People are allowed to buy Leopard, buy any PC, and install Leopard on that PC. What you do with your stuff at home is your business.
Resellers are not allowed to build a PC with a legal or illegal copy of Leopard and market it as such. Because that would be riding on Apple's success, and you're not allowed a free ride if Apple does not approve of it. Microsoft allows it, but Apple does not.
I do not think if someone buys a Psystar and the company tanks that they'll be left out in the cold, or that they'll own a brick for a computer. Psystar, a generic computer assembler, will be using generic components which are available all over eBay. If, and when, Apple wins this case and you find out that Snow Leopard has locked out your Psystar then you can always install other OSes or just keep your Leopard.
Something that you buy, for money, from Apple belongs to you. If someone buys a Mac OS X installation DVD from Apple for $129, Apple can't go to that person's house and take back the installation DVD.
First, when you buy a Mac OS X DVD you buy the media (the physical DVD) and you get a license to use the OS (program) not own it. Second, installing a software (OS or any other software) is considered copying (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_copyright). Third, Psystar already admitted that they violated Apple copyrights.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
And that is different from Apple how?
Last month, my wifes MB top cover cracked. Took it to Apple store and got it replaced within 2 hours. Psystar don't have retail stores and therefore you have to mail your computer or your hard drive for simple problems such as Mac OS reinstallation.
Last month, my wifes MB top cover cracked. Took it to Apple store and got it replaced within 2 hours. Psystar don't have retail stores and therefore you have to mail your computer or your hard drive for simple problems such as Mac OS reinstallation.
A while ago the DVD Writer failed in my iMac, it took me over an hour (and around 40 euro for the taxi ride) to get to the repair centre, and I had to wait for around two weeks for the replacement to arrive, then I got take the two hour return trip (and another 40 Euro) to pick it up. Now I live in Dublin, so I am glad I am so close to a repair centre...
Just because there is store right next to you doesn't mean it is that way in the rest of the world.
First, when you buy a Mac OS X DVD you buy the media (the physical DVD) and you get a license to use the OS (program) not own it.
I paid for it, I have the receipt, I own it. It is absolutely mine to do whatever the heck I want to with it. I don't care what the license agreement says, I don't even recognize their right to have a EULA.
Imagine a flour manufacturer putting a "not to be used to making bread" clause on the bag because they also sell their own bread. No one would settle for that. Yet that's the same crap people are trying to pull with this intellectual property B.S.
I paid for it, I have the receipt, I own it. It is absolutely mine to do whatever the heck I want to with it. I don't care what the license agreement says, I don't even recognize their right to have a EULA.
Imagine a flour manufacturer putting a "not to be used to making bread" clause on the bag because they also sell their own bread. No one would settle for that. Yet that's the same crap people are trying to pull with this intellectual property B.S.
It is not the EULA that say you don't own the software, It is the copyright laws. Unless the owner of the copyrighted material state otherwise, you don't own the software you are licensed to use it (why do you think there is an open source license agreement?). Imagine if you wrote a book and someone bought it, photo copied it, and started selling it for $0.01. "He paid for it, he have the receipt, he own it. It is absolutely his to do whatever the heck he wants to with it." right? I don't so. Maybe then you will start to appreciate copyright laws. Software is no difference since it is a set of written code. If you are a programmer then you will know that two programmers can write two different codes that can basically do the exact the same thing.
Me and my colleagues have written few engineering programs that we used in our firm few years back. Even though we didn't sell it commercially some copies somehow were leaked to one of our competitors. Our lawyers sent them a letter and they agreed to stop using our software (We really could not tell but at least this stopped them from marketing the program as their own). Now, If it wasn't for the copyright laws we would have wasted the hundreds of man hours we spent on developing the softwares.
When a copyrightable work is registered with the Library of Congress, its owner can request and be awarded "treble" damages (3X the actual damages) by the court from an infringer. Apple also has trademark issues to reconcile with Psystar. Psystar might just be negotiating itself into bankruptcy here, with the only question being how badly.
