Apple Sues Tiger Leaks

[PwrMac19]

logic

Anyone can say that Apple sueing people will not change whether other people will continue to illegally download but from my perspective it will. I used to download music illegally...and A LOT of it until I realized there was a threat. The truth is that they can never track all the people that do it and they will never sue all the people doing it, but more and more people will be targeted and in danger as time goes on. After trashing all my old music files...my fear of being sued has led to me downloading music legally from now on. The hope for business in sueing is stupid but true...it is about money. If you own a business and you are selling things, would you want to give away a ton of free stuff and then more free stuff ...that just ammounts to less money for you to take home at the end of the day. If people see that they can get it free, then more people will get it free...eventually those numbers will continue to grow exponentially until apple has to do something drastic like sue a lot of people. So what apple is trying to do here is prove a point... they are showing people that they ARE going to stand behind their company and you CAN be sued for doing this. I doubt they will sue too many people in the future unless it gets out of hand, but they are warning off the people that have thought about doing it but have yet to actually take that chance.

Also, I think sueing is stupid...I think a fixed fine would work well (like a little more than what the software cost in the first place). I guess it just depends on how many people they can track down and actually fine.

 

[wdlove]

Yeah, and you never go over the posted speed limit, either.

Maybe I should be more specific - what's the harm to Apple if a few mac fans that are going to buy Tiger ANYWAY download a pre-release version?

Those that downloaded the Pre-Release Tiger version are guilty also. They had better hope that Apple doesn't try to come after them also.

 

[Yvan256]

Agreed.

Besides, what software development house would, in their right mind, turn down an opportunity for more people to submit more bug reports?

If I were heading a project as large as an OS update (with hundreds of new features, even), I'd be eager to get it on as many test platforms as possible.

Nothing's stopping Apple from doing a public beta release (much like Blizzard did with World of Warcraft). If they're not doing it, it could mean they're not interested in doing so.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

There's more than just a morals/ethics thing here anyway.

Do those of you that download developer releases of Tiger think Apple is outside of their rights to sue?

Apple exists because we buy their stuff; so it is natural that they fear theft. The reason people can get away with illicit software downloads is because a whole bunch of people buy the software, thus paying the developers to continue developing. So it's not "Free", you're just not paying for it.

I have to say I've not decided what I think about P2P; I think people should be left to their own judgement as to how to use the internet, but it is a fact that downloading the leaked Tiger is an act of obtaining something that was not and would not be offered to the downloader by the creator and owner of the software. You didn't write it, it wasn't yours to own. It's the classic question of "I can, but should I?"

Sue those responsible, Apple, I feel no sympathy with them.

This isn't picking a fight, it's an opinion that people are free to disagree with, of course.

 

[Yvan256]

marketing spin is very effective in convincing users that they have no reason to check out the Mac OS because they are told that M$ is already giving them everything they need.

Which is why I think people often overlook iTunes in the "iPod halo" effect. Yes, the iPod is nice, but it only shows one part of the picture: Apple hardware (yes, it's a bit more expensive, but it works great, has a nice interface, and looks stylish). The other side, software, is iTunes. And it's a free download too!

Making iTunes/iPod compatible with both OS X and Win2K/WinXP was also required for the iTMS anyway, so maybe I'm reading too much into this.

Again, sorry for being off-topic.

 

[swissmann]

i do not agree , i can never see the likes of Microsoft droping prices ??? are you mad it is just a reason to keep prices high / cd's/dvd ect

I produce video's for a living. If someone purchases multiple copies of the same video from me the cost of each is much cheaper than if they just buy one. If I catch wind from someone that they plan on making copies on their own I charge them even more up front because I am not going to make any money on the copies. No I am not mad. If a company sells more software (because every user actually buys it) they will either have more money for R&D, or will lower the price because their software is being purchased in bulk instead of a specialty item, or the will be like Microsoft and fatten Bill Gates wallet even more. I just don't think every company is like Microsoft. Mine isn't.

