Username or EmailPassword
I've seen this go round & round and many interesting points are being made.
This is how I see the situation when I boil away the broth & get to the noodles.
a. The Apple EULA is a contractual agreement between Apple and the end-user; not a point of law.
b. While the EULA isn't a point of law, it is enforceable from an business & support perspective. Whith PyStar selling systems with Mac OS installed, the only, 'issue,' would seem to be that of support from Apple should the PyStar customers need anything (individually or collectively).
d. Apple has no obligation to PyStar customers in any shape or form as the OS in not installed on Apple's hardware per the EULA.
e. If PyStar folds for any reason, those who bought their systems with Mac OS installed are on their own.
With the above, I have to ask:
1. Why is Apple filing? Are they really that concerned? From what I see, they're off the hook in terms of support for PyStar customers and they still make money from OS sales & other s/w sales.
2. Is Apple simply being greedy? Saying, 'Mine! All MINE!'
3. Is Apple concerned about their reputation & name associated with non-approved hardware & system builders?
Whether or not this is right or wrong isn't what I was looking for. I was simply trying to boil it down to see through the mud.
Another option could be Apple WANT to licence their OS to OEMS
If I was paying to be a certified OEM I wouldnt want someone undercutting me before I start...
Imagine if HP started selling osx machines (they sold re-branded ipods remember)all the while this little company was undercutting it... It would almost certainly be a deal breaker to any OEM partner. Why pay when these guys are doing it for free??!