Jump to content

Just a thought for a petition to Apple...

hackintosh apple mac os x legal osx86

  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

Poll: Petition Support (8 member(s) have cast votes)

Should I create a petition to remove the non-Apple-labeled clause in OS X's EULA?

  1. Yes, it's a great idea!! (3 votes [37.50%])

    Percentage of vote: 37.50%

  2. No, it's a stupid idea!! (5 votes [62.50%])

    Percentage of vote: 62.50%

  3. I don't care one way or the other. (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote



    InsanelyMac Protégé

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 87 posts
  • Gender:Male

First, let me apologize in advanced if this is located in the wrong board; I'm not exactly sure where to put it!!  Anyways, I've been thinking about the "legality" of hackintoshes recently.  Sure, hackintoshes today aren't illegal, but just a mere violation of Apple's EULA.  I've been thinking of petitioning Apple online to change their mind on that.  But first, to help newcomers understand, you need to know the brief history of the legality of installing Mac OS X on a PC.


First, when Apple announced that they were switching from PowerPC chips to Intel, the only "known" PCs by outside developers capable of booting Mac OS X was through a developer transition kit.  Then, it was only possible through the physical installation of a trusted platform module.  Eventually, the software of the transition kit leaked onto BitTorrent, and only through hacks to bypass this TPM requirement could be used to create a hackintosh.  Obviously, a classified Apple Developer software that leaked through P2P software does violate the DMCA, hack or no hack.


Then, Maxxuss (spelling?) created a patch to allow Mac Restore DVDs to boot onto real PCs, but the process was very complex when applying and hard to do without access to a working OS X machine.  Eventually, "distros" came out on BitTorrent, the most popular one being JaS, allowing 10.4.8 to be burned to a DVD and booted and installed onto a PC.  Again, a clear violation of the DMCA was here, and the leopard "distros" like Kalyway and Leo4All were there, also.


But then, David Elliot modified open source code by Apple called Boot-132, which helped create a fake EFI environment that a retail, non-restore disc copy of Mac OS X Leopard could boot on a PC from.  In fact, Chameleon still uses this code today for Mountain Lion installations.  The only bootloader not using that code is Clover, because it emulates true EFI firmware and loads boot.efi.  If and only if you buy a legal copy of Mac OS X that you install on a PC for personal use only, your actions cannot and will not ever be ruled to be in violation of the DMCA.


Unfortunately, due to the initial "underground" nature of the OSx86 and Hackintosh scene, Apple would have them think otherwise.  Hey, there are still legal experts who look at the Psystar case and use that against all Hackintosh machines.  Mind you, Psystar mass-produced their Open Computers in a way that went from a licensed, legit mac installation, to thousands of illegal PC installations and sold the machines as-is.  But, how can Apple ever use the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, designed to stop the new age of digital and online piracy (it was just a few years prior to the bill's passing that the Supreme Court ruled that someone who uploaded tons of full movies to the internet for free download as non-infringing due to him not making any money off of it), to justify their fight against people legally purchasing a copy of OS X to install on a machine not authorized by a legal contract between the user and Apple, as one and the same as fighting against people who upload and download Mountain Lion from The Pirate Bay?  Is that immoral or what?  Whoever says hackintoshes are illegal due to the DMCA are saying just that IMO.  The DMCA was designed to enforce copyright law against internet pirates, not EULAs against computer enthusiasts.


And, when you do install Mac OS X on a non-Apple labeled computer (and no, putting an Apple sticker over a Dell logo embedded on your laptop cover doesn't make it Apple labeled), you are, at best, violating the End User License Agreement between you and Apple.  To me, the only benefit to wanting to keep that contract in good standing is to get free technical support from Apple.  I mean, it's not like when your Hackintosh gets infected with malware, you're going to pick up your phone, call Apple, and say to them, "Hi, my laptop running OS X has been infected with malware.  What's my MacBook's serial number?  You see, it's not an Apple Product, it's from Gateway!  Do you want me to read off their serial number?  Wait, what?  Hello??  Hello!?!?"


Now, you're probably wondering, why am I ranting about all of this?  Well, this had me thinking: why not create a petition to "legalize" hackintoshes in the EULA?  I mean, has anyone ever pursued such a thing?  Sure, like I said for reasons above, Apple wouldn't be too keen with such a petition back in the days of distros and such.  But now, you really only need access to a real Mac or another Hackintosh, purchase and download Mountain Lion from the Mac App Store, format an 8 GB flash drive, and run an app like MyHack to create a PC-bootable version of an OS X installer.  Then, just boot from that flash drive on any OS X-compatible PC (shouldn't really be a problem unless you're using really old hardware), and install Mac OS X, work out the bugs, and voilla, you've got Mac OS X on a PC.  Legal copy?  Of course!  Piracy involved?  Not at all!!  We all have a right to install whatever OS we want on a machine we legally own.  If Mac OS X is the shoe that fits, Apple's EULA shouldn't stop you from doing that!!!


Not to mention that Apple could really benefit from doing this financially.  Very few Hardware vendors also produce their own software for it, and vice versa.  Apple, as far as desktops and laptops are concerned, would be better off licensing their software to hardware vendors.  That doesn't mean they have to stop producing Mac hardware; they could still do that and license it for other Hardware makers, like what Microsoft does with Windows!!


Finally, you're probably wondering, "How did the non-Apple labeled portion get added to the EULA, anyway?"  Well, what I'm about to say is in no offense to the genius this man really was (RIP).  Steve Jobs, when coming back to Apple in the acquisition of NeXT, decided to shut down Apple's Macintosh Clone Program, saying it was ill-founded.  If it wasn't for Steve Job's position at Apple, installing Mac OS X on a PC would be as allowable as the first Intel Macs, as reported right here on InsanelyMac!!


As far as creating the petition is concerned, I can easily do that, myself!  I just want to hear your opinion here on InsanelyMac to see if you would like me to go ahead with it.  If I get enough support here in this thread, I will do that ASAP!!


So... any thoughts?



    The Round One

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,332 posts
  • Location:Molvania

I see no point. As a company/corporation, Apple is not interested in loosing profit by allowing people legitimately use their partly proprietary OS on hardware bought not from Apple. These are two very different things to sell a software as such and sell hardware with own OS/software on it. IMO


Apple doesn't really mind you using their OS, as long as you are not making any profit from their property. So no point here, unless you want to be 100% legitimate consumer.



    I don't know what to write here

  • Donators
  • 952 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:My apartment
  • Interests:OSx86, female anatomy, electronic music, Clover EFI



Apple needs to protect their brand image, it being substantially encompassing of the business world.


By taking that clause out it would start a war between the cheap PC makers trying to get new users with the better OS.

Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: hackintosh, apple, mac os x, legal, osx86

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
