tveric said:
Why would you want to download a really buggy OS. Seems like a major pain unless you are a developer or something like that. Just to play around seems like it would save a lot of time and hastle to wait a few months for it.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Sues Tiger Leaks
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Why would you want to download a really buggy OS. Seems like a major pain unless you are a developer or something like that. Just to play around seems like it would save a lot of time and hastle to wait a few months for it.
MaCaDDiCT21 said:Apple's sued so many people this week, they're startin to turn into Microsoft
As Apple gets bigger I also think they are acting more like a big company. I don't like it much either but they are still way better than Microsoft.
tveric said:
We all do something illegal. I don't see any way around it in real life. I agree with you that if these people pay for it legally in the end what is the harm now unless they are doing something more aggressive than just trying it out themselves. What I do have a problem with is to get it illegally and never pay for it - that reflects itself into what honest people pay.
God people mellow out.
Blah blah blah blah blah. Every time I hear people screech like a bunch of overgrown apes (People generally being ones high up in the food chain of the *AA or usually some lawyer.) about copyright infringement, breaking the EULA, etc I automatically tune them out because by and large they are full of monkey flinging ****. Murder is a nasty crime. Rape is a nasty crime. The crap that went down at Enron is a nasty crime. Some would argue what is going on in Iraq is a nasty crime. But the kind of crap Apple is screeching over? Give me a break. If some idiot wants to download buggy software that is more likely to crash then anything else. If someone wants to download one episode of Stargate because he missed it last week, if someone wants to download a CD because he/she feels that the RIAA is screwing them over. So be it. Its not as if their bottom line is being sacked because of it. Oh yes the RIAA has been screeching for years about this but more then a few recent studies have supporting proof that its mostly to blame because of the economy and in actually things have been picking up as of late.
There are bigger issues to worry about then a bunch of screeching apes in suits screeching at Congress to ban P2P. Screeching at the feds to do something. Screeching at the consumers of the world to stop it. Think of the billionaires children will you!?! I would suggest you all get over it sit back and mellow. If you think a buggy release of Tiger is going to negatively impact sales of Tiger when it comes out you are just plain dumb. Period. Sorry to be blunt but it had to be said. Dumb.
Blah blah blah blah blah. Every time I hear people screech like a bunch of overgrown apes (People generally being ones high up in the food chain of the *AA or usually some lawyer.) about copyright infringement, breaking the EULA, etc I automatically tune them out because by and large they are full of monkey flinging ****. Murder is a nasty crime. Rape is a nasty crime. The crap that went down at Enron is a nasty crime. Some would argue what is going on in Iraq is a nasty crime. But the kind of crap Apple is screeching over? Give me a break. If some idiot wants to download buggy software that is more likely to crash then anything else. If someone wants to download one episode of Stargate because he missed it last week, if someone wants to download a CD because he/she feels that the RIAA is screwing them over. So be it. Its not as if their bottom line is being sacked because of it. Oh yes the RIAA has been screeching for years about this but more then a few recent studies have supporting proof that its mostly to blame because of the economy and in actually things have been picking up as of late.
There are bigger issues to worry about then a bunch of screeching apes in suits screeching at Congress to ban P2P. Screeching at the feds to do something. Screeching at the consumers of the world to stop it. Think of the billionaires children will you!?! I would suggest you all get over it sit back and mellow. If you think a buggy release of Tiger is going to negatively impact sales of Tiger when it comes out you are just plain dumb. Period. Sorry to be blunt but it had to be said. Dumb.
You're streaming, not copying.karlb said:
Works like borrowing a CD from them and listening in your CD-ROM drive.
What kills me...
The one thing i find so asinine is the fact that the full versions of Panther, Final Cut (Pro and Express), Shake, iLife and basically every other piece of Apple software is available on the targeted torrent site. Why would Apple care more about an OS that no-one is going to use when the final comes out? And when that final comes out why are they not going after that on the torrent sites. It doesn't make any sense to me. The fact that Apple users are so intrigued to download buggy releases of an OS should be a testament to Apple. It is the exact same reason this site, AppleInsider, ThinkSecret, et al. are around. We are curious about all things Apple. I know that I'm a "bad person" for checking out Tiger but I got over it.
The one thing i find so asinine is the fact that the full versions of Panther, Final Cut (Pro and Express), Shake, iLife and basically every other piece of Apple software is available on the targeted torrent site. Why would Apple care more about an OS that no-one is going to use when the final comes out? And when that final comes out why are they not going after that on the torrent sites. It doesn't make any sense to me. The fact that Apple users are so intrigued to download buggy releases of an OS should be a testament to Apple. It is the exact same reason this site, AppleInsider, ThinkSecret, et al. are around. We are curious about all things Apple. I know that I'm a "bad person" for checking out Tiger but I got over it.
