So, you don't think that they loved everything Hitler did? Did you ever have a history class? Most of the party faithful were zealots! They LIKED Hitler's final solution for the Jews. They BELIEVED in eugenics and the creation of the Master Race. Hitler absolutely had fans. The fact that the Nazi party is still around should be a major clue for you.
Psystar is bound to lose because no-one can challenge the great holy AAPL. Why I was praying to Master Steve about this just the other day. His boots had the slight taste of lemon when I licked them. This tells me Psystar is going to get the reputation of a yellow cowardly fruit punch gone just slightly rotten.
Don't get me wrong. Psystar could survive weeks or even months. But although the small, unimportant US "Constitution" and "Sherman Anti-Trust Act" (lol) protects Psystar, or so they believe, AAPL is really above and beyond all this mishmash and jibba jabba. Back when Steven originated the human race about 10,000 years ago, he was careful to avoid any direct challenge to AAPL, the source of our light and knowledge. What is true is AAPL. What is false and wicked is Psystar. This is all a parable that Steve is using to teach us a lesson. Don't be fooled, friends, not everything Steven does can be understood by our small human minds. You have to let go of your human "rules" and "thoughts" because they are useless against AAPL. There is no Dana only Zoul.
Reading your post represents several seconds that I'll never get back.
There is NOTHING in violation of anti-trust in Apple's computer portfolio that I know of (their music offerings are a completely different animal). Apple claims to support an OS on only one platform. Their own. Sun did this for years, as did DEC. Apple is selling a platform, not an operating system. Not hardware. The package deal. In years past, one couldn't just choose to stick your favorite OS on any hardware, so these issues were effectively absent. Tru64 doesn't run on Sparc, etc. The use of mainstream components doesn't change the binding nature of their license.
Actually, there is some history on Psystar's side, but it's quite old, so newer rulings may override them.
In the '70s IBM was forced to allow their operating system, MVS, to run on other manufacturer's hardware. This allowed mainframes from Amdahl and Hitachi as well as IBM to run MVS. In fact, IBM was forced to publish a book (still available today) called "principles of operation, that detailed the requirements from a computer that runs MVS.
That same IBM decided to add file permissions to MVS so that not every user would be able to read or modify every file. Sounds basic enough. Should be in every operating system, right? Wrong, said other software vendors. IBM was forced to modularize the permission subsystem, so that other vendors could compete with IBM. Still today, IBM mainframes (or rather, their administrators) can choose from at least three security packages, only one of which is from IBM.
That last case was the precedent that people thought would lead a court to force Microsoft to unbundle Internet Explorer. If file permissions are not part of an OS, a browser definitely isn't.
Still, the Microsoft ruling is more recent, so I'm not sure that Psystar has a case. OTOH saying that Apple has the right to force people who want to buy the OS to also buy a piece of hardware, may be right, but also may not be right. That's for a court to decide.
IMO a legal system that takes so long to start trial is seriously flawed. But that's all legal system all over the world.
There is a law in my town that says you can't drive over 55 miles per hour on a certain intersection. My friend got pulled over for driving 85. Now a court hasn't ruled that he in fact was speeding yet, however, I think it fairly certain that we can guess he will be found liable based on the clear violation of the posted speed limit.
Here Intellectual Property law is just about as clear. Now it is true, a judge could come back and say something else, but it is highly unlikely. Moveover, even if it does Apple can remedy the situation by charging an outrageously expensive full install version of it's OS, and an upgrade version. To get the upgrade version you must have 1) either paid for the full install version, or 2) bought a Mac.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackSummerNight
How do you know that the law will support apple? Has a ruling been release. I think not.
I don't give two shits about Apple's business model. I want to load OS X on what I want. It's a monopoly and they should be stopped.
Anti-Mac? I own a iMac, Mackbook Pro, and have bought 2 iPhones. Just because I don't agree with them doesn't mean I'm Anti-anything.
Boohoo. If you were so adamant to FOSS and getting Apple to open up it's operating system you wouldn't have bought so much of their hardware. Your argument is neither logic nor substantive.
These Psystar whiners just aren't getting it. They are either ignorant, naive, spoiled, whatever. They feel they are entitled to buy whatever OS they want to place on their own personal system.
Why aren't you complaining about the inability to load the XBOX, or PS3, or Nintentdo OS on your system? Don't they after all, use many off-the-shelf components too?