If I have nothing, and I take the following gamble:
50% zero; bankruptcy
50% Three hundred million dollars
For a single guy who worrries not about bankruptcy, this is a VERY intelligent gamble. The expected value is 150 million dollars in my example. Sure he might go bankrupt. We all might. He also has the potential of a fine family fortune that generations of his heirs can spend. Those who can take risks, do take risks and should. That is how innovation happens. Steve Jobs could easily have gone bankrupt by creating Apple. In many ways Steve Jobs was horribly illogical and stupid. Yet he came out victorious didn't he. So did Bill Gates, despite stealing nearly everything he sold.
This Psystar guy is reaching critical mass. It is not child's play for Apple to kill him anymore. He can cry some awfully nasty things if Apple kills him. Perversely, in a court of law these 2 parties are forced to engage in an argument on the merits. The very fact that an argument will take place (with its risks for AAPL and potential payoff to Psystar) is a profound victory for Psystar.
A while ago the DVD Writer failed in my iMac, it took me over an hour (and around 40 euro for the taxi ride) to get to the repair centre, and I had to wait for around two weeks for the replacement to arrive, then I got take the two hour return trip (and another 40 Euro) to pick it up. Now I live in Dublin, so I am glad I am so close to a repair centre...
Just because there is store right next to you doesn't mean it is that way in the rest of the world.
Your original question was how is Apple repair service is different from Psystar (where your only choice is to mail the computer or HDD and wait for at least 3 weeks to get it back). I was not comparing the rest of the world to the US, I was comparing your options. Yes, sometimes it take time for a repair but not always. By the way, I live an hour away from Apple store too.
It happened to me once that my iMac required a new logic board and they were out of stock with 2 weeks waiting period. I called Apple and explain to them that I need my computer ASAP because I am working on my Masters thesis. Two days later the repair shop (not Apple store by the way) called and told me that they received the part this morning and my computer is ready.
So then don't buy it or go the hackintosh route, no one is forcing you to buy anything, some of you think you should be entitled to everything, if you can't afford to buy something, you save up and go and buy it, which is what I did. If I want a Benz and I can't afford it, I either find another cheaper car or I save up but no Mercedes is evil because their cars are expensive and I can't afford it.
Oh i have money, just not money i am willing to spend on Apple hardware. but thats not the problem. I dont really WANT OS X, it just would be nice to install it on MY pc not Apples pc.
i really dont want a Porsche, but i have a Chevy LS1 Powered sandrail, and i can afford Porsche 911 CV Joints (and buy them on the open market) would it be wrong for me to use these Porsche 911 CV Joints on something other than a Porsche? ( i really dont know i did not see an EULA in the box)
Really how is it that bad that OSX gets installed on a PC(especially when apple makes and installs OS X on PC's all day long)
Your original question was how is Apple repair service is different from Psystar (where your only choice is to mail the computer or HDD and wait for at least 3 weeks to get it back). I was not comparing the rest of the world to the US, I was comparing your options. Yes, sometimes it take time for a repair but not always. By the way, I live an hour away from Apple store too.
But at the end of the day, the Apple experience for me, is exactly the same as what you claim Psystar woul d, I had to take the machine in, wait two weeks and then get it back.
Apple support was no good (they even told me the wrong location for the repair centre)
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE
It happened to me once that my iMac required a new logic board and they were out of stock with 2 weeks waiting period. I called Apple and explain to them that I need my computer ASAP because I am working on my Masters thesis. Two days later the repair shop (not Apple store by the way) called and told me that they received the part this morning and my computer is ready.
The repair centre was nice to me, kept me updated about everything, more than Apple did, Apple made me ring the third party repair agent and organise everything, not the best service shortly after forking out over 2000 euro for the thing.
For a single guy who worrries not about bankruptcy, this is a VERY intelligent gamble. The expected value is 150 million dollars in my example. Sure he might go bankrupt. We all might. He also has the potential of a fine family fortune that generations of his heirs can spend.
He also has the potential to incur a debt that he and his family will be paying off for years.
Quote:
Those who can take risks, do take risks and should. That is how innovation happens.
