w8ing4intelmacs said:
Maybe, but not the one you're thinking of. It is referring to institutional purchases and institutional resale.
False parallelism. Modifiers do not carry over in legal documents. "Institutional purchase" and "resale" are separate entities. Rules of English parallelism would require the terms to state "institutional resale" if that is the intended meaning.
No court would ever come down with a judgment that would prohibit someone from selling their personal property ("You are hereby sentenced to keep your Mac for the rest of your life.")
Not entirely true. There exists a massive number of products and personal purchases which have special conditions associated with them. When you pay a discounted price, there are consequences and tradeoffs. At the developer store, that's a rule that you have to own the machine one year before reselling. Here, the rules clearly state no resale. Again, that's not necessarily their intent, and it's obviously not something they enforce, but a rule is a rule. Just because everyone always drives 50mph on a given street with a posted limit of 35 doesn't mean the speed limit is 50.
"resale" is a commonly understood term that refers to a type of retailing.....a merchant buys a product and then resells it with the intention of making a profit......people who engage in such activity are "resellers" and Apple is clearly saying that people buying for such a purpose are not eligible to buy through the education store.
That's a colloquial usage, but "resale" has a finite legal definition, and it's a broad and simple one. Note that "resale" in one of its most common uses refers to the act of selling a used car. There may be an intended distinction, but there is no such expressed distinction. Again, their intent may indeed be to dissuade "flippers" but "Apple products purchased from the education store are not for resale" isn't a nuanced statement. It might just be bad policywriting, but it is what it is.
Edit: Because this discussion has gotten substantially more attention than anticipated, I am adding the disclaimer that IANYL--for anyone in this thread. Statements rendered are not legal advice for any client.