running OSX 'legally'

[Peter Alcibiades]

Its commonly said that running OSX on a non-Apple branded box would be running 
it not legally.  But this is not true of course.  It would be running it in 
violation of the Eula - but there is nothing illegal about this.

It might be in violation of a valid contract, which is quite a different 
matter, and which might expose one to suit and civil penalties.  If it 
brought about a court order, it would be illegal to violate that.   However, 
whether such a EULA is binding is doubtful - does anyone know of a case where 
anyone was sued for running some software on the 'wrong' platform?  Eg, by 
Apple for running OSX on non-branded equipment, or by MS for running Office 
under Wine rather than Windows?

Generally you cannot, at least in the EU, tell people what to do with what 
they have bought, after they have bought it.  One suspects the lack of test 
cases is discretion triumphing over valour.  

And this is one thing that will make the release of Leopard for MacIntel in 
full, bootable, non-upgrade form so very interesting...

Peter