“Muzzle, a Dutch Hackintosh community site, has posted an interview with Davide Rutigliano, the co-creator of the EFI-X hack dongle and CEO of Art Studios Entertainment Media. Davide weighs in on the legality of the product and on what its future may be,” Filip Truta reports for Softpedia.
“‘…We implement real EFI in our device. There is nothing that links our product to the hack world… Yes, it is [legal]. We made sure to create a product that goes in the same direction of all other computer companies and not against them in any way,’ Rutigliano said,” Truta reports.
“It is well known that Apple’s EULA strictly forbids PC owners to run OS X, and that only Apple computers should be able to boot it. However, Davide reveals that, unlike Psystar, they’re selling something else,” Truta reports. “‘It is possible that we will go to court with Apple, but most likely supporting them, in case we ever find out that someone is selling PCs with our module installed. Selling a computer that can boot OS X is a unique right that only Apple has. And we enforce it.’ Davide explains.”
More info in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Note: Apple’s Software License Agreement for Mac OS X explicitly states: 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.
[Bold text added above for emphasis. – MDN]
So If I have 2 partitions on my iMac’s hard disk, I am only allowed to install one copy?
well it’s a good thing Apple supplies us with so many apple labels \ stickers then. Also I purchased a family pack so I get to install OS X on 5 Apple labeled computers.
@GIL
The license agreement probably says no, but I doubt Apple will hunt you down for it like the RIAA. I’d be surprised if there’s a large number of people who want to run OS X on two separate partitions of the same computer.
“Selling a computer that can BOOT [edit mine] OS X is a unique right that only Apple has. And we enforce it.’ Davide explains.”
So… they way they are attempting to skirt the EULA is by saying, “a computer which ‘boots’ OS X” … damn semantics.
btw, what MDN said…
at HMCIV
It was a hypothetical. But another ? is it ok to install OS X on an external drive? I noticed that the Genius’ at the Genius Bar have external drives with multiple OS’es installed when they are trying to diagnose a problem with Macs.
“or to enable others to do so.”
That would only matter if you were in privity with Apple. (that is to say a party to the contract). The EULA is between Apple and the person who purchased the Mac OS X DVD, not Apple and any supplier of 3rd party hardware.
Therefore it’s impossible for the EFI-X guys to be violating it. And because their solution uses a customer purchased original DVD unmodified, they’re pretty much immune from any suit from Apple.
After all, since when did selling an EFI bios become a crime?
Therefore Apple needs to sue each and every person who actually brought the DVD from them then installed it on a non Apple labelled computer (presumably a machine which you have not stuck an Apple label on, given the plain meaning of the words), with the only claim being that the customer installed the product on non apple labelled hardware.
I doubt any court will have the stomach to allow Apple to brutalize it’s customers in that way.
I thought the EULA said “Apple-branded” machine, not “Apple-labeled”
Could be a distinct difference there!
Apple cannot prevent Art Studios Entertainment Media from selling the dongle, as they aren’t supplying a copy of Mac OS X. Since they aren’t supplying the OS, they are not bound by its EULA. Any buyer of the device, on the other hand, cannot legally use it to install and run OS X, since they are bound by the EULA.
> So If I have 2 partitions on my iMac’s hard disk, I am only allowed to install one copy?
You CAN do that because you cannot “use and run” both installations at the same time. The license statement says, “install, use AND run,” not “install, use OR run.”
According to apple’s EULA, the answer is no.
However, that will not stop people from doing so.
@ Gil:
The EULA says you can install OS X on 1 Apple-branded computer. Your multiple partitions are still on one computer.
The external hard drive is worthless without a computer to use it. In this case, it would need to be an Apple-branded computer to comply with the EULA.
The EFI-X hack dongle is perfectly legal to sell. It’s not legal for you to use the dongle to install OS X on a Dell PC, because the Dell PC is not an Apple-branded computer.
An analogy: it’s perfectly legal in my state to buy those license plate covers which block photo radar from taking a picture of your license plate. However, it’s illegal to use them on your car. Why is the law like this? Because it’s extremely difficult to stop the sale of a device which is legal in many states/countries, but it’s easy to prosecute the people who are caught using them.
So, when China gets their ONE copy of Apple’s OS X software and their ONE copy of EFI-X hack dongle that will kill Vista and Windows in Asia.
Should Steve Ballmer get his resume up to date? No way. They can sell Zunes and xBoxs and Steve can keep his job.
That dongle still only recognizes / allows 256 MB of video ram regardless of the ram actually present on the card AND supports a limited number of mother boards…. it’s not like you can go out and get this dongle and turn your Dull PC into a Mac.
It can be purchased in the U.S. (http://www.efixusa.net/ out of L.A.) …and it retails for $179.00.
WHY you’d want to do that is another question, but here in the good ole U.S. of A. we typically have choices.