 

[Photorun]

Both things are ILLEGAL. Get over it. downloading software is illigal. If you have a problem with that you should complain at apple.

Your version of spelling should be illEgal and you never answered the guy, have you ever sped in a car? That's illegal too... or are you going to tell us that you always drive at or under the speed limit, if you do, you indeed have the moral high ground, congrats, if not, shut your yap.

 

[swissmann]

Nicely said. I'm glad some of the stuff I wanted has demo versions, so I could evaluate before paying for them.

You do need to check licenses to see if one copy will cover the same person on a desktop and a laptop. (Photoshop for one allows this where the primary user on both machines is the same person.) This saves me a small bundle. Some shareware has the same type of licenses. Also, even for 3 computers, some software has a site license that will be cost effective.

I wish Apple had family licenses for more products, it does save a small bundle in software costs.

Agree with all you are saying. I always buy the OS X family pack. The difference in price of $129 to $200 isn't that big of a difference to get 5 lincenses. A lot of software (especially Microsoft) checks across the network to see if the same SN copy of anything is running. If I have Excel open on one computer and Word open on the other one will be forced to quit (both are using the same Office SN) unless of course I buy another license. It just gets so expensive. Put a couple of grand into hardware then put three times that much into software that will be upgraded in a few months. It is hard to keep up if you are staying honest.

 

[swissmann]

I submitted a possible MacPolls idea a few months ago and would like to see if there is interest in it. I am curious to see how much pirated software people have on their computers (measured in US dollar amounts). The poll could be $0, $1-$200, $201-$500, $501-$1,000, $1,001-$2,000, $2,001-$5,000, $5,001+ (or something like that.) The value would reflect the MSRP prices. Is there interest in this sort of thing?

 

[Uragon]

Yeah, uh, didn't I say several times now that I agree it's not in Apple's best interest to have alpha copies of Tiger floating around on the net? I did? Oh yeah, I did. Thank you for agreeing with me.

My only point was, people were posting as if downloaders of the preview (like me) were guilty of some capital crime. I hope by now that I've made 2 points:

1) I haven't harmed Apple (me, just me, now) by downloading and installing a preview Tiger.

2) Apple suing those three guys (which I AGREE they have every right to do) will do nothing to stop future versions from getting into my hands, or any other curious parties.

I must have missed your point, a while ago, you were mentioning something about your disdain for "Apple Legal Cheerleading Team" in force in this forum.

Is it wrong for some members here to mentioned that Apple has the right to sue them, or is it that you do not like people sounding or trying to sound morally or ethically correct or righteous?

 

[Photorun]

Give me a break . . .

If someone really wanted to write malicious software, they would get their hands on it, through bittorrent or not.

We all know that the real reason Apple is pissed is becuase they are charging $500 for a pre-release buggy OS, that 2,500 have downloaded for free, and to them that equates to lost $'s.

Apple is just using the NDA, and trade secrets (which they have every right to use) to cover up the fact that they are pissed that they aren't making any money. We all know that Apple is not having trade secrets exploited that they didn't exploit themselves by releasing Tiget to the public.

Whether are guys want to admit it or not, Apple has turned into a money hungry monster, I mean, they should just change their name to iPod computers . . .

Sorry to rant, it's just some people on these boards just jump to the side of Apple, and think that they are the nicest company and only mean good, when in fact they are like every other corporation on the planet, and the buttom line for them is to make money, and they are loosing money in ADC member ships.

Again, I am not saying that Apple doesn't have the right to do what they are doing, and that the people that leaked Tiger aren't in the wrong, it's just sometimes you have to pick your battles.

