[Tfug] Hackintosh

[Rich]

On Sep 3, 2009, at 10:22 pm, Jim March wrote:

> "for use on Apple hardware"

Please. Don't make it up if you can't be bothered to google it.

 From the 10.6 EULA:

> "A. Single Use License. Subject to the terms and conditions of this  
> License, unless you have purchased a Family Pack or Upgrade license  
> for the Apple Software, 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 at a time. You agree not to  
> install, use or run the Apple Software on any non-Apple-branded  
> computer, or to enable others to do so. This License does not allow  
> the Apple Software to exist on more than one computer at a time,  
> and you may not make the Apple Software available over a network  
> where it could be used by multiple computers at the same time."


And from the 10.5 EULA:

> A. Single Use. This License allows you to install, use and run one  
> (1) copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer  
> at a time. You agree not to install, use or run the Apple Software  
> on any non-Apple-labeled computer, or to enable others to do so.  
> This License does not allow the Apple Software to exist on more  
> than one computer at a time, and you may not make the Apple  
> Software available over a network where it could be used by  
> multiple computers at the same time.

Clearly, they decided to change the language from "Apple-labeled" to  
"Apple-branded". The reason being that you get two (2) Apple logo  
stickers with the OS. These could be regarded as labels. So you could  
have an Apple-labeled towel, if you were so inclined.

The thing is though, that it displays the Apple brand. So applying  
the other sticker to a computer instead of a towel means you do  
indeed have an "Apple-branded" computer. It wouldn't stand up in  
court, but since when has an EULA been legally enforceable? Just  
because it's written in legalese and uses crap like "five (5)",  
doesn't mean it's a legal document.

I don't have any worthwhile ideas why they don't explicitly say  
"Apple-designed computer", or "Apple computer manufactured by or for  
Apple under contract". If it's considered clunky and difficult to  
parse, they could define a term at the beginning of the document, and  
use that throughout.

Rich.