Psystar is not an innovator. Next to zero engineering goes into their boxes.
Quote:
Steve Jobs could easily have gone bankrupt by creating Apple. In many ways Steve Jobs was horribly illogical and stupid. Yet he came out victorious didn't he. So did Bill Gates, despite stealing nearly everything he sold.
Both Jobs and Gates were innovators, pioneers and are successful in their field. Arguably Jobs and Gates stole ideas from each other and from others, but they reconciled their differences a decade ago. Apple and Microsoft have never been known to steal others' code as Psystar is doing.
In selling Mac clones at a discount (albeit unable to achieve the same performance), where is the market risk for Psystar?
Quote:
This Psystar guy is reaching critical mass. It is not child's play for Apple to kill him anymore. He can cry some awfully nasty things if Apple kills him. Perversely, in a court of law these 2 parties are forced to engage in an argument on the merits.
Boo-hoo! When I cry for Psystar, I cry for all infringers everywhere who just wanted to earn a decent living by illegally copying others' hard-earned works.
Quote:
The very fact that an argument will take place (with its risks for AAPL and potential payoff to Psystar) is a profound victory for Psystar.
This is just one battle, that also has its advantages for Apple, so it can not be profound. You need to look at the war.
Oh i have money, just not money i am willing to spend on Apple hardware. but thats not the problem. I dont really WANT OS X, it just would be nice to install it on MY pc not Apples pc.
Why should we care about your situation, if you don't really want Mac OS X? "Nice" doesn't mean diddly.
Quote:
i really dont want a Porsche, but i have a Chevy LS1 Powered sandrail, and i can afford Porsche 911 CV Joints (and buy them on the open market) would it be wrong for me to use these Porsche 911 CV Joints on something other than a Porsche? ( i really dont know i did not see an EULA in the box)
Really how is it that bad that OSX gets installed on a PC(especially when apple makes and installs OS X on PC's all day long)
By installing the CV joints, you're not copying them. You paid Porsche for the copy of the joints you're using. In Psystar's case, they are installing Mac OS X onto a non-Apple computer hard disk, making a copy that no one has paid Apple for. The retail box of Mac OS X does not come with permission to copy the OS onto any computer other than an Apple-branded one.
The arbitration is not binding. If things do not go Apple's way, they can still go
to trial. Psystar might be the one digging (a deeper hole).
I'm aware of that but I think AAPL mishandled it. I believe AAPL is inviting Dell and HP to pull a Psystar. They should've put the screw to Psystar immediately.
I believe AAPL has really bungled this case by entering into arbitration. I read it as a legal ploy to exhaust Psystar's legal options but it has backfired on AAPL.
If you "believe" that Apple obeying the orders of a judge is "bungling" their case ... then yes.... they bungled it!
Isn't it funny what people believe when they don't know the facts?
Oh i have money, just not money i am willing to spend on Apple hardware. but thats not the problem. I dont really WANT OS X, it just would be nice to install it on MY pc not Apples pc.
i really dont want a Porsche, but i have a Chevy LS1 Powered sandrail, and i can afford Porsche 911 CV Joints (and buy them on the open market) would it be wrong for me to use these Porsche 911 CV Joints on something other than a Porsche? ( i really dont know i did not see an EULA in the box)
Really how is it that bad that OSX gets installed on a PC(especially when apple makes and installs OS X on PC's all day long)
Why Is it so hard to understand that there is a difference between what you can do personally with your copy of OSX and what a business that's trying to make a profit can do with their copy of OSX.
The "fair use" laws only covers "personal use". So you can take your copy of OSX and put it on to your own PC if you want. Apple may not like it but they won't (and haven't) come after anyone that's done this. Just like the RIAA have not gone after anyone that uses some one else's music in their personal home movies.
This is why the OSX hack (x86) is free. Apple would have a hard time convicting a hacker if he claims he's only doing it as a hobby. But if the hacker tries to market that hack, it would be easy for Apple to get a conviction based on unauthorize use of some else's copyrighted material for commercial gain. It's no longer a "fair use" issue.
