Upgraded to 10.6. Is it legal to use my 10.5 upgrade on another machine?

[amyschiff]

Hey all,

I have a circa 2006 macbook pro that originally came with 10.4. In 2007 I upgraded to 10.5 and I have just recently upgraded again to 10.6.

My question is this: since 10.5 is no longer on my computer, could I legally use the 10.5 upgrade disk to upgrade another 10.4 machine? I know that the EULA only allows it to be on 1 machine at a time (unless you have a family pack), and this would be true in my case since the original machine that ran it is no longer on 10.5.

Thanks!

 

[Gregg2]

I believe your logic is correct.

There's no registration key like with some software.

I think you can do that in all good conscience.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Depends on which Snow Leopard you bought.

If you bought the $29 upgrade, then your Leopard licence is tied up with the upgrade as it is a condition in the EULA that you have a valid Leopard licence for THAT computer.

If however you bought the $169 Mac Box Set for upgrading computers with Tiger, then your conscience is clear, as you can revert to the original Tiger licence that came with your MacBook.

C. Leopard Upgrade Licenses. If you have purchased an Upgrade for Mac OS X Leopard license, then subject to the terms and conditions of this License, you are
granted a limited non-exclusive license to install, use and run one (1) copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-branded computer as long as that computer
has a properly licensed copy of Mac OS X Leopard already installed on it

 

[Gregg2]

Good point.

Seems to me that Apple complicated things with the way they released SL. It would have been far better to make it independent of owning Leopard. They would have needed to increase the price, but maybe not to the usual $129.

 

[kolax]

There is no license, no registration.. Just do it. You own both..

 

[amyschiff]

Hmm thanks everyone for your comments! That is indeed complicated with SL and Leopard. I guess I'll have to think about it some more. It's very vauge, and with no registration or product key, they can't really keep track of it.

 

[Consultant]

Good point.

Seems to me that Apple complicated things with the way they released SL. It would have been far better to make it independent of owning Leopard. They would have needed to increase the price, but maybe not to the usual $129.

LOL complicated.

I guess you haven't seen the dozens of versions of windows.

 

[axboi87]

Apple and Piracy

One reason among many that Apple genuinely doens't care about piracy of their OS is that they really would like every mac user who's computer will support it, to be running the latest version of their OS regardless of whether that person can afford to buy it or not. They want everyone to have the best experience possible and it's easier to support the computers if they are all up to date. They also want people who are thinking about buying a mac and are using their friends macs, to have the best first impression possible. If it came down to an entire company upgrading their computers with one disc, now that would be a different story, but for casual home and small business users, they would rather everyone be up to date however possible.

 

[Paul B]

Isn't it one license per user, not one license per system?

 

[Gregg2]

Isn't it one license per user, not one license per system?

No.

LOL complicated.

I guess you haven't seen the dozens of versions of windows.

I don't understand. I'm saying it's more complicated than Apple's previous releases, in terms of the EULA, for people with ethics.