That’s the title of my Slaw post for today.  It reads as follows:

For the London Free Press – December 14, 2009

Read this on Canoe

COMPUTERS: In a hardware-software legal war, the company reaches a partial, $2.7-million US settlement with knock-off computer maker

Apple’s business model is to sell hardware with software on it. It does not intend for its operating systems to be installed on hardware it doesn’t make and its software licences expressly forbid it.

But that hasn’t stopped people installing Apple operating systems on non-Apple machines, dubbed Hackintoshes, from “hacker” and “Macintosh.” The main attractions are lower prices and wider selection of hardware.

Several companies have created bargain-priced, knock-off computers able to run Apple software. The most widely used is the OSx86 project, which runs the Mac OS X operating system on non-Apple computers with x86 architecture-compatible processors.

Apple software licences strictly prohibit use on computers that aren’t “Apple-labelled.” But companies such as Psystar and PearC have released products that let consumers use Apple software on non-Apple computers at considerable savings.

Apple has fought back in several ways.

The latest Apple OS version 10.6.2 added code to prevent it being used with the Atom chip used in most netbooks, a common Hackintosh platform. But within a week, a Russian-based hacker had circumvented the code.

Apple also has taken its Hackintosh battle to the courts.

On July 3, 2008, Apple filed suit against Psystar Corp. for violating the licence and breaching Apple’s copyright-protected technologies.

The end-user agreement for Mac OS X reads: “You agree not to install, use or run the Apple software on any non-Apple-labelled computer, or to enable others to do so.”

Psystar began selling PCs hacked to run Apple software — and priced more than $2,000 lower than an Apple notebook — in April 2008. After the suit was filed, Psystar kept selling systems and even created new ones.

Last month, the U.S. District Court judge trying the case found Psystar had violated Apple’s copyrights and anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

Two weeks later, Apple filed a motion against Psystar seeking statutory damages of between $500,000 and $4.5 million US, plus attorney’s fees and costs. Apple also wants Psystar permanently enjoined from continuing a business causing “irreparable harm” to Apple’s business, brand and goodwill.

In the most recent development, a partial settlement has been reached. Psystar agreed to stop selling Hackintoshes and pay Apple about $2.7 million in damages in return for dismissal of some Apple claims. But Apple can’t collect until appeals are complete, which may take years.

Though this is a success for Apple, it remains to be seen what effect it will have on the Hackintosh phenomenon as a whole.

Wired reports that the UK has banned an iPhone ad on the basis that it exaggerates the speed at which the phone operates.  They also banned an iPhone ad a few months ago on the basis that the claim that all parts of the internet are on the phone was false because it doesn’t support Java or flash.

The Wired post has several links to other articles about complaints and lawsuits against Apple over the iPhone.

Of course that is in spite of its massive sales.  What I find amusing/interesting is that flaws in Apple products seem to be overlooked by most people, yet flaws in Microsoft products seem to be exaggerated. 

Digg has a post that refers to a Valleywag post that pokes fun at the fact that Apples stores use Windows Mobile devices to ring up orders on the store floor.

Its amusing to glance at the comments to the posts to see the Apple vs Microsoft camps do battle over that fact.

The iPhone is available in Canada this week.  Michael Geist’s article on the unique Canadian issues is worth a read, especially in light of the rumours that Apple has shorted Canadian supply due to Canadian pricing issues, and the tens of thousands of people who signed up in protest of the rates.

It will be interesting to see to what extent these issues will dampen demand for the iPhone, and reduce their ongoing use for cost reasons.

Read Michael’s article

Lifehacker points to an amusing post on the Put Things Off blog that bills itself as The laid-back prodcutivity blog. entitled Think Different – Buy a Bigger Envelope!, subtitled How to Tell if You Really Need New Hardware.

Its a reality check for those who just have to buy the latest and greatest gadgets. I admit I get caught up in that sometimes – but then I’m too cheap to spend the money.

Apple, for example, thrives on the want, rather than the need to buy new stuff – with the marketing buzz they create, their knack of getting unique (or at least the illusion of unique) products to the market at the right time, and cutting edge design. Why include user replaceable batteries, for example, when you will buy the Macbook Space before the battery on the Macbook Air dies?

