Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 3rd Jul 2009 11:27 UTC
Mac OS X Whenever we talk about Mac clone makers such as Psystar, we all more or less accept as a fact that Apple is selling copies of its Mac OS X operating system at a price lower than it would have been if Apple did not have a hardware business. Even though we treat this statement as fact - recently, I've been wondering: where is the proof?
Permalink for comment 371545
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Wha?
by l0ne on Fri 3rd Jul 2009 13:08 UTC
l0ne
Member since:
2006-11-25

Subsidizing or not is entirely irrelevant, aside from being flamewar fuel.

What is happening here is that Psystar is -- unquestionably -- violating the EULA *and* decrypting Apple's stuff without permissions to produce a Mac-less OS X distribution.

The point is: is the EULA enforceable? And/or: is decrypting this way circumvention of technological countermeasures as defined by US and EU laws? If either is true, Psystar is most likely breaking the law, and thus would find itself in big, big trouble.

Subsidization doesn't even begin to enter the picture here. The price of OS X is irrelevant to the above. It could be free or 10k per seat, and the above would still entirely apply.

Edited 2009-07-03 13:09 UTC

Reply Score: 2