Ask OSNews: Hackintosh Legality
Linked by David Adams on Wed 30th Nov 2011 20:23 UTC
Editorial A reader asks: "Can someone comment on the legality of using my brother's old Snow Leopard DVD to install OS X? My brother has Lion, so why can't he choose to give it to me? It doesn't violate Apple's 1 license per 1 computer policy."
E-mail Print r 1   · Read More · 51 Comment(s) http://osne.ws/jkw
Thread beginning with comment 498538
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Depends on Jurisdiction
by PhilDurt on Thu 1st Dec 2011 05:02 UTC
PhilDurt
Member since:
2011-12-01

The EULA language for OS X clearly prohibits the installation on non-Apple branded hardware. In WIPO signatory countries (like the US and Europe), you must accept the EULA terms to obtain a license to use (copy to disk or memory) the software and a license for the patents embodied in the software (codecs, etc.). In other parts of the world, it may not be a copyright violation or a patent violation.

The DMCA would not apply to the Apple software as there are no access controls of any sort in place. There are technical issues to be overcome to use the software, to be certain, but there's no encryption or intentional impediment to prevent access or copying.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Depends on Jurisdiction
by Soulbender on Thu 1st Dec 2011 05:49 in reply to "Depends on Jurisdiction"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

The EULA language for OS X clearly prohibits the installation on non-Apple branded hardware


Just because it's in a EULA does not mean it's a legally valid and acceptable contract clause.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Depends on Jurisdiction
by dizzey on Sat 3rd Dec 2011 10:05 in reply to "Depends on Jurisdiction"
dizzey Member since:
2005-10-15

I usally let my cat agree to these kind of deals.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Comment by zima
by zima on Wed 7th Dec 2011 21:34 in reply to "Depends on Jurisdiction"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

In WIPO signatory countries (like the US and Europe), you must accept the EULA terms to obtain a license to use (copy to disk or memory) the software and a license for the patents embodied in the software (codecs, etc.). In other parts of the world, it may not be a copyright violation or a patent violation.

"In WIPO signatory countries" is an almost redundant distinction, virtually whole map is in.

And what you claim one supposedly "must" do is rubbish - certainly I don't have to care, in one place in the EU, about licensing terms which are contrary to the law. Or about software patents, which don't exist here.

Actually, I can for example install one license of software on as many machines as I like - as long as only one will be used, only one will run, at any given time.

The DMCA would not apply to the Apple software as there are no access controls of any sort in place. There are technical issues to be overcome to use the software, to be certain, but there's no encryption or intentional impediment to prevent access or copying.

Apple used TPM at least for few years after Intel transition. Plus Apple themselves claim there are copy protection measures in OSX falling under DMCA, and the court of law agreed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psystar_Corporation#Legal_issues

Reply Parent Score: 2