Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 21st Sep 2009 08:44 UTC, submitted by Cytor
Hardware, Embedded Systems There are several options out there if you wan to run Mac OS X on your non-Apple labelled computer, but one of them appears to be in serious trouble. It has been uncovered that the EFI-X module is nothing more than a USB stick with a DRM chip, with code from the hackintosh community on it - without attribution. On top of that, its firmware update utility uses LGPL code - again, without attribution.
Thread beginning with comment 385184
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by lurch_mojoff
by lurch_mojoff on Mon 21st Sep 2009 10:13 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by lurch_mojoff"
lurch_mojoff
Member since:
2007-05-12

Installing OSX on other kit is not a violation of terms elsewhere...

Of what terms? The only terms that can be violated are the terms of the license you're given, as detailed in the respective software license agreement. And among Mac OS X's terms there is one explicitly stating that the license allows you to install the software only on Apple hardware. Unless you can give a particular reason, say a law explicitly invalidating that term, why this does not apply to you, "more fortunate" folks, your argument is bunk.

Let's be realistic, though - neither my nor, more importantly, Apple's disapproval can stop you, as an individual, from using OSX86 folks' bag of tricks to install Mac OS X on your generic hardware. Bending over backwards to prove that it's all legal and fine and dandy is entirely pointless. It's just like trying to argue that downloading stuff from P2P networks is legally or morally right. And at the end of the day all of us have downloaded one thing or another from P2P, but the honest of us do so fully realizing that they are breaking the rules and in most cases breaking the law.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by lurch_mojoff
by bert64 on Mon 21st Sep 2009 17:20 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by lurch_mojoff"
bert64 Member since:
2007-04-23

Incidentally, the OSX license is only presented to you after you have purchased the software and may not be binding at all, depending where you live, which would thus default back to copyright laws which place no restriction on how you can personally use a copyrighted work that you have acquired legally.

The LGPL on the other hand, does not attempt to impose additional restrictions other than those already imposed by copyright law, but what it does do is grant additional rights that you wouldn't have had under plain copyright. You are free to reject the terms of the LGPL and continue using the software, however by rejecting the LGPL you have rejected the right to redistribute copies of the code and doing so would become a copyright infringement.

As far as morals go, i think that having legally acquired something, i should be free to use or modify it in any way i see fit. So if i purchase a copy of OSX, i should be able to try and install it on anything i choose. I don't expect Apple to support me doing this, or do anything to help me, but i don't like the idea of anything done specifically to prevent me (ie actions designed to prevent install on other hardware but which serve no benefit to their intended target audience... requiring efi instead of a kludgy old bios and simply not shipping with drivers for non apple hardware are one thing, but extra code that explicitly checks for non apple hardware and refuses to run are another).

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Comment by lurch_mojoff
by Googol on Mon 21st Sep 2009 23:21 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by lurch_mojoff"
Googol Member since:
2006-11-24

"Unless you can give a particular reason, say a law explicitly invalidating that term, why this does not apply to you, "more fortunate" folks, your argument is bunk."

Spot on dude, spot on. Yes, that, as a matter of fact, and a matter of law to be precise, is what sets better places in the wolrd apart from the US of A. The law says so. Only because someone puts crap into their EULA does not mean it has any merit, weight or validity whatsoever. Awesome stuff, isn't it? ;)

So this being the way it is, what I said is not bunk. The US is not the world, and the world doesn't care about what the US does. So yes, installing OSX on any hardware is perfectly legal, even though it might not be for YOU. Btw, this does not only apply to EULA, but all sorts of T+Cs. Only because someone stuffs a clause in there doesn't mean it is valid/can be enforced. Just sign it and then ignore it. That is also what MS had to learn the hard way when they tried to pull their bull off saying you cannot resell OEM versions - guess what - you can, no matter what it says in the copy/paste bullshit US EULA for Europe. The power and reach of the US legal system ends at the US border, didn't you know? Now you know.

Reply Parent Score: 2