Apple’s legal department this week sent “aggressive” emails to several web sites that support and advocate its products solely because they linked to videos showing a hacked version of the company’s Mac OS X operating system running on off-the-shelf PC hardware. In addition, Apple released a fix for the 64-bit bug. This update is also available through Software Update.
Interesting that it took this long for Apple to react on this, especially among their “own” herd of websites.
If people can keep cracking OSX this easy, even if Apple implement different encryption schemes on every release, Apple are going to have a very, very busy legal department, if they want to keep this level of aggression.
I can’t imagine that Apple will be able to knock down every single cracked instance of an OSX x86 release.
Steve Jobs often say that the customers aren’t stupid. I hope he isn’t forgetting his own words now. 🙂
I agree that it’s taken Apple too long as it is to crack down. The people who claim Apple has suddenly into a bully, they need to realise that Apple, as a company that has invested a lot into development and research of their proprietary software, has a right to protect the copyright of their software. Even Stallman would agree to that.
Ok, so admittedly, requesting sites to remove links to videos in an agressive tone is a bit heavy-handed..but without the tone it would be understandable.
People think that Apple is a better company than Microsoft. They point to the fact tha MS really abused its monopoly (and it did) and compared to that Apple is a sweet angel.
Even without a monopoly and the company is behaving like a bully. What will ever happen if Apple got a large market share, or gasp, became the dominant platform?
Just my $0.02.
They’d sit on an OS without memory protection for half a decade and still say it’s the best…
Just like they did without monopoly power
.
Why would people vote down for that? It’s on topic. It’s non-inflammatory. And it’s based in fact. And, it’s responding to someone elses question.
Somebody stick up for your vote. I’m calling you on it.
Worried? There are different ways to attack this, but these web sites are putting up information on how to steal. In my eyes that goes a bit past free speach.
It seems to me they are trying to protect software that they make from being run by people who didn’t pay for it.
Sounds legitimate to me.
Cujo–
You don’t get it. Piracy is our RIGHT!
Software should be open source
. Meaning there isn’t a point to paying for something when you can get something better, not only free, but better quality. Or you can pirate if you’re that desperate…
I can’t stand people that think closed source is the only way, you can make bigger bucks going into an Open source business
.
I can’t stand people that think closed source is the only way, you can make bigger bucks going into an Open source business
I don’t think anybody is saying that. Mac OS X is closed source and for some people it is the optimal answer to what they desire. For others it is not and they are more than welcome to use OSS.
Apple isn’t putting a gun to anybody’s head and saying, “You must use our software!” Apple is saying, “If you want to use our software you must pay for it.” There is nothing wrong with that.
“Software should be open source”
“I can’t stand people that think closed source is the only way…”
Kind of hypocritical. There is room for both models and one is not inheritantly beeter than the other. Use the one that is best for your situation.
In the grand scheme of things, there are a lot worse “how to’s” on the internet. Apple should just stick with going after the developers that broke their NDAs. For a demo video to even be useful, you need to get a copy of OSX-x86, which is really the core of the problem. And I’m saying this as an Apple shareholder, so I have a tiny interest in makin sure OS X doesn’t get hacked to kingdom come.
I agree that there are worse “howtos” out there. But that doesn’t make this one OK.
And I’d have to say it would be preferable to get the devs who screwed up, but that isn’t going to slow down the piracy now. I think that is what this is: and attempt to slow down the piracy.
A futile attempt for sure. Apple is playing this game for the shareholders to feel all warm and fuzzy inside.
“We fight the pirates, so it is safe to invest in us.”
It seems to me they are trying to protect software that they make from being run by people who didn’t pay for it.
Surely the best way to do that is to embrace all research into cracking it and building a technically better lock?
Take this example: the round-key type of locks (the “Kensington locks”, used to secure laptops, bikes, etc) can be opened using a pen or some strong cardboard. There are lots of videos about how to do that online. What did the lock makers do? Instead of going after all the websites and people who posted how to do it, they built better locks.
IMHO, that’s the right way to go.
How to steal radishes
1. Go to a store known to have radishes
2. Enter the store
3. Walk to where the radishes are kept
4. Remove a radish
5. Walk away
Or better yet a
http://www.osnews.com/permalink.php?news_id=11603&comment_id=19616
Link to how to steal radishes
I’m with you on preventing piracy: if people don’t like charges for the software then they shouldn’t use it at all.
However, I’d have a lot more respect for Apple if they went after people who were violating NDAs rather than gagging journalists reporting on those violations. They behaved similarly when ThinkSecret reported previews of some Apple product – there’s no law against repeating what someone else told you (barring national-security, incitement to commit certain criminal offenses, etc).
I imagine some of the reports were rather intended to help people crack the software themselves. I just think the real solution is for Apple to either a) control its NDA’d developers better or b) control the people *doing* the piracy better.
>”They behaved similarly when ThinkSecret reported previews of some Apple product – there’s no law against repeating what someone else told you (barring national-security, incitement to commit certain criminal offenses, etc).”
But Apple didn’t sue ThinkSecret for reporting the information. They simply supoenod (sp) them to get names of the people that violated the NDA. The media spin that news item in a way to make Apple look like they were suing news sources for reporting information. This site helped fuel that misunderstanding by publishing linnks to sites which reported the misleading information.
>”I just think the real solution is for Apple to either a) control its NDA’d developers better or b) control the people *doing* the piracy better.”
Perhaps… and yet I fully understand their position to… because reporting that its incredibly easy to steal this software and use it on PCs that it was not mean for is an advocation of stealing in my opinion.
“I imagine some of the reports were rather intended to help people crack the software themselves. I just think the real solution is for Apple to either a) control its NDA’d developers better or b) control the people *doing* the piracy better.”
Isn’t one of the points of piracy is to prove that you CAN’T control people? So all ‘A/B’ basically will be is damage control.
“Sounds legitimate to me.”
After being for many years a joung and innovative company, Apple turned into a bad closed source imperialist, neither needing monopoly or big moneys to behave bullish regarding the rest of the world.
In ’90s Apple past half a decade of Open Source community boicottage and nearly collapsed.
In mid ’90s Apple gave money to Open Source community and helped projects like Darwin respecting Open-compatible licenses, and returned to be an innovative and ethically respected company, saving from collapse and increasing their market share even in commercially dark ages for personal computing (2002..2004).
Now Apple feels rich and famous enough to turn bullish against digital freedoms and speach freedoms to discourage working on their code and to publish something it dislikes?
Well, it’s just a little bit of history repeating (TM, R, C, whatsoever)…
I agree with you to some extent. I don’t like this aggression by apple, it just pushes their customers away; I’m considering switching to apple new macintel laptops next year and switch my parents too; but with apple continuing their current behaviour, I’d rather be happy with my linux laptop.
having said that, nothing tops MS. at least apple gives the OSS community something back. MS is just a big ugly black hole.
I don’t know why this behavior is causing you any concern. It would be no different than if Linus got upset because someone didn’t abide by the GPL. Apple is doing nothing different.
I don’t know why this behavior is causing you any concern. It would be no different than if Linus got upset because someone didn’t abide by the GPL. Apple is doing nothing different.
I agree, but reporting something and actually doing it are different things. To quote the website:
The video that we have published was only posted online to prove our comments and news, and to avoid to be considered as a Mac-dedicated rumor site. We did not provide any link to website describing the procedure and so on. (http://www.hardmac.com/news/2005-08-17/#4367)
That’s what ticked me off. I wouldn’t care if they went after the websites that actually do tell you how to get around the TPM.
I recall hearing reports that they were also providing information or were linking to information which detailed who the software could be stolen.
It’s not really the same though: the article isn’t about Apple trying to stop people cracking their software, it’s about Apple stopping these cracks being reported. In your analogy, I don’t think anybody would try and stop GPL violations being reported on.
(I admit it doesn’t quite fit: you don’t need a HOWTO to violate the GPL)
Do you think that banks would have a reason to get upset if people were going out of their way to report to people that its easy to break into a bank and steal all the money. “Its soooo easy. I did it. You can do it to. Check out the video of me robbing the bank. Its not a problem at all”
I think you understand where I’m going with this.
I see where you’re going but I don’t quite agree: if someone robs the bank it’s a crime and they should be punished for it. But there’s nothing to stop a newspaper from reporting that the bank was robbed and how it happened.
The French Mac site was ordered by Apple not to *link to* information on *someone else’s* site. I just think Apple should take on the people violating their NDAs, rather than other people who are just reporting that it happened.
To carry on the bank analogy: if the bank is not secure enough to prevent a robbery happening then the public, its customers and its investors have a right to know this. Reporting the act is a positive thing for these parties, even though act itself was a criminal offense.
