What is the difference though? Lots of manufacturers like Dell use master copies to clone their PCs.
What you're suggesting is insane. The only difference is having to install everything manually on every computer, or just cloning the same bits and bytes. What's the difference as long as Apple got the same amount of money?
This very argument was tackled by Apple. The point is that Psystar made an illegal modified master copy, which they then went on to clone onto all their PCs. The difference is that Dell were entitled to make master copies since they had a licence from Apple to do so. IMO, it's somewhat analagous to taking a Windows install, sticking a pirate key on it, then cloning it to 1000 PCs. That you've then also provided a retail Windows package doesn't help you escape.
The law should not be stupid, but be interpreted according to common sense. If this is how it is, either this broken legal system needs further fixes, or we just need to stay away from proprietary software altogether - too much risk and arbitrary decisions in the hands of the wrong people..
The law is verbose, like a good computer program so that there is less ambiguity about what people think is common sense. Agree that sticking to FOSS will get you in less trouble
