Is PearPC illegal?

[dfoesch]

[quote="dkelley":abdbd66d5f]
[quote="bot47":abdbd66d5f]I just know this rule from GB Emulators and illegal roms...
Why is it? Maybe if you're having it just 24 hours, you do not own it?
[/quote:abdbd66d5f]

There's a 24 hour rule in canadian law at least, maybe elsewhere, which is considered a contractual cooling off period. Even if you buy a car or a house, you have 24 hours after signing the papers to change your mind. It's very unusual to do so, and you'll get major fights ahead of you, but you will win. It's the law. Probably where this warez 24 hour thing came from.

EDIT: by the way, it's also a very little known law and doesn't have to be mentioned within the contract. Most people don't know about the law.
[/quote:abdbd66d5f]

It exists here in the US also. It's called buyer's remorse. You but be allowed to either cancel or get a refund on a product that you are just entirely not satisfied with.

Take for example, Alarm Systems (since this is what I work in) You have 6 days from signing the contract to say "Um... no, I don't think so." For any and all reasons, and cancel the contract. So, if you buy something under contract in the US, you do have a period in which you can be probationally under the contract, but you can still always change your mind within a certain time frame.

Again, like in Canada, this is a little known law, and not mentioned in contracts.

But recall, this requires you to enter into a binding contract for the purchase of a goods or service. Stealing something to try it out for 24-hours is not allowed.

[Ribtorus]

I seriously doubt Apple would kick up a fuss about PearPC, because it seems to me they are effectively getting a whole bunch of development work done, that they may or may not decide to do something with, for free. It costs them nothing, and only serves to promote their OS. They are the big winners in this.

And I am curious why, in an interview with Sebastian baillas, he mentioned the videoX driver with this statement:

[quote:4314715923]
Another nice optimization was to write a graphic driver for Mac OS X especially for PearPC. Sadly, this information is only available under an NDA from Apple.
[/quote:4314715923]

Does that mean that technical help or information was provided by Apple to develop the videoX driver for the PearPC project?

It would be nice if Apple was providing some basic assistance, without too much interferance.

[prasys]

In , Malaysia. You got like 24 (or is it 48 hours)....for you to sign a EULA or contract...(its stated somewhere in the Multimedia act)...I dunno..maybe its true....I dunno

But again , now I legally own OSX and OS 8.6..So , I am happy , because I support Apple and second I support PearPC.

[thewer]

[quote="Ribtorus":091a95ccc9]
I seriously doubt Apple would kick up a fuss about PearPC, because it seems to me they are effectively getting a whole bunch of development work done, that they may or may not decide to do something with, for free. It costs them nothing, and only serves to promote their OS. They are the big winners in this.

And I am curious why, in an interview with Sebastian baillas, he mentioned the videoX driver with this statement:

[quote:091a95ccc9]
Another nice optimization was to write a graphic driver for Mac OS X especially for PearPC. Sadly, this information is only available under an NDA from Apple.
[/quote:091a95ccc9]

Does that mean that technical help or information was provided by Apple to develop the videoX driver for the PearPC project?

It would be nice if Apple was providing some basic assistance, without too much interferance.
[/quote:091a95ccc9]

Are you sure he was refgering to videoX or the fact he wanted to write a more optimized one or something like that and he was ne able to?

thewer ;)

[Ribtorus]

[quote="thewer":a8f087014e]
[quote="Ribtorus":a8f087014e]I seriously doubt Apple would kick up a fuss about PearPC, because it seems to me they are effectively getting a whole bunch of development work done, that they may or may not decide to do something with, for free. It costs them nothing, and only serves to promote their OS. They are the big winners in this.

And I am curious why, in an interview with Sebastian baillas, he mentioned the videoX driver with this statement:

[quote:a8f087014e]
Another nice optimization was to write a graphic driver for Mac OS X especially for PearPC. Sadly, this information is only available under an NDA from Apple.
[/quote:a8f087014e]

Does that mean that technical help or information was provided by Apple to develop the videoX driver for the PearPC project?

It would be nice if Apple was providing some basic assistance, without too much interferance.
[/quote:a8f087014e]

Are you sure he was refgering to videoX or the fact he wanted to write a more optimized one or something like that and he was ne able to?

thewer
[/quote:a8f087014e]

I have no idea, that's why I find it an interesting statement. The way it's said in the quote implies that the optimised graphics driver has been written, and I assume that refers to the videox driver for PearPC.

[jedavis1]

[quote="Ribtorus":8ffa28bec6]
I have no idea, that's why I find it an interesting statement. The way it's said in the quote implies that the optimised graphics driver has been written, and I assume that refers to the videox driver for PearPC.
[/quote:8ffa28bec6]

I thought the video.X driver was taken from MOL(Mac-On-Linux)? Which isn't that another GPL software. Meaning if it was optimized by one of the PearPC team that it would have to be disclosed and returned to the public?

That is the way I thought I had read it.

Jon

[Ribtorus]

Perhaps what he meant to say was more like:
[quote:40449aab1d]
Another nice optimization [b:40449aab1d]would be[/b:40449aab1d] to write a graphic driver for Mac OS X especially for PearPC. Sadly, this information is only available under an NDA from Apple." And so the videox driver is used instead.
[/quote:40449aab1d]

[jeb_8000]

then why didn't apple find out and stop this madness if it was illegal?

[Robin]

People are still disputing the legality of a vast number of emulators of many different kinds of system, i think the general concensus is that if you own the system being emulated, and you own the software or ROMs you are running, (of course with the case of the Mac OSX EULA, i'm unsure about this), then you dont really have that much of a problem.

What they (the makers of systems being emulated) object to, is selling their software and hardware emulators bundled in one product with none of the proceeds going to them. Which is fairly understandable.