Martin LaMonica over at CNET.com pointed out something rather interesting in the Safari TOS. It specifically says “The software allows you to install and use one copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time.”

Apple apparently hasn’t gotten use to the whole making browsers for Windows thing yet…..

I know that no person actually bothers to read this junk, but when the company that actually MAKES the software doesn’t bother to read it, it’s an insult. Apply, along with other companies, can and WILL use the TOS to sue anyone who alters their programs or hardware in anyway. So why would they literally just copy and paste the thing into every program?

After seeing Martin LaMonica blog, Fabio Zambelli of settleB.IT informs him that “the Apple license has been updated so that Windows PC users can install Safari without fear of violating any licenses. Zambelli says the change occurred overnight Wednesday to Thursday European time.”

[CNET: Safari for Windows: Only for ‘Apple-labeled’ computers?]

According to a number of record industry executives, there’s currently talk between Apple and the music industry about giving iPod and iPhone users unlimited access to music downloads, after a special fee, of course.

This news comes as a bit of surprise, considering just last year Steve Jobs made it clear that he believed customers didn’t want to rent their music and that Apple had no plans to create a Music Subscription Service. Yes Steve, we would MUCH rather have to buy the same stupid song 4 times so we can listen to it on different devices. Apparently Apple realized that people would rather use other download services that DON’T use DRM protection. Go figure.

The iPod is a dying fashion. It used to be a novelty to carry around 10,000 songs in your pocket, but people wanted more. Then Apple added video. And people wanted more, so Apple made it smaller, and then threw in a phone. Giving the iPod unlimited access to music might just be the thing to make people want to upgrade their iPods.

Many reports are speculating the service will cost $7 a month for unlimited music, or an extra $100 stuck onto the iPod’s/iPhone’s price tag, giving users a lifetime’s access to free music. Record companies would receive compensation for every sale of a portable device, something Apple isn’t too thrilled with if you ask me.

If Apple ran with this idea, they would pretty much have a monopoly over the music industry. But $7 for unlimited music? Not a bad deal…

Apple has yet to comment on the idea.

[Los Angeles Times: Apple may offer music subscription service]