If any part of the Leopard EFI has a component that can be construed to be a security measure to prevent the software from use on unauthorized hardware, Apple has a DMCA case. And the DMCA does have teeth.
Yeah, but they're arguing a level higher than that. They're saying the security measures Apple is using are illegal. In that case, the DMCA is rendered irrelevant, right? You can't protect illegal protection schemes.
That's an interesting point. Now's a good time to say IANAL and I'm just speculating, but as I understand it they're not really arguing that Apple's security measures are illegal, but that their business practices are illegal; Apple is entitled to have whatever security they'd like. If that's true, then the DMCA violation would still stand.
In light of the Lexmark decision Apple can't stop others from being interoperable legally. Their choices are to bludgeon clonemakers with frivolous lawsuits and try to bankrupt them for pursuing their rights, or to keep trying to make OS X paranoid about what it's running on while clonemakers keep patching the code that does hardware checks. And clonemakers might even be able to sue to stop Apple from doing that.
Hah, everybody was in here saying the sky was falling and they would be shut down overnight, but it turns out this lawsuit threat isn't as real as it seems.
More like how your car can't require its own brand of oil, gas, air filters, light bulbs, etc. If Cisco starts selling its operating system on a CD and you make a clone that can run it, it's fair game. Or another company that makes specialized firmware can sell it so you can install it on your car, assuming it passes regulatory requirements for safety (I'd assume).
