Piracy and Mac OS X

[Pepzhez]

Geez ... Alex, please go enroll in either a freshman composition class or a logic course because it's glaringly obvious that you never learned fallacies of argument. If that's too much trouble for you, I'll be happy to send you one of my many desk copies of Hurley's "Logic" textbook. Without fail, they always send me two every semester, and I've never figured out why that is.

Unfortunately, they never bother to include a EULA in the postal packet along with the book freebies, so I have no idea what your or my specific legal rights would be in this situation and what they are or are not limited to - not to mention the possible legal ramifications of mental distress inflicted upon you by the legally murky (possibly criminal) act of gift-giving, and how this may or may not upset your sense of moral indignation and paranoic fear of violating the almighty Law.

I'm sure glad that Alex isn't on my Xmas gift list, because I never could afford the attorney consulting fees which surely would be a necessary prerequisite before sending him his present.

 

[Cappy]

Originally posted by e-coli
The software industry requires a certain amount of pirated versions to be in the marketplace. It stimulates sales. I guess in the same way that the handgun industry profits by flooding the black market with handguns.

I would certainly agree that piracy can sometimes stimulate sales. It worked well for the Amiga back in its heyday in the UK and has worked well for the Wintel platform previous to the internet. How many times have people borrowed a copy from work and then talk about the software being used to neighbors who didn't have that luxury? Happens alot. Napster even played a role in increasing sales to concerts.

The industry knows this goes on and those that know how to use it, do alright for the most part. I'm not condoning piracy but I do know that it's not always the evil that companies would have you believe.

I actually know people who do pirate software initially and use them as a trial. If they use it and like it, they buy it. If they don't, it goes bye-bye. Is it wrong? Yes, it is...legally. Some developers make you jump through hoops for testing software and only sometimes is it full featured. That's the closest argument I think anyone can really have on piracy. It is wrong but it's actually being used to evaluate a purchase...sometime more than one.

 

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by Pepzhez
Geez ... Alex, please go enroll in either a freshman composition class or a logic course because it's glaringly obvious that you never learned fallacies of argument. If that's too much trouble for you, I'll be happy to send you one of my many desk copies of Hurley's "Logic" textbook. Without fail, they always send me two every semester, and I've never figured out why that is.

I would say it was more a satirical attempt at mocking your half-baked justification for committing felony acts than a fallacious argument.

Unfortunately, they never bother to include a EULA in the postal packet along with the book freebies, so I have no idea what your or my specific legal rights would be in this situation and what they are or are not limited to - not to mention the possible legal ramifications of mental distress inflicted upon you by the legally murky (possibly criminal) act of gift-giving, and how this may or may not upset your sense of moral indignation and paranoic fear of violating the almighty Law.

I'm sure glad that Alex isn't on my Xmas gift list, because I never could afford the attorney consulting fees which surely would be a necessary prerequisite before sending him his present.

And now you are mocking me, I see.

 

[AlphaTech]

I don't believe this...

I actually agree with Cappy here. 😱 😱

Each new generation of OS typically needs a more powerful computer to run. If not, then it needs a more powerful system to run smoothly/better then the previous generation. Remember how many systems could run OS 9.x, and how many of them were no longer (officially) able to run OS X?? Just about every Mac from about 1994 on (PowerPC chipset forward) can run OS 9.x. OS X is calling for at least a G3 chip.

As for the version numbers, it has been pointed out before that Apple is going against what it has done in the past for numbering. With the 10.x being major updates and the 10.x.x being minor/free ones.

You could/can go from OS 9.0 all the way to 9.2.2 via free downloads. I just did a very fast and easy search on Apple's support site (downloads section) and was able to find the 9.1 update (9.0-9.0.4 required) as well as the 9.2.1 update (updates 9.1 or 9.2) you can then download the 9.2.2 update and be at the very latest version. All for free, especially if the computer you have shipped with 9.x.

Hey alex, don't let the ******* get you down. 😀

 

[mec]

What about the BUSINESS case(s) for and against?

Hi All,

The moral, ethical, and end user arguments are really interesting reading. What are people's thoughts the possible outcomes and goals for Apple financially??

An example:

If Jaguar arrives and it can be installed without a license key for each machine I will be sorely tempted, and pressured, to install it on my laptop, my wife's laptop, my Mom's G3 and my Dad's new iMac after purchasing just one copy.

