Originally Posted by melgross
You aren't "asking" a question at all it seems. Yu are just making a statement that is extreme, and aren't interested in anything that supplants it.
Well, that would be because I've not seen anything that supplants it? So again, why would apple use that terminology when prima facie it is ridiculously simple to circumvent?
What you are saying is daft. You know nothing about business, or you would understand something about basic protections business use. Apple stopped using the term "Mac OS", because they are putting the OS into devices other than Macs.
I have zero idea why the name of the operating itself has anything to do with this argument.
Apple did license their OS out before, and it's absurd to think that they don't want to protect themselves if they decide to do so again.
Again - conjecture. They could just as easily have taken the decision ten years ago to never license again. You're just guessing.
There is a direct relationship. Apple can very fairly claim that a sale to Psystar is a lost sale to them. We say very clearly that the reason why the original cloning didn't work well for Apple was that the clones, less expensive than Apples', took sales away from them. While clone sales rose, Apple's sales fell in almost lock-step.
Wrong. I want OS X with x+y+z hardware. Apple don't sell that configuration. But Company psystar do. *Regardless* of the legality of the notion, I'm not buying the closest Apple thing. In no way does that represent a lost sale to Apple, because I would never have bought the configuration they were offering in the first place.
Therefor, in using evidence from that, Apple could show that sales to Psystar are siphoning sales from them. and the term "stealing sales" is entirely appropriate.
Again, you're using the vernacular. I was quite clear in that you *can't steal someone's IP*. If you can steal it, you can give it back. Think about that for a second.
We're just going back and forth here.
Even if you refuse to use that time honored term for this, you can use others that essentially mean the same thing, if it make you feel better. There are a lot of synonyms.
It is not a time honoured term at all for this type of infringement. It's simple terminology for simple people pushed by rights holders who are trying to have others to understand what their rights are.
A good one would be "misappropriate". It might even be better, but doesn't have the same ring to it.
Exactly - the same ring. The same *emotional* response. And you fell for it, hook line and sinker.
So that's end of this one for me. My poor little macbook is back in the shop because the twits who fixed it the fourth time obscured the drive opening. So wash your eyeballs, this post was written on a PC.