Mac Clone???

[John C. Welch]

On 4/16/08 8:27 AM, "Gregory Seidman" <gsslist+osxadmin at anthropohedron.net>
wrote:

>>> They won't need to.  The product will hang itself on it's own
>>> crappiness.  Though perhaps I'm underestimating the average Windows
>>> user's tolerance for random crashes and systems refusing to boot
>>> after a software update.
>> 
>> Apple will have to, since their EULA explicitly forbids it, (Spare me the
>> sophistry about writing "Apple Inc." on the computer, silliness with
>> stickers, or stupidity about monopoly positions that show a complete
>> misunderstanding about what a monopoly is). If they don't, then that creates
>> a "Xerox" issue.
> 
> You're confusing copyright law with trademark law. A trademark owner is
> obligated to protect its trademark in every case in order to have legal
> standing to protect it in any case. (It's obviously a bit more complicated
> than that, but that's the most basic level.) Apple, however, has a
> copyright on MacOS X and the EULA is a copyright license. Copyrights can be
> defended or not arbitrarily, and no failure to defend a copyright is
> precedent for weakening that copyright claim. For the record, IANAL.

No, it's not exactly the same as trademark law. However, should Apple say,
ignore this, even though it is common knowledge for say, a couple years, and
then try to go after them, Apple will have a hell of a time convincing
anyone that they suffered any damages over this. If they can't show any real
damages, then the delay hurts their case.



-- 
John C. Welch         Writer/Analyst
Bynkii.com              Mac and other opinions
jwelch at bynkii.com