3 ms·

IANAL, this is not legal advice. My understanding is that in cases like this, copyright law within the EU allows you to make personal copies Personal copy (si

IANAL, this is not legal advice. My understanding is that in cases like this, copyright law within the EU allows you to make personal copies Personal copy (singular). However, more relevant in this context: You are allowed to download a work protected by copyright from the internet provided you have the author’s permission. The permission to download can be indicated in the terms and conditions of the respective internet site or can be derived from the reference to an open content licence or its terms. If you do not have a Mac, Apple does not give you permission to download macOS. So, if you download macOS, you are violating copyright law. Furthermore: The circumvention of TPMs (technological protection measures) is not allowed. Probably using the Apple OSK string is on a Hackintosh considered circumventing protection measures. Source: https://euipo.europa.eu/ohimportal/en/web/observatory/faqs-on-copyright-lv https://euipo.europa.eu/ohimportal/en/web/observatory/faqs-o...

Y_Y 5y ago
I am your lawyer and this is legal advice. I think a decent (legal or moral) argument can be made either way here. The circumvention of TPMs is allowed in the case that they restrict you from exercising your rights and you cannot obtain a remedy from the rightholder. Furthermore it might be useful to look at the Computer Programs Directive. I quote a Wikipedia summary here: > The legal owner of a program is assumed to have a licence to create any copies necessary to use the program and to alter the program within its intended purpose (e.g. for error correction). The legal owner may also make a back-up copy for his or her personal use. The program may also be decompiled if this is necessary to ensure it operates with another program or device (Art. 6), but the results of the decompilation may not be used for any other purpose without infringing the copyright in the program. For an implementation of this directive in English you can look at e.g. the Irish one at [0], particularly regulations 5, 6 and 7. It's also worth bearing in mind that EUIPO is a "network of experts and specialist stakeholders" who aren't necessarily writing from the perspective of consumer rights. https://web.archive.org/web/20050324110430/http://www.wipo.int:80/clea/docs_new/en/ie/ie019en.html https://web.archive.org/web/20050324110430/http://www.wipo.i...

Y_Y 5y ago

I am your lawyer and this is legal advice. I think a decent (legal or moral) argument can be made either way here. The circumvention of TPMs is allowed in the case that they restrict you from exercising your rights and you cannot obtain a remedy from the rightholder. Furthermore it might be useful to look at the Computer Programs Directive. I quote a Wikipedia summary here: > The legal owner of a program is assumed to have a licence to create any copies necessary to use the program and to alter the program within its intended purpose (e.g. for error correction). The legal owner may also make a back-up copy for his or her personal use. The program may also be decompiled if this is necessary to ensure it operates with another program or device (Art. 6), but the results of the decompilation may not be used for any other purpose without infringing the copyright in the program. For an implementation of this directive in English you can look at e.g. the Irish one at [0], particularly regulations 5, 6 and 7. It's also worth bearing in mind that EUIPO is a "network of experts and specialist stakeholders" who aren't necessarily writing from the perspective of consumer rights. https://web.archive.org/web/20050324110430/http://www.wipo.int:80/clea/docs_new/en/ie/ie019en.html https://web.archive.org/web/20050324110430/http://www.wipo.i...