Legality of running OSx86 on non-Apple machines

[jgombos]

What is the name of your state? CA

I've been reading threads on this matter in other forums on other sites. The majority of posters believe it's illegal to run OSx86 on non-Apple hardware. I'd like to hear from the lawyers as to whether that's correct, and why.

Apple's [url=http://store.apple.com/Catalog/US/Images/MacOSX.htm]license[/url] states "2A. This License allows you to install and use one copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time." Some [url=http://www.ozzu.com/ftopic69954.html]have argued[/url] that if a consumer buys a retail copy of OS X, and installs it on non-Apple hardware (thus using otherwise legitimate software in a way prohibited by Apple), then it's a breech of contract, but doesn't break any criminal laws. Or does it?

[PepperLegal]

In software license agreements, if a particular type of use is not granted, then such use would be violative of the license terms. The agreement need not list each and every prohibited type of use (like non-Apple hardware, for example).

In a practical sense, it is unlikely that Apple would enforce its rights under a breach of contract claim based on the non-Apple hardware use. However, any warranty or support obligations that Apple may provide under the agreement would certainly be nullified.

Regarding your comment asking if this use is "illegal" - it is not. It is a breach of contract, allowing Apple to assert a civil cause of action against the user. There is no criminal component to it.