Jump to content

Apple Sues Psystar for Copyright Infringement


228 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

It has finally come to be, Apple has filed suit against the Psystar corporation for copyright infringement, trademark infringement, and for violation of it's license. That all happened on July 3rd. The picture below has all the allegations against Psystar.

What do you think will happen to Psystar? Tell us in the comments!

 

20080715-mj1eyc935291y82bp4k23mm3jc.jpg

 

Full Story

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's gonna be fun to watch it. ;)

 

Two wishes.

  1. Psystar is out of business.
  2. Apple finds the clause "... on Apple-labeled hardware only ..." in their EULA illegal.

Unfortunately, cannot have both simultaneously. Okay, Psystar wins the shrink wrap license violation and Apple wins the trademark and copyright infringement. Then my wishes can come true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

when apple did not respond immediately, i had a feeling that they might after psystar try to post modified updates for commercial purposes. and that came to be. this is the basis on which they can have solid ground. and also they will make more money if they win, now that psystar has actually sold something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless this guy has sold a bunch of units, Apple probably won't make a dime from this, in fact, this move will very likely cost them in terms of lawyers, etc. What they are more likely trying to do is set precedent and send out a message. I think this could cost the defendant, but if I am reading the complaint properly it looks like he is incorporated. I could be wrong, but I am bet that will protect him from personal liability (its one of the main reasons to incorporate). He could declare bankruptcy and pay some legal fees which could still be a fair amount of dough. I just don't see Apple actually getting any money from him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This will be interesting to watch. I bet it will be settled out of court as Psystar will not have the $$$$ to go to bat again Apples $$$$$. I just hope they don't come after this community as this would be a crying shame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even though they will almost certainly lose money on this (Even if they take Psystar for every dime they will probably not recoup legal costs, right? I don't know.), they will kill Psystar. They have to, because they must maintain control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt it is apples interest to go after this community. Altough it is rather open here regarding use of "hacks" on this website it is still better for apple to have this site which is mostly controlled, than forcing this more underground and loose every control of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two wishes.
  1. Psystar is out of business.
  2. Apple finds the clause "... on Apple-labeled hardware only ..." in their EULA illegal.

It certainly should be, i'm not entirely sure how are laws in the US work though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally hope Apple loses. Their operating system is a closed and restricted piece of software that "should" only run on their hardware.

 

That is monopolistic idea and is no better than what Microsoft has been sued for in my opinion. The only difference is that Microsoft has been sued for bundling their own software with their own software without restricting the addition of any of the competitions software whereas Apple is exclusively bundling their own software with their own hardware with the restriction of who's hardware the software can run on legally.

 

It stifles variety, progression, and price competition which only hurts the end user.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt it is apples interest to go after this community. Altough it is rather open here regarding use of "hacks" on this website it is still better for apple to have this site which is mostly controlled, than forcing this more underground and loose every control of it.

Right, old hackers like S.Jobs know that they can't do anything against "underground" hacking; but of course, they have to fight that buying PC's to run OSX is an ordinary and known thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it boils down to this:

  • Psystar, Inc. will be no more as a corporate entity (file chapter 13 bankruptcy)
  • Or they will (likely) file chapter 11 bankruptcy and walk away with only their legal defense costs out of pocket. The corporation then can move on, but the mac-clones will cease to exist by judgement. My cousin is a class-action lawyer in S.F. and says this happens very often.
  • Apple will make NO money on this for the above reasons. Therefore, this is definately a precedence-setting mission by Apple, Inc.

What Psystar has done is not like what we are doing here. Psystar stole Apple's IP to make profit on it without a licensed deal. Our efforts are still making Apple the money they deserve on their product. Rumor has it that a near-future version of OSX will be made fully PC compatible and licensed for general use, so this scene is needed. Could you imagine the blow to M$ if they did? In fact, I think the only reason they haven't yet is the $900 mil (or so) bail-out deal IBM and M$ made with Apple several years ago. Part of that deal would entail that Apple stay out of the PC OS market for a specified duration of time. Hey, if somne guys figure out how to buy a retail DVD and hack it onto their systems, well, it's a win-win for everyone involved and Apple's hands are clean. Besides, I think Steve Jobs is a little amused by the OSX scene. He's that kinda guy. However, this is rumor and speculation...

I personally hope Apple loses. Their operating system is a closed and restricted piece of software that "should" only run on their hardware.

 

That is monopolistic idea and is no better than what Microsoft has been sued for in my opinion. The only difference is that Microsoft has been sued for bundling their own software with their own software without restricting the addition of any of the competitions software whereas Apple is exclusively bundling their own software with their own hardware with the restriction of who's hardware the software can run on legally.

 

It stifles variety, progression, and price competition which only hurts the end user.

SDRacer48: I have to agree with you somewhat on that, but do you think that it could make sense why their OS is closed by my proposition? I think if this is true, that once the OS could be opened up, consumer choice will actually be widened, and the market will gain much benefit from it. If anyone has information supporting or proving the idea false, please provide :thanks_speechbubble: I have always been interested in this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Psystar are {censored}ed!

 

Not necessarily. Their line of Mac-clones are {censored}ed, but the company can move on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it was gonna happen sooner or later. i cant figure out what psystar thought? that they can sell hacked osx in the midday just before apple's eyes and nothing will happen. theres no chance apple with let it be. i think our community is kind a free alfa/beta testers to the apple osx. and i think some of the apple guys just browse our forums and are checking whats the progress whats wrong etc..., because hey! where're the biggest english-spoken community on the net about running osx on regular pc.

i'm kinda proud that im part of that:)

thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

omg, wow i never thought this would happen. i guess that was stupid of me. i wonder wat will happen to that other OSx86 company, RSOL PC?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SDRacer48: I have to agree with you somewhat on that, but do you think that it could make sense why their OS is closed by my proposition?

 

If I correctly understand what you are saying. You are asking what benefit could it bring to Apple to have their operating system run on only their own hardware?

 

There are numerous reasons.

 

Higher profit margin for Apple (they use basic PC parts in their machines now, but have higher than market average mark ups), exclusivity of product (think of that guy who lets you know he has a Mac every time you talk to him), and an easier way of managing possible problems caused by the integration of software and hardware (it is easier to support software that runs on only a limited array of hardware). There are probably other advantages that are possible, but those are the main one's that stick out to me.

 

On a business stand point, it is great for Apple. I know I would personally try to do the same. It is a good way to control one's product and profit in a country were capitalism rules supreme. But it does reflect the ideals of a monopolist entity, which we all know does not benefit the consumer and the government will eventually intervene...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Therefore, this is definately a precedence-setting mission by Apple, Inc.

 

This is what this is all about. They want to keep their intelectual property for them self. But maybe they will be forced to not make any profit on their OS if they not open it. But I dont know US laws in that matter.

 

It seem like Apple will be basing their case much on their protection of their brand and trademark. It is obvious that the time it has taken is to build up enough to create such a case in court. As long as they are selling their OS and use resellers, i dont think they can do much about that. It is not the OS this court battle will be about, but the hardware and the apple name. Psystar should have been more clear that they are not affiliated with apple and that there is no connection there. If apple wins this might also mean that owning one of psystars "apples" will be illegal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was fun trying the 'Hackintosh' route just to try the OSX system without having to commit by buying an Apple product.

 

When all is said and done, I'm sticking with Microsoft and Vista and XP.

 

Somehow whenever I was on the OSX system, I felt like I was driving a computer with training wheels attached.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

omg, wow i never thought this would happen. i guess that was stupid of me. i wonder wat will happen to that other OSx86 company, RSOL PC?

 

as sonotone stated I don't think they will do anything to OSx86, but other who are selling it, with it pre installed, and Steve Jobs was also apart of hacking and homebrew clubs and groups, so He might be a little friendly who knows lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was fun trying the 'Hackintosh' route just to try the OSX system without having to commit by buying an Apple product.

 

When all is said and done, I'm sticking with Microsoft and Vista and XP.

 

Somehow whenever I was on the OSX system, I felt like I was driving a computer with training wheels attached.

 

Before you get flamed...

 

Remember everyone, this is merely his opinion and has absolutely nothing to do with the thread's topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is said that Apple don't make money on software sales, that it's all about the hardware, but I know a lot of people here who have bought Leopard out of the pricipal of the thing and who now, through recent developments, have the option of unpacking it and installing it on their intel PC. I have seen so many knock on sales for Apple within the student body, thanks in large part to this community. People get a flavour on the PCs that they might not otherwise have had and are hooked on Apple and knock on software and hardware sales. The alienation bringing down the shutters on this community would be huge! SUSE 11, anyone? Ubuntu 8.04? Doesn't make sense to attack the hatchery if you want your chickens to hatch. Pystar is a whole different kettle of going for the jugular.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally hope Apple loses. Their operating system is a closed and restricted piece of software that "should" only run on their hardware.

 

That is monopolistic idea and is no better than what Microsoft has been sued for in my opinion. The only difference is that Microsoft has been sued for bundling their own software with their own software without restricting the addition of any of the competitions software whereas Apple is exclusively bundling their own software with their own hardware with the restriction of who's hardware the software can run on legally.

 

It stifles variety, progression, and price competition which only hurts the end user.

 

Yeah, I agree with that. Proprietary structure (term use in IT to say computer branded) are very poor and so badly close. You can do anything, if you don't Vista, assume that and buy your Lenovo PC with Vista and not XP in. It's no more a choice but an obligation to be part of their monopole. Yes, Psystar try to commercialized OSx86 what is not right morally to use without the consentement of their builder (the commnunity). That's make sick trying to sold you something you needed and you can't leap.

 

Second things, Microsoft and Apple sleeps on the same side of the bed. When one say ok next OS'es will be on base of EFI, strangely make it rule first. When Apple made Bootcamp, Microsoft has taken Vista and put on the flavour of OS X for EFI and drivers... Mac OS X ran for a while on BCD (Boot Configuration Data), Microsoft take this way and developped BCD in Vista... What is not fair when Microsoft sued some Open Source softwares and OS for copyrights infringment. For copying his ideas and codes.. Anyway, we follows the wave and wait to see!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I correctly understand what you are saying. You are asking what benefit could it bring to Apple to have their operating system run on only their own hardware?

 

There are numerous reasons.

 

Higher profit margin for Apple (they use basic PC parts in their machines now, but have higher than market average mark ups), exclusivity of product (think of that guy who lets you know he has a Mac every time you talk to him), and an easier way of managing possible problems caused by the integration of software and hardware (it is easier to support software that runs on only a limited array of hardware). There are probably other advantages that are possible, but those are the main one's that stick out to me.

 

On a business stand point, it is great for Apple. I know I would personally try to do the same. It is a good way to control one's product and profit in a country were capitalism rules supreme. But it does reflect the ideals of a monopolist entity, which we all know does not benefit the consumer and the government will eventually intervene...

 

Actually, what I was referring to was Apple's inability to open their OS up due to restrictions placed on them during the bailout by M$ several years ago, not by any inherent desire to keep the profits high. If they COULD open it up, it would be devastating to M$, and would be fantastic for the consumer. Apple would sell OSX like hotcakes. :)

 

Now that Apple has proved that they are willing to sue, I wonder what is going to happen to eFix?

 

As they are selling their product for profit without license by Apple? Hmmmm :whistle:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well Apple's just retarded. even if they have a great operating system, Mac OS X, the people are dumb. how come Microsoft allowed mac users to install the Windows Operating System on non Windows-based systems LEGALLY and Apple doesnt like installing Mac OS X on non Apple hardware? thats unfair!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...