Do you think if any other company decided to take the OS from one of those "packaged" systems and create their own that they would not fear the wrath of the hammer falling on them when the respective companies burn them at the stake?
Whine about the other companies that have been doing exactly what Apple has been doing with their systems and then just maybe, you may have a better argument. Until then, you're just another typical sad example of what happens when your parents unlocks you out from their basement.
Windows and Linux is a different model. The don't make hardware. Get over it.
Intellectual property rights do mean something. I hope Psystar is taken to the cleaners on this.
... Its vast and complex hierarchy was structured like a pyramid, with party-controlled mass organizations for youth, women, workers, and other groups at the bottom, party members and officials in the middle, and Hitler and his closest associates at the top wielding undisputed authority.[/B]
You should read the Constitution. Intellectual Property Law (e.g. the Copyright law Apple's case is based on) is actually directly grounded in the Constitution. Specifically, Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution, sometimes referred to as the Copyright or Patent clause, empowers the United States Congress: ?To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."
Under the US Constitution, Apple has an exclusive right to it's work. So, for instance, it can decide who to distribute it's software.
Pystar relies on anti-trust law, which any legal expert would tell you is a stretch. More importantly, anti-trust law is not referred to or promoted in the Constitution at all. Instead, it exists because Congress has broad authority to regulate Commerce. The exercise to regulate such commerce, however, must comply with the Constitution itself. In other words, anti-trust laws cannot interfere with Apple's Copyright in OSX.
Moreover, Apple isn't doing anything different then any other hardware maker. For instance, Microsoft isn't allowing other companies to install an OS on it's hardware. Heck, it isn't even allowing Windows to be installed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwik
But although the small, unimportant US "Constitution" and "Sherman Anti-Trust Act" (lol) protects Psystar, or so they believe, AAPL is really above and beyond all this mishmash and jibba jabba. Back when Steven originated the human race about 10,000 years ago, he was careful to avoid any direct challenge to AAPL, the source of our light and knowledge. What is true is AAPL. What is false and wicked is Psystar. This is all a parable that Steve is using to teach us a lesson. Don't be fooled, friends, not everything Steven does can be understood by our small human minds. You have to let go of your human "rules" and "thoughts" because they are useless against AAPL. There is no Dana only Zoul.
So, you don't think that they loved everything Hitler did? Did you ever have a history class? Most of the party faithful were zealots! They LIKED Hitler's final solution for the Jews. They BELIEVED in eugenics and the creation of the Master Race. Hitler absolutely had fans. The fact that the Nazi party is still around should be a major clue for you.
The Vichy were a puppet government who decided that giving in to the the Nazis was preferable to continued fighting.
I don't think they loved everything he did exactly, but regardless in my opinion, the Vichy was a digrace to France and to Europe.
Incidentally, belief in Eugenics was limited to a fairly small section of the upper eschlons of the Nazi party, most other people would not have understood what it meant or what the theories were.
You almost have this right. Sure, there is a license between Apple and myself. However, the license is only legally enforceable to the extend Apple's conditions are legal. Copyright allows the fair use of copyrightable software even if the use is prohibited under the license. Fair use generally protects personal use, not commercial use. If I were to take OSX and install it on a hackintosh, Apple would likely have no legal argument against me.
Where Psystar falls into trouble is that it's use is commercial in nature. It is intending to compete with Apple. That is not fair use and under a strict copyright argument Pystar would lose.
Psystar also falls into trouble with Apple's trademark. This is because when people buy a Psystar machine that is unsupported by APple and it has a problem that Psystar doesn't fix, who do you think they are going to get pissed at? Hint it will not be Psystar. This diminishes the good will Apple has built up in it's Trademark.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stonybrookadam
Which comes to the crux of the issue. Apple does not license MacOS on any hardware save their own. Even if possible, it is still ILLEGAL to make a "hackintosh". Even if you buy a boxed copy of MacOS. You've bought a license. Both parties have to abide by that license. If you don't agree, take the software back to the store, and get a refund. Installing MacOS on a non Apple computer is NOT covered in the license, and is the same as stealing MS Office or downloading music. You can do it, many people do, but it's still illegal.
