Pystart bytes the dust.

[computoman]

What a shame.........

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1137486/psystar-files

[tokenuser]

What a shame.........

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1137486/psystar-filesI think you mean "what a sham".

Pystar were in the wrong for two reasons:
1. Breaking the Apple EULA.
2. Using public source / community developed code to do it.

If you've followed along with their history (http://government.zdnet.com/?p=3761), you'll see it was a dodgy operation right from the start.

[computoman]

Only on user agreements 10.4.4 or later does it specifically say that you can only run Apple osx only on Apple equipment. But that is in direct conflict with the Copyright code which says you can legally ADAPT a program and there is no specific limitation to particular hardware. Personally, I think Apple's eula is morally wrong, but if a user does not use Apple hardware Apple has no liability under normal circumstances for the non-standard use. If and I say only if Pystar legally paid for each copy of the os used, Apple allegedly has no grounds to stop them. ianal. I have never seen osx-intel sold separately unless they have some kind of special mass license agreement . the osx-ppc version has always been sold separately. If Pystar had been smart they would have commandeered a bunch of old Apple cases then modified them for pc motherboard use. It can be done. If you can put a non apple part such as pci card or hard drive inside, why not a motherboard.

If I remember right, there was allegedly another case where dvd decryption software was modified to run on linux. The case was eventually dismissed for the same reason.

i

Us code collection: TITLE 17 > CHAPTER 1 > § 117

§ 117. Limitations on exclusive rights: Computer programs
(a) Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy.? Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the making of another copy or ADAPTATION of that computer program provided:
(1) that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other manner, or
(2) that such new copy or adaptation is for archival purposes only and that all archival copies are destroyed in the event that continued possession of the computer program should cease to be rightful.

[gta_bmx]

Apple's strict about their OS. A few years ago I was visiting my brother and his wife, and their iMac had been acting wonky lately and wouldn't get on the internet. It was their only computer -- the family computer. They had bought it off of CL for $200 and of course it came with no OS disks (why do people lose those?). So I called an Apple "Genius" at the local Apple store and asked if we could buy the version of the OS that came with this particular iMac so I could reinstall it. They said they don't do that, they don't carry old OS's, and that we'd have to drop like $250 (if memory serves) for the latest version of the Apple OS. I would have gone up to like $80 for the OS disks.

If it were a Windows machine, it'd have a COA on it, and all I'd need to do is borrow a Win 2000 or XP disc to reload the OS. The Apple Genius I talked to may have been wrong. I should have asked to talk to the manager. I'm sure Apple has a way to replace the OS that came with your machine because the iMac was obviously a GENUINE Apple Mac and had a legit version of the OS on it.

My brother found an Apple expert and bought him Indian food, and the guy was nice enough to bring over OS disks for that model iMac, and he reinstalled the OS on the iMac, and all was well. Does Apple consider this piracy? When you reinstall the OS that came with a particular machine? A real Mac should automatically have an OS license.