Forums | MacLife

Art743 wrote:

...But what is right is right.

In your honest opinion. It's yours. We'll find out if it's the judge's.

A fair point in my opinion. I agree on Psystar but want to see more evidence before I say whom the other case favors.

Begun, the clone war has

?

advocate of intolerance wrote:

This suing of pystar has turned quite a few people i know off apple completely-first apple won't release a decent machine that people want, then someone beats them to it and they do this.  I was considering a purchase of a mac pro, but now i am just bored of their machines and their lame graphics and would rather see them fall apart completely-i will be actively helping people to load os X on their pc's-anything to see apples cheap poverty hardware go down.  Who knows if enough people do this maybe apple will stop making their junk poverty computers and release OS X out into the wild. I wanna see them fall apart BIG TIME. Apple computer=mushroom computers-kept in the dark and fed lots of s..t

Oh no! Not another one!
*checks IP address*

ukimalefu wrote:

Begun, the clone war has

Star Wars Addict!!

Take it all Apple!!!

Well, no one's noticed this yet, it seems, so I guess it's time. The best defense, post dates 8/26 - /29...

Hackintosh maker bites back at Apple
Psystar, the company that sells open systems capable of running Mac OS X, plans to fight back against the copyright infringement lawsuit Apple has filed against it.

The Miami-based firm said during a press conference this afternoon it plans to challenge Apple's long-standing licensing ban on running the Mac operating system on non-Apple branded devices.

Psystar said it plans to file a legal complaint against Apple alleging the computer vendor leverages an improper restraint of trade under the Sherman Antitrust Act and Clayton Antitrust Act by tying OS X to Apple hardware.

Psystar said it will request the court find Apple's End User Licensing Agreement (EULA) void and seek unspecified damages. And it plans to deny all charges made last month by Apple claiming violations of license, copyright and trademark.

http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2008/0 … nst_apple/

Apple countersued by Psystar
Best form of defence

MAC CLONE MAKER Psystar has countersued Apple claiming that the fruit-themed outfit is engaged in anti-competitive business practices.

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/ … ed-psystar

Psystar countersues Apple on antitrust grounds

Mac clone maker Psystar officially responded to Apple's copyright infringement lawsuit on Thursday by filing a countersuit that alleges anticompetitive business practices.

As expected, the 54-page complaint, filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, charges Apple with restraint of trade, unfair competition, and other violations of antitrust law. Miami-based Psystar, owned by Rudy Pedraza, requests that the court find Apple's end-user license agreements (EULA) void and seeks unspecified compensatory and punitive damages.

"The present litigation is more complex than the misinformed and mischaracterized allegations of copyright infringement," attorney Colby Springer, of antitrust specialists Carr & Ferrell, said in a statement. "The litigation involves the anticompetitive nature of the Apple EULA and similar anticompetitive tactics related to the misuse of Apple's copyrights."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/cnet/20080829/t … 1002872637

Mr. T wrote:

Also, from your yahoo link,

yahoo wrote:

Psystar argues that its OpenComputer product is shipped with a fully licensed, unmodified copy of Mac OS X, and that the company has simply "leveraged open source-licensed code including Apple's OS" to enable a PC to run the Mac operating system.

This is what I was talking about before.  Basically, the alleged "modified redistribution" of the the Darwin bootloader is permissible under ASPL 2.0. The OS itself (including the EFI bootloader) remains intact, unmodified.

This will be interesting to see. I hope Psystar has the resources to see this to a conclusion.
California might not be the best venue for Apple seeing as how Cali has some pretty strong pro-consumer laws.

I don't feel like citing cases I have cited so many times in the past but suffice to say that the trend in rulings in this area, hardware locking, has been against the company(s) attempting to impose said lock in.
If Apple looses it will be interesting to see how their hardware would sell with compatible competition available. Personally I think it would go the same way it went with IBM PC when the "IBM Compatible" clones starting eating their lunch.
It is hard to maintain yourself as a hardware company when your only advantage is your software.

Last edited by Pariah (2008-09-03 5:50 am)

Mr. T wrote:

If/when the industry heavyweights enter the game, I think most existing Mac users will continue to buy from Apple simply because their needs are already sufficiently met by Apple hardware, and the designs are among the best in the industry.  I think this is especially true of laptops where the hardware value is pretty good.   It's also true of the Mac Pro (which is worth the sum of its parts, even if the parts chosen are less than ideal). I see the iMac taking a significant hit, though, and mini sales will just nosedive.  Of course, Apple could always make their hardware more competitive.

The mini has it's own issues ... once it jumped almost 200$ when they went intel, it lost it's huge advantage... PRICE. People were still buying them for entertainment ... then Apple TV came out. I really don't see the mini line lasting much longer.

Of course, Apple could always make their hardware more competitive.

I hope this is the outcome... competition is a good thing for consumers

I think of the mini as Apple's gateway drug.  It's a way for people who are half committed to the Mac to get a chance to try one out, without breaking the bank.  If someone else can sell a far more potent version at half the price, then the mini becomes something else -- an entertainment piece, a portable web server, an art piece, but not a drug.

Mr. T wrote:

Pariah wrote:

It would be very interesting to see how many iMacs Apple would sell if people had another desktop choice.

I hope we find out.

That would sure settle a few disputes around here.