Originally Posted by JeffDM
That's an easy accusation to throw, but it's hard to test. How does anyone else know whether you're capable of entertaining the idea that you might, in fact be wrong?
I've admitted wrong on these boards in the past. There's no reason I shouldn't be willing to do it again.
Originally Posted by solipsism
The only closed minded people here are you two. Neither have addressed questions brought to you about their copying of the software, altering the code and their lack of a reseller's license.
The reseller's license is the only thing of which I won't argue on Psystar's behalf. They don't have one. Does it matter? I'm not sure. There are hundreds of career power-sellers on eBay who get by without them, despite frequently reselling copyrighted work. I also don't understand this either. Regardless, I think it's the least important of the issues at stake here, so let's move on to something more substantial.
I can't speak for Psystar's method, but I know there exist install methods that require no "hacking" of OS X code. With the proper bootloader, OS X install disks will run natively on certain third-party hardware.
Regarding the copying of their software, that is the purpose of the install DVD. The DVD itself is not the copyrighted work, the OS is. When one buys that DVD, they are buying the right to install and use that code. The terms of the EULA attempt to bind that use to "Apple-labeled" hardware. This link is what is contested, as it's akin to saying that you can buy this $15 reproduction Monet painting, but you can only display it in a $150 "Monet-brand" frame.
Psystar is purchasing reproductions, putting them in their own frame and reselling the bundle. The copyrighted work is still intact (depending on the install method), the copyright-holder is getting paid for every reproduction purchased. The only thing that's different is the frame, which isn't copyrighted anyway, so that shouldn't matter, should it?
So what is this dispute really about? Installing one legally-purchased software DVD on one computer? No, it's Apple's overreaching EULA, which attempts to force end-users into buying a frame from Apple even though the reproduction is a legally-purchased, self-standing work.
This is not about Apple protecting its IP at all... It's about protecting its extra dollar.