It's one thing for you to buy Porsche CV joints to install on your own vehicle. But it's a competely different matter if GM did this to the vehicles they sell and then advertise that you don't need to buy an expensive Porsche to own a car that handles like a Porsche because our cars uses patented Porsche technology. Do you think for a second that Porsche response is going to be "Great, we get to sell a lot of CV joints. This ought to make up for lost auto sales."
Now if the CV joints that Porsche uses is made by a third party and that third party also sells their CV joints to GM. Then GM can make the claim that their cars handles like a Porsche because they use the same technology found on a Porsche.
And don't let those people that think that "Mac" is a monopoly hear you say that it's just a 'PC". If a "Mac" is just another "PC", then Apple for sure don't have a monopoly in the "Mac market".
Why Is it so hard to understand that there is a difference between what you can do personally with your copy of OSX and what a business that's trying to make a profit can do with their copy of OSX.
The "fair use" laws only covers "personal use". So you can take your copy of OSX and put it on to your own PC if you want. Apple may not like it but they won't (and haven't) come after anyone that's done this. Just like the RIAA have not gone after anyone that uses some one else's music in their personal home movies.
I believe you're wrong there. Being for "personal use" isn't the sole criterion, maybe not even the most important criterion, and maybe even irrelevant in some cases for determining "fair use."
I am not a lawyer, but I don't believe "Fair Use" has been well defined through court rulings. There are just too many ways that creative works can be copied, distributed and used, and technology is changing too fast for the courts to keep up. One should note that manufacturers of DRMed DVD ripping software seem to be easily shut down when the mood strikes the movie studios, whereas copying of music from one's own CD onto other media for personal use seems to be immune to prosecution after one or more court rulings and, I believe, recording of television broadcasts has been ruled by the courts as being OK for personal use, too.
The Wikipedia is hardly authoritative but it is informative.
"[Fair Use] provides for the legal, non-licensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work under a four-factor balancing test. [...]
the factors to be considered shall include:
1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."
People might find the section on "Common Misunderstandings" very interesting:
wherein this little ditty is stated: "binding agreements such as contracts or license agreements may take precedence over fair use rights."
Quote:
This is why the OSX hack (x86) is free. Apple would have a hard time convicting a hacker if he claims he's only doing it as a hobby.
In contrast, Apple should have little difficulty going after a dongle manufacturer, where the only purpose for said dongle is to enable copyright infringement of Mac OS X.
It is illegal to sell someone else's product (Mac OS X) for personal profit. Therefore Psystar is breaking the law because the are selling OS X bundled with their computers for a profit. If they sold their computers and made you buy OS X they wouldn't be breaking any laws.
It is illegal to sell someone else's product (Mac OS X) for personal profit.
That isn't the problem. The issue stems from the fact that they are selling a derivative work without permission. There is nothing illegal about reselling an unmodified version of OSX. If I find a sucker willing to pay me more than what OSX is costs in retail I didn't violate any law. On the other hand if I modify the code and sell it I am illegally selling a derivative product. Were they selling an unmodified version of OSX and using EFIx to trick OSX into thinking that it is running on the same EFI that one would find on a Mac then you get into the issue of the EULA, which unlike derivative works is a far more gray area of law. Some contract law attorneys question the legality of shrink wrap EULAs, but there isn't much case law AFAIK to say how the courts would settle such a case. Copyright infringement seems like a much better legal strategy for Apple against Psystar.
Quote:
Therefore Psystar is breaking the law because the are selling OS X bundled with their computers for a profit. If they sold their computers and made you buy OS X they wouldn't be breaking any laws.
You could theoretically sell a computer that used EFIx in order to run OSX, but EFIx may violate DMCA at least within the USA. Only time will tell whether EFIx stays on the market within the USA. If EFIx ever becomes popular I wouldn't be surprised if Apple attempts to use DMCA to pull it from sale within the USA.
Comments
Resellers are not allowed to build a PC with a legal or illegal copy of Leopard and market it as such. Because that would be riding on Apple's success, and you're not allowed a free ride if Apple does not approve of it. Microsoft allows it, but Apple does not.
