Comment by willtemperley

10 hours ago

> It’s reductio ad absurdum

It's not, it's just factually wrong.

If Apple can legally claim 30% of your salary then a doctor using an iPad to demonstrate results of a scan to a patient has to pay Apple 30% of their consultation fee.

That's reductio ad absurdum.

Lol.

7 comments

willtemperley

Reply
spacebanana7  10 hours ago

> If Apple can legally claim 30% of your salary then a doctor using an iPad to demonstrate results of a scan to a patient has to pay Apple 30% of their consultation fee.

Apple could absolutely do this. They could say that professional medical use of macOS requires a commercial license, and the price of that commercial licence could be linked to revenue.

Doctors - or rather their hospital IT/procurement departments - would be held to the terms of service they agree to. Far more rigorously than ordinary consumers.

  • willtemperley  9 hours ago

    If that were legally enforcable, which is almost certainly not the case, Microsoft and Google could do the same, making your argument moot in this context.

    • spacebanana7  9 hours ago

      Every software company can do this. Oracle Java is free for personal use but if you use it in prod you have to pay a licence based on the number of employees in your company. Epic games takes 5% of your revenue above a million if you use unreal for a game. Docker desktop requires a paid license if you have over 250 employees or $10 million in revenue.

      2 replies →