I have no problem when Apple deals with people who violate their contract. that’s the law; and who break the law,and their contracts, they deserve it.
But, my major issue is suppressing the media and going after people who report bad things about Apple.
by spreading fear, they don’t solve anything; They should spend their money and time making their stuff harder to crack.
>”But, my major issue is suppressing the media and going after people who report bad things about Apple.”
They aren’t nor have they supressed the media.
>”by spreading fear, they don’t solve anything”
Spreading fear to those that break the law that there are reprocutions DOES solve things.
>”They should spend their money and time making their stuff harder to crack.”
The can and do, but nothing is totally crack proof without limiting functionality.
How is threatening sites which spread information not suppressing the media? Or, at least intending to suppress the media?
Behaving like a bully is different than requiring people abide by the license they agreed to.
If Apple grew its install base and market share, I would imagine that they would not change from their behavior that they exhibit now… which so far has been very admirably IMHO.
Quote: “Even without a monopoly and the company is behaving like a bully.”
That’s corporate America for you. And yes, Apple is a bully. A very nasty bully at that.
Quote: “What will ever happen if Apple got a large market share, or gasp, became the dominant platform? ”
With Steve Jobs at the helm, they’d be a lot nastier than Microsoft I suspect.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll keep saying it – Apple is a damn litiguous company. They’d sue their mother for using the word Apple. Just remember, what goes around, comes around. I hope Apple records wins it’s case against Apple Computers, and Apple is forced to legally either pay recompense, or to forgo the name of Apple. They had an agreement, and Apple Computers has conveniently forgotten to abide by it, by engaging in a online music store, and software such as iTunes and hardware such as the iPod/iPod mini.
Then there’s those nice reseller lawsuits as well in the US – Apple is no angel. They screwed a lot of resellers over with their own Apple store.
The sad thing is, the corporate biased US government and legal system seems to heavily favour the larger organisations – money seems to speak, and speak very loudly in the US.
I’m sure all of you Apple fanboys will mod me down for my comments, and you know what? I couldn’t really give a shit. Truth hurts as the old saying goes, and if you’re angry enough to mod me down, then I must have hit a raw nerve.
These websites will be hit with a take down notice courtesy of the not so lovely DMCA, which in reality is being used to circumvent freedom of speech. Euthanasia or suicide are illegal, but does that stop me from putting up a website about it? No. So why should these websites be treated any differently. I urge people to repost the website content on as many websites as possible, as with what happened with the Cisco fiasco. Spread the word. Live by freedom of speech. Make Apple work, and my suggestion is to refuse to obey take down notices issued under the DMCA under the obligation that they invalidate your freedom of speech, and yes, even go to jail over it. Do you think the government would really put 10,000 people into jail because they disobeyed? It would be very expensive and it wouldn’t look very pretty – both for Apple and the current regime. Yes, regime. Bush jr’s government is nothing but a dictatorship. You can mode me down, you can delete my post, but you can’t change my views.
I’ve said my piece on this now 🙂
Happy fun modding!
Dave
You have an interesting point regarding Apple’s own willingness to abide by contractual obligations. In the face of all of the babble regarding the legally ambiguous EULA, glass houses to have something of a bit of charm.
But there’s a big part of your comment that’s just “I’m a victim, and I’ll be moderated.” Having metadiscussions about the future fate of your own comment for the purposes of espousing moral superiority is really, really not topical. Neither is a huge swath of that DMCA and dictatorship swill. So instead of jumping in ecstasy at successfully constructing a post you suspect will be moderated down, why don’t you just stick with the topic at hand?
The topic at hand is Apple stopping websites from showing how to install Tiger onto Intel based x86 non Apple DRM’d PCs (sorry for all the acronyms guys).
These sites are encouraging freedom of information, and freedom of speech. These people have figured out how to get Tiger working. They haven’t “stolen” Apple technical documents and worked it out. They have broken no law – information is free. Since the DMCA is being used to moderate freedom of speech indirectly by companies such as Apple, then I’m against that type of legislation (and it’s not the only bone I have to pick with it either I might add).
Many readers will know that I’m a fan of the FSF and the GNU GPL, for the express reason of freedom (although others may argue on the GPL as being “free” in favour of a BSD style license). Given this, you can see why I dislike what Apple is doing. And how they are doing it. The DMCA is no friend of the average person – it’s a law designed to protect .5% of the population. That’s not a law. A law should benefit everyone in society, not a select few. We have the RIAA/MPAA/BSA all providing input into laws, where is the input from the ordinary person, the person who voted these bastard politicians in? Corporations have no right to vote. Neither should they have any rights to “donations” either to political parties, which amount to just being bribes.
Apple has long abused the DMCA and take down notices that emerge from this evil legilsation. In fact, Apple, along with the RIAA and MPAA have been the chief instigators of take down notices. This is what angers me, and what, deep in my heart and soul I know is wrong.
Why did I post the way that I posted in my original posting? Because I fully expected to be modded down as I made unfavourable comments to Apple as a company, and many Apple fans cannot tolerate criticism of their favourite company. I’ve made anti Apple comments before and have been modded down, and I expect(ed) the same to occur now. I simply made a comment on what I expected, but made another comment that being moderated down would not affect myself posting my thoughts and beliefs on the matter at hand.
Dave
These sites are encouraging freedom of information, and freedom of speech. These people have figured out how to get Tiger working. They haven’t “stolen” Apple technical documents and worked it out. They have broken no law – information is free.
And how do you suppose they could can figure it out without either (a) a pirated Tiger disk, or (b) an official Tiger disk for which they signed a restrictive license?
I could tell you how to break into a car without breaking into a car, does that make me a criminal?
Stop loving our stuff and constantly inquiring about things before we release them.. Stop being fans, just be customers like we used to have!
STOP LOVING US!
In other news… Everyone else encourages fan followings
.
No, They are actually saying… abide by our contract….
They way you spin it makes it sound like Apple is wishing people would stop appreciating their work… which is kindof trollish.
lol… “She dislikes me so much, it’s iresistable!” -George Constanza
Interesting how these “fans” suddenly come out of the woodwork, now that they can run OSX on x86. But apparently were nowhere to be found when OSX ran on PPC.
Domain Name: MACBIDOUILLE.COM
Registrar: GANDI
Whois Server: whois.gandi.net
Referral URL: http://www.gandi.net
Name Server: MBSERV.MACBIDOUILLE.COM
Name Server: MBSERV3.MACBIDOUILLE.COM
Status: ACTIVE
Updated Date: 18-may-2005
Creation Date: 18-aug-2000
Expiration Date: 18-aug-2007
Yep, they’re coming out of the wood work all of a sudden!
Honestly, I don’t think any cracked version of OSX for x86 will have any effect on apple’s business.
People that want a mac will buy one. The vast majority of people who would use a cracked version of OSX on unsupported hardware are just dabbling with it anyway, they would never use it for any real work because there are no drivers for their hardware.
Anyway, I think this is simply Steve throwing his weight around. He seems like the type of person that would do things based solely on principal regardless of the economic repercussions (not that this is a bad thing), OSX is Steve’s property and he dosen’t want anybody else using it unless he says they can.
He’s not dumb, he knows this has nothing to do with his profits, it’s all about principal.
He’s not dumb, he knows this has nothing to do with his profits, it’s all about principal.
The pirated copies of OSX 86 hurt Apple’s reputation because they suck when run on non-Mac hardware and because it shows that Apple has the mother of all security vulnerabilities. Plus, Steve has historically been ruthless, nothing short of ruthless, in dealing with anyone who steals or tries to steal from Apple. After layoffs, Apple has been known to use police tape to seal cubicals, buildings, etc. Really, you do not want to fuck with Apple in this regard. They will insist on jail time where they can and settle for taking everything you have and make over the next 10 years if that’s all they can get.
well, I think this has nothing to do with security volunerabilities, BSD is inharently secure because of the way it handles files and permissions, OSX is essentially a varient of BSD and hence, quite secure
the fact that an os is cracked to run on different hardware has nothing to do with security.
As I said in my previous post, Steve is a man of principal,.. he will do whatever necessary to protect what he owns, even if it has bad economic reprecussions.
No, making a copy of a product without paying for it may be piracy, but not stealing, no matter how many morons repeat it.
And besides, at this stage MacOSx86 is kinda useless on a standard pc, os is not ready yet and there are no native apps in the market. Even that my company is fully aware of the x86 deal, and besides everyone know about MacOSx86 being ripped and installed on regular pcs, no one is rushing to download it, not even to play with it.