Americans (yes, I'm one too) are FAR too entitlement-minded. You don't "deserve" MacOS. Anywhere. You ESPECIALLY don't get to choose the hardware on which the license is valid. If you like the OS, not the hardware, you have a tough decision to make. Suck it up, use the hardware, or walk to the next option. I will point out that it's also illegal to buy a mac, format the drive, and use that "license" for a hackintosh. Not being installed on an Apple product, not valid for a license. You can't dictate what is being sold. Take it as is, or move on.
Telling Apple that they must cripple their software to NOT be installable on other hardware is like telling breweries that they must make their bottles incompatible with drinkers under the legal age. It's up to the consumer to abide by the law, or be punished, not the manufacturer to make sure that no illegal activity occurs. The scary thing is, in this country, I can imagine both being required in the near future.
"I believe AAPL 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. Psystar is now rubbing the mediation process in AAPL's face. The tail is wagging the dog!"
Psystar rubbing BluRay and notebooks in AAPL's face bought the company to its senses! Good.
Why don't you get Psystar to get the blu ray discs to actually play movies in Mac OSX?
Irrelevant - anti-trust laws are there to protect consumers and the market, not companies. Ask Microsoft.
I agree, which is why I said "the answer is not for companies to just go ahead without permission, as Psystar have done, but to negotiate in the propper manner."
I know actually reading what a person posted can be less interesting than arguing with what you wanted them to say... but I'm all for giving it a go.
I totally agree with this. I am not sure that Windows 'fell prey' to anything, as it has 92% of the market and created a $300bn company. I guess success is relative though.
Well maybe Apple doesn't want to be like Microsoft.
I realize there are hundreds of morons here who are perfectly fine with Apple deciding exactly what is best for them for their computer needs. (Shitty displays, lack of ports, lack of an ultra-portable, lack of a small/mid tower, lack of upgrades, etc, etc)
But there are some of us in the real world, who can make our own decisions.
Psystar if you open up a donation for legal fees let us know.
Go into the Windows world, you'll be happy there, lots of choices there.
Why don't you get Psystar to get the blu ray discs to actually play movies in Mac OSX?
I'd like to see AAPL put Psystar out of business. They're guilty of blatant copyright infringement. If hackers want to clone OS X on their PCs as a hobby I have no objection. I do object to a company looting AAPL's intellectual property for a profit.
Comments
I wouldn't call collaborators 'fans'.
So, you don't think that they loved everything Hitler did? Did you ever have a history class? Most of the party faithful were zealots! They LIKED Hitler's final solution for the Jews. They BELIEVED in eugenics and the creation of the Master Race. Hitler absolutely had fans. The fact that the Nazi party is still around should be a major clue for you.
Psystar is bound to lose because no-one can challenge the great holy AAPL. Why I was praying to Master Steve about this just the other day. His boots had the slight taste of lemon when I licked them. This tells me Psystar is going to get the reputation of a yellow cowardly fruit punch gone just slightly rotten.
Don't get me wrong. Psystar could survive weeks or even months. But although the small, unimportant US "Constitution" and "Sherman Anti-Trust Act" (lol) protects Psystar, or so they believe, AAPL is really above and beyond all this mishmash and jibba jabba. Back when Steven originated the human race about 10,000 years ago, he was careful to avoid any direct challenge to AAPL, the source of our light and knowledge. What is true is AAPL. What is false and wicked is Psystar. This is all a parable that Steve is using to teach us a lesson. Don't be fooled, friends, not everything Steven does can be understood by our small human minds. You have to let go of your human "rules" and "thoughts" because they are useless against AAPL. There is no Dana only Zoul.
Reading your post represents several seconds that I'll never get back.
There is NOTHING in violation of anti-trust in Apple's computer portfolio that I know of (their music offerings are a completely different animal). Apple claims to support an OS on only one platform. Their own. Sun did this for years, as did DEC. Apple is selling a platform, not an operating system. Not hardware. The package deal. In years past, one couldn't just choose to stick your favorite OS on any hardware, so these issues were effectively absent. Tru64 doesn't run on Sparc, etc. The use of mainstream components doesn't change the binding nature of their license.
Actually, there is some history on Psystar's side, but it's quite old, so newer rulings may override them.
In the '70s IBM was forced to allow their operating system, MVS, to run on other manufacturer's hardware. This allowed mainframes from Amdahl and Hitachi as well as IBM to run MVS. In fact, IBM was forced to publish a book (still available today) called "principles of operation, that detailed the requirements from a computer that runs MVS.
