Slashdot Mirror
PearPC Trying to Sue CherryOS
Varg Vikernes writes "PearPC developers are taking in donations to sue Maui X-Stream, the developers of the MAC emulator software CherryOS. There have been allegations that CherryOS is nothing more than PearPC code, which is open-source, but with a GUI attached to it. One of the PearPC developers tried to get in contact with someone from Maui X-Stream, but eventually were told to "speak with an Attorney" about the allegations. "
No. if copyright didn't exist or was structured differently then there would be no need for the GPL. Two different things.
the money does not go to some anonymous company, to buy their directors champagne and caviar and make stock holders rich, years after their employees have died.
Viva la revolucion komandante!
If their were no copyright or ownership laws we would not need the GPL.
True, but then you wouldn't be able to eat if you happened to be an artist, musician or software developer.
Funny, because there are plenty of people who give their software away for free, but can afford to eat. After all if their were no copyright things would be a lot cheaper.
Because most of the people who give away their code have day jobs as programmers or IT people in a large organization, often in the intellectual property business.
Without copyright, there would be virtually no creation. The only artists and creative people doing any work would be those sponsored by corporations who sell physical things, those who are independently wealthy, and those who have other means of supporting themselves. The only produced would be part time amateur works. The professional artist would fade away.
Worse yet, you can count on this: the standards-based world we live in now would quickly fade. Small media producers would be nearly quickly killed off. Media producers will insist on locked down black-box only devices which are rented from the producers. A few may collude, but in general, they would all be incompatible after time. Everything from movie playing devices to camcorders to computers would be locked down. Hard legal contracts will be signed to get a cable box. With no protection from blantly obvious infringement the media cartels will simply remove any opportunity for circumvention. Billions of devices will be made obsolote. Consumers will attempt to resist, but when they realize that no alternatives exist, that will be the end of the resistance. Small producers will never be able to get the economies of scale to pay licensing fees to get access to the audiences locked up by proprietary devices. You can count on other real tangible effects: 1. The large number of remaining jobs that are bsed in the US would dwindle very rapidly as the entire IP based economy would be copied bit for bit overseas. No counting the movie and music industries, advertising, publishing, television, and other related industries would shrink dramatically as their content is mericessily shared and redistributed. 2. The media industry will immediately start making their own black-box proprietary devices that very tightly control content. Devices that when opened destroy themselves. Media that is watermarked and locked to a specific device for all time. The media owners would cease realing media in standard formats - CD, DVD, digital file, etc and release only to entirely closed systems. 3. Trademarks and legitimate patents would suffer greatly, leading to an even more "knock-off" orientated market. Every product would be virtually cloned offshore in a matter of weeks, and stores would begin selling knocks next to the originals. This will see-saw back and forth until finally the knock-off kills off the legitimate product. In the end, development of anything new will virtually cease, since any innovation or modification will be instantly copied and put into production. Consumers will be frequently ripped off, and as such, will consume far less, leading to a large reduction in discrentionary spending. 4. A world mon-culture will accelerate. Distinct cultural shades found the world over will be more and more discarded. Without restriction, a homogenized world culture will seep to all ends of the earth, bringing to each culture the worst of all other cultures, and dulling the finer merits of the native culture. The lowest common denominator culture will be born. 5. The poor the world over will be made even more poor. After some time of decreasing prices, the trend towards proprietary everything is going to be expensive. Simply devices will gone. When previously an analog device would have worked, now, a digital device will be required.
You are a moron. Not only that, but you use the obfuscating language of the copyright industry in a lame attempt to seize the moral high ground when there is nothing there but the law and your simplistic assumption that breaking the law is immoral.
Just because you like to call copyright infringement "piracy" or "theft" doesn't make it that. Anyone with the mental capacity of a five year old understands that calling a lampshade a hat is wrong at best and sinister at worst.
This idea that somehow that you have to pay a "content troll" every time a copy of something is made somewhere simply flies in the face of common sense. The fact of the matter is that we are born with an innate desire to share and that is what the copyright industry is up against. That and the fact that technology has erased any barriers to that sharing. I suppose you'll be screaming about people stealing when technology has erased the physical copying barrier as well?
And BTW, it's also a fine example of capitalism at its finest: The copyright industry's prices are too high and so a black market has arisen to correct that. You right wingers, who like to scream about capitalism as if it were holy writ, like to have government intervention when your holy capitalism gets to that point.
Finally, personally, I find your morals to be repugnant. It's people like you that make other people take a dim view of humanity.
I'm bonch and I'm a troll
Oh wait, maybe we *should* care about RIAA copyrights, even if they are a$$#01es.
and thus violates what the market economy stands for. Apple has made sure that nobody can make a computer that can run their OS, not by technology, etc, but by making the EULA state that OSX can only be run on Apple-Labeled systems.
Even Microsoft is not so controlling in their EULA. Allowing the OS to be run in emulators, etc, as long as you paid for a copy of it.
CherryOS breaks the EULA, and might land them in trouble with Apple. Apple, apparently, can afford better lawyers than PearPC can. Yet CherryOS is not a treat to Apple yet, as it runs OSX very slow and does not give much of an advantage over an Apple-Labeled system.
What needs to be done is make an OS, or an environment for an OS that is able to use the API of Cocoa, Carbon, Aqua, and other elements of OSX. Maybe write this for Linux, so it can run OSX applications on a PowerPC platform, and run OSX under emulation on a X86 or Non-PowerPC platform. Call it WINEMAC or MACWINE or LINMAC or whatever.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.