I see you are working at becoming US President after Bill Clinton’s path of study, with defining “is” as something different. Either that, or you’re too much of a moron to actually comprehend that piracy is defined by stealing, and are simply trying to justify your being a thief and a moron!
People have the right to restrict who copies and distributes what they make, and Apple is not in the wrong here. Just by you saying that “piracy isn’t stealing” doesn’t mean that is correct; it does point out, however, the unlikely prospect of you actually being someone that creates something that someone else would actually *want* that can be copied, or you would place more importance in knowing that piracy *is* stealing, and is wrong.
“everyone know about MacOSx86 being ripped and installed on regular pcs, no one is rushing to download it, not even to play with it”
Hmmmm, go to the pirate bay and check out the top downloads. You might be surprised!
That the whole affair about moving to x86 is nothing more than an attempt to spread MacOS and compete directly with MS.
I can not make sense of it, strategically doesn’t make sense, technically either… Why porting MacOS X to the pc??? They want it to spread as much as possible is the only reason I can think off.
They actually explained why… several times.
Its because IBM didn’t stick to their road map… (some are saying IBM was wanting Apple to pay more for sticking to their road map)
Apple has no insentive in making OS X widespread if its not as profitable as selling OSes and hardware. marketshare without increased profits is meaningless.
Far too many of you are mistakenly trying to apply Microsoft’s business model to Apple’s and thats why so many have such a hard time understanding their strategy behind moving to x86.
Actually they are not porting OS X to anything because they have always had a clone version of OS X! From day one Apple has had a second development team exclusively coding OS X for clones. The second team have stayed right in step and byte for byte with the first development team coding OS X for PPC processors.
What will happen when people get a stable version of x86 OSx running faster on hardware 4x cheaper than Apple’s?
What exactly is Apple offering here? Shinny white boxes? What is the incentive to run their software on overpriced hardware that i can get elsewhere 4x cheaper?
How to run your osx for 199$:
http://www.osx86project.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&…
I believe the drivers will be very spacific to apple hardware, even if it does run on other hardware it will lack many features…. networking, opengl (maybe), firewire support, and the list continues
it will be almost useless, even if it does run faster
>”What will happen when people get a stable version of x86 OSx running faster on hardware 4x cheaper than Apple’s?”
I don’t see why that would happen. PCs aren’t any less expensive than comperably equipped Macs. With that in mind, some will say that these hypothetical PCs are less expensive because PCs allow you to buy less and spend less unlike apple which limits the number of options you have to buy.
>”What exactly is Apple offering here? Shinny white boxes?”
Aesthetics will be part of it… but so far Apple has offered many other differentiating characteristics. Should people break Apple’s EULA and install OS X on their PCs illegally, the only differentiation Apple will provide is the ability to offer a system that is fully supported
>”What is the incentive to run their software on overpriced hardware that i can get elsewhere 4x cheaper?”
Apple’s hardware isn’t overpriced. They give you more so you pay more. They give you less options to buy less and spend less like you can witha PC. When both systems are spec’d equally however, the two typicvally come out to be the same price.
>”How to run your osx for 199$”
Perfect example of buying less and spending less.
>>Should people break Apple’s EULA and install OS X on their PCs illegally, the only differentiation Apple will provide is the ability to offer a system that is fully supported
EULA’s are evil. What I use a product for or on what they shouldn’t give a rats ass about.
‘Apple is saying, “If you want to use OUR SOFTWARE you must pay for it.”‘
No, They are saying “If you want to use our software you must pay for OUR HARDWARE”
They are saying “If you want to use our software you must pay for OUR HARDWARE”
I own a PowerBook. So I’m allowed to run Shake and FinalCut on it without having to pay for it? Hardly.
Yes. Thats the point…
No, They are saying “If you want to use our software you must pay for OUR HARDWARE”
Exactly! And the market is saying, “Why should we pay for your hardware when it’s exactly the same as a cheaper commodity hardware we can get elsewhere”
That’s the crux of this problem. Are Apple still a manufacturer of a unique hardware platform or are they now selling high end PCs?
Jobs wants to eat his cake and have it too. Impossible Steve.
Why is it having his cake and eating it, if he wants to stop pirates using his software how it was not supposed to be used?
If he wants to restrict it to apple hardware then it is his right as manfacturer of both hardware and software
They will have to go back to the Boot ROM
It’s trying to eat his cake and have it too because he wants OSX to run on any commodity hardware (pc clones) so long as the clone is produced by Apple. That isn’t going to work.
I would like to know what is the problem with my comment:
“What will happen when people get a stable version of x86 OSx running faster on hardware 4x cheaper than Apple’s?
What exactly is Apple offering here? Shinny white boxes? What is the incentive to run their software on overpriced hardware that i can get elsewhere 4x cheaper?
How to run your osx for 199$:
http://www.osx86project.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=v…”
-2? Looks like someone is feeling threatened.
“What is the incentive to run their software on overpriced hardware that i can get elsewhere 4x cheaper?”
Reasons to buy OS X with Apple hardware instead of using a cracked version on generic intel hardware? Sure. How about:
* it’s stable
* it’s legal
* you get updates
* comes with iLife
* you get a lot more software for it
* tech support
* it’s stable
* it’s legal
* you get updates
* comes with iLife
* you get a lot more software for it
* tech support
Funny. If you think about it, that’s a very good description of Windows XP running on my laptop. My laptop came with XP and, man oh man, what you said is the best thing anyone has said about it — ever! Thanks for being so considerate.
My point is, you can get the very same list of reasons using another platform. They are not Mac specific. Therefore, nothing in your list is a Mac-only incentive.
Had you said you like its interface better, then OK.
I just thought I’d point this out
iLife is Mac-Only, but other than that you are correct.
True, but two things:
1. You can get replacement services for iLife.
2. Is the iLife really that great that I have to ditch my XP machine to get a Mac just so that I can use iLife? Is it such an incentive?
I’m asking honestly, because I really don’t know.
I had a friend buy an iMac this last weekend despite being a die hard windows guy. If ever there is someone that can be called a Windows whore… it is this guy. He bought the iMac based SOLELY on using agrageband… (not even the rest of iLife but only garageband). iLife is really cool software.
Oh ya, the replacement services for iLife — be they for OS X or Windows — are either not as good or cost more.
Oh ya, the replacement services for iLife — be they for OS X or Windows — are either not as good or cost more.
Fair enough, but still, are the replacement services that much worse to justify throwing away all my Windows/Linux/PCBSD life just so that I get to use iLife?
For most people, I bet the answer is no. Thus it’s not much of an incetive, but more of a bonus. For some people, like those that really do need garageband, it’s a different story.
>”are the replacement services that much worse to justify throwing away all my Windows/Linux/PCBSD life just so that I get to use iLife?”
The x86 Mac will allow you to keep your investment in all that other software as Apple will not preclude you from installing other OSes if you wish.
why throw away your PC. just throw it under your desk and run it headless, then RDC in from the Mac.
I’d have to say for some people….yes it is. Depends on your computing needs.
For me it was for a while, then my needs changed. I had an iMac and when Garageband was added got it immediatley (switched over from Windows 98), at the time I needed something like it. I only have room really for one computer so I was a Mac head for a few years. Then I got an XP machine, I needed it for work related stuff, and sold my Mac off (and have had a hell of a time getting the same sort of software/productivity from Windows XP wrt to music writing).
So long as I can run XP on the new Intel Mac’s I’ll be going back to Mac and dual-boot so I can get Garageband again, and still have the stuff I need from XP.
(And in all honesty, one I was used to it, I found working in the Mac environment nicer than even the Windows XP env)
Funny. If you think about it, that’s a very good description of Windows XP running on my laptop.
Fair enough, but I wasn’t comparing to XP. I was comparing to running a cracked developer seed of OS X on generic intel hardware – which at the moment is probably only interesting for developers that can’t/don’t want to afford a developer box or to OS lunatics who think SkyOS has too much native software for them.
The stupidity of it is that if I decide to buy OSX and play with it on whatever hardware I want, it’s Fair Use(TM). Just because they say you are “renting” their software doesn’t make so. It’s your copy, you paid for it, you do whatever you want with it, including putting it in the microwave and zapping it. Or using it on unsupported hardware.
>”The stupidity of it is that if I decide to buy OSX and play with it on whatever hardware I want, it’s Fair Use(TM)”
No, you didn’t buy it because its not for sale.
>”Just because they say you are “renting” their software doesn’t make so.”
Actually, it does.
>”It’s your copy, you paid for it, you do whatever you want with it”
Yes it’s your LICENSE… you can do whatever you want with it as long as you’re not violating the terms of the agreement you agreed to by installing it.
I thought a EULA has never been proven in a court of law and it may be invalid because you are required to agree to it after you have already purchased the software. Otherwise, dont you think PearPC would have been attacked?
