psystar – liars

That guys said they sell computers with efi v8 emulator..

They forgot to mention author of emulator, so it’s looks like they made efi v8.

But u know who did it (

So, this is violation of my authorship rights on pc efi v8.

pc_efi v8 now had been reloaded, and includes very basic license

which denies any commercial using. also updated with actual smbios.

can be found in topic of channel #leopard in

text of license


EFI V1 – V8

Redistribution and use in binary form for direct or indirect commercial purposes, with or without modification, is stricktly forbidden.

Redistributions in binary form for non-commercial purposes must reproduce the above license notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.

Neither the names of EFI V1-V8 copyright owner nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived direct or indirect from this software.



  1. kunijp
    April 15th, 2008 | 2:20 am

    This is F%’&kup!
    Stealing a non profit stuff for their own profit.
    I 100% got your back netkas

  2. edo
    April 15th, 2008 | 2:25 am

    netkas, they steal your rights.

  3. NMAC
    April 15th, 2008 | 2:31 am


  4. bgrau2000 (billy)
    April 15th, 2008 | 2:44 am

    Well said, they should not only acknowledge you, but pay you royalties from their sales as well…

  5. mysticusa
    April 15th, 2008 | 2:55 am

    hehe, you violated the eula as well then ? :p

  6. skn
    April 15th, 2008 | 3:33 am

    Fully agree! Let’s hope Apple will stop them!

  7. tg7400
    April 15th, 2008 | 4:26 am

    let them win their court case. you have plenty of time for commercial recognition of your expertise. if they win, the whole thing opens up for mac clones, and you can take your pick of which one you want to support, and take a big fat % of the action for your favor. the new dell of mac clones… 😉

  8. cebep
    April 15th, 2008 | 4:35 am


  9. thestevo
    April 15th, 2008 | 4:51 am

    You tell ’em Netkas! I’m behind you all the way. I don’t think this will be good for our community in the long run. So far Apple has treated us with a mild apathy. While we will most likely always find a way around protection, the last thing we need is for Apple to spend more hours thinking up stuff for us to workaround.

    Keep up the good work Netkas, we appreciate you!


  10. Z
    April 15th, 2008 | 5:01 am

    Wow, Have no worries, Steve will/have no choice to open up to us. It’s only a matter of time, And I’f I was him, I’d do it now !, Apple could easily take on windows “NOW” not in 3 mos. NOW !


  11. Kampfgnom
    April 15th, 2008 | 7:14 am

    Thats what I first thought when I read that they used boot_v8. I searched their whole site for some reference to you 😉

    Either they better not mention they use your software (which you would find out anyways) or they just give you the Credits.
    Screw them

  12. Jbla
    April 15th, 2008 | 7:32 am

    Netkas, there is nthing on EFI emulator that limits somehow the selling of it? You should make a simple license to this software man!

  13. Jbla
    April 15th, 2008 | 7:33 am

    At last preventing it to be sold by corporations without explicit permission

  14. Wallstreet
    April 15th, 2008 | 7:38 am

    There’d be some sweet irony in a lawsuit stemming from the OSX86 community towards Psystar rather than Apple. I feel the same way about all this though. Since getting started with OSX86, I’ve bought four Macs – three used and one new.

    OSX86 is like a gateway drug – you tinker with it and get it working and eventually, you buy an Apple system. I’ve had a friend buy a MacBook after playing with my original Maxxus-hacked 10.4-based system.

    Trying to make money off of what is essentially a community effort NOT designed to make any sort of money while depending on the community for support is really poor.

  15. alkobottle
    April 15th, 2008 | 8:07 am

    wouldn’t it be the easiest way to just use GPL3?
    at least they could mention your name, bitches…

  16. sheeplover
    April 15th, 2008 | 8:20 am

    man, go for it!

    imho no one should sell a hackintosh. This will be bad for all of us.

  17. ridicule
    April 15th, 2008 | 8:27 am

    You made an EFI emulator allowing to use OS X on computers not allowed by Apple’s licence… psystar uses your EFI emulator breaking which licence ? powned !

  18. nirmalya
    April 15th, 2008 | 8:40 am

    Not to incite you any further so that you lose your cool and take your head off with what you are busy with, we must sit together and decide what can we do now. Some had suggested that we sign an online petition, while others are thinking of launching DOS attacks on the website. It had hurt the sentiments of everyone of us, let alone the danger we may run into should Apple choose to target us now. This plagiarism must be stopped and the sooner the better. But for the time being why cant we put a sticky note on the other forum that we are no way linked to those thugs and let everybody see that before they can even enter the forum?

  19. April 15th, 2008 | 8:42 am

    Grrrrrrrr !!!!!!!!!!!!!


  20. westwaerts
    April 15th, 2008 | 8:44 am

    yes, if the challenge switch to commercial, we all face more troubles.

  21. April 15th, 2008 | 9:41 am

    netkas, just laugh about it! we all know who did this possible and deeply respect you work … People who think they can get a MAC for 399$ (and most of the mac users want a SIMPLE reliable computer cause they dont want install drivers and bla) will fail anyway with this machines … BIG UP THE NETKAS !!!

  22. April 15th, 2008 | 10:54 am

    I agree with sheeplover – the more attention this gets, the worse it is for us.

    Apple Sell Computers. They will not “open up to us”. Every time an update is issued now, I think that it will be the one that borks my Hackintosh permanently. And does the fact that Apple have issued EFI firmware updates for virtually all their machines not worry anyone else?

    And it is bad that Netkas received no credit but what do you expect from Psystar? They aren’t exactly giving Apple their dues either.

  23. kovrigger
    April 15th, 2008 | 11:02 am

    It could be just a noise – PR-marketing move – a big doubt these guys will sell anothorized Apple-like computers without any guarantee and possible juridical measures from Steve Jobs. No one can not guarantee 100% compatibility of all soft and hard components with MacOS except Apple. So, how they will solve it? Somebody wants to play.

  24. lastExile
    April 15th, 2008 | 1:06 pm

    hmmm wtf open mac to open computer to open crap lol

  25. t0m
    April 15th, 2008 | 1:37 pm

    OMG… hackintosh should have stayed in the dark…
    This is bad news.

  26. frantisheq
    April 15th, 2008 | 3:35 pm

    i agree but i haven’t seen any license or some references to programmers that created the base for what you did. sorry to say that but it’s not all just your work and ppl talked about licensing since the first day you released it

  27. dopey-o
    April 15th, 2008 | 3:45 pm

    by definition, it’s not a Hackintosh if you or your brother-in-law or boyfriend (or girl-friend such as macgirl)didn’t make it. It’s not a Hackintosh if you didn’t scoop up the torrent and re-install it 3 or 4 times. if it came in the mail in a box, it’s just another counterfeit boxen.

    Thomas Edison said it best: Hackintosh is 10% inspiration and 90% persperation.

    BTW, thanks to netkas for all the fish!

  28. urukhai
    April 15th, 2008 | 3:46 pm

    even saruman would not do that!

  29. April 15th, 2008 | 5:42 pm

    Apple has a vested interest in NOT allowing a hardware company to come to market with a viable “Clone.” They tried that over a decade ago, and the clone business quickly outperformed and undersold Apple’s own hardware; the company then underwent not a small amount of pain to squelch such “competitors” and return to a vertically integrated monopoly business model — but not before they purchased the strongest such company — Power Computing — for one hundred million dollars, and folded that companies “crown jewel” motherboard design into what eventually came to be known as the PowerMac G3 (beige).

    Based on that history, I would expect Apple to respond to Psystar with its’ whole flock of lawyers, in order to snap these pups off the market ASAP and injunct anyone involved from selling so much as a digital wristwatch. Further, if what at least one poster has implied is true — that Psystar is selling copies of Leopard with their hardware without proper licenses and for far under market price — they will get sued and lose for that, separately; all hardware issues aside it is a basic truth that one cannot market and sell pirate copies of an OS with impunity and get away with it — if they are in fact doing so, what the hell are they thinking?

  30. kresh
    April 15th, 2008 | 6:00 pm

    They have created an acknowledgement page to open source in general, and netkas in particular.

    Unless netkas wants to charge money for Psystar to use EFI V*, then what else could you want?

  31. April 15th, 2008 | 6:32 pm

    Looks like Apple already is fucking them in the ass…

  32. Darwin
    April 15th, 2008 | 6:52 pm

    Open Source

    “Psystar embraces the Open Source community. We’re all about open computing and the idea that software should be customizable, portable, and available. We use Open Source software in the Open Computers like PC EFI by Netkas, the GRUB bootloader, Ubuntu Linux, and many other Open Source efforts out there. We use Open software in our PsyStor SAN by Sun and IBM. We use the Linux kernel in the Psystar Gateway Router. Psystar will promote Open Source projects in every way possible. To the Open Source community: thank you.”

