[OT] EULA and legality

[Kay C Lan]

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:22 PM, Peter Alcibiades <
palcibiades-first at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> I think the restriction on use is fine, because its just a product feature.
> Rev is perfectly entitled to have whatever features it wants.
>

So it would then be perfectly reasonable for Apple to leave the EULA
restriction in and then include in their software, code that actually
determined that the software was running on Apple hardware and then refuse
to work if it wasn't? This would be a 'feature' of the software, that it
was for Apple hardware only. That would then make it legal in the EU?

What a giant waste of time for Apple to go through the process of
implementing code that does this, when everyone knows the hackintosh
community will crack it as fast as the DVD ripping community crack the
protections on commercial DVDs.

Really, is that the difference, because Apple don't physically write the
code to prevent you from doing this you can't be expected to honour that
part of the EULA that is actually in plain English - and by the way the
Apple website has versions of it's EULA in 18 different languages and from
the 3 I'm familiar with the bit about 'Apple hardware' is about as
non-lawyer speak as it can get.