I do not think if someone buys a Psystar and the company tanks that they'll be left out in the cold, or that they'll own a brick for a computer. Psystar, a generic computer assembler, will be using generic components which are available all over eBay. If, and when, Apple wins this case and you find out that Snow Leopard has locked out your Psystar then you can always install other OSes or just keep your Leopard.
I wouldn't buy from them cause it will take weeks to get the machine fixed if something goes wrong since you have to mail it back to them every time.
And that is different from Apple how?
Something that you buy, for money, from Apple belongs to you. If someone buys a Mac OS X installation DVD from Apple for $129, Apple can't go to that person's house and take back the installation DVD.
First, when you buy a Mac OS X DVD you buy the media (the physical DVD) and you get a license to use the OS (program) not own it. Second, installing a software (OS or any other software) is considered copying (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_copyright). Third, Psystar already admitted that they violated Apple copyrights.
And that is different from Apple how?
Last month, my wifes MB top cover cracked. Took it to Apple store and got it replaced within 2 hours. Psystar don't have retail stores and therefore you have to mail your computer or your hard drive for simple problems such as Mac OS reinstallation.
Last month, my wifes MB top cover cracked. Took it to Apple store and got it replaced within 2 hours. Psystar don't have retail stores and therefore you have to mail your computer or your hard drive for simple problems such as Mac OS reinstallation.
A while ago the DVD Writer failed in my iMac, it took me over an hour (and around 40 euro for the taxi ride) to get to the repair centre, and I had to wait for around two weeks for the replacement to arrive, then I got take the two hour return trip (and another 40 Euro) to pick it up. Now I live in Dublin, so I am glad I am so close to a repair centre...
Just because there is store right next to you doesn't mean it is that way in the rest of the world.
First, when you buy a Mac OS X DVD you buy the media (the physical DVD) and you get a license to use the OS (program) not own it.
I paid for it, I have the receipt, I own it. It is absolutely mine to do whatever the heck I want to with it. I don't care what the license agreement says, I don't even recognize their right to have a EULA.
Imagine a flour manufacturer putting a "not to be used to making bread" clause on the bag because they also sell their own bread. No one would settle for that. Yet that's the same crap people are trying to pull with this intellectual property B.S.
I paid for it, I have the receipt, I own it. It is absolutely mine to do whatever the heck I want to with it. I don't care what the license agreement says, I don't even recognize their right to have a EULA.
Imagine a flour manufacturer putting a "not to be used to making bread" clause on the bag because they also sell their own bread. No one would settle for that. Yet that's the same crap people are trying to pull with this intellectual property B.S.
It is not the EULA that say you don't own the software, It is the copyright laws. Unless the owner of the copyrighted material state otherwise, you don't own the software you are licensed to use it (why do you think there is an open source license agreement?). Imagine if you wrote a book and someone bought it, photo copied it, and started selling it for $0.01. "He paid for it, he have the receipt, he own it. It is absolutely his to do whatever the heck he wants to with it." right? I don't so. Maybe then you will start to appreciate copyright laws. Software is no difference since it is a set of written code. If you are a programmer then you will know that two programmers can write two different codes that can basically do the exact the same thing.
Me and my colleagues have written few engineering programs that we used in our firm few years back. Even though we didn't sell it commercially some copies somehow were leaked to one of our competitors. Our lawyers sent them a letter and they agreed to stop using our software (We really could not tell but at least this stopped them from marketing the program as their own). Now, If it wasn't for the copyright laws we would have wasted the hundreds of man hours we spent on developing the softwares.
I paid for it, I have the receipt, I own it. It is absolutely mine to do whatever the heck I want to with it.
So you now own the software do you? It's not Apple's Mac OS X? It's now bsenka OS X. How are you people so naive?
What do you think will happen to the IT guy who buys ONE copy of Windows Seven, and then proceeds to upgrade his company's 10,000 PCs?
"I paid for it, I have the receipt, I own it. It is absolutely mine to do whatever the heck I want to with it."