And once you get beyond personal use, it gets even weirder.ChrisBrightwell said:
If you buy a CD for yourself, you can make backup copies, rip it to your computer, make MP3 CDs, load it into an iPod, etc.
If, however, you're a DJ and you buy that CD for your business, you can't do any of the above without paying for additional licenses. In order to play the disc in public, you (or more commonly, the venue) need a license (typically a general/blanket license from the big-3 agencies: ASCAP, BMI and SESAC. If you want to duplicate the disc (whether as a backup or for redistribution), you need a master-rights license. If you want to play it from a hard drive, MP3-CD or iPod, you need a digital rights license. If you want to distribute a lyric sheet (perhaps as a part of making a karaoke disc), that's yet another kind of license. If you are in a band and you want to record yourself performing someone else's song, that requires a mechanical rights license (like those from the Harry Fox Agency). Ditto of you want to record your customers singing over someone else's recording (e.g. at a karaoke event.)
All the "fair use" provisions of the copyright law (that allow you to pretty much do what you want with the discs you buy as long as you don't redistribute the results) go out the window if you're using the disc to make money in any fashion.
This is a big gray area. I don't think anybody's going to care if you don't redistribute the files, but I would not count on that holding up in court if somebody decides to file suit.ChrisBrightwell said:
For personal use. If you use them for public performance, you will need a separate digital rights license. Downloaded music is not considered a "phonorecord" under the law, and that's all you can play in public under a general/blanket license.ChrisBrightwell said:
Hopefully, the laws will be straightened out sooner or later. IMO, there should be no difference between a phonorecord and a digital recording of the same song, but the laws have not yet caught up to reality.
Making copies of, and distributing, phonorecords (records, tapes and CDs) requires a master-rights license, which generally must be negotiated with the copyright holder of the material. You can buy such licenses, but in doing so, you obligate yourself to keep careful records of how many you produce and pay the appropriate royalties. (This is how record labels like K-Tel can issue compilation albums when they don't publish the original albums.)ChrisBrightwell said:
The digital equivalent is things like iTMS. Right now, there is no standard procedure for getting digital rights licenses for redistribution. They are all privately negotiated. Companies like Apple and Real have gotten these licenses. They can sell/give away any covered song, as long as they keep records and pay the license fees.
Theoretically, you could get a license to redistribute music over a P2P network, if there is some way to actually track the number of downloads and make the royalty payments. But since existing P2P software is designed to hide (or completely eliminate) this kind of information, it is unliely that any major copyright holder will actually issue such a license.
WRT your right to make the download, that's another gray area. If I already own the music (perhaps on vinyl) when I download the song, I don't think I've done anything morally or ethically wrong. But I don't think anyone can say for certain if any law was broken by the downloader. (As opposed to the sharer, who almost certainly has broken some laws.)
Streaming
So in effect could I legally use icecast or somesuch to stream music that I have bought over the internet from, let say, the USA or UK ?
ta
ChrisBrightwell said:
So in effect could I legally use icecast or somesuch to stream music that I have bought over the internet from, let say, the USA or UK ?
ta
Good question. One that I don't think has a clear-cut answer yet.karlb said:
If you stream the music from one of your computers to another of your computers, that's clearly OK. It falls under the "fair use" provision of the copyright law (assuming we're talking about personal use and not public performance or anything for profit.)
If you stream the music from one of your computers to strangers on the internet, that's illegal. That's the same as running a radio station. It requires the digital equivalent of a broadcast license, just like the ones that internet radio stations have. This is probably the reason Apple disabled this ability from iTunes (the first releases that supported streaming allowed you to stream to the internet.)
Streaming between computers in two offices at a private corporation is sort of in between. I have no idea if this would be generally acceptable or if it would require a special license of some kind. I know that if your company plays background music over the PA system, a license is required, even though it's private property. I don't know if this would also apply to streaming music between offices over a LAN.
No. That would be running a radio station. Many internet radio stations were shut down a few years ago, because they were not paying for broadcast licenses for their music.karlb said:
What you're describing is the same thing.
Posting what I posted in the Apple suing over Asteroid thread:
Hmmmm... I think an "I told you so" to those people that kept trying to make the hollow argument that getting a copy of Tiger through illegal means was perfectly alright just won't do this time.
Oh well, I told you so anyway. I'll think of something better to say later.
A thumbs up to Apple. Knock those pirates out.
Hmmmm... I think an "I told you so" to those people that kept trying to make the hollow argument that getting a copy of Tiger through illegal means was perfectly alright just won't do this time.
