Policy regarding OS X on non-Apple Hardware

[Hurmoth]

But owning a valid copy of OS X and installing a hacked version of it on a pc are 2 totally different things.

This was something that we actually discussed, the staff I mean. This is essentially what we agreed, "'Cracking' is circumventing a copy protection of some sort. There is no copy protection with OS X. There isn't even a CD key at all. What's being done by people is they are modifying the software in a way that violates their EULA. But a EULA is just an agreement between the user and Apple. It's nothing illegal to violate it, since it's not a law that you're breaking. The most Apple can do for violating it is to deny you support."

[funciona]

Why does everyone bitch so much about this topic? :s The mods have allowed it. Period. Windows on Macs. OSX on x86. Everyone gets everything and everything is avaliable to everyone.

Stop bitching.

[giga Veteran]

So, a user can violate the Apple EULA, as long as they bought one install media.

Likewise for Vista? If I purchase a boxed copy, I can freely violate the EULA on Neowin and install it on numerous PCs and get support?

Sounds crazy, if true!

How would you? Circumventing activation/copy protection? (which doesn't apply to OS X)

[markwolfe Veteran]

Why does everyone bitch so much about this topic? :s The mods have allowed it. Period. Windows on Macs. OSX on x86. Everyone gets everything and everything is avaliable to everyone.

Stop bitching.

I'm not bitching. I'm trying to see if the same freedom to violate Microsoft or Adobe Photoshop EULAs will be given.

[Hurmoth]

So, a user can violate the Apple EULA, as long as they bought one install media.

Likewise for Vista? If I purchase a boxed copy, I can freely violate the EULA on Neowin and install it on numerous PCs and get support?

Sounds crazy, if true!

No, because you only have one license for that copy of Vista. Purchasing a copy of Vista only grants you the rights to install it on one PC, the same with OS X. That would be the law, not just the EULA.

[fhpuqrgrpgvirzhpujbj]

But it seems that no one is going to help [osx86] posts now anyway...

[funciona]

I'm not bitching. I'm trying to see if the same freedom to violate Microsoft or Adobe Photoshop EULAs will be given.

You are bitching about something that is legal (installing OSX on x86) and something illegal (installing Vista on more than one PC with the same license)

See the difference? If you still dont, please forget about it. If you are not intrested in this world, ignore that and done. Don't ruin it for the rest of us.

[DigitalE]

oo, cool... Glad we can talk about OSx86 now :D

[Hurmoth]

You are bitching about something that is legal (installing OSX on x86) and something illegal (installing Vista on more than one PC with the same license)

See the difference? If you still dont, please forget about it. If you are not intrested in this world, ignore that and done. Don't ruin it for the rest of us.

No need to be rude, he's just looking for our reasoning behind us changing our policy. No harm in asking for clarification.

[Lee G. Veteran]

I have mixed feelings about - Part of me is pleased that this discussion is now allowed as it's interesting, but the other hopes that this doesn't give people a license to constantly complain and demand help on how their copy doesn't work, or that it needs sorting out; or asking others on how to obtain it.

[Hurmoth]

I have mixed feelings about - Part of me is pleased that this discussion is now allowed as it's interesting, but the other hopes that this doesn't give people a license to constantly complain and demand help on how their copy doesn't work, or that it needs sorting out; or asking others on how to obtain it.

Let me be clear on this, if a person requests information on how to obtain a copy of OS X, if someone posts warez, that person will be punished. Our rules are clear that warez is NOT welcomed here and that rule will continue.

Outside of that, as long as users have a legal copy of OS X, we will gladly allow discussion on how to modify the files so that they can install and run it on any AMD/Intel processor.

[Marshalus Veteran]

We allow discussion of ways to modify the operating system files of Vista, XP, etc to allow stuff like unsigned drivers or themes... in my view its a similar situation.

[evo_spook]

I think they've just opened up a big can of worms that they really should have kept covered up.

Its a very slippery slope they have just started down.

We all know that the OSX used on whitebox PCs is going to be a pirated version just as we know that a the majority of people have pirated software on their machines, dodgy decisions to open up with no visible sign on what exactly they stand to gain by the decision.

[kylejn]

So, what exactly is allowed and what isn't? Am I allowed to make a topic asking what version of OSX86 would be best for my hardware? No links to the software, obviously, but just names.

[Hurmoth]

We allow discussion of ways to modify the operating system files of Vista, XP, etc to allow stuff like unsigned drivers or themes... in my view its a similar situation.

Very nice comparison. I completely agree.

[Tim Dorr Veteran]

I'm not bitching. I'm trying to see if the same freedom to violate Microsoft or Adobe Photoshop EULAs will be given.

We've been allowing discussion of violating the Windows EULA ever since we've supported people installing uxtheme hacks.

