Tiger license question

[Bote]

8 months ago I bought my first Mac. The mini which came with panther. When tiger came out I bought it and upgraded and registered. I just recently bought a used iMac from my friend for a good price, but it has panther on it. Can I use my oem tiger install disk on my new iMac or is that impossible since I registered tiger under my Mac mini?

 

[Will Cheyney]

Nope. It'll install just fine.

 

[liketom]

8 months ago I bought my first Mac. The mini which came with panther. When tiger came out I bought it and upgraded and registered. I just recently bought a used iMac from my friend for a good price, but it has panther on it. Can I use my oem tiger install disk on my new iMac or is that impossible since I registered tiger under my Mac mini?

so you bought Retail Tiger , and you got a New iMac - i see no problem

 

[grapes911]

Apple does not track registrations or have serial numbers. But that does not mean it is legal. You only received one license with that disk (unless you purchased the more expensive family pack with comes with five).

 

[liketom]

Apple does not track registrations or have serial numbers. But that does not mean it is legal. You only received one license with that disk (unless you purchased the more expensive family pack with comes with five).

but he has the license that comes with the iMac also so he has 2 now

 

[grapes911]

but he has the license that comes with the iMac also so he has 2 now

I read it as:
Retail on Mini
OEM on new iMac
Panther on used iMac

Unless he got rid of the mini and still has the retail, then I can't see how this is legal.

 

[wordmunger]

but he has the license that comes with the iMac also so he has 2 now

No, he has 2 Panther licenses and 1 Tiger license. If he installs Tiger on his iMac, he's violating the license agreement, unless he uninstalls it on the mini.

 

[Bote]

No, he has 2 Panther licenses and 1 Tiger license. If he installs Tiger on his iMac, he's violating the license agreement, unless he uninstalls it on the mini.

Correct:

I have 1 license retail copy of tiger & 2 Macs that came with a panther license. I was unsure of the license agreement or if it mattered since I owned both Macs.

 

[mduser63]

Correct:

I have 1 license retail copy of tiger & 2 Macs that came with a panther license. I was unsure of the license agreement or if it mattered since I owned both Macs.

According to the end user license agreement for Tiger, you're only allowed to install Tiger on one computer at a time, unless you have the 5 license "Family Pack." That said, Tiger is not like Windows XP -- it doesn't require any activation and there's nothing technically stopping you from installing it on two (or more) computers. It's just a matter of you deciding whether you feel good about doing that.

 

[mdavey]

According to the end user license agreement for Tiger, you're only allowed to install Tiger on one computer at a time, unless you have the 5 license "Family Pack." That said, Tiger is not like Windows XP -- it doesn't require any activation and there's nothing technically stopping you from installing it on two (or more) computers. It's just a matter of you deciding whether you feel good about doing that.

No, he has two single user licenses of Mac OS X (the one that came with the Mac mini and the one that came with the iMac).

When he installed Tiger on his Mac mini, the software completely replaced a previous licensed version of the OS (section "3 Updates" of the license agreement).

His new (second-hand) iMac came with Panther. Assuming he has the single use license document and the installation media for the copy of Panther that came with the iMac AND the panther license agreement is written the same way as the Tiger license agreement, then he can replace Panther with Tiger on this machine too (as long as he keeps hold of all the documentation and installation media). The reason he can do this is because the single use license is for "Mac OS X" and not for a specific version AND he bought the retail media for Tiger.

IANAL - that is my understanding.

 

[ChrisFromCanada]

To the original poster this is absolutely physically possible with no problems what so ever. It is just a question of the interpretation of the user license and the ethics of violating it. I would just go ahead and do it, why would you go and buy another copy of Tiger at the store when you have a perfectly good disk sitting right there?

 

[James Philp]

The reason he can do this is because the single use license is for "Mac OS X" and not for a specific version AND he bought the retail media for Tiger.

IANAL - that is my understanding.

If this was true then I have 4 "licenses" of Tiger?!? - No!
If you have 1 copy of Tiger (not Family pack) you have 1 license of Tiger.
If you want to install it (legally) on another machine, you have to buy another copy. Just because you don't have Panther installed on other machines does not mean you've effectively migrated the licenses.

I'm pretty sure of this from this situation:
Say you already own 3 Macs all running OS X.1 or .2 or .3 (or a combination). Then you go out and buy a Mac Mini, which comes with Tiger (either direct or second hand). It would be ludicrous to expect that you can now legally install that copy of Tiger from the Mini on all your other machines. That would be getting something for nothing - not a common occurrence in the retail world!

Quoting Various Bits of the License:

This license allows you to install and use one copy of the Apple software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time. This license does not allow the Apple Software to exist on more than one computer at a time,

And goes on to say about transfer:

Updates: If an Apple Software update completely replaces (full install) a previously licensed version of the Apple software, you may not use both versions of the Apple software at the same time nor may you transfer them separately.

i.e. you can't use a previous version of the OS (or "Apple software) that has been replaced by Tiger, on a different system at the same time. - my interpretation anyhow.

 

[CanadaRAM]

No, he has two single user licenses of Mac OS X (the one that came with the Mac mini and the one that came with the iMac).

When he installed Tiger on his Mac mini, the software completely replaced a previous licensed version of the OS (section "3 Updates" of the license agreement).