“I thought the EULA said “Apple-branded” machine, not “Apple-labeled””
No, it uses the awkward construction “Apple Labelled”
For the most part courts will construe such contracts according to the plain meaning of the term and the benefit of the doubt going against the drafter of the agreement.
So Apple would argue that “Apple Labelled” means a machine manufactured for Apple and sold under one of Apple’s brands.
An EFI-X user would argue he understood the term to mean that by placing an Apple Label on the machine (widely available, shipped with most Apple products, from memory even with the software) that he was complying with the terms as he understood them to be.
If Apple Labelled didn’t mean a machine with Apple Labels on it, why would Apple give you Apple Labels right there in the DVD box unless it’s to help you meet the terms of the EULA.
If Apple allows this it will be Cannibalism at it’s finest.
“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.”
Ahhh, I see! I guess that’s why Apple includes a couple Apple decals with every Mac they sell?
I’d love to get one of these to try. I really need a replacement for my Powermac and as much as I love Apple simply cannot afford to shell out for a new MacPro.
Incidentally the issue with only 256MB video ram being addressed is apparently being worked on so a fix should be out soon.
Hey MDN make a poll and lets get a group consensus on what the mac community thinks about this issue. Good for us bad for Apple? Could it be a good thing for Apple to open up and let others play!
It’s clear Apple doesn’t give a shit about us in these harsh economic times. So maybe this is what we need to keep Apple grounded along with their fucking prices!
While the idea that EULAs are generally unenforceable is a myth, a EULA cannot over-ride legal statutory rights – in certain territories, you definitely have a right to install a purchased OS X disk on A machine capable of running it – using multiple machines takes you into copyright infringement rather than EULA infringement.
Going back to the 80s, Apple had the same problem trying to stop Mac expansion boards for Atari ST machines – so long as you could find a legit ROM the boards were legal.
The consequence of that was Apple tightened up it supply line of spare parts, and if it really started to hit Apple, the obvious solution would be to make the only way to get OS X to be with a Mac (and then make it a ‘lifetime’ licence, seeing as I imagine very few people actually buy more than one OS update in the life of their machine).
Wow, it sounds like OS X is pretty hardware limited! Microsoft would never get away with this (they would have anti-trust lawsuits coming at them from every end of the earth). Apple simply sweeps its Psystar anti-trust lawsuit under its alternative dispute resolution rug (read, secret pay off) and we Apple faithful get to rejoice again at how great this is.
I switched to Apple computers (for personal use) a couple of years ago and still am a Windows sufferer at work (writing this on a Dell desktop as we speak). Honestly, I am in the camp of using Macs BECAUSE of the OS, not the hardware. I’ve had two laptops so far and they have both been unimpressive to me (PB 12″ 1.5Ghz, MacBook White Plastic 2.0Ghz Core2Duo). They look fantastic but they are not as durable as Dell’s and particularly ThinkPads I’ve had in the past. My iMac, on the other hand, is fantastic (I tried to upgrade to one at work but they won’t support computers that they can’t do on-site repairs on and we don’t have a critical mass of Apple computers to get that level of support from Apple so that is out… I would be on my own and my boss won’t allow me to not have a work computer for days to weeks if it needs a repair and I have to send it away/drop it off at an Apple Store).
I would love to use OS X on the hardware of my choice. Apple has taken a quantum leap, in my opinion, in the laptop category with the new MacBooks (unibody aluminum) which will probably keep me buying Apple hardware in the future as well but it would be amazing to be able to choose my own hardware and still stay in the Mac OS universe.
I know, I know, this is not what companies like Apple with vertically integrated business models do (and Apple doesn’t want to sully its OS X reputation with all the hardware driver problems that plague Windows from the infinite variety of vendors and infinitely varied quality of drivers) but I can dream right? OS X on a ThinkPad T30 would be sticking an operating system tank inside a laptop that is built like a tank (those things (and some of their descendants) are like Terminators, you can’t destroy them).
Reminds me of the state of Massachusetts- it’s legal to buy fireworks- but it’s illegal to light them off. ??????
@ Nitpicker
Rutigliano and colleagues had to violate the EULA in order to test the EFI-X and certify its ability to allow OSX to load on a PC. Now they are enabling others to do so.
“Rutigliano and colleagues had to violate the EULA in order to test the EFI-X “
Surely they played it safe and used the free Apple Labels?
“Rutigliano and colleagues had to violate the EULA in order to test the EFI-X “
Actually that’s not neccesarily so. It’s like the early days if PC cloning. One group can examine the BIOS and write down exactly what it does. Another group with clean hands can use the specification to write a compatible BIOS. No laws have been broken in that case.
Similarly here, they could have developed the EFI-X to the EFI spec and had someone else test that it worked and feed back any problems.
But good luck to Apple, it’s a stretch to try to have banned a product which is not illegal in itself, coded to a public spec that Apple doesn’t even own, just because a side effect of that is that it allows you to install another fully paid for Apple product on a PC.