Where does MacOS and iOS fit then? The core of both those operating systems (darwin) is open source (APSL licensed).
A project like PureDarwin, however, can be freely distributed because it omits Apple's proprietary parts.
This law describes as a true-false something that is not only true or false. This law is poorly written. Amending it didn’t fix that.
The full MacOS as distributed by Apple is engineered to require closed source, non-redistributabe components even on the hardware it is most compatible with. It will completely stop functioning if you remove those parts. The presence of freely licensed components becomes de facto irrelevant.
I can copy and redistribute macOS binaries, and I can write programs/extensions that modify macOS.
These vague terms show that legislators are incapable of regulating software effectively; but they do create an enduring legal franchise to deal with their confusion.
> No Reverse Engineering. You may not, and you agree not to or enable others to, copy (except as expressly permitted by this License or by the Usage Rules if they are applicable to you), decompile, reverse engineer, disassemble, attempt to derive the source code of, decrypt, modify, or create derivative works of the Apple Software or any services provided by the Apple Software or any part thereof (except as and only to the extent any foregoing restriction is prohibited by applicable law or by licensing terms governing use of Open-Sourced Components that may be included with the Apple Software).
The “under license terms…” is a pretty important clause you omitted here.