  33. Jazzania
    April 15th, 2008 | 7:45 pm

    They’re crediting you now. From their website…

    “Psystar embraces the Open Source community. We’re all about open computing and the idea that software should be customizable, portable, and available. We use Open Source software in the Open Computers like PC EFI by Netkas, the GRUB bootloader, Ubuntu Linux, and many other Open Source efforts out there”

  34. porco
    April 15th, 2008 | 8:59 pm

    btw you are doing excellent work man i forgot to tell it in the last message ^_^ keep doing it right

  35. synapsis
    April 15th, 2008 | 9:01 pm

    They actually mention Netkas on their website:

    Go to OpenSource:

    Psystar embraces the Open Source community. We’re all about open computing and the idea that software should be customizable, portable, and available. We use Open Source software in the Open Computers like PC EFI by Netkas, the GRUB bootloader, Ubuntu Linux, and many other Open Source efforts out there. We use Open software in our PsyStor SAN by Sun and IBM. We use the Linux kernel in the Psystar Gateway Router. Psystar will promote Open Source projects in every way possible. To the Open Source community: thank you.

  36. April 15th, 2008 | 9:31 pm

    Man, I hope some Lawyer in Florida that is part of the OSX86 Community feels like helping you out Netkas. You need to either license and sell the PC EFI or stop Psystar.

  37. April 15th, 2008 | 9:34 pm

    Hahaha, Psystar is paying you via google to advertise on your site. Hahahah :(

  38. netkas
    April 15th, 2008 | 9:54 pm

    apsl isn’t valid in place where i live tho..

  39. dave null
    April 15th, 2008 | 10:38 pm

    while acknowledging your work, I agree with #9. and as always, what happens when author retires?

  40. Carlos Pombo
    April 15th, 2008 | 10:43 pm

    want to thank netkas (others to) to give us some joy playing, buikding, installing, etc. hackitoshes. I’m afraid openmac commercial way is a strong step to kill, disgrace, and disrespect brain work.

  41. Allen
    April 16th, 2008 | 4:18 am


    netkas, you’re awesome, but isn’t it a little weird for you to be outraged at *just* them stealing pc_efi? I mean, they’re kinda stealing the work of hundreds of Apple engineers and designers, too.

    It’s not fair to sell other people’s work without them acknowledging your work AND paying you *something* for it.

  42. josh
    April 16th, 2008 | 6:31 am

    Psystar is asking for trouble. all most hackintosh users really want is to tinker with the OS.

  43. TorqueX86
    April 16th, 2008 | 6:59 am

    Here’s a fine example of how an amateurial project can be used in an “evil” way to bring disgrace on a wonderful technical project that actually brought thousands of people closer to Apple than anyone else could ever before.

    And not just close to the shiny and nice aluminium computers that smell good, but to the great tech behind their OS, we learned how to use it properly, we learned how it works, the mechanics behind it and the great care that Apple put behind its hood.

    Our life has never been easy. Apple buyers were always ass-hurt that we could by fact obtain a working mac more powerful and cheaper than theirs, and they have tried to stop us in any possible way, without understanding the main purpose of our project.

    But we lived, and thrived.

    And now this company jumps out of nowhere, saying “yeah who cares” and uses our faces and our hard work to make $$$.

    If any Apple legal person is reading this, I would like to point out that THIS is theft, not what we do. We fiddle with our LEGALLY OBTAINED Operating System for our personal entertainment, we don’t sell anything and we immediately kick from the channels whoever wants to obtain pirate material.

    And this is a matter of fact.

    I hope with all my heart that these thieves will be prosecuted, and they are thieves TWO times, as they make profit over the hard work of Apple, and ours.


  44. frantisheq
    April 16th, 2008 | 8:26 am

    netkas don’t know why you deleted what i wrote here yesterday 😀 looks pretty childish for a hacker like you but you forgot to thank me for remembering you that you didn’t released PC EFI under any license and that it’s not only your work. now i finally understand what MacGirl was talking about

  45. netkas
    April 16th, 2008 | 9:06 am

    Kids can’t understand diffrence beetwen product and code. nothing to talk with u about.

  46. frantisheq
    April 16th, 2008 | 9:44 am

    :) at least you didn’t deleted #41

  47. Sakten
    April 16th, 2008 | 10:00 am

    Oh hi, you’re coming next.

  48. TorqueX86
    April 16th, 2008 | 1:37 pm

    I wouldn’t see any reason to delete my previous post.

  49. //bpunk//
    April 16th, 2008 | 2:20 pm

    It’s has always been the case that Apple has tolerated small scale hacking projects as it understands that this is a gateway for the next generation of coders for Mac OS X but hardware clones are a different ball game, if you love Mac OS X the way it is, don’t let those thieving pystar liars get away with it netkas – Apple could if forced to come up with other ways of locking down the software, is that what you really want? Apple needs to do what is necessary in the fight to rid the world of M$ dominance, once that happens and is confirmed we can all move to more open and free quality software for all.

    You’ll get lot more kudos from the wider Mac community instead of a tiny mention on thieving pystar site – this is a great chance for the OSX86 community to come out from under the rock and do the right thing…..

  50. April 16th, 2008 | 4:32 pm

    […] clones”, is not only breaking the EULA of the Mac OS, but also the Netkas’ license of PC_EFI V8.0 which is what they are using to enable the booting of the Mac OS on non-Apple hardware. The license […]

  51. cookie23
    April 16th, 2008 | 5:53 pm

    Jbla: I’m not a lawyer but I do also program so I have a good sense of the way copyright works. As I understand it netkas doesn’t need to make a license on his original work to prevent commercial use. Copyright is attached to all works even without a license stated and is, by default, all rights reserved. A license grants rights to the work that you would not have had otherwise, not restricts what rights are available.

    Now I’m not sure what code was reused and may also fall under another license so there may be other avanues to getting part of the code, however the license above makes non-commercial use permissible, where previously it wasn’t (or only implied). The prohibition on commercial use is for clarity, not as a restriction because previously it was wasn’t permissible either. Under US copyright, as I understand it, Psystar can’t just take anything they can see on the internet and use it or sell it. They have to have permision to make a copy, i.e. they need a license which permits them to use the work in that way or ownership of the work. I think Psystar have confuse the ability to see the source code and code under a open source license which permits modification. The ability to see source code on a website doesn’t grant the ability to use, copy, modify or redistribute it.

  52. Consultant
    April 16th, 2008 | 6:29 pm

    United States copyright laws protects intellectual rights, unless the rights are explicitly given away or has a different ownership, in case of work for hire. Thus the author IS protected and can clarify his rights.

  53. April 16th, 2008 | 7:14 pm

    […] building one yourself — you’ll probably have it done well before this whole mess gets sorted out. Read – Netkas blog posting Read – The Guardian “So exactly who or what is Psystar?”Read – Psystar […]

  54. April 16th, 2008 | 7:15 pm

    […] building one yourself — you’ll probably have it done well before this whole mess gets sorted out. Read – Netkas blog posting Read – The Guardian “So exactly who or what is Psystar?”Read – Psystar […]

  55. m41k
    April 16th, 2008 | 7:22 pm

    Hahaha, i knew it something like that would happen.
    I wonder what maxxuss would do in your case, netkas. Maybe laugh at psychostar, turn around, light up his blunt and enjoying the party between psycho and apple.
    Btw, i don’t think apple would ever smash this cummunity, they can’t !

    However, sad that the project’s getting sold out.
    F≠?% capitalism!

  56. April 16th, 2008 | 7:23 pm

    […] building one yourself — you’ll probably have it done well before this whole mess gets sorted out. Read – Netkas blog posting Read – The Guardian “So exactly who or what is Psystar?”Read – Psystar […]

  57. April 16th, 2008 | 7:26 pm

    […] building one yourself — you’ll probably have it done well before this whole mess gets sorted out. Read – Netkas blog posting Read – The Guardian “So exactly who or what is Psystar?”Read – Psystar […]

  58. April 16th, 2008 | 7:36 pm

    […] building one yourself — you’ll probably have it done well before this whole mess gets sorted out. Read – Netkas blog posting Read – The Guardian “So exactly who or what is Psystar?”Read – Psystar […]

  59. Brad
    April 16th, 2008 | 8:21 pm

    So, I am not seeing the problem, since you havent actually seen the code they distribute…They could very well include written notices with the computers giving credit to the open source code authors, with information on how to obtain the source…but you are simply going on the information on the website, and furthermore, having a hissy fit about the whole thing…I wish some hackers would just grow up. These people are putting your software on completed systems that serve exactly the purpose you intend your software to, that is, make OSX run on non Macs. I suppose only geeks should be allowed to run OSX on their computers, and everyone else is going to be left in the cold. Y’all are crazy if you think Steve is going to open up to everyone and allow OSX to be sold for non-Macs…you dont seem to understand Steve. He is a control freak, and is probably solely responsible for OSX not being sold for non macs right now. If they did release it for non macs, it would be bug city for a few years as they added HW configurations, and I dont think they like the idea of having a crazy messed up buggy OS running on anything…

    Anyways, I support open-source work, but not authors taking offense when someone tries to mass market a non-licensed open source, especially before you even know if credit has been given.

