Slashdot Mirror
Apple Cease-And-Desists Stupidity Leak
Apple cites the Lanham Act (see below) and I have no idea what that covers. But Bill Innanen pointed out on a mailing list that the operating system might be said to violate its own access control rights under the DMCA:
...since the possession of the tools to violate a copyright has been criminalized, we have yet another case of circular legal "logic." The only tool necessary to violate this particular copyright is the very operating system that the copyrighted software (the updater/full-installer) installs (or an earlier version of same).(Just pop open the installer package with the built-in "context sensitive menu" module, find the CheckForOSX module and drag it to the trash can. Voila!)
Is the possession of MacOS X v10.1 or its installer illegal because it can be used to violate its own copyright?
(Well, actually by the letter of the law in 1201(2) I think you'd have to argue that Mac OS X 10.0 was "primarily" designed to circumvent the access controls in the 10.1 update... but it's still pretty funny.)
Bill goes on to point out: "The problem that this converted updater fixed is that there are reported problems with 10.1.1, and with a 10.0.x and the updater you can't backtrack. With the 10.1 full installer you can."
Apple's lawyers write:
We represent Apple Computer, Inc. ("Apple") with respect to its intellectual property matters. Recently, it has come to our attention that you are providing unauthorized instructions concerning the modification of the Mac OS X 10.1 update software (the "Software") on your website. Specifically, it appears that you are providing instructions for converting Mac OS X 10.1 update Software to a full install version of Mac OS X from your web site in violation of the Copyright Act and in violation of your software license agreement with Apple.
You should be aware that Apple has never authorized you modify the Software. Moreover, by providing instructions on how to modify and circumvent restrictions within the Software, you are infringing Apple's copyrights in violation of the Copyright Act and engaging in acts of unfair competition in violation of the Lanham Act. Additionally, Apple's license agreement, which you accepted upon purchasing a copy of the Software, specifically prohibits you from copying, decompiling, reverse engineering, disassembling, modifying or creating derivative works of the Software.
Consequently, on behalf of our client, we demand that you cease and desist from publishing or distributing the above-referenced materials. We believe that this is a very serious matter, thus we ask that we receive confirmation in writing from you that you have removed the infringing material from your web site.
Thank you for your prompt cooperation on this matter.
Horses gone. Lawyers hired to close barn door. Non-farmers sick and tired of hearing about it.
Okay, yes, companies are posessive about their software, even when they're stupid with it. We know this. It's not news. Yeesh.
Apple is a company seeking to profit from the purchase of the hardware and software it produces.
Mac OS X is the culmination of more than 7 years of "next-generation" operating system development of many forms at Apple and untold millions, and probably more than a billion dollars in software development that has not begun to show any return for Apple until March of this year, after Mac OS X's release.
Pure Mac OS X sales will never pay for the development of the operating system. In a way, Mac OS X is the greatest loss-leader of them all--driving the hardware sales with fat margins that keeps the company afloat. While I'm aware that open-source choices in operating systems are free, $130 is not expensive for an OS, considering the price for other mainstream OSs.
The Mac OS 10.1 update is given away for free. You walk into any Mac-carrying retail outlet and they will hand you this nicely-packaged CD with instructions and send you on your way, without asking for proof of OS X ownership. Putting a check for 10.0.x in the software updater is not unexpected.
Apple legal has been heavyhanded in the past. Apple has a very strong brand to protect and does so vigorously. In this case, they're not just protecting the specific look of the iMac or a trademark, but the profits that any company should expect for producing a quality product.
Is the possession of MacOS X v10.1 or its installer illegal because it can be used to violate its own copyright?
This kind of "circular geek logic" astounds me. It is like a Mobius Strip - circular, but one sided.
Of course Mac OS X cannot violate the DMCA. The anti-circumvention portion of the DMCA requires that the software be designed specifically to be a circumvention device that will break protection for copyrighted works. Mac OS X is software that is designed specifically to Operate Your Computer.
Attempts to twist the law in this manner only make the anti-DMCA cause look stupid. Only digital crowbars like DeCSS & Dmitri's software violate the DMCA. The way to win the argument for the DMCA is to convince the people of America that it should be legal to write software to steal from companies - not accuse Apple of being "crackers".
If guns kill people, then CmdrTaco's keyboard misspells words.
Well, the source code for linux is available online. There's some silly text that goes along with it saying what I can and can not do. If they really meant to protect linux from being rolled into proprietary products than they'd have gone to greater steps to protect it. It isn't necessarily immoral for me to release my own closed source operating system with a few of the text references to linux wiped out, afterall, I was given the source code.