If that were the case there would be 4 installed copies of 10.2 floating around out there and Apple would only see the $129- of (gross) revenue.

If Jaguar arrives and it requires a paid license keyed to a machine's ethernet ID or serial numbers
that one copy or four copies (depending on how they implement the scheme), if I could convince these 3 people that they should (or must) pony up, will represent $516- of revenue to Apple.

I am sure there are many early adopters of OS X
that will do at least one "favor" for a family member, friend, themselves or their company and slap their 10.2 CD (or copies) into more than 1 Mac. It's too simple and too easy to do someone a 'no cost' favor and "save them a few bucks".

It's very easy to say cheaper is better as a user who clicks the agree button as fast as possible during an install and earns brownie points every time they violate a EULA with no consequences for them.

Possible Upside to Locking:

If Apple nodelocks future versions of OS X they could possibly grab a lot more cash from their die hard users and from switchers who might otherwise freeload off of someone willing to burn, post, or install a copy for them.

That is money to build market share, staff genius bars, man hotlines, buy software and hardware companies, to hire more talented programmers and invest more man hours to make 10.3 that much more competitive and compelling.

Possible Down side:

Apple can put Phil or Steve on stage a WWDC 2003 to explain to their developers why the growth of the installed base has slowed to a trickle.

To explain why there is a fractured chaotic installed base of machines running 8.6, 9.2, 10.1.6, 10.2, 10.3 etc, all with different feature sets and development issues.

To explain why forward progress on Mac OS X has been thrown into question by short term greed.

Free vs. Paid / Locked vs. Unlocked:

With free unlocked updates like 10.1.5 Apple can point to ALL of their Mac OS X users and tell developers that MacOS X is a consistent and up to date installed base of users to develop for.

Apple will likely see no major growth or drop in income from their OS efforts.

With paid updates (or possibly worse locked) updates Apple would no longer be able to compel a developer to build on technologies which were only deployed in a fraction of the installed base - QuickDraw GX anyone?

They would likely see some rise in income from "freeloaders" going legit and some decrease from pissed off users just saying no.

Speculation:

Apple wants to grow their base and their income and in their arrogance and greed don't care too much about their current users.

Apple is using .Mac to test these waters.

If Apple makes enough money off of .Mac I bet that Software Update will only be free for security patches and that any new feature downloads, will require a paid .Mac subscription... in a year or two you will have a choice of buying your annual (locked) updates for $129- or getting them a month earlier for $19.95 - if you are a current .Mac subscriber.

Here's comes "Apple Club" all over again.

-mec

 

[sicle]

Moronic analogies

Enough of stupid analogies. The original topic of this thread was about installing a copy of an OS on multiple computers in your home. Get real! The overwhelming majority of people do not regard installing an operating system they have bought on two computers as immoral. I doubt anyone has been prosecuted for this I doubt they ever will be. Is this even technically theft? I don't know the intricacies of US law but I doubt whether this would be considered as theft in most countries. Please remember most people in the world are not governed by US law.

Morality? Possibly endangering someone's life by driving over the speed limit seems like a much more serious crime to me than software piracy. Oh, but wait I don't write commercial software.

Does piracy cause jobs to be lost in the software industry? Most figures that are bandied around assume that the people who use pirated software would have bought the software if they couldn't pirate. As Pepzhez has pointed out in most cases this isn't true.

What certainly will cost jobs in any software company is if people stop buying its products. I believe we are reaching the point now where people will stop buying. I have. I no longer buy upgrades to Photoshop or Office. There are cheap and even free alternatives that do what I need to do. Judging from sales of Office X a lot of other people have the same attitude.

I think most of the posters screaming about the morality of software piracy are simply ridiculous. However, I don't see piracy as the best way to change things. The way to make your voices heard is simply not to buy until they reduce their inflated prices. Buy shareware produced by conscientious small developers. Use open source software. Make do with existing versions of software your have.

I sincerely hope that Apple see sense and do not go down the Microsoft road on licensing.

 

[e-coli]

Re: What about the BUSINESS case(s) for and against?

Originally posted by mec
If Apple makes enough money off of .Mac I bet that Software Update will only be free for security patches and that any new feature downloads, will require a paid .Mac subscription... in a year or two you will have a choice of buying your annual (locked) updates for $129- or getting them a month earlier for $19.95 - if you are a current .Mac subscriber.