Oh. That's OK then.
Do you have any idea what you're talking about?
When a copyrightable work is registered with the Library of Congress, its owner can request and be awarded "treble" damages (3X the actual damages) by the court from an infringer. Apple also has trademark issues to reconcile with Psystar. Psystar might just be negotiating itself into bankruptcy here, with the only question being how badly.
If I have nothing, and I take the following gamble:
50% zero; bankruptcy
50% Three hundred million dollars
For a single guy who worrries not about bankruptcy, this is a VERY intelligent gamble. The expected value is 150 million dollars in my example. Sure he might go bankrupt. We all might. He also has the potential of a fine family fortune that generations of his heirs can spend. Those who can take risks, do take risks and should. That is how innovation happens. Steve Jobs could easily have gone bankrupt by creating Apple. In many ways Steve Jobs was horribly illogical and stupid. Yet he came out victorious didn't he. So did Bill Gates, despite stealing nearly everything he sold.
This Psystar guy is reaching critical mass. It is not child's play for Apple to kill him anymore. He can cry some awfully nasty things if Apple kills him. Perversely, in a court of law these 2 parties are forced to engage in an argument on the merits. The very fact that an argument will take place (with its risks for AAPL and potential payoff to Psystar) is a profound victory for Psystar.
A while ago the DVD Writer failed in my iMac, it took me over an hour (and around 40 euro for the taxi ride) to get to the repair centre, and I had to wait for around two weeks for the replacement to arrive, then I got take the two hour return trip (and another 40 Euro) to pick it up. Now I live in Dublin, so I am glad I am so close to a repair centre...
Just because there is store right next to you doesn't mean it is that way in the rest of the world.
Your original question was how is Apple repair service is different from Psystar (where your only choice is to mail the computer or HDD and wait for at least 3 weeks to get it back). I was not comparing the rest of the world to the US, I was comparing your options. Yes, sometimes it take time for a repair but not always. By the way, I live an hour away from Apple store too.
It happened to me once that my iMac required a new logic board and they were out of stock with 2 weeks waiting period. I called Apple and explain to them that I need my computer ASAP because I am working on my Masters thesis. Two days later the repair shop (not Apple store by the way) called and told me that they received the part this morning and my computer is ready.
So then don't buy it or go the hackintosh route, no one is forcing you to buy anything, some of you think you should be entitled to everything, if you can't afford to buy something, you save up and go and buy it, which is what I did. If I want a Benz and I can't afford it, I either find another cheaper car or I save up but no Mercedes is evil because their cars are expensive and I can't afford it.
Oh i have money, just not money i am willing to spend on Apple hardware. but thats not the problem. I dont really WANT OS X, it just would be nice to install it on MY pc not Apples pc.
i really dont want a Porsche, but i have a Chevy LS1 Powered sandrail, and i can afford Porsche 911 CV Joints (and buy them on the open market) would it be wrong for me to use these Porsche 911 CV Joints on something other than a Porsche? ( i really dont know i did not see an EULA in the box)
Really how is it that bad that OSX gets installed on a PC(especially when apple makes and installs OS X on PC's all day long)
Your original question was how is Apple repair service is different from Psystar (where your only choice is to mail the computer or HDD and wait for at least 3 weeks to get it back). I was not comparing the rest of the world to the US, I was comparing your options. Yes, sometimes it take time for a repair but not always. By the way, I live an hour away from Apple store too.
But at the end of the day, the Apple experience for me, is exactly the same as what you claim Psystar woul d, I had to take the machine in, wait two weeks and then get it back.
Apple support was no good (they even told me the wrong location for the repair centre)
It happened to me once that my iMac required a new logic board and they were out of stock with 2 weeks waiting period. I called Apple and explain to them that I need my computer ASAP because I am working on my Masters thesis. Two days later the repair shop (not Apple store by the way) called and told me that they received the part this morning and my computer is ready.
The repair centre was nice to me, kept me updated about everything, more than Apple did, Apple made me ring the third party repair agent and organise everything, not the best service shortly after forking out over 2000 euro for the thing.
