OSNews

I have sat in front of me a 17" iMac Core Duo, paid for with Pounds Sterling.

I have to the left of me a home built P4 running OSX.

I hae not distributed it to anyone, so I haven't broken any laws whatsoever.

Yes you have, because copyright law only allows one installation copy.

Who said I run them at the same time?

The P4 had it installed as an experiment, to increase my knowledge. It's called learning. All knowledge is power.

Some of us like to learn, strange as it may seem to some people here.

No matter how you look at it, copyright infrigenemnt != theft. They are parts of completely diffrent sets of law.

Theft is when you remove something from someone else with the intention to give it to yourself (that's the definition by Swedish law atleast).

Downloading a copy of something without the permission of the copyright holder doesn't fit that description. It is a breach of the copyright holders right though.

That takes care of the technicality of the matter.

You might want to argue that depriving someone of his/her monopoly is moraly theft.

Then consider this. Copyright is a time limited monopoly that the state takes upon itself to uphold. By doing so copies and derivative works becomes an artificially scarse resource, therby raising its value, which would otherwise be zero. The purpose of doing so is that the state belives that this is needed to create room for comerce in creative trades such as writing, programming or composing.

No matter if this acrually is true or not. Limiting a resource that could be free for everyone at the cost of noone cannot be defended as a moral right.

You have no inherent right to OWN copyrights. You are granted that right on the hopes that is is beneficial for society.

Actually, if you're running OSX on both the P4 and the iMac duo, then yes, you have broken laws, because you're consuming exactly one more license than you have legally purchased.

I doubt it anyway. Just Blah Blah Blah.

The licensing allows one installation of the OS for each computer purchased. Same as Microsoft's. So yes, you are stealing.

for the fifteenth time in this thread, infringing on the terms of a license agreement is not even _remotely_ the same as theft.

"The licensing allows one installation of the OS for each computer purchased. Same as Microsoft's. So yes, you are stealing."

It is different, as everyone keeps pointing out. The licensing allows one installation of the OS for each computer purchased.

So no, you are not stealing. You are violating the license provisions.

This is different from stealing, and different from violating the DMCA, and different again from breaking copyright law.

You may also, even if you are not installing it on more than one computer, but just in a way that violates the Eula, be violating the terms of the Eula which impose post sale restrictions on use.

In that case, what has happened in the EC is that the supplier has attempted to lead you to believe that you have entered into a contract of a sort which it is unlawful for him to make with you. That's all. You have no obligations of this sort, moral or legal.

The only one whose conduct is legally and morally questionable, when you install your copy of OSX on one and only one computer which is not made by Apple, is Apple.