Installing Leapord on multiple computers

If i buy one copy of leopard, can i use that one copy to install on all my mac computers in my house?


Thanks in advance =)

 

Legally, that isn't allowed, as each OS X installation disc is only allowed to install on one Mac according to the EULA. However, seeing as there is no copyright protection, activation, or even a license, it is perfectly possible to install one copy of OS X on as many Macs as you want.

 

Consider the Family Pack License. The License agreement allows you to install OS X on up to 5 Macs.

 

No, you are only allowed to use one copy of Leopard for one Mac. If you want to install on more than one Mac, buy a Family Pack, as Xander suggested.

 

I also agree with Xander. Apple is actually being reasonable by offering a Family Pack for a very fair cost.

 

I wouldn't call that reasonable. We're allowed to import our music CD's into hard disk based home stereo systems, into our computers, and even into our cars with their hard disk based stereo systems. So our ONE audio CD can be enjoyed in multiple places. The same should carry for our computer software.

Also, may I point out the obvious? "Family Pack" If the original author is going to install it on family computers, I can understand. However, if he's the soul user of two or more computers, he should have the right to install the software he bought for his use on however many computers he uses.

 

Unfortunately, you only license software, not buy it. And in the license the company dictates how many machines you can install it on. In the case of OS X, it is one (for the cost of $129) or if you buy the family pack, it is 5 (for $199). Now Apple could be like other companies and charge you full price per machine and load down the software with DRM, but they aren't. They are giving you the opportunity to do it the right way.

As for CDs, you are technically wrong. In fact, the RIAA is beginning to assert that ripping CDs is illegal. And to be honest, since you are only buying a license to listen to the music, and they own the rights, they can dictate to you how you can use it. While I agree that the **AAs are shooting themselves in the foot with some of this, I also agree that companies need to make money, not be charities.

 

I suppose $199 is a fair price for 5 machines, but what about those with only two machines? It'd be nice to see something like "$20 per additional license".

That sucks about CD's. I have a few from Japan with that Sony BS protection on it and I can't even rip the promotional video DVD's to play on my laptop. I legally purchased it, yet still have no right to use it. So money is an issue, but there are other issues as well. It's alright for a Japanese to listen to that DVD, but American's have no right. I thought the next-gen players/consoles were pushing for region free boundaries, but it seems that idea failed.

While I think it's fair for companies to turn a profit on their products, as that's only right, some companies do go a little far with their prices. Honestly, Apple is one of those companies, charging more for hardware than it's really worth. Kind of like a Mom and Pop store, charging $3.00 for a particular can of soup when Wally World can charge only $1.99. I suppose it depends on the connections they have with suppliers.

Though you have to admit, maybe 90% of people that'll purchase an Apple will purchase their own memory and install it, since Apple overcharges for the memory upgrades. DELL used to do that, and probably still does as well.

I really hate how technology and politics/ethics are advancing. I can understand purchasing multiple physical items because you have no choice, but with virtual software, it should be a little bit of a bonus. To be able to purchase it and copy it for archival purposes. I've come across many CD's that became unplayable over the years due to poor design of the technology or storage containers. Is it fair I have to buy it again when it wasn't my fault it broke? Should I have to buy three copies of one album just to have one in my car, in my stereo cabinet, or in my laptop?

I'll admit one reason why I'm angry with DRM is because of my disability. Sometimes I'm bed ridden with pain, I can't get up to look for a CD in my hundreds of CD's I've collected over the years. My records are worthless since a record player is so old fashion, as well as cassette tapes. I have the same song on four different mediums. A record, an 8 track, a cassette, and finally a CD, haven't I purchase the license to it enough?

We should be able to "register" the right to a song. Say, I purchase "When You're Gone" by Avril Lavigne. I should be able to have the right to play that song and obtain that song when it's remastered or released on new media.

That's just a dream, though. So long as there's an opportunity to make money, someone will exploit it and force it upon the powerless. Also, as long as there's seemingly well-off individuals that'll stand up for the big companies, certain individuals will always have to resort to other methods.

Anyways, I don't support Piracy, but given the circumstances we're surrounded with today, for some people it's the only alternative, and in some instances, it should even be a right to do so. :|

Edit: This is also a good example of technology being held back. We're promised a better future with what technology "could" offer, but when technology does offer something beneficial, say the ability to virtually copy it, than certain individuals become hell bent on making that illegal as they can't profit from it.

"Guess what! We created a new medium that allows you to listen to music in better quality and hold more songs! Best of all, with certain appliances, you could even copy the contents of that CD so you can enjoy it in multiple places and not have to search around for a CD. *guy off camera* What? Oh, never mind, I'm told by our attorneys whom represent the "inventor" of this material that you will not be allowed to do that since they realized they won't make a profit. Because of this, will install DRM software in the CD as well as on your computer. This will inconvenience you, but ensure our wallets grow larger and larger while yours shrinks from mountains of credit card debt. Please return to worshiping "our" one and true god, the almighty dollar."

 

I completely agree with you coyote. What the rights holders have done is plain stupidity. I think the DRM and locking down have done nothing but hurt their industries. Unfortunately, our only recourse is to not buy DRM'd products and urge the companies to open things up.

 

- leopard disc with no copywrite protection what so ever
- my motorcycle that can go 200MPH

Two things that make me think "well if no one knows its ok right ?"

 

- Speed limit sign on Interstate 40 that says 70MPH Cars/65MPH Trucks.

Rules were made to be broken as life advances. Since the truckers keep in contact by CB they'll point out where the bears are. As a result, a lot of truckers will do 75MPH while light traffic will do 80MPH. Especially if you're near Conway, Arkansas.

Myself, I think that's perfectly fine. Going 70MPH seems like you're dragging, especially when everyone is passing you. Those highways can easily allow for driving of up to 90MPH, if they're kept in good enough condition.

As life advances, so must our laws and our morals/ethics. You need to remember, the rules aren't there to protect us, they're there to give us a boundary. Than when that boundary is reached, it'll be re-written. Give it another 10 years, and the Highway speeds will increase from 70MPH to 75MPH, maybe even up to 80MPH. Than when that happens, we'll drive down that 80MPH highway at 90MPH. As long as it's possible and safe enough, it will be ventured. Life will find a way, life doesn't like restrictions.