where the complexity of legal contracts between companies or states has long exceeded what any team of lawyers (much less a mere mortal) can comprehend.
Why is Sudan of all places singled out and not like North Korea or Iran? Or was that just reduced for brevity.
Does anyone know if #10 changed in El Capitan? I remember reading that Apple allowed hackintoshes.
The thing they DID begin to allow at some point is OS X running in a VM, on Apple host hardware, I believe.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which is what Apple's license says, but with a bunch of additional terms unfavorable for the user and without access to the source code.
No it says nothing of the sort.
The author is clearly Apple and they are not responsible just as in the BSD license:
The Capitan is AS-IS, of course.
Unlike BSD, there is no source and a bunch of other very restrictive limitations, which is what I was commenting about.
1. I can’t use the Capitan with illegal copies of anyone’s stuff.
2. Apple didn’t sell me this software. They still own it, in fact. I’m just borrowing it.
3. If I install more Apple software, those are on loan as well.
...
And so on.
I did not read anything about installing Windows on Apple hardware and then running OSX Capitan in a virtual machine. Is that really allowed?
Apple does not put any legal restrictions on what OS you choose to run on Mac hardware, you're free to install Windows on it (but then you'd better be complying with Windows' license terms)
IIRC, #7 about the voice synthesizers appeared with 10.6. Prior to that, there was no mention of the voices in the license and commercial use of narrations produced with the system's voice synthesizer might have been legal.
> Slideshows made with Photo; same deal, don’t even think about using them for some commercial purpose. ??? Was Apple too cheap to buy the proper license for the default slideshow music? That sounds completely arbitrary and unexpected. (I doubt anyone will ever enforce this rule, but why is it there?)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No it says nothing of the sort.
Judging from the article it does: The author is clearly Apple and they are not responsible just as in the BSD license: The Capitan is AS-IS, of course. Unlike BSD, there is no source and a bunch of other very restrictive limitations, which is what I was commenting about. 1. I can’t use the Capitan with illegal copies of anyone’s stuff. 2. Apple didn’t sell me this software. They still own it, in fact. I’m just borrow…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which is what Apple's license says, but with a bunch of additional terms unfavorable for the user and without access to the source code.
No it says nothing of the sort.
C. TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, THE APPLE SOFTWARE AND SERVICES ARE PROVIDED “AS IS” AND “AS AVAILABLE”, WITH ALL FAULTS AND WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, AND APPLE AND APPLE'S LICENSORS (COLLECTIVELY REFERRED TO AS “APPLE” FOR THE PURPOSES OF SECTIONS 7 AND 8) HEREBY DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES AND CONDITIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE APPLE SOFTWARE AND SERVICES, EITHER EXPRESS, IMPLIED OR STATUTORY, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES AND/OR CONDITIONS OF MERCHANTABILITY, SATISFACTORY QUALITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, ACCURACY, QUIET ENJOYMENT, AND NON-INFRINGEMENT OF THIRD PARTY RIGHTS.
D. APPLE DOES NOT WARRANT AGAINST INTERFERENCE WITH YOUR ENJOYMENT OF THE APPLE SOFTWARE AND SERVICES, THAT THE FUNCTIONS CONTAINED IN, OR SERVICES PERFORMED OR PROVIDED BY, THE APPLE SOFTWARE WILL MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS, THAT THE OPERATION OF THE APPLE SOFTWARE OR SERVICES WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR-FREE, THAT ANY SERVICES WILL CONTINUE TO BE MADE AVAILABLE, THAT THE APPLE SOFTWARE OR SERVICES WILL BE COMPATIBLE OR WORK WITH ANY THIRD PARTY SOFTWARE, APPLICATIONS OR THIRD PARTY SERVICES, OR THAT DEFECTS IN THE APPLE SOFTWARE OR SERVICES WILL BE CORRECTED. INSTALLATION OF THIS APPLE SOFTWARE MAY AFFECT THE AVAILABILITY AND USABILITY OF THIRD PARTY SOFTWARE, APPLICATIONS OR THIRD PARTY SERVICES, AS WELL AS APPLE PRODUCTS AND SERVICES.
+ the usual warnings about not being suitable for use in nuclear facilities, aircraft or air traffic control, life support & weapons systems.
(I wonder if they'll be adding self-driving cars to that list?)