A Hackintosh is a bootlegged version of Apple's macOS loaded onto a computer that has not been manufactured by Apple and doesn't have a license to run macOS. According to Apple's macOS license,

I. Other Use Restrictions. The grants set forth in this License do not permit you to, and you agree not to, install, use or run the Apple Software on any non-Apple-branded computer, or to enable others to do so.

However, Apple does not pursue any legal action unless the software is being commercially sold, even though Apple is very quick to shut down anything that threatens its business. Many options and techniques are available to prevent Hackintoshes from being created, but Apple does not use any of them and there are no 'hidden security settings' that will shut down Hackintoshes.

This article may explain some reasons Apple hasn't shut down, and even benefits from the Hackintosh.

Considering that Apple could have shut down the Hackintosh, but deliberately chose not to, would it be permissible to create a Hackintosh if one would not be buying a Mac for this purpose anyways?

  • 1
    This question, as I understand it, can be asked more generally as whether an unenforced law must be followed according to Jewish Law (AKA Dina d'malchusa dina).
    – user9643
    Commented Jun 11, 2018 at 22:34
  • 1
    @Ploni, The question is more to ask if the written statement must be followed when other actions show that that what is written is not really intended.
    – Rafael
    Commented Jun 11, 2018 at 22:40
  • 2
    Is this any different than judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/31121/pirating-software? Commented Jun 11, 2018 at 23:14
  • 1
    Dupe? judaism.stackexchange.com/q/38386/9643
    – user9643
    Commented Jun 11, 2018 at 23:26
  • 3
    The discussion about "law" doesn't really seem relevant here. There's no specific law about installing Mac OS on non-licensed hardware. The only law in question here would have to do with violating terms of software license, which is enforced in some circumstances (e.g. when other companies want to enforce their licenses). This is a question about violating a contract when one party to the contract has similar contracts with others and is known not to enforce it in certain circumstances.
    – Daniel
    Commented Jun 12, 2018 at 3:21

1 Answer 1


It deffinetly isn't stealing - there is nothing physical being stolen. The only shaila I can think of would be dina dimalchusa dina, so it would depend on the legalities. From what I saw online it looks like it is deffinetly illegal, so then the shaila is what the deal is under dina dimalchusa dina. You would have to ask a posek for a definitve answer, but I do not believe a technically illegal practice that is widespread and unenforced is assur under dina dimalchusa.

  • 1
    Please add-in any sources to support your answer.
    – Shmuel
    Commented Aug 2, 2022 at 9:02

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .