

Forget the Courts — Apple May Fight Mac Clones With Tech - edw519
http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/news/2008/04/apple_psystar

======
pius
If any part of the Leopard EFI has a component that can be construed to be a
security measure to prevent the software from use on unauthorized hardware,
Apple has a DMCA case. And the DMCA _does_ have teeth.

~~~
dcurtis
Yeah, but they're arguing a level higher than that. They're saying the
security measures Apple is using are illegal. In that case, the DMCA is
rendered irrelevant, right? You can't protect illegal protection schemes.

~~~
pius
That's an interesting point. Now's a good time to say IANAL and I'm just
speculating, but as I understand it they're not really arguing that Apple's
security measures are illegal, but that their business practices are illegal;
Apple is entitled to have whatever security they'd like. If that's true, then
the DMCA violation would still stand.

~~~
wright
Nah, the DMCA bites the bucket in cases like that. It was already overturned
for a garage door opener and a printer manufacturer.

You can't claim DMCA protection in cases where you are simply trying to shut
out competition. Others are allowed to be interoperable.

------
TrevorJ
Exactly the conclusion I came to in my short take on this development at
<http://borderlinetheory.com/?p=107#more-107>

~~~
wright
In light of the Lexmark decision Apple can't stop others from being
interoperable legally. Their choices are to bludgeon clonemakers with
frivolous lawsuits and try to bankrupt them for pursuing their rights, or to
keep trying to make OS X paranoid about what it's running on while clonemakers
keep patching the code that does hardware checks. And clonemakers might even
be able to sue to stop Apple from doing that.

See <http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/06/07/1416228>

------
zkinion
Hah, everybody was in here saying the sky was falling and they would be shut
down overnight, but it turns out this lawsuit threat isn't as real as it
seems.

------
wright
Requiring usage only on Apple hardware would be illegal tying.

Trying to do it technically would amount to the same thing.

~~~
wmf
Sorta like how IOS is illegally tied to Cisco hardware and my car's engine
firmware is illegally tied to the engine computer, etc?

~~~
wright
More like how your car can't require its own brand of oil, gas, air filters,
light bulbs, etc. If Cisco starts selling its operating system on a CD and you
make a clone that can run it, it's fair game. Or another company that makes
specialized firmware can sell it so you can install it on your car, assuming
it passes regulatory requirements for safety (I'd assume).

<http://www.google.com/search?q=illegal+tying>