PearPC is an PPC emulator. It has nothing to do with OS X.
PearPC has everything to do with OS X because it allows you to run OS X on an non Apple machine. Running OS X on a non Apple machine is prohibited by the EULA, but as far as I know PearPC hasnt receved any sort of legal threats from Apple.
What I’m trying to say is maybe Apple realizes they would not win a law suit about this and that it would be legal to run a purchased copy of OS X on any PC.
>”PearPC has everything to do with OS X because it allows you to run OS X on an non Apple machine.”[/i]
but PearPC isn’t in violation of anything relating to OS X because its a PPC emulator. Its not as if there is only one OS for PPC. SHould someone use PearPC to break Apple’s EULA… THEY would be in violation… not PearPC.
>”but as far as I know PearPC hasnt receved any sort of legal threats from Apple.”
I’ve interviewed the creators of the software. No they haven’t. And that makes sense… they haven’t broken any laws relating to Apple.
>”What I’m trying to say is maybe Apple realizes they would not win a law suit about this and that it would be legal to run a purchased copy of OS X on any PC.”
People keep saying that EULAs haven’t been tried in court. If thats your rational for this statement then I think it noesn’t hold much water. EULAs are a contract like any other. There is more reason to believe that courts would support them than there is not.
>”but PearPC isn’t in violation of anything relating to OS X because its a PPC emulator. Its not as if there is only one OS for PPC. SHould someone use PearPC to break Apple’s EULA… THEY would be in violation… not PearPC.”
I’m sure they had to add functionality to specifically make OS X boot like all of that Spiro Multimax stuff. I dont think any of that is needed to boot PPC Linux. I could be wrong though.
>”People keep saying that EULAs haven’t been tried in court. If thats your rational for this statement then I think it noesn’t hold much water. EULAs are a contract like any other. There is more reason to believe that courts would support them than there is not.”
How can a contract that you were not aware of be enforced after you purchased a product? Thats like going to a restaraunt, ordering a steak, and being told after it is put on the table that you can only look at it and that no refunds are allowed. (Try returning opened software and see if they take it back easily).
>”How can a contract that you were not aware of be enforced after you purchased a product?”
You are presented with this contract before installing OS X or before you’re able to run a Mac for the first time.
>”You are presented with this contract before installing OS X or before you’re able to run a Mac for the first time.”
If you do not accept the contract, then shouldnt you have the option of returning the software?
Yes… and I imagine you can…. though you may need to jump through a few hoops to do it.
No hoops should be involved if companies are going to have agreements such as these. Besides, I dont know if having an agreement saying you can only use the products on a certain type of computer is legal. If the product works on the platform, then it should be legal to use. Its kind of like how Windows NT 4 Workstation and Server were basically the same disc, they just changed the id on the disc to cripple the workstation install. You’re forcing the customer to buy more to use your product.
>”No hoops should be involved if companies are going to have agreements such as these.”
I’d imagine it to be easier for companies because you’re just buying site licenses rather than actual boxed copies that need to be re-shelved.
>”I dont know if having an agreement saying you can only use the products on a certain type of computer is legal”
I don’t know why there is any reason to think its illegal.
>”If the product works on the platform, then it should be legal to use.”
Once you accept that fact that Apple hardware and its OS are a single product, then its easier to understand that installing one without first having not bought a Mac to install it on then you can understand that you are taking money away from the company that paired them together.
>”Its kind of like how Windows NT 4 Workstation and Server were basically the same disc, they just changed the id on the disc to cripple the workstation install.”
But Windows is meant for PCs. If you bought the software legitimately, and the license says that you can install it on that PC… HOW you install it on that PC is not up to Microsoft to decide (unless the EULA says otherwise and you agreed to it.)
>”You’re forcing the customer to buy more to use your product.”
In Apple’s case, you’re not asking them to buy more… you’re just asking them to buy a Mac. In Microsoft’s case, yes… you are asking them to pay more for the same software.
>”Once you accept that fact that Apple hardware and its OS are a single product, then its easier to understand that installing one without first having not bought a Mac to install it on then you can understand that you are taking money away from the company that paired them together.”
Please do explain to me then how I bought a boxed copy of OS X without a computer for my iBook…
>”In Apple’s case, you’re not asking them to buy more… you’re just asking them to buy a Mac. In Microsoft’s case, yes… you are asking them to pay more for the same software.”
They are asking you to buy one of their computers, that is more in my book. Besides if Microsoft started making PCs and they added to the EULA that you can only run the software on a Microsoft PC you wouldnt care? This would not be an issue if they did not sell boxed copies of their os, but they do.
They are asking you to buy one of their computers, that is more in my book. Besides if Microsoft started making PCs and they added to the EULA that you can only run the software on a Microsoft PC you wouldnt care? This would not be an issue if they did not sell boxed copies of their os, but they do.
If Microsoft did that, people would be screaming bloody murder. But of course, since Apple is the one doing it, then it’s ok, because we all know that Apple is perfect.
If Apple wants to lock people in to its hardware so that it can sell off-the-shelf PC hardware at inflated prices, they’re more than welcome to do that. But I certainly will not be patronizing them.
>”If Microsoft did that, people would be screaming bloody murder.”
Yes, because theres a hypocracy element at issue if they did it.
>”But of course, since Apple is the one doing it, then it’s ok, because we all know that Apple is perfect.”
No, Its Ok that Apple does it not because anyone thinks they are perfect but because thats their business model.
>”If Apple wants to lock people in to its hardware so that it can sell off-the-shelf PC hardware at inflated prices”
Apple requires you to buy their computer to use their operating system, but they aren’t selling their gear for any more than a comperably equipped PC would cost.
>”they’re more than welcome to do that. But I certainly will not be patronizing them.”
Well, if the reason is because you think that Apple offers the same product as you can get elsewhere but for more money then you will be making that decison based on ignorance rather than fact.
>”they’re more than welcome to do that. But I certainly will not be patronizing them.”
Well, if the reason is because you think that Apple offers the same product as you can get elsewhere but for more money then you will be making that decison based on ignorance rather than fact.
But it WILL be the same product, minus the OS. Hence, a Mac PC with OSX shouldn’t cost any more than the same PC with Windows XP/Vista.
“If Apple wants to lock people in to its hardware so that it can sell off-the-shelf PC hardware at inflated prices, they’re more than welcome to do that. But I certainly will not be patronizing them.”
And that’s your right. Feel free to exercise it.
>”Please do explain to me then how I bought a boxed copy of OS X without a computer for my iBook… ”
You can buy an upgrade or even a complete OS for that single product.
>”They are asking you to buy one of their computers, that is more in my book.”
And yet its not actually more because for you to buy OS X, you should have a Mac anyways.
>”Besides if Microsoft started making PCs and they added to the EULA that you can only run the software on a Microsoft PC you wouldnt care?”
Why should I?
” Besides if Microsoft started making PCs and they added to the EULA that you can only run the software on a Microsoft PC you wouldnt care?”
Why should I?
Microsoft has the right to write a EULA (which is covered under contract law, and under contract law, a person can agree to waive all sorts of rights) which means that their OS can only be run on their hardware.
I have the right to choose not to purchase their products based on the EULA. (I have chosen not to use MS OSes based on their EULA, and if Neo Office J turns out to be decent, I’ll never need to buy a new copy of MS Office — snoopy dance!)
Don’t like Apple’s or MS’s EULA? Learn to like Linux or BSD.
Yes, but I don’t think that gives them rights to all the pictures and videos you take while using the OS…
Just because Apple wants to pair their software and hardware products together doesn’t mean that consumers are obligated. I can buy a full copy (not an upgrade) of OSX right off the shelf without a Mac – from an Apple store.
I understand that the two go hand in hand right now. I also get that Apple has a business model that it’s trying to follow. I just don’t see any moral or legal obligation to follow it. It’s a businness plan, not a law.
“Once you accept that fact that Apple hardware and its OS are a single product”
Sorry, but they are not a single product, else you wouldn’t be able to buy one without the other (i.e. boxed version of OS X).
As far as I once read the Apple OSX Eula here in Switzerland, they tell you that you are only allowed to used their software in combination with Apple hardware. So you are event not allowed to stuck a MacOSX into an emulator.
“You are presented with this contract before installing OS X or before you’re able to run a Mac for the first time.”
