Followers

Monday, December 15, 2008

Hack of the Clones: Why Apple Can't Stop the Copies

By Brian X. Chen
Eee1

Just hours after announcing plans to sell a high-end Mac clone, niche electronics reseller EFIX USA changed course in order to avoid a nasty legal confrontation with Apple.

"We certainly don't want to get into a legal battle that's over a couple thousand dollars," an EFIX USA spokesman said. "Potentially Apple could have a legal issue there. They may not have a legal issue, but with all the money they have they might try to make one."

Despite the sudden turnabout, it's getting harder and harder for Apple to guard the most precious jewel at the core of its success: The Mac operating system.

Apple forbids Mac OS X from running on anything but a Mac. But in the past year, an army of Mac cloners has emerged, their rise facilitated in large part by Apple's 2006 decision to switch to Intel chips. The most prominent example is Florida-based Psystar, a startup selling Mac clones, which has been in legal battle with Apple since July. Shortly following Psystar's lead were companies with similar offerings: " href="http:///">OpenTech, " href="http:///">OpeniMac and " href="http://www.muzzle.nl/english-chat/39-interview-davide-rutigliano-ceo-art-studios-entertainment-media.html">Art Studios Entertainment Media.

Friday morning, " href="http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/12/12/efi_x_usa_to_sell_pre_made_pcs_as_do_it_yourself_mac_clones.html" id="ti1m">AppleInsider reported that EFIX USA was going to start selling custom-made PCs with a Mac-OS-loaded USB dongle included inside. But in a phone interview with Wired.com, EFIX USA said it was going to cancel this deal, in fear that Apple would construe this offer -- a computer shipped with a Mac OS X booter -- as a Mac clone.

HR&O attorney Eric Overholt said the dongle will likely face legality issues with Apple. He explained Apple could potentially allege piracy and copyright infringement in violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, because the Taiwanese company is essentially copying the Mac BIOS and putting it in a chip (the dongle).

"My thought is that this company will face the same type of lawsuit and claims that Psystar is facing," said Eric Overholt, an attorney with HR&O. "This dongle tricks the clone into thinking that the clone is actually a Mac. There will also most likely be claims against [the company] for 'reverse engineering' the Mac BIOS in order to create their 'dongle.'"

Art Studios Entertainment Media's dongle shows how the definition of a "Mac clone" has become blurry. And that gives away just how easy it's become for manufacturers to steal Apple's operating system -- and market it in different ways in order to dodge legal bullets.

"I would say that one of the things that's happening to Apple is that it's less able to keep secrets than it used to be because it has broader supply chain and broader distribution," said Roger Kay, an Endpoint Technologies analyst.

Apple wasn't always opposed to Mac clones. For a brief period in the 1990s -- when Steve Jobs was still exiled from Apple -- Apple CEO Michael Spindler licensed the Mac operating system to several manufacturers: Power Computing, Motorola, Umax, APS, Radius and DayStar. When Jobs retook the helm in 1997, one of the first items on his agenda was to destroy the clone program and eliminate these cheaper alternatives to Apple's goods.

But in 2006, Apple opened itself up to attack again (knowingly or not) when it ditched its own Power PC processors in favor of Intel's more power-efficient CPUs. Because Apple then had to code OS X to run on Intel processors, it opened a door for hackers: They could modify the operating system code to run on any Intel-powered, non-Mac machine.

The Intel switch gave birth to an underground community of hackers dubbed OSX86, who " href="http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/FAQ#What_is_The_OSx86_Project.3F" id="wcf2">anonymously contribute to a wiki that details the techniques required to get the Mac OS to work on other Intel machines. The OSX86 community is what made Psystar and all the aforementioned companies possible, and it's also what enables people to ">install Mac OS X on a netbook, a popular hack.

"People were talking about Apple coming out with a laptop under $800 for the first time, and someone already made one and it's a [hacked] netbook," said Brad Linder, blogger of Liliputing.

Although running OS X on a non-Apple machine may violate Apple's software license agreements and copyrights, and may be a violation of the DMCA, the new crop of clone makers have plenty of tricky moves to evade legal trouble.

One of the trickiest moves comes from Art Studios Entertainment Media. The company isn't selling a Mac clone, per se. It's " href="http://www.efixusa.com/" id="m80x">manufacturing a USB dongle that lets PCs boot up any operating system, including OS X. Conveniently enough, Art Studios Entertainment Media calls the product EFI-X, and is selling the product through EFIX USA, the reseller that no longer wants to be known as a maker of Mac clones. The Taiwanese company is urging EFIX USA to avoid marketing the dongle's primary feature as booting computers off OS X -- even though that's what most customers likely want it for.

Confused yet? EFIX USA says it is too.

"We get somewhat mixed signals on what [Art Studios Entertainment Media] would really like to accomplish," an EFIX USA spokesman said. "They produce the device and want to sell it, but somehow they don't want it to come out that the primary function of the device is that it allows people to run OS X on generic Intel hardware."

Another company with a creative plan to put out a Mac clone was OpenTech. The Florida-based company launched in July, promising to sell computers together with a how-to kit on installing the operating system of your choice, including Apple's. A spokesman for OpenTech made bold statements, saying, "Our legal team has come to the conclusion that we wouldn't be violating any copyright laws or any other laws." But just a month later, OpenTech " href="http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/08/one-month-old-m.html" id="j978">shut down its operation and put it up for sale.

Apple continues to battle Psystar, a Florida-based company that " href="http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/news/2008/04/apple_psystar" id="scdq">started selling PCs hacked to run OS X in April. Apple in mid-July filed a lawsuit alleging copyright, trademark and shrink-wrap license infringement. And much to Apple's surprise, Psystar's legal team is fighting back, leading the corporation to " href="http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/12/apple-cries-cor.html" id="s8f9">believe the small company may be receiving help from other parties -- perhaps another competing corporation.

Since the Mac clone market is young, it's difficult to tell how much these clone makers and netbook hackers are actually cutting into Apple's sales. Given the difficulty of getting the hacks to work, or even of getting a clone maker on the phone, total sales of Mac clones are probably miniscule. And it's unlikely we'll see Mac clones break into the mainstream any time soon, given Apple's ruthless legal team.

Even so, Apple's clone problem is unlikely to go away in the near future. As long as OS X runs on Intel hardware, and as long as the developers behind OSX86 continue their work, it will be difficult for Apple to stop cloning altogether.

Original here

No comments: