Apple's recall demand would probably kill Psystar, says IP attorney

Computerworld ^ | 07/17/2008 | By Gregg Keizer

[Swordmaker]

But Mac clone maker might counter with anti-competitive argument

Apple Inc.'s demand that a Mac clone maker recall computers because the company installed Mac OS X on the machines may be an extreme measure, but it's hardly unprecedented, an intellectual property attorney said today.

"It would be extreme because it would likely put Psystar out of business, but it's not a remedy that's coming out of the blue. It's not completely without precedent," said Carole Handler, a partner in the intellectual property (IP) department of Wildman, Harrold, Allen & Dixon. Handler is best known for her work on a case involving Marvel Enterprises that, among other things, established protection for copyrighted characters in online games and returned the movie rights to the Spiderman character to the company.

[Swordmaker]

Psystar may be put out of business by recall demand... PING!

MacPing!

If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me.

[antiRepublicrat]

I put odds on Apple getting the injunction.

[martin_fierro]

[martin_fierro]

[Ronin]

It sounds pretty open and shut to me. Apple has always maintained in its EULAs that their software is only to be installed on their products, and the have been willing to fight for that all the way down the line.

But you never know what a court is gonna do these days.

[Swordmaker]

Martin? Did you buy one?

[martin_fierro]

Nooooooooope. < |:(~

[PAR35]

I don’t have one of those boxes, but how many folks does the ‘expert’ think will send in a working computer if they get a recall notice in the mail?

If you got a letter saying you should send in your computer so that the maker could wipe the hard drive, would you bother to box it up and mail it back?

[antiRepublicrat]

But you never know what a court is gonna do these days.

Possibly say that the power of copyright doesn't cover what Apple is trying to do under the EULA. But that's only for the part about installing it on a non-Mac, I don't see any likely way out for the rest of the claims.

[publiusF27]

Psystar might argue that what Apple offers in Mac OS X is sufficiently unique that there is no substitute, and with Apple controlling the use of the OS, the case might be made that that behavior prevents competition which otherwise would drive down prices.

"What Psystar might say is 'What we would like to do is use the Mac operating system's unique features more broadly on a variety of hardware. We would like to break the connection between the hardware and the software'," said Handle, who admitted Psystar would have its work cut out for it. "I think it's a very, very hard argument to make, but I wouldn't be surprised if they tried."

This is an attack on the very concept of licensing copyrighted material. If you can't create and enforce a license to use the material, what good is a copyright?

The idea seems to be that if you write software which is good enough, it becomes necessary to make it public domain material, for the common good. That's anti-property rights, anti-capitalist, and I hope they lose that argument.