Only problem with that is, what if you don’t agree? I don’t know of any company that will allow returns on opened software, so then you are stuck with a product you cannot use…
Um. I’m pretty sure it’s been done with Microsoft. But it’s VERY difficult. Although, that may not be *opened* software.. But I’ve heard of it done with prebuilt PC’s and Windows; after many tens of hours ot phone time…
“Only problem with that is, what if you don’t agree? I don’t know of any company that will allow returns on opened software, so then you are stuck with a product you cannot use…”
Well first I doubt someone would go to all the trouble to get OSX (especially with it until recently running on PPC) just to not agree with the license.
Second most who are “stuck with a product they can’t use” end up selling it to someone who can.
And last complainers about being unable to return opened software, might want to thank their predecessors for that state of affairs. How many “I want something for nothings” does it take for a business to figure out they’re being ripped off?
After you said that, I looked it up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrink_wrap_contract
You’re right, there is question as to the enforceability of EULAs.
“The stupidity of it is that if I decide to buy OSX and play with it on whatever hardware I want, it’s Fair Use(TM).”
The doctrine of fair use in US Copyright Law is defined here http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107
So, that has nothing to do with Fair Use.
Also, you *cannot* use it on whatever hardware you want. To install the software, you have to agree to the terms of the EULA, and that’s not a matter of copyrights, it’s a matter of torts and contract law.
The Apple EULA says you’ve agreed that you’re going to install the OS on Apple hardware.
You are right about this, and the later responder is wrong. No EULA can prevent you from using a bought product as you wish. This is not because EULAs are invalid, but because post sales restraints on use are invalid. A company cannot impose post sales restraints on use of products, because it is anti competitive. So, even if all its customers are held to have agreed to conditions on sale which limit post sale use, the company will be unable to enforce them in court, because to limit post sale use by agreement is anti competitive behaviour, and so not lawful. This applies to running Office under Wine, and it applies to putting non-GM stereos in your GM car, and it applies to using Pillsbury flour with other brands of baking powder, and using non-Dell disks with Dell computers..and so on. It has nothing whatever to do with piracy or copyright, either
Well if we still had a Free Market, Apple would be screwed, and would have to reply upon themselves to come up with a better way to lock down there code. If someone found a way to get around that, then it would be there own problem, not the governement’s.
For seconds this wouldn’t even be a legal issue where another large greedy tyrant of a corporation tried to smash another poor individual like a bug in the legal system where they have no money to defend themselves.
This crap is getting out of hands.
You zealots are something else. If my choice is between a monopoly and a dictator, i prefer the monopoly.
Not that I care anymore, (i sold my last mac over 12 years ago), you zealots should realize that you are talking about an OS and at the same time, a computer.
Get a life, get your heads out of Steve’s butt.
Macs are overpriced, period. Apple and Steve are control freaks. God saves us is they got 90%+ market share.
This is the beginning of the end of Apple. Apple will see declining sales starting in 2007 and their new Intel machines will be a complete failure. The iPods will be commoditized. Will Apple be around 10 yrs from now? I suspect the answer is yes, but a mere shadow of their current self.
By alienating their fan base with threatening letters and legal sledgehammers, the creativity that keeps a cult alive will be extinguished.
PLEASE oh PLEASE can I have your contact information so that if (when?) your anonymous self is proven wrong… we can hold you up as the poster buy for forum trolls that got it wrong?
“This is the beginning of the end of Apple.”
Of course…
Apple. Proudly going out of business for over twenty years.
“This is the beginning of the end of Apple. Apple will see declining sales starting in 2007 and their new Intel machines will be a complete failure. The iPods will be commoditized. Will Apple be around 10 yrs from now? I suspect the answer is yes, but a mere shadow of their current self.”
Translation: WHAAA! Apple will not give ME what I want so they must DIE!!
“By alienating their fan base with threatening letters and legal sledgehammers, the creativity that keeps a cult alive will be extinguished.”
The only one’s being alienated are those who want the OS without purchasing the hardware. Real tragedy there.
Did you read the article?
“French language Mac news site MacBidouille was one of the first web sites to receive an “amazingly aggressive email asking for the immediate removal of all links to the videos,” the site reported on Wednesday.”
Let me repeat:
“French language Mac news site MacBidouille”
One more time:
“Mac news site MacBidouille”
If anything this will boost Apple OSX sales when x86 comes to life.
Microsoft did not make money building PC’s, but selling OS. Future is bright for Apple.
>”If anything this will boost Apple OSX sales when x86 comes to life. ”
But thats not a good think if those sales are to the exclusion of Mac computer sales.
>”Microsoft did not make money building PC’s, but selling OS.”
No, they got their money with bundling agreements.
>”Future is bright for Apple.”
Agreed.
I don’t want to buy from mean people!
What the heck is wrong with looking anyway? Sheeze, remind me to never buy from them in the future.
>”I don’t want to buy from mean people! ”
Me neither. (Curious who you’re talking about because nothing in this article relates to Apple being mean.
>”What the heck is wrong with looking anyway?”
Because its not yours to look at. Would you mind if I broke into your house… just to look?
>”Sheeze, remind me to never buy from them in the future.”
Ya, Damn that Apple… they actually want money for working. TERRIBLE!
If you don’t see the difference between peaking at an electronic document and breaking into someones house to spy you are a sorely broken mind… Or you don’t have a good understanding of the difference between freely (no scarcity copying, not legally allowable) copyable items and tangible items.
A better comparison would be peaking at his medical records.
But this site isn’t doing that. It’d be like telling people who to peak at other people’s medical records. Which would not, for various important reasons including bettering our security, be illegal.
This isn’t an argument over freedom to crack. This is over freedom of information, because that’s all they’re spreading is information.
If I’m misinformed, and something other than information about this is spreading than please tell me!
Seems to me that the difference between writing about something you weren’t supposed to look at and showing videos of it is pretty thin today. I’m sure it’s legally there, but it’s also illegal to drive past the speed limit, buy alcohol at 18, buy marijuana, spit on the sidewalk (usually because of chewers), write your own dvd decryption code, etc etc etc.
Point is. Apple’s been way too mean to its fans. Give ’em a break, they’re worshipping you!
Point is. Apple’s been way too mean to its fans. Give ’em a break, they’re worshipping you!
———————————————–
But they are not fans, they have not bought a mac, they are downloading a cracked, pirate version of the OS
Why if all you people hate apple do you desperatly want to get your grubby mitts on OSX – bloody buy the machine – or sod of and stick to linux or XP, and stop crying its not stealing when you know full well it is
Has anyone else noticed how many kellym* people have posted to this thread? How they are all pro Apple? kellym4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 12, kellym, and others.
How do we sign up to multiple accounts again? Ah yes, it’s broken:
Parse error: parse error in /home/osnews/web/registration.php on line 38
Hmmm.
Yep. Kelly McNeil has been account spamming for a while. Probably for the purposes of being able to moderate the same comments multiple times. I guess it’s not a big concern for the staff.
Yep. Kelly McNeil has been account spamming for a while. Probably for the purposes of being able to moderate the same comments multiple times. I guess it’s not a big concern for the staff.
We have taken care of this. Don’t worry. Back to topic please. Replies to this comment are likely to be modded down.
Thanks.
OK, fair point regarding Think Secret – I was misremembering. That said, I think it’s Apple’s responsibility to control its own developers rather than issuing subpoenas to get the information they need from journalists.
I do agree some of the sites are probably really advocating stealing (which leaves a bad taste in the mouth) but I don’t really like the idea of going after the people who are merely reporting it and not perpetrating it.
I’m not sure they have a legal base – I doubt even explicitly advocating copyright piracy is illegal because copyright piracy is a civil (not criminal) offense.
Actually, they may be on fairly firm ground. To paraphrase the DMCA, it is illegal to “offer to the public” a device, service, or component that is primarily intended to circumvent copy protection.
It’s decently possible, though not certain, that they could succeed in convincing a judge that linking to the video constitutes offering it to the public, and should therefor be considered illegal.
And regardless of one’s stand vis-a-vis the DMCA (I don’t like it either), it is still the law, for the time being at least.
Yes, good point. It’s interesting… I’d argue that the person who’s providing the video is the person who put it online, not the person who links to it. It’s not well defined, so a judge might well see it differently.
Two other points:
* a video of MacOS running doesn’t help people make it run, any more than distributing video footage of a robbery helps the robbers
* the hacks aren’t actually *for* copying, just running on non-Mac hardware. You could use the hacks to do that with a legitimate copy of MacOS (it’s breaking the EULA but it’s not copying…). The question would probably be whether *somehow* running on a non-Mac x86 box would help you circumvent copy protection (but I think that’s a bit tenuous).
The first site to receive the take down notices was French. The DMCA doesn’t apply in Europe (there is a similar law but I’m not so clear on it’s status so don’t know if it was covered). OTOH, the site’s publishers seem to be in the states so I guess they can be strongarmed this way.