What we're saying here is it's OK to talk about going down to the Apple Store, buying a copy of OS X, coming back home and modding the files on the disk so you can run it on your PC. There's no US law violated by that, just an agreement between you and Apple.

What we are not saying is its OK to go download a copy of OS X and mod it to work on your computer. That's a violation of copyright laws.

Copying bad. Modding OK.

[Lee G. Veteran]

Let me be clear on this, if a person requests information on how to obtain a copy of OS X, if someone posts warez, that person will be punished. Our rules are clear that warez is NOT welcomed here and that rule will continue.

Outside of that, as long as users have a legal copy of OS X, we will gladly allow discussion on how to modify the files so that they can install and run it on any AMD/Intel processor.

Yeah - sorry Hurmoth. I realize that - in fact I just edited my post to get rid of most of what I'd said... but I edited it back so it doesn't look all odd, now I've been quoted.

As this doesn't violate US laws then I'm pleased that this discussion is allowed. But yeah, I know Neowin will punish those who discuss how to to obtain it. Neowin of course has proved to be very good at dealing with topics that involve warez.

[Hurmoth]

So, what exactly is allowed and what isn't? Am I allowed to make a topic asking what version of OSX86 would be best for my hardware? No links to the software, obviously, but just names.

No, because that would be warez. What is allowed is you going and purchasing a legitimate copy from Apple, Best Buy, etc. and manipulating the files yourself to be able to install it on any Intel-based computer.

[Tim Dorr Veteran]

We all know that the OSX used on whitebox PCs is going to be a pirated version just as we know that a the majority of people have pirated software on their machines, dodgy decisions to open up with no visible sign on what exactly they stand to gain by the decision.

No, we don't. It's quite easy to go down to your local Apple Store or Best Buy and pick up a copy of Leopard. It's entirely possible to get OS X on your PC in that manner in legal ways.

We can't be absolutely sure that every person receiving Windows support on these forums has got a legit copy. Should we stop providing help for everyone out of risk that they might be running an illegal copy?

[evo_spook]

No, because that would be warez. What is allowed is you going and purchasing a legitimate copy from Apple, Best Buy, etc. and manipulating the files yourself to be able to install it on any Intel-based computer.

hmmm, the scenario you keep describing thou Hurmoth, I sell you a stolen laptop in a Pub, as-long as I don't tell you its stolen, its OK

[Darran]

The mods have allowed it. Period.

So if the mods allowed discussion and distribution of warez or bomb manufacturing we shouldn't have the right to discuss whether they may have made a terrible mistake? I'm not saying it's anything on the same level but we should be allowed to discuss whether it makes sense for Neowin.

Edited May 28, 2008 by Darran

[Hurmoth]

We all know that the OSX used on whitebox PCs is going to be a pirated version just as we know that a the majority of people have pirated software on their machines, dodgy decisions to open up with no visible sign on what exactly they stand to gain by the decision.

First of all, imagine the number of people that have pirated software here already, such as Windows itself. We DO NOT support that, but as long as we don't know, what can we do about it?

The fact of the matter is, there are people who are running a legit copy of OS X on their PC. I am one of them. I'm doing it more for testing purposes, but I own a legit copy of OS X and I manipulated the files myself, so everything I've done is 100% within the law. Other's might be trying to do the same, but could be running into minor issues. What we gain is a new market, if you will. We are opening ourselves up for a larger community, but this time in the Mac world.

[giga Veteran]

I think they've just opened up a big can of worms that they really should have kept covered up.

Its a very slippery slope they have just started down.

We all know that the OSX used on whitebox PCs is going to be a pirated version just as we know that a the majority of people have pirated software on their machines, dodgy decisions to open up with no visible sign on what exactly they stand to gain by the decision.

And we also know that the majority of users here are running pirated versions of Vista, XP, Photoshop, etc.

So, what exactly is allowed and what isn't? Am I allowed to make a topic asking what version of OSX86 would be best for my hardware? No links to the software, obviously, but just names.

No, you're not. That would be like asking "which version of Vista on thepiratebay should I download"

What you are allowed is to discuss how to run a legally license/bought Leopard DVD on your PC. This usually means emulating EFI or modding the Leopard license you bought to make it run on your PC.

[Hurmoth]

hmmm, the scenario you keep describing thou Hurmoth, I sell you a stolen laptop in a Pub, as-long as I don't tell you its stolen, its OK

There's a difference there though. Neowin is not legally libel for what a user does as long as Neowin doesn't know about it. A person is not protected the same way however.

Neowin is not promoting the use of illegally obtained software, in fact we're punishing those who talk about illegally obtaining software.

[kylejn]

No, because that would be warez. What is allowed is you going and purchasing a legitimate copy from Apple, Best Buy, etc. and manipulating the files yourself to be able to install it on any Intel-based computer.

Gotcha. I already own a copy of Leopard anyway, so I'm in the clear.

Thanks!