Take a look at the Buy a Bigger Envelope post.

Steve Jobs’ “reality distortion field” was in full force at yesterday’s MacWorld. Even if one is not an Apple fan, or does not use any Apple products, you have to admire the way they design, announce, and sell their products.

There was so much buzz, and so much desire to get the word out as the announcements happened, that some communications services were overwhelmed with traffic.

Despite the fact that their products are not cheap, they sell amazingly well. Millions of iphones, for example, in 10 months – enough to garner 19% of the smartphone market.

Apple seems to have the knack of figuring out what people want, and provides that by leaving out or compromising what most would feel are necessary features. For example, the new MacBook Air is amazingly thin, has wifi N, but has no ethernet port, only 1 usb port, no optical drive, and the battery is not user replaceable.

They also have the ability to announce new products, then have them available almost immediately.

Coverage is everywhere. Some examples:

Gizmodo

Engadget

Techdirt

Client side blog

For those that are counting – 9 days to go before the iPhone is available. Keep in mind that while there is no question that it is a cool and innovative device, it is aimed at the consumer market. It is not designed to play nice with the corporate desktop, where Blackberry’s and Windows Mobile devices reign supreme.

So if you want an iPhone for work purposes – check it out carefully before you buy to make sure it will meet your needs. I suspect lots of people will try to use them for business use, and perhaps web apps will be created for the iPhone browser that will bridge the gap. I’m sure we will see commentary on this soon after it is on the market.

For those that just can’t wait to get one – Steve Rubel points to an article entitled Waiting for Your iPhone: Five Ways to Handle the Unbearable Stress

Apple’s stock dropped temporarily yesterday in high volume trading based on the publication of an internal email saying that the launch of the iPhone and Mac OS X Leopard were both being delayed by several months. 23 minutes after that hit the stock markets, there was another email from Apple saying that the first one was fake, did not come from Apple, and that the launches are on schedule.

It will be interesting to find out who was behind that, why, and how they were able to fake it.

This shows the danger of relying on such information without corroboration and the speed at which it disseminates, but also the speed at which false things get corrected.

Read the emails themselves and some commentary at:

Infectious Greed by Paul Kedrosky

GigaOm

Steve Job’s anti-drm essay has received a lot of attention over the last few days. Is this the beginning of the end for DRM? Lets hope the Canadian legislators are paying attention to this in connection with the copyright reform bill thats in the works.

For those who have not seen it – he published an essay concluding that Apple would prefer to be able to sell music withut DRM.

Essentially he said the reason Apple had to put DRM on its iTunes songs to limit consumer use was that the record companies demanded it. Without it, they would not provide iTunes with the songs.

There has been much speculation as to why Apple is now saying this. One motivator will be the decision in Norway saying that Apple’s DRM is illegal as it prevents interoperability. This is Apple’s way of saying to Norway that its not Apple’s fault – they are the victim. Other suggested motivators are a negotiating tactic with the labels for a new deal for iPhone downloads, and a ploy for publicity.

Whatever the motivators, its another example of Steve Job’s ability to get publicity and position Apple as a friend of the consumer – sometimes referred to as his “reality distortion field”. He has sensed that the planets are aligning on this issue – ranging from the Norway decision, the growing awareness of drm in the public, the growing anti-drm movement, and a growing number of smaller labels offering music without drm.

And there is evidence that the approach may be working – or at least has been timed to appear it is working (which from a publicity perspective is just as good for Apple). Michael Geist points out this morning that several news sources are reporting that EMI, one of the 4 major labels, is considering allowing the sale of drm free mp3’s.

And the RIAA’s response was amusing (talk about a reality distortion field). The essay discussed and rejected the possibility of Apple licensing its Fairplay drm software. The RIAA responded by saying that Apple’s offer to license Fairplay was a welcome breakthough.

Read Steve Job’s essay

Read an article in the Register about the Norway issue

Read Michael’s post about EMI

Read an engadget post about the RIAA response