Skip to comments.Clone maker will countersue Apple
Posted on 08/26/2008 9:47:14 PM PDT by Swordmaker
US-based Mac clone maker Psystar plans to file its answer to Apple's copyright infringement lawsuit Tuesday in the US as well as a countersuit of its own, alleging that Apple engages in anti-competitive business practices.
Miami-based Psystar, owned by Rudy Pedraza, will sue Apple under two federal laws designed to discourage monopolies and cartels, the Sherman Antitrust Act and the Clayton Antitrust Act, saying Apple's tying of the Mac OS to Apple-labeled hardware is "an anti-competitive restrain of trade," according to attorney Colby Springer of antitrust specialists Carr & Ferrell.
Psystar is requesting that the court find Apple's end user licence void, and is asking for unspecified damages.
Springer said his firm has not filed any suits with the Federal Trade Commission or any other government agencies. The answer and countersuit will be filed Tuesday afternoon in the US in the US District Court for Northern California.
Pedraza attended at a press conference his lawyers called to present how the Psystar will defend its its OpenComputer Mac clone, which has been for sale online since April.
Psystar's attorneys called Apple's allegations of Psystar's copyright infringement "misinformed and mischaracterised." Psystar argued 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.
Pedraza says he wanted to make Apple's Mac OS "more accessible" by offering it on less expensive hardware than Apple.
"My goal is to provide an alternative, not to free the Mac OS," said Pedraza. "What we want to do is to provide an alternative, an option ... 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 will have 30 days to respond to Pystar's counter-claim. In the meantime, Pedraza says it will be "business as usual" at company headquarters. Though he said there was a "slight" downward dip in sales once Apple filed its suit, he planned to go ahead with making servers, and soon, a mobile product, which he said will be "like a notebook." But he refused to offer more detail.
Apple declined to comment.
But other legal experts say Psystar faces a tough legal challenge in proving Apple has engaged in antitrust behaviour by loading its software on its own hardware and thereby allegedly harming consumers and competitors.
Psystar's ability to prevail on the issue of having the latitude to load Apple's OS on its own hardware, given it has a licensing agreement with the company, may prove an easier road to hoe, legal experts note.
CNET News' Dawn Kawamoto contributed to this story.
If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me.
I’ve always thought of MAC hardware as overpriced. the OS is pure gold though..
Psystar is MAC what Linux is to Windows.
Psystar's ability to prevail on the issue of having the latitude to load Apple's OS on its own hardware, given it has a licensing agreement with the company, may prove an easier road to hoe, legal experts note.WHAT? Where did that allegation come from? Nowhere have I seen anyone claiming that Apple has licensed Psystar to do anything with OS X except to install it on an Apple Labeled computer through it's EULA.
Mac heads remind me of Obamaniacs.
That does not follow. That's like saying Psystar is to Mac as Joe's Windows OS is to Windows. Linux is an OS. Psystar is a company selling hardware.
I meant Psystar Hardware is the opensource, and Mac Hardware.. you know what I mean :(
I suspect Apple’s real agenda here is the ‘it just works’ reputation their products have with their adherents. They want no part of supporting their OS on other hardware, or of people having problems running it on hardware apple didn’t supply the drivers for.
Who can blame them for that? It’s their business, it’s their custom GUI on top of BSD. Psystar can write their own BSD derivative if they like and support it.
This restriction may or may not be fair, but that's not the question. Apple's EULA is somewhat more restrictive than other, but it's not unheard of. Windows 95, 98, NT, 2000 and XP allow only one install of the software, even though technically you could load the same CD onto thousands of PCs (until WGA was implemented.) But anyway, I think the precedent of selling you a CD with software and then telling you what you may do with the software is well established by now.
I believe Psystar also understands that, and that's why they are grabbing at straws, claiming higher misdeeds of Apple. But the judge only needs to hypothetically substitute a smaller, non-Apple company and see if it makes any difference. It won't. I can open a one-man company and send you a CD with the same EULA, and it will be just as enforceable as Apple's. If Psystar has nothing else to fight with, it is only delaying its demise. It might be not a bad business plan, after all, if the company can keep the preorder payments and then be closed by the court. If the owners are properly insulated from the corporation they have a chance to get away with it, however barely.
True. I have an XP, a Suse Linux, and a Mac OSX at home... I love Suse Linux 11.0!