- Being a shady ass PC dealer: Guilty
If i want shady I'll sit under a tree. Yeathx
For a single guy who worrries not about bankruptcy, this is a VERY intelligent gamble. The expected value is 150 million dollars in my example. Sure he might go bankrupt. We all might. He also has the potential of a fine family fortune that generations of his heirs can spend.
He also has the potential to incur a debt that he and his family will be paying off for years.
Those who can take risks, do take risks and should. That is how innovation happens.
Psystar is not an innovator. Next to zero engineering goes into their boxes.
Steve Jobs could easily have gone bankrupt by creating Apple. In many ways Steve Jobs was horribly illogical and stupid. Yet he came out victorious didn't he. So did Bill Gates, despite stealing nearly everything he sold.
Both Jobs and Gates were innovators, pioneers and are successful in their field. Arguably Jobs and Gates stole ideas from each other and from others, but they reconciled their differences a decade ago. Apple and Microsoft have never been known to steal others' code as Psystar is doing.
In selling Mac clones at a discount (albeit unable to achieve the same performance), where is the market risk for Psystar?
This Psystar guy is reaching critical mass. It is not child's play for Apple to kill him anymore. He can cry some awfully nasty things if Apple kills him. Perversely, in a court of law these 2 parties are forced to engage in an argument on the merits.
Boo-hoo! When I cry for Psystar, I cry for all infringers everywhere who just wanted to earn a decent living by illegally copying others' hard-earned works.
The very fact that an argument will take place (with its risks for AAPL and potential payoff to Psystar) is a profound victory for Psystar.
This is just one battle, that also has its advantages for Apple, so it can not be profound. You need to look at the war.
Oh i have money, just not money i am willing to spend on Apple hardware. but thats not the problem. I dont really WANT OS X, it just would be nice to install it on MY pc not Apples pc.
Why should we care about your situation, if you don't really want Mac OS X? "Nice" doesn't mean diddly.
i really dont want a Porsche, but i have a Chevy LS1 Powered sandrail, and i can afford Porsche 911 CV Joints (and buy them on the open market) would it be wrong for me to use these Porsche 911 CV Joints on something other than a Porsche? ( i really dont know i did not see an EULA in the box)
Really how is it that bad that OSX gets installed on a PC(especially when apple makes and installs OS X on PC's all day long)
By installing the CV joints, you're not copying them. You paid Porsche for the copy of the joints you're using. In Psystar's case, they are installing Mac OS X onto a non-Apple computer hard disk, making a copy that no one has paid Apple for. The retail box of Mac OS X does not come with permission to copy the OS onto any computer other than an Apple-branded one.
The arbitration is not binding. If things do not go Apple's way, they can still go
to trial. Psystar might be the one digging (a deeper hole).
I'm aware of that but I think AAPL mishandled it. I believe AAPL is inviting Dell and HP to pull a Psystar. They should've put the screw to Psystar immediately.
I believe AAPL has really bungled this case by entering into arbitration. I read it as a legal ploy to exhaust Psystar's legal options but it has backfired on AAPL.
If you "believe" that Apple obeying the orders of a judge is "bungling" their case ... then yes.... they bungled it!
Isn't it funny what people believe when they don't know the facts?
Oh i have money, just not money i am willing to spend on Apple hardware. but thats not the problem. I dont really WANT OS X, it just would be nice to install it on MY pc not Apples pc.
i really dont want a Porsche, but i have a Chevy LS1 Powered sandrail, and i can afford Porsche 911 CV Joints (and buy them on the open market) would it be wrong for me to use these Porsche 911 CV Joints on something other than a Porsche? ( i really dont know i did not see an EULA in the box)
Really how is it that bad that OSX gets installed on a PC(especially when apple makes and installs OS X on PC's all day long)
Why Is it so hard to understand that there is a difference between what you can do personally with your copy of OSX and what a business that's trying to make a profit can do with their copy of OSX.
The "fair use" laws only covers "personal use". So you can take your copy of OSX and put it on to your own PC if you want. Apple may not like it but they won't (and haven't) come after anyone that's done this. Just like the RIAA have not gone after anyone that uses some one else's music in their personal home movies.
