Apple Mac OS X 10.4.1 for Intel hits piracy sites


Recommended Posts

Are there any screenshots of someone actually running osx on a pc? Except the apple ones..

586054856[/snapback]

Will therre be a difference?

Pretty sure that says 'PowerPC' in there

586054979[/snapback]

Evem if it doesn't could u jsut use xcode to make a dialog that looks exactly like the official one but syas Penitum 4 instead?

i know theres torrents and all but has anyone considerd apple might be watching them

thats whats putting me off downloading one!

586054990[/snapback]

I'm sure every illegal activity is monitored but things like these will be monitored and if possible the violators will be prosecuted as well.

They would go after the seeders, not the leechers.

586055017[/snapback]

A leecher uploads as well as dowloads, no escaping it.

more importantly im wondering if this build will "expire" after the date that ADC members are supposed to return their hardware. If thats the case apple is giving everyone (who downloads it) a good taste. so those trial period rumors may be true especially if apple athourized the leak and is then just "wink wink hush hush" and expected some crackers to make it work on any x86 processor. In any case i think this does help apple a bit.

oh and in a few hours i shall see if it runs on any of my amd boxes (dont have a single intel box :( )

more importantly im wondering if this build will "expire" after the date that ADC members are supposed to return their hardware. If thats the case apple is giving everyone (who downloads it) a good taste. so those trial period rumors may be true especially if apple athourized the leak and is then just "wink wink hush hush" and expected some crackers to make it work on any x86 processor. In any case i think this does help apple a bit.

oh and in a few hours i shall see if it runs on any of my amd boxes (dont have a single intel box :( )

586055077[/snapback]

if you're downloading it now, you might want to open up part of the file you've downloaded so far in a hex editor or text editor.. it could be a fake...

what are you on about? :p im just stating my opinion, but in the case of an official leak, they wont sue people.... hopefully. Because if it was an offical leak and people were sude for downlaoding it that would be wrong.

586055094[/snapback]

Official leak ? Is this the most absurd post of the day ? :huh:

There are no official leaks.

It has been leaked on the net. ~24mins ago it was pred. Thats all the info I'm giving.

its pre'd by XISO

anyone (well not anyone can join) get get into a addpre channel / db and add a fake release.. and/or join public pre channels (after-all? oink?) and search for them. doesn't mean there real

if it is fake, it would be pretty funny as to how much hype its causing across various forums...plus the group under whom it got release by, if that is fake too...i dont think they would be too happy with having their name under a fake release which got uploaded by sumone bored trying to stir up hype

I thik this is fake.. uaually things this hot doesnt take several hours to spread.. If it was released news sites would be posting screenshots by now.. Popular sites like Neowin/Winbeta/Enagadget has high level pirated connection I thin so they gets stuff much faster..

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • This got me thinking, would you rather a self driving car prioritise protecting its passengers or everyone else? I'd choose the one that keeps me and my kids safest. At some point, these cars have to make those choices already, don't they? Wonder if we have a way to find out what way they lean.
    • The proportion (or number of iterations) has nothing to with this aspect of Copyright I am describing. In short, it doesn't matter how many times the manager tells you to change something or how. Your work product is always YOURS until and unless you then assign that to the person representing the client/company, usually for financial compensation -- either in salary or as a subcontract work for hire payment. if iterations determined copyright, then businesses would have learned to just keep making changes until they could claim they owned the copyright, without having to compensate the artist for their work. And that would be BAD. The only place where the amount of changes does have a role is in how much does a human modify a previous public domain work (from any source) before it is considered fair use or their own work, etc. For example, if a human makes substantial changes to a public domain (re: AI, by definition) work, then they can then claim that derivative work as their own...but NEVER the original version, of course. That's why anyone can make a movie about Dracula, for example, as long as it is based on the public domain novel, but not if they take new ideas from copyrighted movies made afterwards. As one of the people who personally advised the US Copyright Office on their recent ruling on these very issues, be assured that I specifically used the terminology precisely -- though I made it simple enough for laymen to understand it. If I made this confusing by doing so, I apologize. But, to be clear regarding your assumption that I would agree to your second statement that I quoted above -- the answer is NO. If AI does the work, no matter how much "direction" you give it, it cannot be copyrighted. All AI generated content is in the Public Domain and therefore the copyright cannot be assigned to ANYONE, even you -- until and unless substantial modifications are made to it BY A HUMAN BEING (yourself or a contracted artist/writer/etc.) and then that copyright on the derivative work is legally (in writing) transferred to you. This is a critical distinction. And it is important that people, especially AI sloppers, understand this. For example, YouTube is not paying AI slop generators for the copyright, etc. of their AI slop. What YouTube is doing is sharing AD REVENUE for permission to publish your AI slop. Copyright/ownership/rights never come into it. Importantly, that means that anyone can copy any AI slopware on YouTube, etc. and rehost it anywhere they want, even back on YouTube, and there is nothing legal that YouTube can do about it with regards to copyright protections, ownership, DMCA, etc. Anyone is legally free to use any AI slopware in any way they want. When this ruling was pending, I warned Disney legal of all of this before they did their OpenAI deal -- that it would literally dilute their entire IP portfolio forever. They ignored that warning for the PR and stock bump. But that is why, when the ruling came down last year, Disney quickly extricated themselves from that OpenAI deal, even eating the initial upfront fees -- followed closely by OpenAI ending their entire AI video generating business model. They adjusted their PR release dates to make this less obvious to shareholders, of course. Phew. I hope that this clears up the key distinctions for you and anyone reading. If you have any additional questions or even hypotheticals about AI and Copyright, please feel free to ask.
    • Each of the devices displayed on this page now has a little volume meter next to it to show if there is audio actively playing. About time.
    • Owing to the nature of Windows feature enablement updates, it was distributed over Windows Update services as a complete system upgrade rather than as an ordinary cumulative update
  • Recent Achievements

    • Collaborator
      ryansurfer98 went up a rank
      Collaborator
    • Week One Done
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      Skeet Campbell earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Month Later
      Sharbel earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      565
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      188
    3. 3
      Michael Scrip
      79
    4. 4
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      74
    5. 5
      neufuse
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!