That same IBM decided to add file permissions to MVS so that not every user would be able to read or modify every file. Sounds basic enough. Should be in every operating system, right? Wrong, said other software vendors. IBM was forced to modularize the permission subsystem, so that other vendors could compete with IBM. Still today, IBM mainframes (or rather, their administrators) can choose from at least three security packages, only one of which is from IBM.
That last case was the precedent that people thought would lead a court to force Microsoft to unbundle Internet Explorer. If file permissions are not part of an OS, a browser definitely isn't.
Still, the Microsoft ruling is more recent, so I'm not sure that Psystar has a case. OTOH saying that Apple has the right to force people who want to buy the OS to also buy a piece of hardware, may be right, but also may not be right. That's for a court to decide.
IMO a legal system that takes so long to start trial is seriously flawed. But that's all legal system all over the world.
Here Intellectual Property law is just about as clear. Now it is true, a judge could come back and say something else, but it is highly unlikely. Moveover, even if it does Apple can remedy the situation by charging an outrageously expensive full install version of it's OS, and an upgrade version. To get the upgrade version you must have 1) either paid for the full install version, or 2) bought a Mac.
How do you know that the law will support apple? Has a ruling been release. I think not.
I don't give two shits about Apple's business model. I want to load OS X on what I want. It's a monopoly and they should be stopped.
Anti-Mac? I own a iMac, Mackbook Pro, and have bought 2 iPhones. Just because I don't agree with them doesn't mean I'm Anti-anything.
Boohoo. If you were so adamant to FOSS and getting Apple to open up it's operating system you wouldn't have bought so much of their hardware. Your argument is neither logic nor substantive.
Why aren't you complaining about the inability to load the XBOX, or PS3, or Nintentdo OS on your system? Don't they after all, use many off-the-shelf components too?
Do you think if any other company decided to take the OS from one of those "packaged" systems and create their own that they would not fear the wrath of the hammer falling on them when the respective companies burn them at the stake?
Whine about the other companies that have been doing exactly what Apple has been doing with their systems and then just maybe, you may have a better argument. Until then, you're just another typical sad example of what happens when your parents unlocks you out from their basement.
Windows and Linux is a different model. The don't make hardware. Get over it.
Intellectual property rights do mean something. I hope Psystar is taken to the cleaners on this.
... Its vast and complex hierarchy was structured like a pyramid, with party-controlled mass organizations for youth, women, workers, and other groups at the bottom, party members and officials in the middle, and Hitler and his closest associates at the top wielding undisputed authority.[/B]
You mean something like this:
Under the US Constitution, Apple has an exclusive right to it's work. So, for instance, it can decide who to distribute it's software.
Pystar relies on anti-trust law, which any legal expert would tell you is a stretch. More importantly, anti-trust law is not referred to or promoted in the Constitution at all. Instead, it exists because Congress has broad authority to regulate Commerce. The exercise to regulate such commerce, however, must comply with the Constitution itself. In other words, anti-trust laws cannot interfere with Apple's Copyright in OSX.
Moreover, Apple isn't doing anything different then any other hardware maker. For instance, Microsoft isn't allowing other companies to install an OS on it's hardware. Heck, it isn't even allowing Windows to be installed.
But although the small, unimportant US "Constitution" and "Sherman Anti-Trust Act" (lol) protects Psystar, or so they believe, AAPL is really above and beyond all this mishmash and jibba jabba. Back when Steven originated the human race about 10,000 years ago, he was careful to avoid any direct challenge to AAPL, the source of our light and knowledge. What is true is AAPL. What is false and wicked is Psystar. This is all a parable that Steve is using to teach us a lesson. Don't be fooled, friends, not everything Steven does can be understood by our small human minds. You have to let go of your human "rules" and "thoughts" because they are useless against AAPL. There is no Dana only Zoul.
So, you don't think that they loved everything Hitler did? Did you ever have a history class? Most of the party faithful were zealots! They LIKED Hitler's final solution for the Jews. They BELIEVED in eugenics and the creation of the Master Race. Hitler absolutely had fans. The fact that the Nazi party is still around should be a major clue for you.
The Vichy were a puppet government who decided that giving in to the the Nazis was preferable to continued fighting.
I don't think they loved everything he did exactly, but regardless in my opinion, the Vichy was a digrace to France and to Europe.
