Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 2nd Dec 2008 22:42 UTC, submitted by anon
Legal The legal back-and-forth between Apple and clone-maker PsyStar continues to develop, with the latest news being a move by Apple - the Cupertino company has invoked something with many already predicted Apple would call upon: the DMCA, or the Digital Millenium Copyright Act. This was done in an amendment to the original suit, filed in July this year.
Thread beginning with comment 339061
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Throw it out!
by Doc Pain on Wed 3rd Dec 2008 14:37 UTC in reply to "Throw it out!"
Doc Pain
Member since:
2006-10-08

Apple's complaint is that Psystar has "circumvented OS X's copy protection scheme". In order to make that complaint, Apple would have to prove that Mac OS X has, in fact, ANY copy protection scheme at all.


That's a valid point, I think. In order to make this proof, Apple would have to explain how the copy protection (they claim is present) works exactly so that it's possible to tell if it is a copy protection.

Stupid example: If I take a hardcopy of my program out of the printer and write "YOU CAN NOT COPY THIS!" under the source code, would it be a copy protection? What if Bob from the cubicle next to mine would take this hardcopy to the copier and press the copy key? Would he have circumvented my copy protection?

Checking that the hardware is made by Apple does NOT constitute a copy-protection scheme, as it does not stop discs being pirated between Macintosh owners.


Well, that's a good point. The presence of specific hardware seems to be the reason for Mac OS X to run or not to run. If such hardware characteristica are supplied by hardware that is not made by Apple...

Reply Parent Score: 2