Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Psystar accuses Apple of anti-competitive tactics in countersuit

By Aidan Malley [AppleInsider.com]
Published: 06:10 PM EST

Itself attacked for allegedly violating Apple's licenses, Psystar made offense its best defense on Tuesday when it filed a countering lawsuit in federal court, accusing the Mac maker of unfairly squeezing out possible rivals.

A statement from custom PC builder Psystar rejects the basis for Apple's complaint, which asserts that Psystar's OpenComputers violate the Mac OS X end-user license by running the software on non-Apple hardware. The firm instead argues that it's Apple breaking the law through the terms of the agreement in question.

By insisting that its software be tied to its hardware, Apple is violating pro-competition laws that include the Clayton Antitrust Act and the Sherman Antitrust Act, Psystar claims. Apple is characterized as a monopoly-like entity, abusing its copyright to guarantee its position as the only authorized PC maker for the operating system.

Since Psystar began selling what are effectively Mac clones as of April, the Florida-based company has repeatedly challenged Apple and insisted that Apple is deliberately ratcheting up the prices on Macs knowing that there was no real alternative for running its operating system, although Psystar has never elaborated on this perceived cost difference.

While the plaintiff in the new lawsuit intends to negate the restrictive clauses of the Mac OS X license as well as obtain damages, company chief Rudy Pedraza tells CNET that the goal is simply to make non-Apple Mac OS X systems a possibility rather than forcing complete access to the platform.

"What we want to do is to provide an alternative, an option," he says. "It's not that people don't want to use Mac OS, many people are open to the idea, but they're not used to spending an exorbitant amount of money on something that is essentially generic hardware."

Apple has kept to its traditional silence regarding lawsuits, but in this circumstance won't have that option for much longer; the California-based electronics designer is legally required to respond to Psystar's complaint within 30 days.

Simultaneously, Psystar has no intentions to reverse course even after the threat of an Apple lawsuit intimidated what's allegedly a small portion of its customers. In addition to the OpenComputer and the more recent OpenServ, Pedraza's company is planning a portable computer that would also support Mac OS X through unofficial, community-sourced methods.

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/08...ountersuit.html

Well, well. Dunno how far this'll get, but it might be interesting if it goes anywhere. My bet though is that Apple manages to squash this before it gains any real ground.

Don't think that will help them on their process from Apple but I'm really interested to see the result of all this

I can't imagine the results if Psystar win all these, we will see more OEM computer makers selling OS X.

^^Which will just suck and ruin Apples chance all over again.

Interesting. I think Psystar is attempting to chip away at the legality of the restrictive EULA, rather than force Apple to "open up". IMHO, Psystar is hoping the courts will see things their way, and have the "Apple labelled" part of the EULA removed.

If Psystar wins, there's a good chance that Dell will start selling open computers too.

I'm getting popcorn.

The "EU" in EULA stands for "End User". Psystar is not an "end user", they are a reseller. They really don't care about the EULA.

Far too many people see EULAs as being binding and legal, and think the worst that could happen is a company being forced to modify their EULA. The issue is that EULAs are COMPLETELY INVALID to begin with when they concern shrinkwrap software sold at retail.

You can't make someone agree to something AFTER they pay for it. That's just wrong.

Psystar is not a reseller. They pre-install it on their machines, which breaks DMCA. Amazon is a reseller of OS X.

Apple's EULA is online. And can easily be found by google searching "os x license."
Hell, every company has their EULAs online. They give them to you in print as a reminder of what you can't do.
And if you don't like the EULA after you buy the product, why not return it? It's not like you're stuck with it.

bigpimpin, its the EULA that prevents ALL of us from putting OSX on a non "apple-labeled computer", including Psystar, or its customers.

You then say that EULA is "invalid". Apple begs to differ.

If you are right, and EULAs are "invalid", then Psystar has already won.

That's how the law works many places, however the USA is not one of them.

No it won't. This is x86, not Motorola. They have a huge base to wreak havoc on now and they're fools for not doing it imo.

Yeah, well, I have now stuck a giant Apple sticker on the side of my Hackintosh. Now I guess I have a EULA compliant computer.

I'm EULA compliant too

Idk what will happen, but i hope apple wins. whats the fun of hacking when it gets defeated and diluted? You know what I mean?

If Psystar wins, our systems that we all build will be legal for use, and not just for learning. I am all for Psystar, though I understand why Apple only makes it's own hardware. I don't like the way that Psystar went about it, but it's definitely going to help us out. I like the ability to learn, but I would like to be able to keep OSx86 on my hardware, which now can even be done with an unmodified disk. That mixed with Psystar winning will make my computer legal.