Cloverleaf Kickstarter includes a pledge for RPCEmu

We didn’t make a built yet for MacOS as we need to setup a irtual MacOS first as no real Mac available.

You are aware that you’ve just publicly admitted that you plan to violate Mac OS’ license agreement, right? The license for Mac OS explicitly states that you can only run it on Apple-branded hardware, virtualised or otherwise. If you haven’t got a real Mac, you can’t legally use Mac OS.

That said, I’m not really surprised by this.. It’s fairly clear Cloverleaf has a problem reading, understanding and following software licenses after the retro games discussion earlier in the year and this more recent Twitter thread about ChatCube’s violation of multiple open-source software licenses.. https://twitter.com/riscos/status/1419209640257142784

It’s fairly clear Cloverleaf has a problem reading, understanding and following software licenses after the retro games discussion earlier in the year and this more recent Twitter thread about ChatCube’s violation of multiple open-source software licenses.

The thread somewhere around here asking what they could do with GPL-licenced software was quite fun, too.

You are aware that you’ve just publicly admitted that you plan to violate Mac OS’ license agreement, right? The license for Mac OS explicitly states that you can only run it on Apple-branded hardware, virtualised or otherwise. If you haven’t got a real Mac, you can’t legally use Mac OS.

That entirely depends on the jurisdiction under which you operate. It is very unlikely that such a clause in an End User license agreement is actually enforcable under EU customer protection and copyright law. It reminds me of ROL claiming that RISC OS 4 is not allowed to be used with emulators.

I am not aware of Apple trying to enforce that clause anywhere wrt end users, and in the heydays of “Hackintosh”, they had plenty of opportunity. However, it is likely different in commercial setups – at least one company in the US selling non-Apple hardware pre-installed with MacOSX go sued by Apple.

I never try. I’m not “MAC interested” but in the most german PC Mags you find a “step by step todo” for a virtualize MAC OS on WIN10.
Have PC Welt here (MAC OS in VirtualBox).. quote: “Apple stellt sein Betriebssystem übrigens kostenlos zum Download bereit – ein Lizenzschlüssel (Product Key) wird nicht benötigt.”
This suggests me I can do for testing …

It reminds me of ROL claiming that RISC OS 4 is not allowed to be used with emulators.

ROL were just passing on the requirement for ARM hadware by Element14/Pace in the head licence.
n.b.Steffen did you get my email a couple of weeks ago.

The things to note are that you don’t buy a copy of MacOS, you buy a licence which allows you to install and use it depending upon your agreement of certain terms.
Whilst emulators are generally not illegal in the EU, you would end up on dicey ground should Apple decide to push things. Real legitimate Macs are available, so there’s no justification for using a fake Mac. The terms within the EULA can be struck down if they are deemed unfair, but in this case they actually have to be properly unfair, and not simply inconvenient to you.
Note, again, that agreement with the licence is a requirement under copyright (you do not have a right to use the software as you see fit), which implies that failure to abide by the terms will result in you no longer being granted the right to use the software. They are giving you that right based upon certain conditions. I don’t see “don’t use this on an emulator” as being that much different to “don’t burn a copy of this disc and give it to your mates”. They are moral arguments, not technical ones. You don’t have to agree with them, you just have to agree to abide by them.

Which leads to the second point, and that is that MacOS includes a number of copy protection mechanisms. The EU rights for making personal backups and disassembly for interoperability specificity do not permit circumvention of protection methods. Thus using anything that does exactly this is unlawful (not illegal, it’s civil not criminal). This is one of the things that may make emulator use not legal – if it circumvents a rights protection system.

The reason why Apple don’t go after those who infringe and create/use fake Macs is the same reason why Microsoft tended to use rather poor licence key methods and not completely disable versions of Windows suspected of being fraudulent…even a fake version of Windows/MacOS is a version in the hands of somebody who may not have used it before and maybe the user will like it enough to consider buying the real deal next time. Stamping on everybody just makes you seem like Sony a dick, so a more nuanced “tolerance” might actually result in some sales.

Of course, copyright isn’t like trademarks so Apple doesn’t have to prosecute. They can, they just seem to choose not to. They aren’t Sony.

But that’s their choice as the copyright owner. Their inaction doesn’t make it magically permissible. Even in the EU, with it’s generally saner legal framework.

[note: IANAL]

Real legitimate Macs are available, so there’s no justification for using a fake Mac.

There’s some limitation to the specs of Macs that are available – I’m particularly conscious of the screen size of laptops. Personally, the ARM CPU in the new Mac laptops trumps that, and the extra resolution almost makes up for the small screen size; but it is a possible issue for some people. For me, it’s a compromise that would come down in Mac’s favour if I had the money – which sadly I don’t. So an old 13" MacBook Air and an old Mac Mini will have to do…