Originally Posted by bsenka
That's certainly the claim that the software companies keep making, thankfully the courts are increasingly ruling against such nonsense.
When I buy a physical product at a store, I sign no lease or license agreement. I flat out purchased a physical product. It's mine to do what ever I want with it. Home depot can't tell me what I can or cannot build with the lumber I buy, Apple cannot tell me what computer I can install their OS onto. Home Depot cannot stop me from building something with that lumber and turning around and selling that new product for my own profit, Apple can't stop me from installing that OS onto a PC I build and turning around and selling that.
You are seriously missing the point of intellectual property rights. If you buy a photograph of a beautiful scene photographed and copyrighted by Ansel Adams, you can take it home and plaster stuff all over it if you want, but you cannot copy it into your computer, print out a thousand copies of it on photographic paper and sell them for $10 each. This would be a violation of copyright laws and violation of intellectual property rights. This is totally different from buying a piece of lumber, or a bunch of ball bearings.
Your argument sounds to me like the rationalization used by thieves to steal music and to buy one copy of a software program, then make 20 copies for friends. Just because you can do it does not mean it is legal. If you make copies for friends because you don't like the price or the manufacturer it's not only stealing as if you had walked into a store and taken them off the shelf and walked out without paying, it's also mean, malicious and vile. If you make 20 copies of the latest million seller album and even if you give them away, you are still stealing from the musician or artist, who has most likely lost out on 20 more sales. If you don't think the album is worth the $15 or whatever, that still doesn't give you the right to make multiple copies, and it's certainly an immoral thing to do. For example, if you were a programmer, and you spent a year working away on a great new program, then after releasing it you discovered that half the copies in existence were simply copied onto another disc and given or sold cheaper to someone else, wouldn't you be pissed off that you had lost 50% of all the money you should have made after pouring your heart and soul into this project for an entire year? Money which you deserve after having sweated for a year to create this great new product? Of course you would be mad. This is the way to look at this and many other challenges in life, not just whether or not it would make someone mad, but whether of not it is fundamentally unfair and you would feel ripped off it is happened to you.
I don't know all the details of what Psychotic Komputer Kompany is doing, but it sounds like they are buying copies of Mac OS X and then hacking them to make them work on their hardware. If this is true, another false analogy you might come up with (So I will shoot it down now before you use it) is that it's like buying a Ford and taking it to a body shop and getting it modified to look cooler or have fancy fins on it or whatever. However, that is a false analogy, as the OS is the most important piece of how it functions. So a more correct analogy would be you went a bought a Ford, then changed the suspension, the engine and the transmission out (selling them perhaps to someone else for parts), and put cheaper crap in in its place, then you sold it as if it was a Ford. Certainly Ford would be pissed at you when people started wrecking their cars or having them blowup on them, and suing Ford about it when it was your cheap parts that caused the accidents.
Similarly, Apple has the right to come up with it's own products that are an integral mixture of software and hardware, all controlled by them, and not have to support a competing company that wants to rip off the equivalent of hundreds of years of one person working on software development, and then commercially sell it to others without ever paying Apple a cent for all the development work (and NO, the $129 does not begin to cover the hundreds of millions they've put into development over the years, it just gets them a little back from people who've already invested thousands into their hardware which is what really pays to keep them afloat. That's why they can undersell Apple on hardware prices, is by not having to spend 20% of everything they earn to develop the next version, and by buying cheaper crappier parts, and then also the idea that they should be allowed to undersell Apple's own products would actually be VERY detrimental to the consumer, as Apple would probably go under if it had to compete without getting large margins which allow them to have the R&D needed to come up with the next great idea.
So, Microsoft, gets away with ripping off Apple's OS X by developing something of their own that looks a little like the Apple product, but is never as good, so it doesn't matter as much, and it is their right to copy something else as long as they had to do all the programming themselves and work out the bugs themselves etc. However, Psypuke is not allowed to steal Apple's OS and resell it with a crappy box, and especially is not allowed to hack the OS (that is definitely severely illegal ! ! )
So, think about it, if you were Apple, maybe youd decide to license your operating system, but knowing that youd spent many years developing it (as well as paying over $400 million to Next Computers to buy their OS), youd probably lease the OS to other manufacturers for $500 or $700, you certainly wouldnt give away the main reason you have an advantage in the marketplace for a miserable $129. (And remember, if you buy the full version of Windows, it costs around $279, more than double Apples OS price. Part of the reason for this is that they can make up some of the R&D expenses on the price of their excellent hardware, that most people are willing to pay a premium for because they know its so much better.)
In conclusion, I think you havent been looking at it from the point of view of either whats good for the consumer in the long run - which is to let Apple flourish and keep pushing the computing world (and consumer world) forward, nor have you been accurately making analogies. Comparing a very sophisticated OS thats been in the making for nearly 20 yrs (counting the time at Next) to an undifferentiated piece of wood at Home Depot totally misses the point of all the intellectual property rights that are inherent in products that require a lot of originality to produce, as opposed to a piece of wood that anyone can cut to certain dimensions.
I agree with most of the others here that this Thieving company should just all rent a boat, sail out into the Gulf Stream (or the Gulf of Mexico, depending on which Florida coast they are closest to) and tie large boulders around their ankles and throw them overboard. That way we would need less of the hated class of attorneys, and we would be rid of a bunch of expletive deleted amoral, lying thieving, scum who perhaps could then have their 15 minutes of fame by being listed on the Darwins Awards for this year!
Now, similarly, imagine that