Here's comes "Apple Club" all over again.

that's interesting. i hadn't thought of it that way, but i wouldn't be suprised. That would really p*ss some people off though. It's kinda like having to lease your computing services. Heck, M$ is getting away with it.

 

[Pepzhez]

Also doing an "end run" around the EULA IS theft, the same as stealing the application off a store shelf.

Says who? Never saw that in the Bible or the Koran or any US court document. AlphaTech, I want you to show me the legal ruling which states this. Show me a test case in which someone was convicted, in which the law equates a EULA violation with physical felony theft. You can't, because it's never been tested in court. Ask any corporate attorney about the binding legality of software EULA's and she or he will tell you ... it has not yet been challenged in a US court.

Now ask yourself why so many multi-billion dollar corporations have not pressed the issue. It would be extremely easy for them to find violators of their EULA (corporate, eduction, individuals) and attempt to sue for damages. Why haven't they? Easy - they are in no hurry to have their EULA's scrutinized and found wanting.

Theft is theft is theft ...

You intimate that you subscribe to the ten commandments, thus implying that "theft" is a matter of divine law. But things are more problematic than that, so I ask you to consider the following and reconcile that with your inflexible absolutism:

Obviously, the concept of theft is a relative matter, varying from place to place, and is contingent upon the question of what does and does not constitute private property and what legal rights are bestowed by a legal institution in any given place.

For example, I happen to know that the software EULA's differ in the US and Germany, as I live and work in both countries at different times of the year. Since the EULA in Germany accords me the legal right to put multiple copies of a single piece of software on as many machines as I own, legally in Germany, I am not a thief if I am installing the same copy of OS X onto both my Power mac and my iBook. However, I am perhaps legally considered a thief if I do the same thing in the US. So which is right? Where to do you draw absolutes?

According to divine absolutism, is it all dependent upon geography then? Am I not a thief when the iBook is in Europe, but become one when I and it enter US airspace? You tell me.

So it just isn't that simple after all, is it then? If you're going to make such sweeping generalizations, then prepare to justify what you are saying.

And, yes, I would steal a van in order to transport people, if there was no other choice and if it was a matter of life and death. And, no, I wouldn't lose any sleep over the alleged "wrongness" of the act of thievery. I think it would be a justifiable act.

 

[Rower_CPU]

Romanticism...

Wow, Jean Valjean and Robin Hood rolled into one and brought forward to the 21st century...impressive.

Romanticize the act of theft if you wish, but that does not change the legal ramifications of your actions. If something is illegal in one country and not another that does not entitle you to break the law in the latter. Marijuana use is legal in the Netherlands. Do you expect to be able to use it legally here, if you happen to spend half your time there? Please. Now who's making sweeping generalizations?

 

[sicle]

Deal with people's arguments

Rower_cpu please deal with his arguments. Is a breach of the licensing agreement installing an OS on more than one computer the equivalent of theft even in the USA? Legal precedents please! If you haven't got them don't bandy around phrases like theft.

 

[Pepzhez]

Now Alex is setting US legal precedent.

I don't know why I have to keep reminding you and AlphaTech that software EULA infringements have never been challenged, much less upheld, in any US court. So please tell me which felony acts I am guilty of committing? Perhaps in your own private Lilliput, but not in the eyes of US law.

Neither you or AlphaTech have any idea of what you're talking about. I'd say that you are both acting hysterically, tossing around epithets like "immoral" and "felon" with the zeal of Mccarthyites screaming "Communist!" and having no logic or proof to justify any of it. None whatsoever.

Let's put this issue to rest, shall we? Alex, AlphaTech and the rest of the Anti-Piracy Hysteric Squad can send all excess cash they have to Cuppertino, volunteer to pay $800 for Jaguar and $10,000 for OS 10.3 when it's released in six months. They can also form vigilante groups to beat senseless any and all immoral kids who have a Carracho app on their desktops, perform canings on and collect reasonable fines from all immoral third world software pirates, maintain Apple's product activation servers, and spend the remainder of their time gravely informing all exiting customers from the Apple Store, purchases dangling from their wrists, the dire consequences of breaking the almighty EULA. Perhaps Fritz Hollings will even submit a bill (after Apple gives him at least $187,000, that is) to add an amendment to the U.S. Constitution, officially recognizing the power and the privilege of the Apple Cops.