Oh well, I told you so anyway. I'll think of something better to say later.
A thumbs up to Apple. Knock those pirates out.
My scope of knowledge here doesn't extend much past personal use, but I did know about the BMI/ASCAP licenses.shamino said:
Thanks for that wealth of information.
I'd have to echo this, myself.shamino said:
I know that the same setup at home isn't a problem (me listening to my sister's iTunes Library over the network, for example), but I don't know if moving that to a corporate network actually changes the rules of the game.
If anyone has a specific answer, I'd love to hear it.
tveric said:
Who cares?
It's more a case of your not paying attention.
Apple's not going after the slugs what download Tiger betas, it's going after the slimewads that violated the stated terms of a contract that they voluntarily made with Apple, the NDA.
I certainly wouldn't voluntarily do business with anyone whose word is worth so little to them.
Oh, and for the record, this thread is turning ito the exact type of discussion I thought it would when I first saw the topic. Legal v.s illegal acts, flames, immaturity, irresponsibility regarding illegal activities, morals, ethics, P2P, downloading legalities - they've all made appearances! Well, until the thread is shut down, I'll continue to read the posts, shake my head, chuckle and probably toss in a couple more replies if warranted... Keep it coming, it's not like we've had these debates on MacRumors a million times before...
broken_keyboard said:
That's a good point but is the only thing you get with the membership is a preview of the next major OS. I don't think so. I would never pay $500 I'm just not in need of what developers get. I might be curious and want to play around so I would download a copy for fun (if I had lots more time). It really wouldn't mean anything positive or negative to anyone but me and in the end I buy a full version anyway. I still think it is stealing and wrong but for someone like me no harm done.
kcmac said:
Great point. I am sure that MS has access to all of Tiger's features. Not like Apple and MS don't incorporate each other's ideas all the time. There are a lot of features in the OS X that were first in windows and I like a lot. It is just that Apple seems do it off so much better.
The problem with these 'car speeding' analogies is that you don't have to prove that sometimes breaking the law is moral. Why make an analogy? There's nothing about a law that infers that following said law is moral. Morality and legality are two separate things. There's nothing wrong with breaking a law given any law, so why make an analogy? Just talk about the facts straight up.
well i guess in the end it will be al good thing that Apple is going to clamp down on all these people leaking Tiger. after all it is the industrial espionage side of this that's really scary. no doubt MS would have multiple copies hidden away being examined somewhere...
and Apple should also just sue the dumbasses that post on forums that they've got a copy of Tiger, asking how to isntall it etc.
but i wonder why Apple didn't sue earlier? maybe the latest seeds contain more sensitive information?
and Apple should also just sue the dumbasses that post on forums that they've got a copy of Tiger, asking how to isntall it etc.
but i wonder why Apple didn't sue earlier? maybe the latest seeds contain more sensitive information?
whoa there, hold on a second! you mean pirating software can bite me in the ass? Next thing you know, they're going to tell me I can't take my video camera into the movie theater anymore. Jeez, what is the world coming to.
i knew they'd eventually track someone down for all that. it's like when dvd screeners get circulated... hello, they have a tracking # on them which says who you are that got the disc originally.
i knew they'd eventually track someone down for all that. it's like when dvd screeners get circulated... hello, they have a tracking # on them which says who you are that got the disc originally.
Late to this thread, but...
Apple software is worth the money and people should really stop pirating it. Otherwise, Apple's going to get all Microsoft on us and start requiring license codes and activations for everything <shudder>.
That's all
Apple software is worth the money and people should really stop pirating it. Otherwise, Apple's going to get all Microsoft on us and start requiring license codes and activations for everything <shudder>.
That's all
But every now and then the discussion/debates get so heated that the Forum section that houses this type of discussion gets closed for a cooldown period.~Shard~ said:Oh, and for the record, this thread is turning ito the exact type of discussion I thought it would when I first saw the topic. Legal v.s illegal acts, flames, immaturity, irresponsibility regarding illegal activities, morals, ethics, P2P, downloading legalities - they've all made appearances! Well, until the thread is shut down, I'll continue to read the posts, shake my head, chuckle and probably toss in a couple more replies if warranted... Keep it coming, it's not like we've had these debates on MacRumors a million times before...
As far as playing music at a business, that copyright question has been answered with Muzak and the number of times businesses have been forced to cough up money to the RIAA for playing the radio for customer enjoyment.
what so top secret about the OS anyway. if the 'competition' wanted to know what makes what tick, they would have bought a developers account, which would seem like pennies if they are getting the 'holy grail' . and besides, anybody who's anybody doesn't pirate software, so the people that matter and are actually developing and being productive will pay and pay well. ' piracy is like an extended trial period '.