One year later we see that-
Florida judge will laugh at that
The Psystar boys bring a functioning clone to court and that high flying bs gets shot down
Psystar will beat Apple in a Florida court
Apple will concede a segment of its desktop business to Psystar style clone makers
Steve Jobs and Apple will grow up and learn to be happy with the Apple laptop business which is growing mightily anyway and is its most consistent profit center
Maybe a hoer?
View Full-Size Image
|Price per Unit (piece): $554.99
|Ask a question about this product|
The highly extensible Open Computer is a configuration of PC hardware capable of running unmodified OS X Leopard kernels. All known Leopard software works flawlessly including the built-in Software Update utility. The price includes a retail copy of Leopard in its original package. We preinstall OS X on your machine so that you may be able to begin using your Open Computer right out of the box. Information about our restore disc is available on our website. Please note that Bootcamp is not supported by Open Computers because it is Apple-hardware specific.
|Open Computer: The Smart Alternative to an Apple|
Why spend $1999 to get the least expensive Apple computer with a decent video card when you can pay less than a fourth of that for an equivalent sleek and small form-factor desktop with the same hardware. Sometimes reinventing the wheel is a good thing. The Open Computer can work for new Mac users and Mac geniuses, alike.
You don't need to spend an arm and a leg to get the full OS X Leopard experience. Apple's Mac Mini is completely stripped and still expensive. Why would you want a stripped-down computer, anyway? You asked for a good and inexpensive computer that can run OS X and we answered with the Open Computer which is
|Open Computers: OSx86 Compatible|
The Open Computer/OpenPro is fully compatible with the OSx86 Project and is 100% operational out of the box. With no assembly required the Open Computer is a great value. You won't have to try to return parts because they're incompatible or don't work exactly as you'd like them to. Psystar has tested the Open Computer thoroughly and even run XBench to confirm the performance that is advertised. With this level of compatibility it's easy to install OS X Leopard on your own. Pick one up today.
The Open Computer mops the floor with the average Intel Mac Mini as can be seen from the XBench results (but the Open Computer shows up as a Mac Pro in XBench and isn't too far off from the average Mac Pro in it's base base base configuration). As a better performer for less the Open Computer is a superior product . New Xbench tests will be performed and posted here on both the Open and OpenPro computers.
Obviously, from your several consecutive posts, you have an agenda yourself.
Apple pan dowdie
He won't get a chance.
The suit was filed July 3 in U.S. District Court in Northern California.
If they bring a "functioning" clone to court, it will save Apple the trouble in bringing in Exhibit A, a Pyystar clone with a modified version OS X illegally installed on it, which will prove their contention that Psystar has illegally copied and distributed OS X on other media than that which Apple provided in its OS X Leopard Upgrade package, violating Apple's copyrights.
Don't you love screwed up metaphors? Those short handled hoes are hard on pavement...
Maybe they use them to install potholes?
Obviously a modified installation in violation of US Copyright laws because they need to have a "Special restore" disk to install OS X that they DON'T send you.
Psystar claims their Open Computer,2.0GHz Intel Dual-Core Pentium 2.0GHz Processor:
. . . faster than most Apple computers out now . . .
. . . The base processor of the Open Computer is faster than any processor available for the Mac Mini.
. . . Why spend $1999 to get the least expensive Apple computer with a decent video card when you can pay less than a fourth of that for an equivalent sleek and small form-factor desktop with the same hardware?
. . . the Open Computer shows up as a Mac Pro in XBench and isn't too far off from the average Mac Pro in it's base base base configuration). As a better performer for less the Open Computer is a superior product .
Not one of those statements is true. They are demonstrably false. Just more BS they use to sucker people into buying a load of their unsupported junk. Even the lowliest Mac Mini sports an Intel Core 2 Duo, Intel's premium line of Duo processors, which has a minimum 2MB Cache, not just an older Dual-Core Pentium, Intel's bargain basement processor, with only a 1MB Cache.
They then dare to compare their crappy computers with Dual-Core Pentiums with a Mac Pro, which has, in its least configuration, an Intel® Xeon® 2.8GHz QUAD core processor with a Dual 12MB Cache, and dare to claim its "faster than most Macs."
Let's see: iMac 2.4GHz, 2.66Ghz, 2.8GHz, and 3.06GHz Core 2 Duo's with 6MB L2 Caches. MacBook 2.1Ghz, 2.4Ghz Core 2 Duos with 3MB L2 cache. MacBook Pro 2.4Ghz, 3MB L2 Cache, 2.5GHz, 6MB L2 cache.
