Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 26th May 2009 20:56 UTC
Mac OS X Getting Mac OS X up and running on a computer without an Apple label has always been a bit of a hassle. You needed customised Mac OS X disks, updates would ruin all your hard work, and there was lots of fiddling with EFI and the likes. Ever since the release of boot-132, this is no longer the case. Read on for how setting up a "Hack"intosh really is as easy as 1, 3, 2.
Thread beginning with comment 366092
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

I disagree. It is perfectly legal to modify Darwin code as one sees fit. If Apple's copy-protection scheme for OS X relies upon Darwin, it cannot legally enforce that scheme, since doing so would violate the terms of Darwin's open-source license.

In other words, Apple can't put code into Darwin, declare that code part of its OS X copy-protection scheme, and assert that it is thus illegal for other developers to alter that code. If Apple even attempted such a thing, it would by definition amount to a licensing violation -- and thus would be unenforceable.

If Apple's copy-protection scheme does not rely upon Darwin, then modifying Darwin does not qualify as circumvention in the first place.

And hardware-based protection is a moot point. If you're using non-Apple commodity hardware, then there is no firmware-based protection to work around -- and thus no circumvention.

The real legal issue here, IMO, is the Apple EULA for OS X. I strongly suspect that by "labeling," Apple is not simply referring to a cutesy decal on the system case. Rather, in this case, "labeling" is shorthand for "Apple-branded," or in other words, Apple-proprietary hardware.

I certainly wouldn't want to discourage anyone from pursuing this experiment -- software EULAs are generally a revolting species of legal monster, and Apple's EULAs are no exception. And this presents absolutely no threat -- none -- to Apple's business, since there is zero chance this kind of hack will cost the company any paying customers. But really, I think it's a mistake to take the world "label" too literally in this context.

IANAL -- but then again, I don't charge $400 an hour for my opinion, either :-)

Reply Parent Score: 1