Quote: “And regardless of one’s stand vis-a-vis the DMCA (I don’t like it either), it is still the law, for the time being at least.”
Some laws are unjust, and should be broken. Unions were illegal in Poland, but Solidarity won. Tell me, if 65% of the US population ignored the DMCA, because they felt it was wrong, would that be illegal? Or would that be the majority of the population voting on the fact that they do not want this legislation? Where would the politicians respect the will of the people? How could the politicians justify a law in that type of scenario as being for ‘the people’ and acceptable? Sometimes, civil disobedience is the right way of doing things. And sometimes, it is the only way that ‘the people’ can voice their thoughts and ideals and morals.
Dave
It would be nice if Apple could load these “leaked versions” of OS X and find out who is responsible…..may a competor that makes mac software leaked it.
well just think, Apple’s installed share just doubled by this……lol(laugh it’s a joke).
These sites and leakers will likely be in court soon and I’m sure the rest of the comptuer industry will support Apple, because no company wants their product altered, etc.
Breaking copy protection is a violation of the law.
Apple sales are obviously hurt by having Mac OS X on generic x86 boxen in a long term fashion.
Since they tested a theory and now have the goods to show Intel before the new chips hit the pavement, they are minimizing the after effects so OSXonG-86 doesn’t turn into a major problem for them.
Apple will beef up the DRM, zero in on the developers who leaked their version and with the next issue of Mac OS X, change things so much for the better that all those who got thier first free hit will be bringing the bucks for a real Mac.
After all it’s the seamless hardware and software integration that makes Mac a Mac.
No, They are saying “If you want to use our software you must pay for OUR HARDWARE”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wrong answer. Apple provides a complete computing solution; both hardware and OS integrated in a symbiotic relationship. Neither works well without the other. That is what you are paying for.
When they release it for x86 what do they think will happen? Welcome to MS’s world.
I can’t imagine that Apple will be able to knock down every single cracked instance of an OSX x86 release.
You don’t know what you are talking about. Apple has a very very long history of aggressively litigating with anyone who steals or assists in the theft of their IP. They will make the RIAA look like rank amatuers in this regard. Cracked OSX 86 is like poison –you will lose your website if it contains any information on how to do it or get it. It does not really matter where you are located, Apple will get to you.
Apple should just stick with going after the developers that broke their NDAs.
They will go after anyone anywhere at anytime who steals –or even tries to steal– OSX or tells others how to do it. I guess the current generation of techies need a refresher course in how effective Apple can be in trashing people who mess with it. Unfortunately, people under 30 have been jaded seeing other big companies they grew up with not really being able to stop the SPAMMers, hackers or the music pirates, so they have lost hope. The difference is that all of Apple’s revenue is at stake and they have more than a billion in cash with armies of lawyers that have 25 years of experience in blowing people out of the water (sometimes without even filing a lawsuit). Sure, there will continue to be bootleg copies of OSX 86 Developer Edition being run by people for a decade to come, but any one who talks about it on the Net will get sued and all the sites who carry information about it will get messed with legally until their goose is royally cooked. I don’t know how Apple is going to deal with Slashdot’s threads on how to hack yet, but it should be interesting (it’s a PR nightmare) –something like “it just goes offline” (due to court order) and comes back up with no discussion (due to court order) is probably the way it will work out..
When Mac PC is released and is hacked to run on generic x86 hardware, I’ll probably warez a copy of OSX just to try it out (or use a trial version if they have one). If I like it, I’ll purchase a copy. If I can’t purchase a copy to run on my own hardware, then Apple is not going to get my business. Afterall, why should I pay the Apple Hardware Tax if the OS runs just fine on hardware I already own?
Afterall, why should I pay the Apple Hardware Tax if the OS runs just fine on hardware I already own?
Uh, to avoid going to jail for theft when your IP shows up online talking about how you plotted to run OSX 86 off a warez site, then talked about your experience with it afterwards. Oh wait, you didn’t know that one of the major NAPs on the Internet (the one known as Worldcom/MCI) is actually operated in Apple’s facility? What a dumb way to become a felon.
MMhh…. I think that in his case, I will just use Linux… If an os can run just well on my hardware but that I have to buy a new one just to run it, then I may as well not use it… After all, linux is an unix, just like osX ? After all, there are a lot of cool apps under linux, right ?
Why pay for new hardware to use an OS of a company that denies freedom of speach ?
So I’ll just use linux at my business, and oh, btw, that’s what I’m doing right now
If someone has a nice car you can’t afford do you steal that aswell?
Stealing it is one thing, trying to justify it is another
Once again… Distributing videos of something which broke an EULA while illegally distributing a copyrighted material via copying is not the same as stealing a car.
Apple has not ever lost a single copy of OS X for x86 to stealing to date. It’s probably had some copied.
But this site isn’t pirating it. It’s distributing information about pirating it. It’d be akin to a site telling how to break into a car… Which is, and should be, legal!
“If I can’t purchase a copy to run on my own hardware, then Apple is not going to get my business.”
I think the better question is. Why would any company want you as a customer? If you’re willing to screw over Apple, what’s stopping you from screwing over other companies…or even individuals?
The thing some forget is that the customer isn’t always right, and sometimes some customers aren’t worth keeping. Play nice now, but be willing to screw over whomever stands in your way is the motto for todays consumer.
That is absolutely genius.
Where’s all the talk of OSx86 would N-E-V-E-R run on a generic x86 machine? Funny how all these people found a rock to hide under. Never under estimate the human mind. Time and time again it’s proven that if it can be done, it will be done.
Anyway, I hear talk of numerous drivers already being ported, and Apple’s officially pissed, so I take that to mean this little project is coming along nicely.
Of course, the means in which people get OSx86 on their machines are wrong, but Apple should be happy so many people want to use their OS. IMO this will result in better developer support, more popularity, which may in turn push Microsoft to produce a better OS.
My two pennies. Peace.
Good, its Apple’s property and these people don’t have any type of permission to do this.
Apple in it’s quest to conquer the x86 world is entering dangerous ground that even Microsoft has never treaded on….MSFT never limited you to particular hardware, now Apple, who have always hid behind the PPC veil, are stating that if you legally purchase OSX x86, you cannot go to a web site and learn how to install it on the PC of your choice.
I don’t think it’s any of Apple’s business as to what hardware you install the OSX on, as long as you legally buy the OS X. We shall see if Apple can pull off this high wire act.
What’s the importance of the silly video in comparison to the fact, that you can actually get all the copyrighted/illegal binaries on p2p? (Out of curiosity I checked – it IS there). Now, don’t tell me you didn’t know…
>I guess the current generation of techies need a >refresher course in how effective Apple can be in >trashing people who mess with it.
I think that old generation needs to notice that things changed. There is such a thing as ‘community’. ‘Community’ is selfish, childish, egotic and it (often) doesn’t care about law. But one thing is sure – messing with the community makes your IT corporate image BAD. If you don’t understand the delicate ways of handling the ‘community’ you’ll not make a good business in IT.
>Oh wait, you didn’t know that one of the major NAPs on >the Internet (the one known as Worldcom/MCI) is >actually operated in Apple’s facility? What a dumb way >to become a felon.
That’s laughable. No one has resources nor interest to do that. Just remember what happened to RIAA.
BTW, it seems to me, that a lot of people are getting too emotional about all this (“jealous that their precious OSX child is being run by some junky hackers”). Get over it.
I was one of the people who said you’d never get to use OSx86 on a generic grey box…and I’m still right
Does it work on your pc? How do you know? So, you have an official release? I thought not
Like many have already pointed out and the focus of this featurette this is all about Apple, and they’re gnawing their teeth already and sharpening their axes.
This has merely strengthened their desire to ensure that you will NOT be able to run their official release, which will run on THEIR hardware only, because you can bet your ass they’ll make sure they use all the tools necessary – provided by their new buddy Intel and the US legal system.
I personally think Microsoft are smarter than Apple in many respects, but mainly that they understand the concept of tipping-point and how giving away a technical inferior product to the types of people who wax lyrical and evangelise can be a positive thing in the longer term.
If Apple were the software visionaries they think they are, then they would have started a whole new freely distributed but limited version of OSX for people to try and download with their blessing, at their own risk. Just like Be did with BeOS PE, but wait! This isn’t about selling software it’s about selling HARDWARE, which is where this all falls neatly into place.
As long as Apple control the hardware OSx86 is and will continue to be under their control. Enjoy your x86 unofficial developers release, I’ll stick to Linux
while i agree with most of what you say, i do not agree that there will be no cracked version of the final release of OSX-x86, you are forgetting that that there is an astronimical ammount of people who will work to crack osx (many very intelligent developers and hackers).