Hear hear (or here here, depending on the version you like), someone else making sense and not spouting their moral pretenses here in these forums. Oooh, people who do bad things bad, oooh, me goody two-shoe... gimme a break people. Personally I'd love to put an alpha version of OS X on my machine just for poops and giggles but I've not the time or wherewithal at this moment. Does it mean I wont buy Tiger when it comes out? I've bought all versions of OS X, including the less than spectacular ones, and bought the previous "classic" OSes too. I download music on a P2P network because I like to HEAR many songs in full (not 30 seconds) before buying them, then if I like the album, I go and buy it, in a store, so I have the actual CD (though I have sometimes used iTunes too). Overall there ARE people who will "borrow" buggy early software or music who DO, in fact, shop with their hard earned dollars, and buy what they "borrow" (or say steal if it makes you holier than thou types happy in your insular worlds)... to carpet bomb everyone as being this horrible person is weak and narrow minded and in 99.9% of the cases you're not changing anyone's minds, certainly only irking those of us who see a bigger picture of things and will do what we will do and, eventually help the cause... that cause being Apple, no matter how trite, trivial, and sometimes horribly misguided they often in times like these lawsuit happy times be. You don't see Linux's market share shrinking with a free OS do you? What's that? You don't do you? Precisely.

 

[mk_in_mke]

Are you Okay?

What, exactly, is wrong with downloading a pre-release, buggy Tiger that's not for sale, if I intend to buy the real Tiger when it comes out anyway?

Apple has a cool policy with developers: they provide the pre-release versions, get feedback... Apple make developers sign a confidentiality agreement I suppose. And this is only fair game in a give/take relationship.

Apple has all the rights to sue the developers... To protect their intellectual property, to protect the code but above all to guarantee the Mac Community that we will have top software to play with, to use...

I can only encourage Apple to go all the way...

 

[ChrisBrightwell]

[...] I download music on a P2P network because I like to HEAR many songs in full (not 30 seconds) before buying them, then if I like the album, I go and buy it, in a store, so I have the actual CD (though I have sometimes used iTunes too).

News flash: It's still illegal. I understand what you're saying, but it's still illegal.

Overall there ARE people who will "borrow" buggy early software or music who DO, in fact, shop with their hard earned dollars, and buy what they "borrow" (or say steal if it makes you holier than thou types happy in your insular worlds)...

It's not so much the holier-than-thou types as much as it is, you know, the real definition of what you are doing. Borrowing something implies permission from the owner. P2P apps, for the most part, do not impart that permission.

It's not much different, in a literal sense, from borrowing a CD and listening to it. Borrowing the CD, though, doesn't require creating an explicitly illegal copy of the material on the disc. Downloading it from KaZaA or another P2P network does, which is where we have this "illegal downloading" problem.

to carpet bomb everyone as being this horrible person is weak and narrow minded

Trying to somehow justify your illegal downloading habit by saying, "Oh, I'm just borrowing it," is pretty weak. It's illegal, regardless of how you look at it.

and in 99.9% of the cases you're not changing anyone's minds,

Talk about being narrow-minded ...

certainly only irking those of us who see a bigger picture of things and will do what we will do and, eventually help the cause...

And holier-than-thou, too!

that cause being Apple, no matter how trite, trivial, and sometimes horribly misguided they often in times like these lawsuit happy times be.

I don't follow you. How, exactly, does illegally downloading OS X support Apple? Sure, you bought the hardware. Big deal. You still need an OS, and that license still costs $129 (more or less, depending on which discounts are available to you).

You don't see Linux's market share shrinking with a free OS do you? What's that? You don't do you? Precisely.

Comparing Linux to OS X is pretty unfair, IMHO. They have completely different mindsets and come from completely different cultures. Linux is eating away at the Windows marketshare, for the most part. Most of the OS X users who would use Linux tend to either dual-boot or buy a cheap PC somewhere to install and run Linux.

The enterprise-based marketshare for Linux, though, tends to come from companies like RedHat, SuSe, and Mandrake who all basically give you the software but charge for tech support. That's how they make their money. Very few people have homegrown Linux hackers in-house who are competent enough to keep one of the free (as in speech) distributions up and running 99.999% of the time with minimal fuss and administrative overhead.