  60. Burnout
    April 16th, 2008 | 8:27 pm

    The folks at Psystar have some pretty impressive balls to do what they’ve done. They are challenging Apple in public on the monopoly the company enjoys over tying their OS to Apple-only hardware. They claim that this is no different than Microsoft forcing all OEMs to bundle MSWindows on computers, which led to the anti-trust case in the 1990s.

    I am not a lawyer, so I don’t know if they have a real case, but the fact that they refused to back down says something positive about them. That, and their embracing of open source models for their business plan helps consumers save money int he long run. If you want an OpenPC with Ubuntu, they’re happy to pre-install it, charging you nothing; if you want it with no OS at all, they can do that, too. If you insist on running XP or Vista, they will include that along with the license fee (which they also charge for pre-installing Leopard, using your EFI). They sound like they’re trying, but it would have been nice if they’d talked to you in advance. From the Engadget article that linnks to your blog, they didn’t seem to know how to reach you.

  61. andrew
    April 16th, 2008 | 9:12 pm

    Hey, it’s almost like how Apple uses OpenBSD and doesn’t give anything back, all while barely mentioning OpenBSD at all!

    Seriously, Apple basically takes all the credit for it as barely any of their customers know that OS X is based on OpenBSD.

    Do a quick Google search:
    Notice only one result, and if you open that link, there’s actually no mention of OpenBSD.
    The only mention of OpenBSD on Apple’s site is from, and that’s just mailing lists.

  62. April 16th, 2008 | 9:21 pm

    […] Read – Netkas blog posting Read – The Guardian “So exactly who or what is Psystar?”Read – Psystar listing at the Florida State Department website […]

  63. t0m
    April 16th, 2008 | 10:00 pm

    Looks like the Psystar thing is a joke:

    Chill out until we have an answer :-)

  64. TI3GIB
    April 16th, 2008 | 10:38 pm

    Dude. You’d be worse than Apple.

    Contact them and ask them to credit you properly, but don’t stop them. You wrote code that’s very good, I’d imagine you want to it to be out there as much as possible, ask them to do that for you properly with proper royalties.

  65. April 16th, 2008 | 10:58 pm

    is it just me, or does anyone else find it ironic that we are pissed at Psystar for using netkas software without giving him due credit, yet the software created by netkas was specifically designed to get around EULA with Apple.

  66. April 16th, 2008 | 11:50 pm

    Digg it. Or write something better and digg it :)

    To get some attention to this side of problem. Otherwise you’ll continue to see only one aspect of the problem in all medias.

  67. April 16th, 2008 | 11:59 pm

    2 Wallstreet
    “There’d be some sweet irony in a lawsuit stemming from the OSX86 community towards Psystar rather than Apple.”

    Hm…lets ask Apple to represent us! :)

  68. cms
    April 17th, 2008 | 12:22 am

    I love it.

    “Am I the only one who finds it hilarious that the author of software that is designed to violate a company’s licensing agreement is annoyed that another company is using that software in violation of his own licensing agreement?”

  69. nikolaus heger
    April 17th, 2008 | 12:55 am

    These people are scam artists. They will probably go out of business in no time. However, if they turn out to be a real business – which is a rather remote possibility – wait until they have some cash, then contact a U.S. lawyer to sue their socks off. They’ll do it for “free” e.g. for a share of the winnings, so no problem.

    So no matter what happens, you win. Relax :)

    1 – Wait for them to implode all on their own. Seems likely, from all I heard.
    2 – In case that doesn’t happen: Wait for the Apple lawsuit to strike them down.
    3 – In case they survive that or it drags on longer than a month – sue ’em!

    ps: Your basic point that they just stole your stuff remains valid of course. But doesn’t it make you feel better that the end outcome will be either they die or they pay you, so that’s not all bad now, is it?

  70. del
    April 17th, 2008 | 1:01 am

    You can have a *legal* hackintosh. Apple’s EULA says you can install it on an Apple labeled machine. I got a g4 case from a friend who’s machine died after a massive power surge, found instructions online on putting intel hw into it, and used efi v8 to get everything working.

    So don’t bash Netkas saying he did something illegal first so he deserves to have his work stolen. Some people may be breaking Apple’s EULA when they use it, but not all are.

