The only "copies" involved in the case were the absurd "copied to RAM so the machine could boot" ones. Psystar didn't make illegal copies, they resold the legal copies they had purchased. The "copied to RAM" hogwash is a pathetic dance around the plain meaning of the law.
It wouldn't be much more crazy to claim that YOU make an illegal copy of a book when you read it because the image of the page appears on your retinas!
Again, "fair use" is irrelevant because there was no real copying involved, only the insane "copied to RAM" thing. It's a red herring to cover the court's refusal to abide by 17, 109.
It's a red herring to cover the court's refusal to abide by 17, 109.
The other way to say this is -- "I'm mad because the legal system and judges don't see the law the way I read it..." LOL...
BAH! It is patently obvious that you have not even bothered to read the facts outlined by the judge in his decisions or the rest of the case. You don't know at all what you are talking about. There are copies of OS X existing on the Hard Drives of the Psystar Open Computers that are infringing copies. There are copies of OS X existing on Psystars Imaging stations that are infringing copies. There were several several Open Computers that were shipped to customers with OS X installed WITHOUT copies of OS X included. Often, there were copies of OS X on SHIPPED Open Computers that did not match the earlier versions of the sealed copies of OS X that were shipped with the computers, also a violations of copyright laws. All of these were enumerated in the decision.
Why don't you take an evening and read through the discovery, the decisions, the pleadings, etc., all of which are posted on Groklaw, before you expound on stuff you obviously don't know anything about instead of making assumptions that make you look foolish.