 

[mpw]

maybe , but who is at fault here ? them for putting it P2P or the people downloading it ? just ban them and let that be it no need to sue , i am sure if the likes of Microsoft wanted a copy of it they would of had one the day it was released and it would of come direct from apple ! it's not as if microsoft does not develope apps for apple anyway?...

I'm sure Microsoft do get a copy direct as soon as most developers (if not before) but I imagine when they do they sign a specific contract over how it can be used.
Now I'm no expert but at what point in the developement does the copyright kick in? If they don't copyright or patent a piece of software until its release whats to stop me downloading a copy of the developers release and copyrighting myself. I've no contract with Apple and have done nothing wrong it's the person who made it available to me who's gonna get sued and rightly so.

 

[Westside guy]

Maybe I should be more specific - what's the harm to Apple if a few mac fans that are going to buy Tiger ANYWAY download a pre-release version?

The problem is your assumption is not valid. People generally use bit-torrent (and Kazaa, and Limewire) to get things for free that otherwise they'd have to pay for. I'm sure there are a handful of downloaders that will buy Tiger later, once it's released - but the ones I know most certainly will not. They're currently running the copies of Panther they snagged off of bit-torrent.

The version of Tiger that's on bt right now is certainly buggy, but later on the gold master version will certainly show up - and people will grab it.

 

[BillyShears]

I'm sure Microsoft do get a copy direct as soon as most developers (if not before) but I imagine when they do they sign a specific contract over how it can be used.
Now I'm no expert but at what point in the developement does the copyright kick in? If they don't copyright or patent a piece of software until its release whats to stop me downloading a copy of the developers release and copyrighting myself. I've no contract with Apple and have done nothing wrong it's the person who made it available to me who's gonna get sued and rightly so.

Copyright "kicks in" the moment you create something. It comes by default with anything you do.

 

[Xtremehkr]

Good for Apple. Microsoft and others aren't above stealing ideas, Microsoft have made a habit of it in fact.

 

[Mtn Tamale]

Good for Apple

Call me a rebel, but I speed, don't wear my seatbelt, jaywalk, interpret fair use with regard to personal copying of digital content in my own way, and probably break a lot of other laws all the time. What is between the law and me is my business, I don't believe in not doing things simply because they are "illegal" but, I say GO GET 'EM APPLE. I don't believe in hurting other people/corporations with my actions. I pay for all my music and my software. And I'm happy to do it. I hope Apple gets their $25k out of each of them, and then some. Can't have stupid kids, or overzealous geeks thinking they can ignore all propriety or personal commitments as ADC's, hurting Apple just because its giggly fun, or they feel cool. Idiots.

 

[shamino]

We all know that the real reason Apple is pissed is becuase they are charging $500 for a pre-release buggy OS, that 2,500 have downloaded for free, and to them that equates to lost $'s.

If you think the sole purpose of the developer program is to charge college kids money for pre-release software, then you obviously have no idea what you're talking about.

The developer program is just that - for developers. It is meant for people with software products to get help making their applications work. The alpha/beta program exists so that these developers can get their programs working with the new system before it ships, so their customers don't have to deal with the problems afterwards.

It is not, and has never been, a program for students and curiosity-seekers to get their copy "first".

Apple is just using the NDA, and trade secrets (which they have every right to use) to cover up the fact that they are pissed that they aren't making any money. We all know that Apple is not having trade secrets exploited that they didn't exploit themselves by releasing Tiget to the public.

You seem to be under the impression that Tiger is finished, and that all these developer releases are just stupid games to keep you from being the first to own a copy.

Think again. The system is not finished. These developer releases are not meant for anybody to use in a production environment. They are meant solely for developers to fix their application bugs in advance of the release.