    So does taking one of those Apple stickers that comes with a new machine and slapping it on any PC make it an Apple labeled computer?

  71. Fweem
    April 17th, 2008 | 2:23 am

    They credit you now on their website –
    “We use Open Source software in the Open Computers like PC EFI by Netkas, the GRUB bootloader,”

    now they have credited you, you have proof and can prevent them from continuing.

  72. April 17th, 2008 | 4:35 am

    […] Pero no solo eso, al basarse en el proyecto OSx86, era de esperarse que sus fundadores se manifestaran en contra de alguien que piensa hacer negocio de su trabajo. En este caso Netkas (uno de los principales desarrolladores) se ha proclamado en contra en su blog. […]

  73. //bpunk//
    April 17th, 2008 | 4:42 am

    Hey Netkas, you got mentioned in ‘The Register’, leading IT news site for UK and beyond, over 6 million unique visitors/uber geeks a month 😉

    Well done, we are very proud of you in the Mac underground :)

  74. April 17th, 2008 | 5:23 am

    […] Click link to read Netka’s blog : Click Here […]

  75. Bill Dyer
    April 17th, 2008 | 5:49 am

    Those jerks!

    Cracking a company’s monopoly is one thing but using your software! That would be like using someone’s software. F—king wh-res! Why bother to use this Mac Sh_T when we could all just us Vista! Now THAT is a OS we should be able to put on any machine! But NO, that won’t work on even the machines it is supposed to!

    Long live Netkas! And Jobs! and Gates! and, and whatever.

  76. April 17th, 2008 | 6:00 am

    […] be totally bogus, infuriating Richard Koman / ZDNet Government: Psystar: Hoax or fraud? psystar – liars — That guys said they sell computers with efi v8 emulator.. Arik Hesseldahl / Byte of the Apple: Still More Revelations on Psystar PC World: More Twists in […]

  77. Z
    April 17th, 2008 | 7:32 am

    Gosh, money is the devil ! “Moving to new Guinea to buy a women with some dog teeth.” J/K. :)


  78. April 17th, 2008 | 8:00 am

    […] και αναγνώστες. Και ο Netkas, δημιουργός του EFI emulator, τους αποκαλεί ψεύτες. Κατηγορεί την Psystar για παραβίαση των όρων χρήσης του […]

  79. cumbla
    April 17th, 2008 | 8:02 am

    hey, I’m using VISTA!!!!

  80. April 17th, 2008 | 1:11 pm

    […] First: obviously they use the EFI v8 emulation developed by Netkas. For comprehensible reasons Netkas is not amused about Psystar and decided to edit his EULA to bar commercial use of PC EFI – well errm… with […]

  81. Scott Lambert
    April 17th, 2008 | 2:37 pm

    Typo: stricktly-> strictly

  82. April 17th, 2008 | 2:39 pm

    […] Read – Netkas blog postingRead – The Guardian “So exactly who or what is Psystar?”Read – Psystar listing at the Florida State Department website addthis_url = ‘'; addthis_title = ‘OSx86+Project+not+too+happy+with+Psystar+either'; addthis_pub = ”; […]

  83. April 17th, 2008 | 6:20 pm

    […] the programmer who led the PC EFI effort, retorted angrily to Psystar on his blog. “This is a violation of my authorship rights on PC EFI V8,” he wrote. The […]

  84. toleman
    April 17th, 2008 | 7:39 pm
  85. April 17th, 2008 | 10:49 pm

    […] via […]

  86. Tom D
    April 18th, 2008 | 2:29 am

    Keep in mind Apple is a “Hardware” company, who distribute their own OS (regardless of it’s origins). Loading Leopard on a non Apple system is akin to loading the Sony Playstation 3 or Wii OS on a Mac. Apple sells Leopard to Sell Machines. If Apple were to see OSX as a standalone OS (like Microsoft) for third party hardware, the price would increase dramatically and be about what Vista Home Premium costs, and, they would implement a method of licensing which up until now they have not had so the copy of OSX that you load on your mac is the same (serial numberless) copy you load on your non Apple machine with EFI V8. If this does happen, I do imagine that some clever coder would find a hack around this, and so apple like Microsoft would continue to work towards stronger methods of protecting their software from illegal duplication.

  87. azaz
    April 18th, 2008 | 3:36 am

    nice job, netkas!!!

  88. behindthescene
    April 18th, 2008 | 4:26 am

    you’re deleting the comments that revealing the truth …
    i’m quite dissapointing about your act, netkas.
    see what you’ll do.