Incidentally, belief in Eugenics was limited to a fairly small section of the upper eschlons of the Nazi party, most other people would not have understood what it meant or what the theories were.
You mean something like this:
Good Lord, annuder conspiracy nut.
Outside of a historian's intrigue, can you give some examples, some names, past or present, fans of Hitler?
Just curious...
Good one, looks like Der Fuhrer's great grandson.
Where Psystar falls into trouble is that it's use is commercial in nature. It is intending to compete with Apple. That is not fair use and under a strict copyright argument Pystar would lose.
Psystar also falls into trouble with Apple's trademark. This is because when people buy a Psystar machine that is unsupported by APple and it has a problem that Psystar doesn't fix, who do you think they are going to get pissed at? Hint it will not be Psystar. This diminishes the good will Apple has built up in it's Trademark.
Which comes to the crux of the issue. Apple does not license MacOS on any hardware save their own. Even if possible, it is still ILLEGAL to make a "hackintosh". Even if you buy a boxed copy of MacOS. You've bought a license. Both parties have to abide by that license. If you don't agree, take the software back to the store, and get a refund. Installing MacOS on a non Apple computer is NOT covered in the license, and is the same as stealing MS Office or downloading music. You can do it, many people do, but it's still illegal.
Americans (yes, I'm one too) are FAR too entitlement-minded. You don't "deserve" MacOS. Anywhere. You ESPECIALLY don't get to choose the hardware on which the license is valid. If you like the OS, not the hardware, you have a tough decision to make. Suck it up, use the hardware, or walk to the next option. I will point out that it's also illegal to buy a mac, format the drive, and use that "license" for a hackintosh. Not being installed on an Apple product, not valid for a license. You can't dictate what is being sold. Take it as is, or move on.
Telling Apple that they must cripple their software to NOT be installable on other hardware is like telling breweries that they must make their bottles incompatible with drinkers under the legal age. It's up to the consumer to abide by the law, or be punished, not the manufacturer to make sure that no illegal activity occurs. The scary thing is, in this country, I can imagine both being required in the near future.
As I posted last week...
"I believe AAPL 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. Psystar is now rubbing the mediation process in AAPL's face. The tail is wagging the dog!"
Psystar rubbing BluRay and notebooks in AAPL's face bought the company to its senses! Good.
Why don't you get Psystar to get the blu ray discs to actually play movies in Mac OSX?
I don't give two shits about Apple's business model. I want to load OS X on what I want. It's a monopoly and they should be stopped.
Anti-Mac? I own a iMac, Mackbook Pro, and have bought 2 iPhones. Just because I don't agree with them doesn't mean I'm Anti-anything.
Go the hackintosh route if you want that, no one is stopping you.
Irrelevant - anti-trust laws are there to protect consumers and the market, not companies. Ask Microsoft.
I agree, which is why I said "the answer is not for companies to just go ahead without permission, as Psystar have done, but to negotiate in the propper manner."
I know actually reading what a person posted can be less interesting than arguing with what you wanted them to say... but I'm all for giving it a go.
I totally agree with this. I am not sure that Windows 'fell prey' to anything, as it has 92% of the market and created a $300bn company. I guess success is relative though.
Well maybe Apple doesn't want to be like Microsoft.
+100 for Psystar!!!
I realize there are hundreds of morons here who are perfectly fine with Apple deciding exactly what is best for them for their computer needs. (Shitty displays, lack of ports, lack of an ultra-portable, lack of a small/mid tower, lack of upgrades, etc, etc)
But there are some of us in the real world, who can make our own decisions.
Psystar if you open up a donation for legal fees let us know.
Go into the Windows world, you'll be happy there, lots of choices there.
Why don't you get Psystar to get the blu ray discs to actually play movies in Mac OSX?
I'd like to see AAPL put Psystar out of business. They're guilty of blatant copyright infringement. If hackers want to clone OS X on their PCs as a hobby I have no objection. I do object to a company looting AAPL's intellectual property for a profit.
if the law was clearly on Apple's side then why have they agreed to a trial in a years time?
The only company to win from this Psystar, imagine how many they could sell in that time??
I think its Apple who are stalling, maybe trying to do a deal with them.
in any case I'll always root for the little guy..
Right I'm sure Psystar will put Apple out of business soon by selling their crap computers.
It died with BHO.
hahahaha.