Xref: utzoo comp.sys.next:12157 comp.sys.mac.misc:8117
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!cunixf.cc.columbia.edu!cunixb.cc.columbia.edu!es1
From: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next,comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: Macintosh emulation
Keywords: Amiga, Macintosh, Emulation
Message-ID: <1991Feb5.011331.31087@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>
Date: 5 Feb 91 01:13:31 GMT
References: <1991Jan29.225142.1732@Neon.Stanford.EDU> <12538@ccncsu.ColoState.EDU>
Sender: news@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (The Daily News)
Reply-To: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita)
Organization: Columbia University
Lines: 62

In article <12538@ccncsu.ColoState.EDU> klingspo@holst.tmc.edu (steve klingsporn) writes:
>
>I must show my disgust in that copies of "pirate" Macintosh ROMs do
>exist (as do pirate copies of the AMAX-II software) in the Amiga
>community and all over AMIGA bulletin boards across the nation, and
>due to the method in which the AMAX software indeed "reads ROMs into
>RAM," users are provided with an often seemingly "fully-functional"
>Macintosh.
>
	This is hardly specific to the Amiga. People pirate on
every machine. Copying of that pirate version of AMax II is
illegal both to Apple and to Readysoft, the emulator maker.

>My question is this:  Legal?  I worked for Apple for 2 years and often
>do back in Chicago when I'm not at school.  Obviously the fact that
>Amiga (read "Toy") users are so "lucky" (as are ATARI-ST users) to
>have in reality a "free Macintosh" (though compatibility is not always
>a reality) bothers me...
>
	Well, since you say "read Toy" without a smiley you're a
closed-minded idi*t. Not the Amiga is a god-send, but the
opposite position is just as stupid. I'm open to corrections.
	Ignoring that, the legality is a big issue. Assuming the
user bought the ROM like he was supposed to, from his position he
owns the ROM and has a right to use it. The emulator works by
reading the ROMs, copying them into RAM, making a few patches and
running the code.
	The catch comes with the System Software. It says in the
license that the OS can't be used on an emulator without
permission in writing, and there is no chance of getting that.
However, shrink-wrap licensing's validity is in question and
there is no official decision by the courts.
	In other words, this is grey-area. The problem from
Apple's perspective is that it isn't the AMax people's crime. It
is the users crime for loading the OS into an emulator. And then
Apple would have to sue every user individually, which would be
ridiculous. Also, it is possible to call the Amiga a Mac and not
an emulator because it is using Mac coding, not a rewritten
equivalent. Anyway, Apple doesn't want to give the Amiga any
unnecessary coverage.

>I assume that System 7.0 has "preventative measures" against such
>"emulators," but of course, I'm unsure.
>
	So am I.

>Any response to this news would be great; I'd appreciate a copy
>via email to klingspo@holst.cs.colostate.edu
>
>
>Cheers,
>
>Steve Klingsporn
>CS Major & Visionary "wanna-be,"
>Colorado State University

	-- Ethan


Q:	What's the definition of a Quayle?

A:	Two right wings and no backbone.