Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 24th Dec 2008 20:49 UTC, submitted by judgen
Legal The legal back-and-forth between PsyStar and Apple is slowly but surely moving into the twilight zone. Not too long ago we had Apple going all black helicopter on PsyStar claiming people and/or companies other than PsyStar are involved in the clone maker's unlawful practices, even though Apple could so far not name any of them because, well, they don't know who they are yet. If that wasn't enough, PsyStar now claims that Apple's copyright on Mac OS X is invalid.
Thread beginning with comment 341429
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
TheIdiotThatIsMe
Member since:
2006-06-17

Using Mac OS X isn't a right!

It is if you pay for it. Through Pystar, you DO pay for Mac OS X. The real question is does Apple have the right to limit how you use it after you've paid for it, and also whether or not Pystar broke copyright by intentionally altering/fooling/bypassing/whatever part of the OS.

...when better options exist like Windows XP and Windows Vista...

That is completely subjective. While one person may argue that Windows is a better option, another may argue that Mac OS is a better option. In the end they may both be right (or wrong), because really it's up to the end user as to what's best for them. Same goes for Linux.

In the end, it's not a privilege, but an option. And when a company attempts to limit a consumers options for it's own gain, you may run into problems.

Reply Parent Score: 4

Hussein Member since:
2008-11-22

You do know that anyone who buys a retail copy of OS X is assumed to own a Mac, and thus is buying an upgrade, when Apple starts selling Macs without Mac OS X pre-installed, then your claim (or Psystar's) makes sense.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

You do know that anyone who buys a retail copy of OS X is assumed to own a Mac, and thus is buying an upgrade, when Apple starts selling Macs without Mac OS X pre-installed, then your claim (or Psystar's) makes sense.


The most nonsensical statement in the history of EVAR. Mac OS X retail is a full functioning product, and nowhere on the box does it say it is an upgrade or that you need to own a Mac before you may run it. In addition, no store clerk has ever mentioned it to me, even though I've bought several retail copies of Mac OS X.

This is an argument thought up by Mac zealots affected by the RDF. It's such utter nonsense, it makes me wonder how it even survived this long.

Reply Parent Score: 4