True, he now owns a surplus license to 10.3 Panther

His new (second-hand) iMac came with Panther. Assuming he has the single use license document and the installation media for the copy of Panther that came with the iMac AND the panther license agreement is written the same way as the Tiger license agreement, then he can replace Panther with Tiger on this machine too (as long as he keeps hold of all the documentation and installation media). The reason he can do this is because the single use license is for "Mac OS X" and not for a specific version AND he bought the retail media for Tiger.

IANAL - that is my understanding.

You're arguing that because the EULA doesn't name the version number specifically, it can extend to any future version?

If that were true, a company with 50 machines on OSX 10.1 could buy one Tiger retail and upgrade all 50 machines from it. I don't believe that is correct. I think you'll find the EULA with the Mac says somewhere 'this' software or 'the software enclosed' -- and not 'all future versions of OSX', The Tiger EULA will similarly say 'this software' and 'one machine only'. You can't use a selective reading of the original license to both extend it to unnamed other versions or to override the license restrictions of a completely separate product.

 

[mdavey]

If you have 1 copy of Tiger (not Family pack) you have 1 license of Tiger.

No, you have one license of Mac OS X. The license starts "Software License Agreement for Mac OS X / Single Use License". Nowhere in the license agreement does it refer to 10.4 or Tiger.

It is only the retail pack that allows you to upgrade an earlier version of Mac OS X to a later version - the ones that come with machines are locked to a particular hardware. The retail license says "If an Apple Software update completely replaces (full install) a previous licensed version of the Apple Software you may not use both versions of the Apple Software at the same time nor may you transfer them separately." - so you are not getting "extra licenses", you are just getting the ability to use the media to replace an old version of Mac OS X with a new one.

 

[Bote]

Ok, question answered. Thank you all for you insite. Everyone here was prompt and helpful as always. I love MR

 

[mdavey]

True, he now owns a surplus license to 10.3 Panther

No, he doesn't. See my other post.

 

[James Philp]

No, you have one copy of Mac OS X. The lisense starts"Softwre License Agreement for Mac OS X / Single Use License". Nowhere in the license agreement does it refer to 10.4 or Tiger.

It seems you're disagreeing but agreeing with me?!?
Within the license it makes clear that although it says "OS X" on the cover, that actually within the content (that we both quoted!) it really is "locked" to a certain version of the OS.
I think this is because all the licenses for OS X are the same.

 

[mdavey]

It seems you're disagreeing but agreeing with me?!?
Within the license it makes clear that although it says "OS X" on the cover, that actually within the content (that we both quoted!) it really is "locked" to a certain version of the OS.
I think this is because all the licenses for OS X are the same.

Ah, I kinda get what you are saying now. I guess the real question is, what is proof of purchase? Is it the physical media (as an aside, is the physical media for the 5 license pack different to the single license version) or the actual license agreement. With Micrsoft, the proof of purchase is the certificate/license agreement (a single document) but I guess it is up to Apple to decide what they want to treat as proof of purchase.

 

[liketom]

so what it boils down to then is 1 licence per machine ie 1x tiger retail = 1 machine or 1 x tiger family pack = 5 machines

i wonder what would happen to all of us that are less strict when it comes to this matter on our Macs if Apple used product keys?

 

[James Philp]

Ah, I kinda get what you are saying now. I guess the real question is, what is proof of purchase? Is it the physical media (as an aside, is the physical media for the 5 license pack different to the single license version) or the actual license agreement. With Micrsoft, the proof of purchase is the certificate/license agreement (a single document) but I guess it is up to Apple to decide what they want to treat as proof of purchase.

Interesting point, like all those people who bought a Mac installed with 10.3, but with the (retail) tiger discs included - what do they technically own? - I'll tell you:
1 license of OS X! I guess the one replaces the other?! But the discs you get with a Mac (the "Installation" discs) are NOT upgrade discs as such, and so shouldn't be used as such (ethically anyhow).

 

[mdavey]

Interesting point, like all those people who bought a Mac installed with 10.3, but with the (retail) tiger discs included - what do they technically own? - I'll tell you:
1 license of OS X!

Hmm, seems all a bit messy to me. That hypothetical someone could go and install Tiger on their System 9 machine instead if I understand it correctly, so they would now have two legitimate licensed copies of OS X.

Also, on re-reading "3 Updates" *again* in light of comments about the phrase "Apple Software" meaning the software that accompanied with this particular license, I'm not so sure that someone couldn't transfer their Panther license if they did a full install of Tiger, as long as they didn't sell it or it was a retail copy of Panther.

Thoughts?

 

[fartheststar]

To the original poster this is absolutely physically possible with no problems what so ever. It is just a question of the interpretation of the user license and the ethics of violating it. I would just go ahead and do it, why would you go and buy another copy of Tiger at the store when you have a perfectly good disk sitting right there?

Because it's not the right thing to do and is part of the reason software is becoming more expensive. I hope they lock down leopard so it is required that each copy of the OS is registered, that's the right thing to do.

 

[liketom]

Because it's not the right thing to do and is part of the reason software is becoming more expensive. I hope they lock down leopard so it is required that each copy of the OS is registered, that's the right thing to do.

its wrong i agree but if they put is as serial numbers like FCP and QTPro then they can be broke or more to the point downloaded of the Tinternet

i'm thinking what about apple's DRM tech could they change that so that when we connect to the internet once installing an app that we have to authenticate it,once to get it working and when ever a software update is ready for download ?