

Apple says booting OS X makes an unauthorized copy - cesare
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20091024213209193

======
bmunro
From the article:

Psystar copies the hard drive of a Macintosh computer containing Mac OS X (as
depicted above on the left side of the diagram) onto its "imaging station"
computer (shown in the middle of the diagram). This is the first unlawful
copy.

Psystar then modifies this copy of Mac OS X to create a "master copy" that wil
run on non-Apple computers. Psystar next uses "hard drive imaging" to install
copies of its "master copy" of Mac OS X from the imaging station onto each
computer it assembles. This is the second unlawful copy (a process repeated
many times).

 _Finally, every time Psystar turns on any of the Psystar computers running
Mac OS X, which it does before shipping each computer, Psystar necessarily
makes a separate modified copy of Mac OS X in Random Access Memory, or "RAM."
This is the third unlawful copy._

~~~
frankus
This "third unlawful copy" really highlights a glaring incompatibility between
copyright law as it exists and digital technology.

As it now stands, it is possible to argue that purely incidental copies of
digital data are subject to copyright law. The law that used to regulate what
a mid-sized or large enterprise did with its printing press now regulates what
happens when someone presses "play."

That's not to say that copyright lawyers and "big content" aren't pleased with
the law as it stands, but it increasingly fails to generate a beneficial
tradeoff between incentivizing content creation and supporting a rich public
domain.

------
benofsky
I don't see what the issue over this is. The headline is sensationalist and
misleading, what Apple is claiming is technically correct. Booting a Pystar
computer does create an _unlawful copy_ of OS X in memory because OS X isn't
licensed to run on these computers.

~~~
mindslight
Just like playing a CD in an unapproved player (with skip protection) creates
an unlawful copy in memory?

A copyright is not absolute ownership of a bit pattern, but a balance of the
interests of consumers and producers. Apple is clearly attempting to abuse
copyright law; such in-memory copies are implicitly granted with the disc as
they're necessarily for the software to operate.

~~~
tedunangst
When you buy a CD, does it come with a license that only authorizes it for
play in approved players?

No.

~~~
mindslight
And if it did, would it be enforceable or laughable? How would playing an
audio CD even require agreeing to a license? The original seller may have
agreed to a shrinkwrap contract, but one purchasing a used CD certainly
hasn't. Copyright protection coverts duplicating the content of an object, not
use of the object.

~~~
joubert
Well, the fine print on most of my CD's include the prohibition of
unauthorized LENDING of the disc.

------
simanyay
Finally, every time [your name] uses Pandora.com, [your name] necessarily
makes a separate copy of a song in Random Access Memory, or RAM and on the
Hard Disk Drive, or HDD. This is an unlawful copy.

This is so ridiculous it is even not funny.

~~~
jsz0
Not a very good analogy. The content on Pandora is licensed so every copy in
the chain is completely legal and adheres to the license terms agreed to by
all parties involved.

------
jsz0
This is obviously more of a legal statement than a technical statement. If you
go into it with the assumption that Apple's license agreement is valid then
each time they touch Apple's bits without legal right they would be committing
violations. If your legal goal is to prove damages you would obviously want to
document each infraction. Not being a scummy lawyer myself it seems sort of
similar to the damages awarded for piracy. I may only break the DMCA once by
distributing one copy of a CD online however the damages reflect the number of
subsequent infractions that occurred due to my failure to adhere to the
license terms.

------
jrockway
Clearly the solution is for Psystar to make a bootloader that takes an OS X
DVD as input and results in an install as the output. Then the user is
infringing, Psystar just sells a program that the user can misuse to install
OS X "illegally".

If handgun makers aren't liable for murder (or wrongful death), then Psystar
shouldn't be liable for copyright infringement.

------
cesare
Found on Slashdot: [http://slashdot.org/submission/1105620/Apple-says-booting-
OS...](http://slashdot.org/submission/1105620/Apple-says-booting-OS-X-makes-
an-unauthorized-copy?art_pos=2)

