Correct. This is a common abuse of intellectual "property" law. Check this one out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omega_S.A._v._Costco_Wholesale_Corp https://

Correct. This is a common abuse of intellectual "property" law. Check this one out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omega_S.A._v._Costco_Wholesale_Corp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omega_S.A._v._Costco_Wholesale.... Corporations abuse these laws to restrict trade in goods already manufactured. What you can see here is Apple's legal declaration: You do not own the device. Apple does. Apple has the right to refuse sale of the device and you have no recourse. What you see is a fundamental attack on the notion of ownership. Do you own an Apple device? Apple decides what you may do with it. Apple even apparently decides who you may sell or give it to. Do you really own the device? Even "buying" something doesn't really give you ownership of it, the corporation still controls it. You are a serf. This is the how of the danger of these intellectual "property" laws being misused against the public.