Chris Kuivenhoven is a thief, beware
about $15B in annual revenues. You can put Jobs and Gates in bag, and it wouldn't matter which one you pulled out first.
The trouble with practical jokes is that very often they get elected. -- Will Rogers
Moral stupidity. Morals have no place in the law. You Christian nutcases should stay in church babbling about impractical pie-in-the-sky nonsense which you can understand.
Apple sells you a CD which has more on it than they want to give to you mistakenly -- their fault, not yours. Once you've bought the CD, its yours -- short of using it as a disc to chop someones head off with, you can do whatever you want to/with the CD, as well as the information obtained off if it(at least on your computer). If you want to modify part of the CD or the program it creates, that's your right -- no different than if I buy a game and want to apply a patch to it to make it better. My right.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
Information on how to do this can be obtained from Michael Holve's website article on the subject. If you want to really understand it, go to his website -- he has graphic illustrations along with the instruction:
www.everythingmac.org/articles/UpdateCDHack/
Note, that I am not hyperlinking this becaue I do not know how. Interestingly, according to a recent Appeals Court Decision, providing the text to a controversial website is OK, but hyperlinking to it is bad.
I suggest that you all go to this website, copy it to your hard drive, print it out, and scatter it accross the earth like DeCSS.
----------
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
you are absolutely *totally* missing the point here.
It is not about "macfixit being the poor victim of some evil corporation bashing their constitutional rights with an army of law-sharks", it's simply about macfixit publishing information that is highly sensitive and potentially harmful to Apple's interests and Apple simply trying to defend themselves against obvious attempts of software piracy.
Just because that hole was easy to find, or because, you, with your "extensive programming experience", find the way they went about shipping a much-needed upgrade on-time ... DUMB, does not give you any MORAL nor LEGAL right to go expose that security hole, nor should it give you any particular reason to feel like bashing Apple for trying to protect what's legally AND, i think, morally their legitimate intellectual property.
And Freedom-of-Speech does absolutely NOT give you the right to expose those holes. Freedom-of-Speech in fact, does not give you the right to divulge any infomation you *contractually* (purchasing the software, accepting the license agreement) accepted not to divulge.
1) Apple has absolutely every LEGAL RIGHT to send that cease-and-desist and chances are they'd win in court, hands-down. MacFixIt knows it. Again, their intention weren't bad, and pulling it out was the right thing to do and I doubt Apple would pursue any legal action since they complied.
2) I believe they have every MORAL RIGHT to do so as well. just read my original post again for the reasons. Again, Apple did not do anything wrongful to their user-base by shipping the 10.1 upgrade for free. It's not like Apple users have anything to protect themselves against which would warrant exploiting that hole. Their package-hole was *not* meant to be used, and exploiting it clearly goes against their license agreement. Now if you happen to have found the hole, congratulations, more power to you, it'll save you some time and headache, BUT it sure as hell is not "your holy duty" to go out there and shout it over the roofs just so you can look cool and let everyone get the full software for free. Because by doing that, you essentially are doing the exact same thing as publishing CD-KEYS for m$ windoz to everyone, which, of course, is illegal. If you do publish that information, then you play a gamble. You may get caught. You must accept the consequences. MacFixIt unintentionally gambled, got caught, got some *serious publicity* and acted responsibly. It is in both Apple's and MacFixIt's interests to stay in good terms anyway. MacFixIt got their bragging rights and a bunch of geeks on slashdot got to stupidly laugh at Apple by calling this whole thing "Apple Stupidity Leak", when most of those bad-mouthers, while at best savvy perl hackers, have no fucking idea what it takes to develop a complex piece of software that works and meet *strategic* deadlines with stockholders breathing down your neck.
3) anyone has the right to tell anyone to shut the fuck up. plz *resist* trolling this one.
4) i've never owned any Apple stock, in fact, until recently, i was a windoz user for over a year, since i got a pc laptop from my work. When i saw the power and potential of OS X, and with help from my boss, i got to score this nifty TiBook. Since then my productivity has quadrupled, and work has been more fun. Thanks to OS X. So yeah you're damn right i'm guna defend such a fine piece of software.
5) I really absolutely *HATE IT* when people make devious claims to Liberties I most definetly cherish and stand for just to make some noise and random bashing, or just because they don't think. Man, you wanna push my buttons, you just do that. And people sure do. heh. Oh well. After all, we're all exercising our Freedom of Speech.
So KUMBA-FUCKING-YA.
Extraordinary Vacations. Exceptional Prices