Return to Answer

Stack Exchange is not party to, and is not bound by, the presumed license agreement between Apple and the poster. The consensus opinion on Meta Stack Overflow is that SE should not enforce 3rd-party agreements because it is not obligated to do so, and in fact doing so might actually expose SE to liability.

That answer was marked as accepted and the question made an FAQ by the diamond moderator Won't with no objection by SE employees, suggesting it is the official or semi-official position. See also Jeff Atwood's answer here that we should give the benefit of the doubt to questions about things possibly illegal in some jurisdictions.

Absent a specific reason that the same argument doesn't apply here, we should not close questions about virtualizing OS X.

Stack Exchange is not party to, and is not bound by, the presumed license agreement between Apple and the poster. The consensus opinion on Meta Stack Overflow is that SE should not enforce 3rd-party agreements because it is not obligated to do so, and in fact doing so might actually expose SE to liability.

That answer was marked as accepted and the question made an FAQ by the diamond moderator Won't with no objection by SE employees, suggesting it is the official or semi-official position. See also Jeff Atwood's answer here that we should give the benefit of the doubt to questions about things possibly illegal in some jurisdictions.

Absent a specific reason that the same argument doesn't apply here, we should not close questions about virtualizing OS X.

Stack Exchange is not party to, and is not bound by, the presumed license agreement between Apple and the poster. The consensus opinion on Meta Stack Overflow is that SE should not enforce 3rd-party agreements because it is not obligated to do so, and in fact doing so might actually expose SE to liability.

That answer was marked as accepted and the question made an FAQ by the diamond moderator Won't with no objection by SE employees, suggesting it is the official or semi-official position. See also Jeff Atwood's answer here that we should give the benefit of the doubt to questions about things possibly illegal in some jurisdictions.

Absent a specific reason that the same argument doesn't apply here, we should not close questions about virtualizing OS X.

Stack Exchange is not party to, and is not bound by, the presumed license agreement between Apple and the poster. The consensus opinion on Meta Stack Overflow is that SE should not enforce 3rd-party agreements because it is not obligated to do so, and in fact doing so might actually expose SE to liability.

That answer was marked as accepted and the question made an FAQ by the diamond moderator Won't with no objection by SE employees, suggesting it is the official or semi-official position. See also Jeff Atwood's answer here that we should give the benefit of the doubt to questions about things possibly illegal in some jurisdictions.

Absent a specific reason that the same argument doesn't apply here, we should not close questions about virtualizing OS X.

Stack Exchange is not party to, and is not bound by, the presumed license agreement between Apple and the poster. The consensus opinion on Meta Stack Overflow is that SE should not enforce 3rd-party agreements because it is not obligated to do so, and in fact doing so might actually expose SE to liability.

That answer was marked as accepted and the question made an FAQ by the diamond moderator Won't with no objection by SE employees, suggesting it is the official or semi-official position. See also Jeff Atwood's answer here that we should give the benefit of the doubt to questions about things possibly illegal in some jurisdictions.

Absent a specific reason that the same argument doesn't apply here, we should not close questions about virtualizing OS X.

Stack Exchange is not party to, and is not bound by, the presumed license agreement between Apple and the poster. The consensus opinion on Meta Stack Overflow is that SE should not enforce 3rd-party agreements because it is not obligated to do so, and in fact doing so might actually expose SE to liability.

That answer was marked as accepted and the question made an FAQ by the diamond moderator Won't with no objection by SE employees, suggesting it is the official or semi-official position. See also Jeff Atwood's answer here that we should give the benefit of the doubt to questions about things possibly illegal in some jurisdictions.

Absent a specific reason that the same argument doesn't apply here, we should not close questions about virtualizing OS X.