This is why the OSX hack (x86) is free. Apple would have a hard time convicting a hacker if he claims he's only doing it as a hobby. But if the hacker tries to market that hack, it would be easy for Apple to get a conviction based on unauthorize use of some else's copyrighted material for commercial gain. It's no longer a "fair use" issue.
It's one thing for you to buy Porsche CV joints to install on your own vehicle. But it's a competely different matter if GM did this to the vehicles they sell and then advertise that you don't need to buy an expensive Porsche to own a car that handles like a Porsche because our cars uses patented Porsche technology. Do you think for a second that Porsche response is going to be "Great, we get to sell a lot of CV joints. This ought to make up for lost auto sales."
Now if the CV joints that Porsche uses is made by a third party and that third party also sells their CV joints to GM. Then GM can make the claim that their cars handles like a Porsche because they use the same technology found on a Porsche.
And don't let those people that think that "Mac" is a monopoly hear you say that it's just a 'PC". If a "Mac" is just another "PC", then Apple for sure don't have a monopoly in the "Mac market".
Why Is it so hard to understand that there is a difference between what you can do personally with your copy of OSX and what a business that's trying to make a profit can do with their copy of OSX.
The "fair use" laws only covers "personal use". So you can take your copy of OSX and put it on to your own PC if you want. Apple may not like it but they won't (and haven't) come after anyone that's done this. Just like the RIAA have not gone after anyone that uses some one else's music in their personal home movies.
I believe you're wrong there. Being for "personal use" isn't the sole criterion, maybe not even the most important criterion, and maybe even irrelevant in some cases for determining "fair use."
I am not a lawyer, but I don't believe "Fair Use" has been well defined through court rulings. There are just too many ways that creative works can be copied, distributed and used, and technology is changing too fast for the courts to keep up. One should note that manufacturers of DRMed DVD ripping software seem to be easily shut down when the mood strikes the movie studios, whereas copying of music from one's own CD onto other media for personal use seems to be immune to prosecution after one or more court rulings and, I believe, recording of television broadcasts has been ruled by the courts as being OK for personal use, too.
The Wikipedia is hardly authoritative but it is informative.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use
"[Fair Use] provides for the legal, non-licensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work under a four-factor balancing test. [...]
the factors to be considered shall include:
1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."
People might find the section on "Common Misunderstandings" very interesting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_us...understandings
wherein this little ditty is stated: "binding agreements such as contracts or license agreements may take precedence over fair use rights."
This is why the OSX hack (x86) is free. Apple would have a hard time convicting a hacker if he claims he's only doing it as a hobby.
In contrast, Apple should have little difficulty going after a dongle manufacturer, where the only purpose for said dongle is to enable copyright infringement of Mac OS X.
It is illegal to sell someone else's product (Mac OS X) for personal profit.
That isn't the problem. The issue stems from the fact that they are selling a derivative work without permission. There is nothing illegal about reselling an unmodified version of OSX. If I find a sucker willing to pay me more than what OSX is costs in retail I didn't violate any law. On the other hand if I modify the code and sell it I am illegally selling a derivative product. Were they selling an unmodified version of OSX and using EFIx to trick OSX into thinking that it is running on the same EFI that one would find on a Mac then you get into the issue of the EULA, which unlike derivative works is a far more gray area of law. Some contract law attorneys question the legality of shrink wrap EULAs, but there isn't much case law AFAIK to say how the courts would settle such a case. Copyright infringement seems like a much better legal strategy for Apple against Psystar.
Therefore Psystar is breaking the law because the are selling OS X bundled with their computers for a profit. If they sold their computers and made you buy OS X they wouldn't be breaking any laws.
You could theoretically sell a computer that used EFIx in order to run OSX, but EFIx may violate DMCA at least within the USA. Only time will tell whether EFIx stays on the market within the USA. If EFIx ever becomes popular I wouldn't be surprised if Apple attempts to use DMCA to pull it from sale within the USA.