  89. LegalScholar
    April 18th, 2008 | 6:12 am

    Netkas… all is well and good and you should get credit for your work. However your license is not valid since well to be honest your not the copyright holder (check US copyright registry). You hold no license, trademark or copyright to EFI itself (ask Intel legal if you doubt this). The fact that you wrote an emulator with the sole purpose of “unlocking” Apple’s OS X is possibly actionable, but probably not worth the hassle to Apple. Please keep up the good work, and if PSYSTAR or any equivelent company desires to use your work then I suggest you contact a proper attorney who is versed in copyrights and liability to make sure that your work is not actionable and that you can benefit from your work. Keep in mind that anyone (including for example Intel, AMI, Pheonix, ATI, AMD, Microsoft) can write a EFI emulator that allows OS X to boot on *any* box but probably do not do so since its not legal.

  90. IP Miami
    April 18th, 2008 | 7:03 am

    Since this is happening in my neighborhood, I am watching these developments with interest. I would like to clarify for benefit of previous posters here that there is a vast difference between what PsyStar is doing to Apple and what PsyStar is doing to netkas and OSX86 team.

    In the first case, Apple is getting paid. PsyStar (or whoever is selling Leopard to PsyStar) is breaching the EULA and/or the distribution agreement. This is mere breach of contract. As various commentators have pointed out, EULAs often can’t be enforced. Or, maybe it can, it’s been breached, but a court might find no or minimal damages. The article in Wired magazine points out that breach of contract is one of the weakest forms of legal action. However, as we all know, Apple is an 800-pound gorilla.

    In the second case, PROVIDED that the EFI V6 itself does not violate someone’s copyright or patent, PsyStar is then in breach of copyright. This is a much more serious matter. The copyright owner can sue for damages and/or to stop distribution.

    Netkas, you have my e-mail address if you would like someone on the ground in Miami on your side. Congratulations on your new fame. I know that you’ve been contacted by several magazines/websites already.

  91. IP Miami
    April 18th, 2008 | 7:09 am

    Sorry, I meant EFI v8, of course. As for my credentials, I am an IP attorney in Miami, registered with the USPTO as a patent attorney.

  92. April 18th, 2008 | 7:38 am

    […] meldete sich der Programmierer des in den als Open Computer bezeichneten Klon-Macs verwendeten Emulators. Psystar hat nämlich […]

  93. netkas
    April 18th, 2008 | 3:21 pm

    IP Miami
    it’s called PC_EFI

    just some companies can’t read english properly.

  94. netkas
    April 18th, 2008 | 3:22 pm

    In my point of view, company can’t use somebodies work without asking author. Anyway, need a lawyer to be sure.

  95. jimmy7430
    April 18th, 2008 | 11:58 pm

    Netkas, Completely support you to take action lawfully. Issue of Psystar should be settled down asap. I will be watching.

  96. April 19th, 2008 | 5:16 am

    Apple cloner or scammer?…

    Recently, Psystar Corporation announced the Open Mac, now renamed "Open Computer," a $399.99 Mac clone.Besides violating Apple’s EULA, and the license for the emulator that allows Leopard to run on commodity hardware, apparently the co…

  97. April 19th, 2008 | 4:54 pm

    […] get permissions from the guys at OSx86 Project to sell their work. One of the OSx86 guys openly calls Psystar liars. At this point, it sounds like Psystar is just throwing up the middle finger to practically […]

  98. l0pht
    April 20th, 2008 | 9:57 pm

    Hmm it seems to me that it´s right timing now to get it a legal matter. Which already is resulting in

    Congratulations on your new fame. I know that you’ve been contacted by several magazines/websites already.

    Publicity, and knowledge for EVERYONE that U can run MAC on PC.
    More and more people will try and find out exactly what Ive found out.
    MAC is extremly wellfunctioning OS and people might change OS or setting pressure on the big dragons to cooperate and opening up the closed market of M$ and Apple !

    anyway, netkas a BIG thanks to YOU for Your authority and work on this issue!

    SEA U

  99. cumbla
    April 21st, 2008 | 7:11 am

    i’m waiting OSX for generic PC, so MS wouldn’t alone on my PC

  100. Dodo
    April 22nd, 2008 | 7:51 pm

    Take the money and make a good deal for us.

