Apple Embeds Message to OS X Hackers 575
zentechno writes "Apple has confirmed it embedded a message in the form of a poem to those who would hack its version of OS X on Intel hardware." From the article: "The embedded poem reads: 'Your karma check for today: There once was a user that whined/his existing OS was so blind/he'd do better to pirate/an OS that ran great/but found his hardware declined./Please don't steal Mac OS!/Really, that's way uncool./(C) Apple Computer, Inc.'Apple also put in a separate hidden message, 'Don't Steal Mac OS X.kext,' in another spot for would-be hackers."
Re:That's not bad... (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Lame (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm not a pirate. I never pirated anything in my life, and never will, either. I only use proprietary software that I licensed and FOSS software. I respect and obey all copyright laws, even some of the most restrictive ones (such as the DMCA).
However, I believe your error in your argument is that you think that all objects must be used in the way that the manufacturer intended. Alright, I'll use some more analogies. Is ripping (not sharing) a CD that you bought from the music store and converting those files to MP3s immoral because you aren't listening to the CD with a CD player? Is using a soccer ball for basketball immoral because soccer balls aren't intended to be used in basketball? Is putting an object wrapped in aluminum foil in a microwave immoral because it will blow up the microwave?
Whatever happened to fair use, i.e., the principle of you using an object in any way, shape, or form, as long as you aren't copying it or "stealing" it? Why should Apple tell me that I can must only use their OS on their computers, or they'll send out their army of ninja lawyers? Why should the MPAA tell the that I must listen to my CDs with my CD player, or they'll send me to jail? Oh wait, the MPAA bought out Congress and passed the DMCA in 1998, forbidding me to do either of those things if they involve some sort of DRM.
Give me a break! Laws such as the DMCA restrict the individual freedoms of the purchasers of the content to the point of foolishness. Nobody should tell me what I can or should do with something that I buy from them, as long as I am not copying and redistributing or selling it to people all over the globe. All of those Congresspeople who passed the DMCA need to be voted out of office this year and be replaced with people who respect liberty, for a change.
But, hey, you are right. We don't have to buy Apple's OS X. We don't need no stinkin' OS X. Anything that you can do with OS X can be handled by us with free *nix, KDE/GNOME, and Wine. That covers all of our bases. Plus, KDE and GNOME has improved to the point that they are almost matching OS X in capabilities and usability. OS X is a very good operating system, but we don't need it. We'll stick on the free side of the fence and use free (as in speech) operating systems and applications. At least RMS, Linus, and Theo doesn't tell us to use their software on only their personally branded boxes, or else.
Re:Lame (Score:3, Interesting)
I can buy a copy of IntelliJ IDEA for academic use for $99, or a license for personal use for $199. They charge (I think) $599 for the commercial license. All have equal functionality. So, you think it's moral for me to buy the personal license for $199, and then use it to create commercial software? After all, that right do they have to tell me what to do with the software I've purchased? I should be able to do whatever I want with it, regardless of what the terms of the sale were.
You are a slave (Score:5, Interesting)
Image you went to your local baker and bought a loaf of bread and then were threathened with jail time for hacking it up into little bits and feeding it to the ducks when clearly the baker decided it was only to be used for human consumption.
But computers are different. It causes people like you to behave like slaves who lick their masters asses and swallow everything they deliver.
Apple sells software. Once it made the sale I can do with it what I want for my personal use. If I decide to take it apart and chance it to run on other hardware or to function in a way different then it was before then that is my right.
Oh but wait of course, I get it. Games were never intended to run with trainers. So trainers are illegal. They also never meant for you to use someone elses savegame so savegames are illegal. They also do not come with a walkthrough so clearly walkthroughs are illegal.
Running say program X on a emulator is obviously clearly illegal.
But then I got a bit of bad news for you. Your lord and master Steve Jobs is breaking his own laws. By allowing windows software to run in emulation he is hacking that software to run on platforms it was never intended to run on. Could every windows developer sue whenever a mac user runs a bit of windows software?
No, Apple has a right to cry foul when people give away its software for free but when I buy a copy of Mac OS X in the shops I am then free to use it in anyway I please. I can use it as a coaster. I can run it on mac hardware and I can hack it and run it on whatever I like. As long as I respect the fact that I got right to 1 copy of it running at anyone time I am in the clear.
Anyone who tells you different is a fucking tool.
Re:Pirate? (Score:1, Interesting)
A clickwrap license "agreement" is considered an infringement on consumer rights and invalid in EU.
It is a bit ironic to see fair use consumer rights infringing clickwrap licenses actually supported on Slashdot. And even worse, legal action using DMCA (!) against geek websites spreading information. But, then Apple PR never ceases to amaze me..
LEGAL security (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Sense of humor... (Score:5, Interesting)
Apple needs a little look at its China operation.. (Score:2, Interesting)
On a related note (disclaimer)... I have been using an example of an official Apple Store where I live to and what it does, but this store may not necessarily be official, just that they look official, and they say that they are official, and have sufficiently proved to me that they are official (showed me that they have access to internal Apple systems and all that).
What I mean is that they should not be trying to deter hackers, but rather encourage those who are smart enough to hack it, and discourage those who can't.
Change of heart (Score:3, Interesting)
Now, you're a "pirate" if you try to "decompile, reverse engineer, disassemble, modify, or create derivative works of the Apple Software or any part thereof."
Whatever happened to "1984 won't be like 1984"?
Re:Pirate? (Score:1, Interesting)
However, I do wonder whether it is any different from buying those "upgrade" copies of MS Office, Adobe Photoshop, or whatever that are set at a low price because of the assumption you already have an installation of a previous version. If you were to break the checks that ensure you do have a previous version installed, is that still be legal? I'm doubtful, but maybe the law is less stringent on this than I think -- these are the precidents people should check. Even without the law, it is at least unethical, in my opinion, to pay an "upgrade" price when you've never bought the "full" version.
And that's the issue for me: all copies of OS X sold in a box right now are, effectively, like these "upgrade" versions -- they are meant to be installed on Apple hardware for which you would already have a license for an older version of OS X (or even older Mac OS versions). It is probably one of the reasons that OS X is relatively cheap: because they are upgrades. Historically, there wasn't any way you could install them on anything but a machine that already had a Mac OS license of some kind. The nice thing is, Apple trusts people sufficiently NOT to force checks for pre-existing versions, or to bind them only to one machine (think Win XP product registration hassles).
The right thing to do if you really wanted to run OS X on non-Apple-approved hardware would be to buy the "non-upgrade" version, which, in this case, doesn't exist. It would no doubt be more expensive if it did.
I really hope that people don't make poor choices on these matters, because it might force Apple to go the route of MS for its OS versions. Please, at least *buy* a copy of OS X if you are going to try to run it. It's the right thing to do.