No, there aren't hackintosh methods that don't modify OS X. And, yes, the court did find that replacing the appropriate kexts does create a derivative work. No, reselling your Mac after you've installed an app is not infringement because Apple gives you permission to do so.
Open source Boot-132.
Again, Psystar argued copyright misuse. The argument failed. It is not against the constitution to create a contract to tie certain software to certain hardware.
Of course it failed. Courts rarely recognize abuse of copyright even when it's obvious.
What gives you the write to make copies of a book and distribute it? And your analogy to tearing off the cover is hardly comparable to modifying software. It's more comparable to tearing off a side of the box.
I said copying was possible. Also, tearing off the cover is modifying the creative work as a whole -- the book. How about marking up a book? That's changing it. All those college students need to go to jail.
Again you are arguing a slippery slope dependent on nobody looking out for their best interest.
The valid slippery slope (remember, it isn't necessarily a fallacy) only relies on the industry adopting EULAs as standard practice, as the software industry already has. Once that happens, nobody will be able to look out for their own best interest.
When all lawnmowers come with that license, you could be sure that someone would be scrambling to open a lawnmower business hat doesn't come with the license.
The license-free mowers will not be sold through any of the chains, thus have very few sales. The vast majority of consumers will be ignorant as to how their freedom is restricted by the EULAs so won't make the extra effort to seek-out EULA-free mowers (such is currently the case with software).
In any case, you're trying to focus on the example without looking at the larger point. EULAs are damaging, period. They restrict your free use of what you purchased, which is simply wrong. Right now they are mainly popular with software, but their use is expanding.
And if the existing players conspire to prevent that, then you have monopoly issues that would override the license.
OMG somebody finally admits that there is SOMETHING that can override a license. The Constitution wasn't enough, but apparently antitrust laws can.
Carrying the analogy to the situation we are discussing. All OS software doesn't come with a license tying it to specific hardware. You do have choices.
That is only one of many, many, many offensive terms of EULAs. And nobody uses EULAs as a competitive advantage anyway. Microsoft, "Use SQL Server instead of Oracle because we now have a EULA that requires you to give up less of your First Amendment right!" Yeah, right.
But your point is why PsyStar failed in its ridiculous claim of monopolistic practices.