When OSX was ppc this was not an issue because of the architecture barrier, this has all changed.
Either way, I really do not see how Apple will lose any business over a cracked copy of OSX. Anybody that would buy a Mac will buy one anyway because anyone who would use a Mac for any kind of work (most anybody who would buy one), needs the full feature set and they need and desire the reliability and the driver support for their hardware.
People who would run a cracked OSX would never buy it anyway…. it just ticks Steve off that his software is being used against it’s liscensing (and rightfully so).
As nice as OS X (I rate it as the best o/s currently on the market), I cannot recommend it – simply because of Apple’s behaviour, and of course the license.
Linux may not be a perfect desktop environment, but it is highly usable. And I like the licensing agreement 🙂
Dave
Only problem with that is, what if you don’t agree? I don’t know of any company that will allow returns on opened software, so then you are stuck with a product you cannot use…
And this is a matter of you knowing your state’s law.
In my state, the Consumer Affair’s Division’s official word on the matter is “Always ask about the return or exhange policy”, which means, that no, stores can refuse.
OTOH, I can protect myself against EULAs I don’t want by exercising my rights under NRS 104.2513 “The right to inspection of goods before purchase”
Or, under the same law, if I have ordered something to be delivered, “When the seller is required or authorized to send the goods to the buyer, the inspection may be after their arrival.”
… works great.
Legallity aside, the only problem I have with the whole thing is that Apple said the OS will not run on any vanilla PC…but that as been proven to be a lie. Just my thought
Mac OS X is a really nice OS, I can see why Mac fans are crazy about it.
Will it motivate me to buy a PowerBook next time?
I think so, it’s nice not having the annoyances of Windows, it’s like all of a sudden everything just does what it supposed to do.
I dread having to reinstall Windows, but I’m seriously thinking about getting a Mac now more than ever before.
Personally i think all this great marketing for Apple.People who want some babysitting and the assurance of everything stable and just working will continue to buy Apple no matter what.Most others want maximum freedom and either buy a gateway or build a box themselves.For them it would be great if they could just install and activate their legally bought OSX.A little time spend to endure the harrassment procedure of activation a la MS online and that’s it.
Would be also good to keep all others on the edge of innovation and good security practice.DRM is just bad in to many ways.
A little time spend to endure the harrassment procedure of activation a la MS online and that’s it.
But it’s activation that I specifically do not want. It is a heinous piece of technology. I have never had to activate my Mac OS before. I don’t want to start it now.
It’s all the lovely pirates and software thieves who make me jump through hoops to do as I have been doing for more than a decade now. Somehow this is a ‘good thing’ and ‘normal’.
I knew it was a bad idea to leave Magrathea. Never thought it would become this bad.
Yet again we see people running straight into the same confusion about this.
It has nothing to do with EULAs. Even supposing EULAs are enforceable, the particular condition on sale, whether in a EULA or not, whether I sign it or not, which says that I will not use a bought piece of software on any other than a certain platform, THAT is what is unenforceable. It really is folks.
You are not making copies, you are not stealing, you are not doing piracy, you are just taking home what you bought and using it as you wish.
Now, why is this? Yet again, the reason is, post sales restraints on use SOLELY BY CONDITIONS OF SALE are unlawful, because they are anti competitive. This is, for instance, why PearPC will never be proceeded against. This is why, whatever the EULA says, MS will never proceed against people or companies running Office under Wine. This is why you are entitled, whatever the EULA says, to move your copy of Windows from one machine to another. And finally, this is why Pillsbury cannot stop you, by conditions of sale, from using some other brand of baking powder with its flour.
That’s not what the courts say.
http://www.bitlaw.com/source/cases/copyright/procd.html
The ProCD case showed that such EULAs are indeed valid and enforcable (at least in the United States).
The court decision you posted is not relevant to the discussion at hand. The defendant in your cited case bought software (a list of names and phone number) under a consumer license (as opposed to the company’s business license) and re-sold access to the list on their Website. The decision in the above case is based on copyright restrictions, not on “shrink wrap licenses.”
Now if running OSX on any x86 hardware ends up violating the DMCA, Apple would have a course of action to take…but I can’t see them going after anyone (and winning) by citing their EULA agreement.
The current situation won’t stop just because Apple is threatening Websites that show contain information.
If all it took was tech, money and motivation, there wouldn’t be so many cracked versions of XP running on the world’s PC’s. MS has plenty of money to throw at the problem, and they haven’t been able to prevent it. My point here is that we’ll all soon see what Apple will try to do to resolve the situation and it should be interesting. My guess is that OSX will gain marketshare over the next couple of years (just not in the way that Apple intends).
I can’t think of a single piece of software that hasn’t been cracked. It’s just part of the business plan. I developed and sold some software myself a few years ago and my unknown, little program was cracked in a day. Apple will be no different than MS, Adobe and the thousands of other software developers. The only thing keeping people from running OSX on PCs before was the architecture barrier…and that’s gone.
Why are people running OSXx86? They sure aren’t using it for productivity (due to the lack of applications, drivers, network connections, etc.) They’re curious about the OS. Right or wrong, legal or illegal, it’s getting Apple’s OS more exposure and press…which any PR person will tell you is a good thing. Either way, I seriously doubt that Apple can stop the tide now.
Another interesting point to this would be a potential stategy. There are numerous arguements that suggest software pircacy can help a company’s bottom line. 3d Studio Max comes to mind. Many younger ameteurs have downloaded cracked versions of Studio Max and learned the software. This gets them exposed to (and trained on) the software before they ever enter the professional world. When these kids get into decision making positions, they are probably more likely to lean towards a program that they’re familiar with than one they could never afford to learn on.
I know that many Mac fans believe that Apple is all about the hardware, but I think they’re wrong. Apple, like any other business is all about the bottom line – making money. If they could get more exposure and start selling to 4 x 5 times their current customer base, they’d benefit. I wonder if Apple is creating a buzz before they release an official version that runs on any x86 hardware.
Sorry about the long rambling post.
Yes, having looked at the decision, I can’t see that it is relevant. The question is, having bought something, can I be restrained in how I personally use it. The question is not about me reselling it or repurposing bits of the information. The question is, can I be restrained in how I personally use it. Like, can I be stopped from using it on some particular hardware, or moving it from one machine to another (all within copyright). It really is like the question, if Pillsbury says on the back of the flour packet, that by buying this you agree only to use Pillsbury baking soda with it, can they then sue you if you use some other kind? No, of course they can’t. Similarly, MS cannot sue you if you run Office under Wine. They know they can’t and this is why they haven’t. You have to think what a weird and wonderful world it would be if companies could do this. They would be doing it all the time, and using any two products together would be a legal nightmare. The law is not an ass, at least not in this case.
Actually you are making a copy. Legally, yes, you are making a copy.
Even a livecd has to make a copy, legally speaking.
So when will we see the first OSX distros?
This modding system is unfair, there is a under represented amount of Mac trolls and the Win trolls have a unfair advantage.
I suggest this site check the browser type and apply a 10x multiplier to Safari browsers when they vote.
Some of them Mac users have very good arguments, but get modded down unfairly. This makes all of us who wish to discuss topics with them to set the mod level low enough and wind up getting the garbage.
Software licenses are based on copyright, and therefore they can only regulate under what conditions you are allowed to copy the software and not how you can use it.
So the only way Apple’s hardware restriction could be enforced is by arguing that the user is actually making a copy of the OS when installing it.
Yet §117a of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) expressly permits exactly that:
(a) Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy.— Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided:
(1) that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other manner, or
(2) that such new copy or adaptation is for archival purposes only and that all archival copies are destroyed in the event that continued possession of the computer program should cease to be rightful.
So at least in this respect the DMCA isn’t quite as bad as its reputation
.
Behaving like a bully is different than requiring people abide by the license they agreed to.
There are licenses that state you cannot make videos of the OS in use ? Amazing. I had no idea!
If Apple grew its install base and market share, I would imagine that they would not change from their behavior that they exhibit now… which so far has been very admirably IMHO.
admirably ? LOL thats rich.
Apple is a sue happy company that likes to theaten its own userbase constantly. If they are not trying to sue their own fans they are out shaking down 3rd party shareware authors.
The quicker the worthless schmucks go out of business the better.
OK so there has been a lot of hype surrounding the hack of Mac OSx to the x86 platform and if you’re in the community you’ll know a lot of them WILL be now getting a mactel box when it is finally released by apple. I too will be spending that little bit extra to own a ‘real’ Apple Mac, even if its really just a PC running Mac OS in a nice shiny box. Why? because we’ve had the chance to experiance what a machine running OS X is like. A lot of people have never used anything other then Windows and most have said the hack of getting mac os x on their PC was actually easier then installing Linux. (maybe thats something the linux folk should look into)
At the end of the day, all them people who went out and got an iPod could have gone and got any other MP3 player, they do the same job, not as expensive yet they don’t.. they go and get the branded name Apple iPod. Reason, the hardware Apple create is usually very unique looking while also being very nice to look at and use.
