[metadat]

How is it copyright infringement? Who was going to buy a Mac but then found this and was like "Oh, this docker thing is way better". If you've ever tried this docker thing, you'd know it's a pain in the ass. :)

It's laughable, but no surprise the army of lawyers at AAPL needs something to do to justify their existence.

[dboreham]

That's not what copyright infringement is.

[metadat]

There don't have to be damages?

[glimshe]

You can create your own proprietary OS and never even sell it or use in your machines... It's yours and unless you authorize, others can't distribute it.

[metadat]

Makes sense, thanks.

[slimsag]

For Docker to decide to remove the image from their website? Obviously not.

Docker runs the service and can do whatever they want.

If Apple sends a cease and desist, and Docker decides they'd rather take it down than risk going to court with Apple /to determine if there were damages/ - then they're free to do so.

[Y_Y]

> Docker runs the service and can do whatever they want.

What does this mean? If they could choose any course of action with no consequences they'd probably choose to do nothing.

[exe34]

They can choose to follow the law or to fight the claim in court. Or do nothing and get sued to oblivion. They have choices.

[Y_Y]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobson%27s_choice

[krick]

"Caving in to the bully with expensive lawyers" isn't synonymous with "following the law", FYI.