Then maybe NOW the rest of us can sleep soundly at night, knowing such upright citizens are making sure that Steve Jobs won't be up tossing and turning all night long, pining over that pilferred Quick Time Pro key some Carracho kid or starving Third World peasant snatched from the jaws of Wicked Corruption and Vile Temptation (cause we're ALL potential criminals, after all).

To the grave, to the grave! The day of doom is nigh! Unless of course Alex and AlphaTech can save us. Don't worry, they'll make sure that their sweet prince Steve Jobs won't have to worry his pretty little head about a single thing.

 

[Cappy]

Originally posted by Pepzhez


Says who? Never saw that in the Bible or the Koran or any US court document. AlphaTech, I want you to show me the legal ruling which states this. Show me a test case in which someone was convicted, in which the law equates a EULA violation with physical felony theft. You can't, because it's never been tested in court. Ask any corporate attorney about the binding legality of software EULA's and she or he will tell you ... it has not yet been challenged in a US court.

Have you asked any corporate attourney this question? Silly question...I'm expecting you to be honest when you're endorsing piracy.

Just because it has not been challenged(if that is the case), does not mean it's ok to ignore it. Where do things stop if it's ok to ignore it? One small town just buys one copy and then circulates it through the neighborhood? The reason it has not been challeneged(again, if that is the case) would be because you're talking about small quantities in the consumer's hands in the grand scheme of things. The law system is taxed the way it is so it's more productive to just stick to going after businesses and institutions.

Originally posted by Pepzhez

For example, I happen to know that the software EULA's differ in the US and Germany, as I live and work in both countries at different times of the year. Since the EULA in Germany accords me the legal right to put multiple copies of a single piece of software on as many machines as I own, legally in Germany, I am not a thief if I am installing the same copy of OS X onto both my Power mac and my iBook. However, I am perhaps legally considered a thief if I do the same thing in the US. So which is right? Where to do you draw absolutes?

And in some countries you get your hand cut off for stealing. Get a grip dude! You're trying to make this argument something that it's not. Piracy is all about ease and convenience. It's going to happen no matter where you are but the harder it's made to happen and the more strict the punishment, the more likely the point is goig to get across what's right or wrong about it according to the culture you're in.

Originally posted by Pepzhez
According to divine absolutism, is it all dependent upon geography then? Am I not a thief when the iBook is in Europe, but become one when I and it enter US airspace? You tell me.

Morals are typically defined by culture and the US is a multicultural country where the government and laws are made up by the people. The vast majority in the US feel that these laws, rules, and regulations are necessary to maintain a strong country in commerce.

Originally posted by Pepzhez
And, yes, I would steal a van in order to transport people, if there was no other choice and if it was a matter of life and death. And, no, I wouldn't lose any sleep over the alleged "wrongness" of the act of thievery. I think it would be a justifiable act.

Yeah and I can picture you sitting in your jail cell telling all of the inmates how wrong it was that you were convicted. 🙂

 

[Cappy]

Originally posted by Pepzhez
Now Alex is setting US legal precedent.

I don't know why I have to keep reminding you and AlphaTech that software EULA infringements have never been challenged, much less upheld, in any US court. So please tell me which felony acts I am guilty of committing? Perhaps in your own private Lilliput, but not in the eyes of US law.

You really need to go back to school if you believe this about US law. It is a binding license until challenged and the courts rule otherwise. Not the other way around. You *could* assume that it would fall on its face but that doesn't change the law until challenged and the license is altered.

Also you seem to imply that Mac OS X users have some sort of right to get 10.2 for free. It is a priviledge not a right. A priviledge that is not going to happen and no challenge in court is going to change that.

Originally posted by Pepzhez

Neither you or AlphaTech have any idea of what you're talking about. I'd say that you are both acting hysterically, tossing around epithets like "immoral" and "felon" with the zeal of Mccarthyites screaming "Communist!" and having no logic or proof to justify any of it. None whatsoever.

And your points had proof? C'mon now...play fair. Stop trying to spin doctor this. Maybe you should become a politician so you can address this issue. 😉

Originally posted by Pepzhez
Let's put this issue to rest, shall we? Alex, AlphaTech and the rest of the Anti-Piracy Hysteric Squad can send all excess cash they have to Cuppertino, volunteer to pay $800 for Jaguar and $10,000 for OS 10.3 when it's released in six months. They can also form vigilante groups to beat senseless any and all immoral kids who have a Carracho app on their desktops, perform canings on and collect reasonable fines from all immoral third world software pirates, maintain Apple's product activation servers, and spend the remainder of their time gravely informing all exiting customers from the Apple Store, purchases dangling from their wrists, the dire consequences of breaking the almighty EULA. Perhaps Fritz Hollings will even submit a bill (after Apple gives him at least $187,000, that is) to add an amendment to the U.S. Constitution, officially recognizing the power and the privilege of the Apple Cops.

Then maybe NOW the rest of us can sleep soundly at night, knowing such upright citizens are making sure that Steve Jobs won't be up tossing and turning all night long, pining over that pilferred Quick Time Pro key some Carracho kid or starving Third World peasant snatched from the jaws of Wicked Corruption and Vile Temptation (cause we're ALL potential criminals, after all).

To the grave, to the grave! The day of doom is nigh! Unless of course Alex and AlphaTech can save us. Don't worry, they'll make sure that their sweet prince Steve Jobs won't have to worry his pretty little head about a single thing.

Ok. You've convinced me. You just like to read and hear what you say. You've spouted off some of the biggest bunch of horse sh*t I've seen in a long time.

 

[sicle]

The law

Copying a CD for personal use, and even giving a track or two to a friend is not theft whatever the manufacturer writes on box. Can't you conceive that the same concept of fair use could possibly apply to software?
I do not believe the majority of people in any country believe that installing an OS you have bought on more than one computer you own is theft. I think most people's sense of morality is quite sound.

 

[Rower_CPU]

Re: The law

Originally posted by sicle
Copying a CD for personal use, and even giving a track or two to a friend is not theft whatever the manufacturer writes on box. Can't you conceive that the same concept of fair use could possibly apply to software?
I do not believe the majority of people in any country believe that installing an OS you have bought on more than one computer you own is theft. I think most people's sense of morality is quite sound.

If the manufacturer writes on the box or places a EULA on the software and you click "Agree" you are legally bound to follow the stipulations of that agreement.

Have you ever read one of these, or is it jsut another dialog box you just have to click through when you install your software?

 

[Pepzhez]

Cappy,

Why, yes, I have indeed asked three different corporate attorneys about this very topic - all of whom have said that this is a much debated issue in intellectual property circles, and one which no software company is eager to test in court - for the reasons that I stated.

Plus, haven't I been quite forthcoming about my activities? I haven't made it a secret with anyone, not with the people with whom I've dealt, not in the conversations I've had with attorneys (and even the Apple rep I met at the university), and certainly not in Macrumors. So how do you think I am not being honest in my convictions and actions?

I don't believe in divine absolutism or cosmic law, but AlphaTech and Alex apparently do and use that vague, half-thought generalization to justify their hysteria, and that is the issue I was addressing. Of course it's relative! And that's precisely my point. They are equating "thievery" with morality, or rather lack of morality. "Morality" and/or "immorality" has zilch to do with the law in the US. In other words, Alex and AlphaTech are not talking about any legal definition - they are judging others according to whatever divine or cosmic "law' they are projecting onto the world. To that, I simply ask how it is they make the distinction. What is it based on? Is US law the cosmic law? The EULA is different in Germany (which, like the US, does not drag the slippery slope of "morality" into the legal system), so how do these two instances of legal variance figure into their "moral" universe?

I'm frankly amazed that some people here are such inflexible letter of the law zealots, raining down hellfire on someone who pirates a piece of damn software. But I understand how arbitrary it all is. After all, I never saw Alex or AlphaTech defending and salivating over Windows XP product activation, nor have I ever heard them whine over how heavily pirated Microsoft software is, nor did I ever hear them screaming for the heads of the Windows Pirates. But if someone dares to complain (gasp) that Jaguar pricing is unfair, that the EULA is unfair, if someone, somewhere d/l'd FCP on Carracho - hey! these two are ready for the jihad!

If Steve Jobs proclaimed himself Hitler tomorrow, these guys would be the first on their block to buy the requisite jackboots, no doubt about it.

Fortunately, I seriously doubt that Jobs or anyone on his staff is anywhere near the hysteric these guys are.

That's it! I'm tired of repeating myself. I really don't care if anyone here wishes to snatch Jaguar from Carracho or if they want to pay double for the privilege of owning it. It's up to you and I'm in no position to judge. I'm not god (I'm an atheist anyway) and I'm not on the Apple board and I'm not the district attorney, so what's it to me? I don't think Apple is going to collapse because some kid is getting FCP on Carracho. And if Apple somehow managed to stop all piracy, I don't believe FCP will suddenly come down in retail price. Or at least I'll believe it when I see it.

Again, Cappy, when someone is convicted as a felon for violating a EULA, come tell me about it. Anyone with the cash can assemble a legal team to compose a EULA saying any crazy thing you want it to. You can assume it's legally binding if the EULA in Jaguar has a provision that no user of Jaguar can ever say anything bad about Steve Jobs' shirts, but until someone is convicted of a felony in court for badmouthing Steve's attire - in direct violation of the Jaguar EULA - save and stuff your moral and legal bellowing and branding.

And just where in the world did I imply that people deserve 10.2 for free? I never said that. In fact, I never even brought this issue up. Either you are confusing my posts with someone else's or you're hallucinating.

 

[skunk]

EULA SCHMEULA

An EULA is not law. An EULA is an attempt to form a contract, usually after purchase. Until it has been tested in the courts it has no legal status. Many contracts foisted on purchasers are unfair, and have been found to be so when they are challenged. Actually, this applies to quite a few laws as well: how many times have unfair laws been overturned? Many laws are in breach of natural justice (as represented by various Constitutions), because many are drafted by vested interests in an attempt to extend their own agenda. There is, however, a clear distinction between installing one copy of an OS on all your own machines (as a private individual), and distributing or downloading copies without paying. The latter is obviously theft, irrespective of the law in any state, whereas the former is not: whoever said that stealing from yourself is theft is quite plainly mad.
Just for the record, I have paid for one copy of every piece of software I have.

 

[durandal]

mooooooo

Piracy is wrong.
Price gouging is wrong too.

Why don't they sell a $20 update version of OSX that is the system only and none of those new apps I will never use, as well as a Sherlock without those net thingies. And charge separately for the apps, or sell the whole deal for $130.

On the weed argument+the "people of this beautiful multicurltural country make the law" argument: if the majority really did make the law, weed would be legal. And Bush wouldnt be in power.
USgov is maybe better than 3rd world countries, that doesnt make it good.

And for the people bitching about their Car prices, sell your car, cancel your car insurance and tear up your registration. Get on the Bus or a bike. Thats one less car's exhaust fumes i'll be inhaling.

Pephez, you're funny. Doesnt add much to the thread tho.

Apple, please be reasonable. Either protect your software and sell it at resonable prices so that we CAN buy multiple copies and not break the law, or charge your ridiculous prices for bloatware bundled apps which I wont use (for all I know they are the best thing since french bread -american sponge sliced bread sucks- but I don't need and e-calender or a syncing app or expensive and prestigious web storage for backups. iomegaware was free with my zipdrive.) and dont protect it so I can actually pay a price its woth by dividing the price of $130/6=approx 20=the price i should pay for a couple of of OSX updates.

Whew. Rant and digressions.
And no comment on my spelling, i'm in a hurry to get to the waterpark.

 

[peterjhill]

Re: Moronic analogies

Originally posted by sicle
Enough of stupid analogies. The original topic of this thread was about installing a copy of an OS on multiple computers in your home. Get real! The overwhelming majority of people do not regard installing an operating system they have bought on two computers as immoral. I doubt anyone has been prosecuted for this I doubt they ever will be. Is this even technically theft?
<snip>
I sincerely hope that Apple see sense and do not go down the Microsoft road on licensing.

It is not a question of morality for me, it is a question of ethics. Legal Ethics. It is illegal in the united states, and any other country that apple can make it illegal in to install the os on more than one machine. As for being prosecuted, well, I speed when I am driving on interstates. I go 73 in a 65 mph zone. I realize that I am breaking the law, and am willing if I get caught to face the music and pay any fine that I would incur. The possible fine for stealing software is much greater.

What road are you talking about? Microsoft has to use license codes. As there are way many more people with PC's, thus the number of people willing to pirate the software being greater, they need to protect themselves from lost sales. Who gives a f**k about having your OS less widely installed compared to actually selling less of the s**t.

again, I will laugh at all the pissed off people, I will ROFL, if Apple is able to keep illegal copies of 10.2 from being installed.

