Linked by Nescio on Mon 9th Mar 2009 08:05 UTC
Apple Numerous irrelevant issues and feelings about them are ventilated in comments on the case. However, there are only two important issues. One is what the law is, the other is what we think the law should be.
Thread beginning with comment 352492
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Whose boat is it?
by GCrain on Tue 10th Mar 2009 16:32 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Whose boat is it?"
GCrain
Member since:
2005-07-11

"But what about if you modify and possibly compromise the Mercury engines the way you want and them resell them as Mercury engines? Is it your right to be able to do that? What happens when the modified Mercury engine blows up... who's responsible??
Naturally, if your modifications were unsafe or caused accidents than you WOULD be liable. Exactly the same for Psystar; if the modifications to OSX cause computers to blow up, then Psystar, not Apple, is liable. Your point? "

Where lies the Apple - Psystar liability? They are using MacOS, which is branded by Apple. You supposedly bought a retail version of MacOS-there is some inherent liability back to Apple. If MacOS installed on Psystar computers inflicts damage in some way, it WILL be associated with Apple. Apple has a right to protect themselves. Psystar is an opportunistic little company with no money. Even if they are 100% liable, they would not be the target.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: Whose boat is it?
by Bobthearch on Tue 10th Mar 2009 17:16 in reply to "RE[4]: Whose boat is it?"
Bobthearch Member since:
2006-01-27

Do have any evidence that consumers are being being physically harmed by Psystar's OSX computers? Even the slightest hint that the products could be dangerous?

Or are you just making stuff up?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Whose boat is it?
by alcibiades on Tue 10th Mar 2009 18:49 in reply to "RE[4]: Whose boat is it?"
alcibiades Member since:
2005-10-12

What you are missing is that Psystar is installing retail copies of OSX as an agent of the end customer.

Should I be allowed to install Windows XP for someone without permission from MS?

Same thing.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Whose boat is it?
by gcbirzan on Tue 10th Mar 2009 19:04 in reply to "RE[5]: Whose boat is it?"
gcbirzan Member since:
2009-03-09

What you are missing is that Psystar is installing retail copies of OSX as an agent of the end customer.

Should I be allowed to install Windows XP for someone without permission from MS?

Same thing.

What you're missing is what the restriction is. The only purpose of that is to take choice away from its customers, choice over something totally unrelated. Somebody put it quite nicely, saying that it would be akin to book publishers saying you're only allowed to read their books with their prescription glasses.
Not allowing customers to make a choice is something that most legal systems frawn upon.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: Whose boat is it?
by GCrain on Tue 10th Mar 2009 20:40 in reply to "RE[5]: Whose boat is it?"
GCrain Member since:
2005-07-11

What you are missing is that Psystar is installing retail copies of OSX as an agent of the end customer. Should I be allowed to install Windows XP for someone without permission from MS? Same thing.


No, they are *including* a retail copy. They are installing a hacked version of their own, trying to side step the legality by saying that a license was purchased.

Should it be legal for me to buy Windows Home Basic hack it to Ultimate (on the same install media), remove Validation and install it as an 'agent' for someone else and profit from it? If Psystar wins, then it seems that it would be okay too.

Should it be legal to sell hacked software if the original was purchased and included (insert some copyright court case here)?

Reply Parent Score: 1