The NDA has nothing to do with money. It exists because this software is not finished. Features are missing because they haven't been written yet. There are bugs, because QA hasn't finished their testing work. Without an NDA, the media would run their own tests on this unfinished code, and would then write articles trashing it. Then when the software is finally released, people won't buy it, because there are hundreds of bad reviews, that were written about the unfinished code.

If people flagrantly violate this NDA, then Apple can do only two things. They can either sue the people who violate it, or they will stop sending these code drops to everybody that pays the fee to join the developer program.

Again, I am not saying that Apple doesn't have the right to do what they are doing, and that the people that leaked Tiger aren't in the wrong, it's just sometimes you have to pick your battles.

You could've fooled me. Sounds more like you think you have a right to all of Apple's pre-release code and you're pissed that only people in the developer program are allowed to get it.

 

[shamino]

EULAs are starting to fail miserably in court, so there's one down ...

The NDA for developer releases is not a shrink-wrap license. It's a signed contract. If you don't sign the paper, they don't give you the software.

 

[wdlove]

Nothing's stopping Apple from doing a public beta release (much like Blizzard did with World of Warcraft). If they're not doing it, it could mean they're not interested in doing so.

Maybe Apple will surprise us in 2005. They did do a mass public beta of Mac OS 10.0.

 

[WannaWiki]

Why all the fuss

Why does apple care about people who are downloading pre-releases of an OS? A pre-release of an OS is usually not worth using, as it's so slow from the debugging code and rife with bugs. I'm all for apple striking those down who do them wrong, but let those technology elite users get first look at the newest stuff without having to be developers- and if its under the table through piracy then the system just manages itsself. Oh and goto my website guys, contribute to the wiki. It needs more apple articles.

 

[ChrisBrightwell]

The NDA for developer releases is not a shrink-wrap license. It's a signed contract. If you don't sign the paper, they don't give you the software.

NDA != EULA.

Thanks for the clarification, though. I should've guessed that dev. releases come under an NDA, but it's been a long week.

Thanks again.

 

[SilentPanda]

Yeah, and you never go over the posted speed limit, either.

Maybe I should be more specific - what's the harm to Apple if a few mac fans that are going to buy Tiger ANYWAY download a pre-release version?

And as soon as you see the people that can get you in trouble for going over the speed limit you.... slow down. You know it's wrong just like everybody else and are aware that you can get in trouble for it. That doesn't make it right.

 

[mkaake]

Your version of spelling should be illEgal and you never answered the guy, have you ever sped in a car? That's illegal too... or are you going to tell us that you always drive at or under the speed limit, if you do, you indeed have the moral high ground, congrats, if not, shut your yap.

wow. how inventive and original.

most people try to go with the j-walking analogy.

it never ceases to amaze me that people get flamed for suggesting that maybe obeying the law is a good idea.
upon which people laugh, spit, and yell that they don't have to obey the law because they're not hurting anybody. and furthermore, even though they're not obeying the law, it should be illegal for a company to pursue someone for breaking the law that they agreed to.

oh right, i forgot. we're not actually supposed to read those EULA's that we say yes to, so they're not enforceable, right?

*cough*

oh, and yes, I do always drive the speed limit or less. and no, I don't j-walk. but if I did or had, would it mean that I can't expect or ask others to obey the law? because around here, the mentality is that once you've broken the law, it's pointless to try to obey it anymore. stupid. absolutely stupid.

if my daughter was driving, and started speeding, and i asked her to stop, and she replied with
a) i'm not hurting anybody
b) what, you've never sped?
c) oh, the cop won't pull me over anyway
d) oh c'mon. have you ever j-walked?

she would not be driving for a very very long time.

which reminds me, the people around here who are condoning illegal behavior (that you consent to being illegal when you click on that EULA) all pretty much sound like college students or younger... you can tell when someone has a sense of responsibility about them.

I for one would never hire a person who argues that their illegal activities are not all that bad, and should be ignored. but i guess ethics aren't all that popular around here...