 

[peterjhill]

Originally posted by Pepzhez
Cappy,

Why, yes, I have indeed asked three different corporate attorneys about this very topic - all of whom have said that this is a much debated issue in intellectual
And just where in the

...
<snip, blah, blah, drivel, drivel, communism is dead dude snip>

They really need to implement a SQUELCH feature to this bboard software. The bandwidth that Pepzhez is consuming, all those electrons wasted. (IMNSHO)

 

[peterjhill]

Re: Re: What about the BUSINESS case(s) for and against?

Originally posted by e-coli


that's interesting. i hadn't thought of it that way, but i wouldn't be suprised. That would really p*ss some people off though. It's kinda like having to lease your computing services. Heck, M$ is getting away with it.

e-coli was speaking of the need to pay for software updates. I would bet that Apple would not do that. Microsoft is not doing it (therefore not getting away it).

Yes, 95-98 and nt-2000 did contain bug fixes, but there were other significant changes to the OS that warrented a paid upgrade. windowsupdate.microsoft.com is still free, and bill is not stupid enough to make it a paid service, and neither is steve.

 

[peterjhill]

Originally posted by Pepzhez


Says who? Never saw that in the Bible or the Koran or any US court document. AlphaTech, I want you to show me the legal ruling which states this.

The web makes it so easy to search the law...

TITLE 17--COPYRIGHTS

CHAPTER 1--SUBJECT MATTER AND SCOPE OF COPYRIGHT

Sec. 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

Why Apple owns the copyright to software written by programmers in its employee:

USC17 Ch2 Sec 109
(b) Works Made for Hire.--In the case of a work made for hire, the
employer or other person for whom the work was prepared is considered
the author for purposes of this title, and, unless the parties have
expressly agreed otherwise in a written instrument signed by them, owns
all of the rights comprised in the copyright.

What they will do to you:

TITLE 17--COPYRIGHTS

CHAPTER 5--COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT AND REMEDIES

Sec. 503. Remedies for infringement: Impounding and disposition
of infringing articles

(b) As part of a final judgment or decree, the court may order the
destruction or other reasonable disposition of all copies or
phonorecords found to have been made or used in violation of the
copyright owner's exclusive rights, and of all plates, molds, matrices,
masters, tapes, film negatives, or other articles by means of which such
copies or phonorecords may be reproduced.

Interesting article from law.com

Piracy is indeed a bad thing. It cheats those who've created something valuable out of their rightful compensation. My theory has always been if it's good enough to use, it's good enough to pay for. On the other hand, software used to be the cheapest part of a PC purchase, often accounting for a small fraction of the total system cost. Today the software you run probably costs more than the hardware.
I don't begrudge Microsoft taking steps to protect its intellectual property. I do have a problem with the heavy-handedness they use in enforcement, but more on that later.

 

[GPTurismo]

Let me say that the only place to focus on making money is the business sector. Companies charge way to much for their software for the average consumer. Even 130 dollars is a lot for when I PAID for a freaking apple machine and they won't keep it up to date, especially since they are going to FORCE you to use 10.2 to run newer software. I really now see why so many mac users are going linux.

Remember, 130$ for the average consumer is half a months of groceries. And again, the fact I paid 3 grande for their damn machine... like so many other people...

It looks like the only platform I am starting to respect for consumers is Linux >:| Especially since Apple makes their money off of hardware, they are simply going to the old "leech the consumer around every corner" program.

BUT....

I don't trust spymac, so we will see when 10.2 hits.

 

[mmcneil]

Re: One OS X on Multi machines

Originally posted by eric_n_dfw
As an adendum to my prior post - one easy way they could implement a check for this would be like what Adobe does. It polls the local network looking for other copies of itself with the same serial number. (Not sure how site license serial numbers are handled) and will refuse to work if multiple copies are running.

Office vX, VPC, and Action Utilities have exactly this type of licensing system. It is probably the easiest and least intrusive to implement - perhaps less hackable😕

 

[mmcneil]

Anybody here a lawyer?

Certainly seems like a lot of "legal opinion" - I vote we throw five lawyers in a ring to settle this - the survivor gets to have his opinion overturned by either the 9th Circuit or the court of public opinion😛