> I think the top left hand paragraph which read:
>
> Get access to every CS6 application and so much more for as low as
> US$49.99 per month.
>
> Is a clue to it not being free.

No, I think it's a clue that if you like the downloadable CS2 below you 
should consider buying the latest version... Otherwise why wouldn't they 
put the price and a link to buy the software that's actually on the page?

>> Another analogy I thought up, imagine a coke vending machine gets a bug
>> after a software update and then gives drinks for free. Obviously word
>> will spread and people will empty the machine pretty quickly. Coke gets
>> a call that the machine is out of order (because it's empty) and come
>> out to fix it. But they "fix it" by taking off any reference to a price
>> or having to insert coins and re-stock the machine with a huge number of
>> cans.
>
> I do not think that by any stretch of the imagination that would be
> considered fixing.

Exactly - they had the opportunity to at least shut off the machine or 
simply not re-fill it yet they deliberately took different action to 
further promote people taking free cans.

>> Is it legally and morally correct to then take a can without
>> paying?
>
> No it is not.

In the UK at least theft has not been committed unless you know your are 
stealing. A court would have to decide whether someone taking a can from 
the machine that had been modified by the manufacturer thought they were 
stealing or they thought the manufacturer intended to give away the cans 
for free. Given the actions taken by the manufacturer they would have a 
very difficult case to convince a court people were knowingly stealing 
from them.

>> What happens if a week later coke try to force everyone who took
>> a free can to pay for it by taking to court the ones who refuse to pay?
>
> Not likely, at all.

Agreed, because they would know it was unlikely they would be successful 
in court due to their earlier actions to "modify" the machine.

> Similarly if an ATM gives out more money than you ask for:
>
> http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/atms-wrong-money-165239004.html

The key point is whether a person taking the extra money/goods/software 
thinks they are stealing it or not. In the case of the ATM it's obvious 
you are taking more than you ask for (especially if you join a queue 
specifically to do that), so it's theft (under UK law at least). With 
the machine modified by Coke itself to remove pricing information and 
give out free cans it's likely people genuinely think the cans are being 
given away for free, so it's not theft.

Post a reply to this message