People are still going to buy a mac machine from apple, just for the simple fact, they’ll have a real mac not a welfar mac. Same reason people don’t shop at wallmart even though you can get the same items as other branded shops.
Who determines it?
Are they even SURE that it’s enforcable?
If I have the neighbor’s kid install something for me, what then? I certainly didn’t click ok so you can’t hold me accountable for it. And I don’t think ANY company in their right mind is going to want to go into court and admit that they entered into an illegal contract with a minor.
In reality it’s probably going to take a lawsuit like that to get this click wrap nonsense thrown out.
No, Apple says “We want to have full control”.
The problem is that MS has already full control on the PC (see what happened to BeOS when they tried to bundle it with PCs…) That’s why OSX-x86 will only work on their motherboard (unless hacked off-course).
“As nice as OS X (I rate it as the best o/s currently on the market), I cannot recommend it – simply because of Apple’s behaviour, and of course the license.
Linux may not be a perfect desktop environment, but it is highly usable. And I like the licensing agreement :-)”
I feel the same way. OsX and a nicely polished system, but Apple as a company makes me think Microsoft are nice business people. Apple better get their act together simply because Windows is becoming more and more like OsX by the day and Linux is also on the rise. They can either spend their time fighting and trying to protect their software which is impossible or give the market what they want. The recording industry has been suing loads of people, have people stopped downloading music? Yes, perhaps there has been a drop, but tell me, how many millions are still doing it?
Open source is the community to support.
Open source software AND hardware is the future.
When are people going to learn that big companies who survive on YOUR MONEY are going to do things THEIR WAY to benefit THEM?
Support only those who create software and hardware which is open.
Too bad for them – with this action they just lost ME as a customer.
I was going to switch and buy an iBook, but now I’ll get a thinkpad instead.
I’m not going to support aggressive behaviour – I might be the next victim.
Mmmmm…. I love thinkpads… Lil bit of a price difference between an iBook and a Thinkpad though don’t ya think?
That’s right, if you’re thinking of the T-series … but not that much:
iBook + AppleCare – around 1400 Euro
T 42 (3 years guarantee included) – 1700 Euro
and for that the thinkpads’ quality is much superior – build almost like a tank.
The R-Series is even cheaper than the iBook.
Too bad for them – with this action they just lost ME as a customer.
I was going to switch and buy an iBook, but now I’ll get a thinkpad instead.
I’m not going to support aggressive behaviour – I might be the next victim.
Are the people who post on this forum really 11 year olds?
If not stop bloody acting like it, grow up
Hey I know, let everyone pirate our software, don’t make any threats, let everyone sell shares and down go apple share price
Live in the real world, not the dream land that you seem to inhabit, how many times, have we heard, they’ve lost me as a customer, GOOD
So what you are saying is “I won’t buy from this company because they don’t let other people steal there stuff?” What a bunch of cr*p. Its people like you that drive me nuts. Apple owns the software. Why the heck should they stand back while others attempt to pirate their stuff. I don’t care what your thoughts are on monopolies and so forth, but lets face the facts. Whether you are dealing with Microsoft or Apple, it is their software. Just because the are big and have lots of money does not give you a right to pirate their stuff. Pirating IS stealing. If you want to use it, buy it!
Are the same people who are up in arms at Apple telling a site to stop showing videos of OSX crack the same people who where agast at Cherry OS stealing parts of code from PearPC?
Why is it Ok to steal from business but you should fry in hell for copying OS?
Well in some countries Justice is when money talks.
That their DRM got hacked already.
From TFA:
“it took only about a month and a half for hackers to successfully crack Apple’s TPM scheme and allow the version of Mac OS X to boot on virtually any Intel-based PC.”
Apple is better at sueing people than anything else.
It’s inevitable so they might as well get used to it and just focus on making OS X better.
The question is not, whether a EULA can contain enforceable provisions. Yes, it can. The question is, whether a EULA can contain provisions which violate competition law, and have these be enforceable. Please guys, think clearly and very specifically about this. The reason it is not possible to stop a customer running the OS of his choice on the hardware of his choice has nothing to do with EULAs, piracy, copyright. It is because these kinds of provisions are unlawfully anti competitive. Restraints on use, post sale, are unlawfully anti competitive. You bought it, you can use that one copy as you like. You can read this book in the bedroom or the living room. You can plug whichever make of VCR you choose into that SCART plug. You can use whatever blades you like with that Giletter razor. THIS is why MS cannot stop you running Office under Wine, and this is why Apple cannot stop you running X on whatever it will technically run on.
It is really puzzling to me that people don’t seem to grasp the basic principle here, which is to do with competition law. it is competition law that prevents post sales restraints on use. No amount of EULAs or signed contracts will make a court enforce unlawful restraints on a company’s customers. The restraints are unlawful. So the courts will not enforce them.
I am not arguing, here, that this is good or bad for Apple. I am just arguing that it is the law, certainly in Europe, and most likely in the US as well. There is an interesting debate about whether Apple is following the right strategy in trying to limit the hardware its OS runs on, regardless of what means it chooses. But this is not the issue here. The only issue here is, can Apple, having sold an OS, restrain the use the customer makes of it SOLELY by conditions on sale. I believe the answer is no, and have not heard any court decisions or cases which support the opposite view. But if there are any, please, please lets have them cited.
No, making a copy of a product without paying for it may be piracy, but not stealing, no matter how many morons repeat it.
=====
Wrong. Piracy is making $$$ from copying it. Merely copying it is copyright infringement.
But point taken. It’s definitely NOT stealing.
St. Jobs is a businessman and he does not care what is good for his clients, he care for his own company. The migration x86 will be successful only in case Apple will keep on to be hardware company. Enabling their hardware to run Windows and restricting their OS running any non-Apple hardware will allow them to succeed. Simple logic, people like experiments, they are under rigorous and aggressive ad influence and OSX looks sedusively nice, so if you want to buy new hardware, why not buy that one which allows run OSX, perhaps it is nice, if it is not you are free run WIndows and use it as always. If OSX is not confined to Apple’s hardware, people may just download form P2P and install it on any hardware, why should they buy more expensive Apple’s comp when they can opt any other vendor? And this is the worst scenario for Apple.
So, people you should understand that OSX is a business, not a donation for fans …and St. Jobs wants to gain profit …
you are rigtht (afer a night on the piss) it is business
and anyone who say says evil corporatkoon FCUK OFFF
Apple are trying to stop people linking to sites that have a video of so-called ‘illegal activity’? Well, if showing a video of illegal activity is a crime then I guess the makers of tv shows like “COPS” are about due to do some time themselves…or the nightly news that shows videos of people robbing convenience stores among other things.
The bottome line is that nothing is being done but the passing on of information. Since when did that justify threatening letters?
I know OSX is nice, but c’mon, it ain’t the be-all-and -end-all of computing. I can do everything I need to do with OSS and have the smarts to fix things when they break…and I’m not about to be sued by anyone for anything I decide to do with it.
Imagine
Steve Jobs sells boxed versions of Mac OSX for Intel and Power PC, both “officially”work only on their own hardware.
However, you can get an original hack on the internet, supplied with the necessary drivers for the underlying Darwin OS.
So, every legal business can buy a Mac computer, considering security and the lack of hardware problems they are a lot cheaper than other offers.
All interested persons can buy legally a Macos package and hack it on their home PC instead of upgrading to Windows or linux. Legal issues might be more complicated. the potential masses are enormous. No additional costs for Mac: they have done the work, and they don’t have to worry about support nor security.
Everybody interested can put it illegally on its computer. This will probably not eat in the client base, but rather spread the use of the operating system to evergrowing masses. These guys are clearly in breach of the law, but as long as they stay at home and don’t sell the system nor services for cracked systems, little can be done.
Remember wordperfect? they had a total monopoly on wordprocessing, and started suing universities for copyright infringement. A startup in the wordprocessing business went a different track: it was authorised to install it on a second “home”computer if you had a legal copy at work. Moereover, the floppies could be copied and installed without any problem. You only needed a code.
After 2 year or so, wordperfect was nearly dead and word for windows was the new monopoly.
“After 2 year or so, wordperfect was nearly dead and word for windows was the new monopoly.”
Maybe we should revise that old saying? “Lies, damn lies, and statistics” to “Lies, damn lies, and history”.