  101. John Sawyer
    April 23rd, 2008 | 2:29 am


    What do you think of the argument that at least one person is making regarding your control of PC_EFI, at

    Where he says:

    “As for the EFI emulator, under U.S. copyright law, that is now public domain. The authors freely distributed it with no license for more than two years with the intent of unrestricted dissemination. Under U.S. law, that constitutes placing the code in the public domain. Once the code has been placed in the public domain, it cannot be later removed from the public domain. By placing the code in the public domain, the author irrevocably relinquishes all ownership and rights in the copyright. “[S]oftware released thus goes completely out of control of the author, who, even if he subsequently so desires, cannot impose any restriction on its use.”

    “Programs that are uncopyrighted because their authors intended to share them with everyone else are in the public domain. Programs in the public domain can be used without restriction as components of other programs.”

    “The test of whether software has passed into the public domain is set out in Computer Associates Int’l v. Altai, 982 F.2d 693.This decision holds that computer software may enter the public domain through “freely accessible program exchanges and the like,” or by becoming “commonplace in the computer industry.”

    I personally sympathize with Netkas’ concern about someone making money using his software (though was it a collaboration with other people too?), but the legal considerations above may trump any other opinions. Netkas may not consider PC_EFI to be in the same category as Linux, which many companies make money from even though it’s Open Source, but legally, he seems to have released it in a similar, if not the same fashion as Open Source, and so there seems to be no way of taking that back, regardless of any new additions to its license agreement.

    At best, it may be that the version of PC_EFI that was current, just prior to Netkas adding the new restrictions on commercial use, may still be public domain, but any versions produced after that, aren’t. Or, it may be that all the code contained in even the later versions, that is the same as that in the earlier versions, is still public domain, and only the new, unique code produced after the new license restriction, is under Netkas’ control. But this might mean anyone would be free to use that prior code, which is the meat of the software, and then rewrite any newer code that Netkas develops, to produce workalike code, and thus continue to produce public domain versions of whatever new PC_EFI code Netkas develops.

    Netkas is right about needing to consult a lawyer at this stage.

  102. t0m
    April 29th, 2008 | 4:26 pm

    It seems that psystar has just begun delivering their computers…

  103. ruilima
    June 1st, 2008 | 5:24 pm

    Netkas, just calm down and let Mr Jobs take care of them. You’re great!

  104. mr dobbs
    December 3rd, 2008 | 6:15 pm

    Copyright infringement is easy to prove – just show 50% of the code is the same. Perhaps a lawyer (if he believes Paystar has any money) will take the case for a cut.

    Also, Apple might be happy to enforce your copyright for you

  105. thedove
    December 28th, 2008 | 4:10 am

    I think what Psystar has done is awesome. No offense to netkas, I’ve been following his work for about 3 years now. However Psystar ultimately is putting the pressure on for Apple to open Mac Os X to other platforms than their own proprietary hardware. Which I think the ultimate goal of Netkas’ work is to get mac os x running on non-proprietary machines, is it not?

  106. January 2nd, 2009 | 7:53 am

    […] credit for someone else’s work? If Psystar is not using the OSx86 Project’s code, why did they add a new restriction on their work requiring that it be used only for non-commercial p…? Redistribution and use in binary form for direct or indirect commercial purposes, with or without […]

  107. October 23rd, 2009 | 5:33 pm

    […] hackintosh computers.But now Psystar is selling a bootloader which is primarily based on someone else’s work. No credit was given or permission asked to use the code and sell it as a closed-source commercial […]

  108. November 4th, 2009 | 9:40 am

    […] pecetach, więc cała ta rozmowa miała przynajmniej kilka różnych aspektów… Właściwie zamiast “zaczął sprzedawać” powinienem był napisać “przywłaszczył sobie&#82… bowiem Psystar z wrodzoną sobie pasożytnicza naturą tym razem zagarnął efekt pracy […]

  109. November 14th, 2009 | 6:04 pm

    […] они, как возмутился Netkas, разработчик EFI, эмулятора Мак-биоса на PC. Ведь ему-то […]

  110. November 15th, 2009 | 11:01 pm

    […] wspomagającego instalację OS X na nieapplowskich komputerach. Szybko okazało się jednak, że ta unikalna technologia to kolejne zawłaszczenie cudzej pracy, tyle że tym razem padło na środow… skupione wokoło kilku webforów poświęconych OSx86. Dokładnie to samo zrobiła wcześniej inna […]

  111. December 30th, 2009 | 1:48 am

    […] But not simply because of Apple. The OSx86 Community and Netkas have publicly called Psystar “liars” and have stated that Rebel EFI is based on their efforts to bring Apple OS X to a multitude […]

Leave a reply