Even the least expensive Mac Mini is at 1.83GHz Core 2 Duo 2MB cache is faster than their crippled 2.0Ghz bottom-of-the-barrel computer. The Mac Mini's faster 2.0GHz model certainly is.
“All known Leopard software works flawlessly including the built-in Software Update utility.”
“Please note that Bootcamp is not supported by Open Computers because it is Apple-hardware specific”
Um, Boot Camp is known Leopard Software.
You are right about the California venue....the Psystar boys hired a high powered silicon valley IP lawyer Colby Springer
Just on a lark I sent him a few suggestions
That I doubt he needs to defend the Psystar boys
Steve Jobs is old and half functional due to a weird cancer. Suppressing the Apple stock...
I guarantee you Steve Jobs is envious of these two young brothers. Jobs was once young brash and bold like them with a Beatle haircut. Now he’s just a ridulous blue jeans wearing old bald headed stooge with a huge anal style perfectionist streak. All that’s missing is for Jobs to come out with a new fashion collection featuring mauve under pants for guys and gals
Whatever ... Psystar computers do what Apples do at 25% the price. Why should I pay some stupid California billionaires for an Apple when I can get a cheaper clone from two up and comers?
They are sending out "Apple" restore discs of some kind
I think they are helper discs to help re-install along with the Apple OS disks they include when you buy their Open Computer
Steve Jobs had a curable form of Pancreatic cancer in 2003-2004.
Jobs, however, stated that he had a rare, far less aggressive type known as islet cell neuroendocrine tumor. Survival in islet cell carcinoma is highly dependent upon the degree of disease involvement. Surgical cure is possible if the tumor is resected completely.His doctors have certified him cured. Why do you feel it is necessary to dredge up ancient history. The suppress the stock?
Do you have anymore FUD and innuendo (In-you-Window?) you care to spread?
Why should you pay the owner of the jewelry store in the Mall for a diamond ring when you can get the same ring from the fence on the corner? Why should you pay for that music CD when you can download it for free from Bit Torrent? Why should you go out and earn money when you can easily print all you want on a color laser printer? Or steal it from the guy down the street who who earned it and has more than enough?
You are not a conservative. You are a liberal troll.
This one will be interesting, if every copy is legally purchased we get back into just what can a EULA restrict this one could bite apple on the butt..
“Pyystar clone with a modified version OS X illegally installed on it”
Only if that segment of the Eula is enforceable..
“Psystar has illegally copied and distributed OS X on other media than that which Apple provided in its OS X Leopard Upgrade package, violating Apple’s copyrights. “
Violating a Eula does != violating copyright. If the OS is truly unmodified and still runs on the hardware you have, at most, contract breach..
I thought bootcamp was outside the OS? thats why you can boot windows...
Actually no, it would be like GM selling parts that a small car company buys and puts in their car then GM saying *you can only put a GM part in a licensed GM car..
Let's compare Windows, OS X, and Linux:
There is no case that Apple monopolizes OS software for PCs, not even Microsoft does that - much as it would like to.
- Windows license is sold by a software vendor who has historically been willing to license Windows to any hardware - but who doesn't want a single license to cover multiple instances of Windows in virtual machines.
- OS X is software sold by a hardware vendor which sells licenses only to run on its own hardware.
- Linux license is free from vendors who do not make hardware.
The issue seems to be whether a hardware vendor can make software exclusively for its hardware and legally prevent its use on other hardware. Or, if not, what steps Apple may not take which might degrade the performance of non-Apple hardware operating OS X.
Historically, at least, software licenses have been enforced which limited the performance of the computer hardware on which the software could be operated - if you want to run the software on bigger iron, you have to pay bigger bucks for the license. I think that Sun might still do that.
Sorry, but that's NOT the case. Apple does not "sell" their software. It's licensed for use. When you "sell" something, the rights to that "something" are transfered to the buyer. In the EULA, you agree to only use that software on a MAC. Given the market share of MACs, there's no way to claim that Apple is monopolistic.
“Apple does not “sell” their software.”
Umm I can go to their site right onw and buy some, it would be one thing if apple only sold the software loaded on hardware but thats not how they roll..
“It’s licensed for use. “
And the question is can you license it as apple is trying to do? are willing to say *if* gm took a part they sell and added a license that it could only be used on GM cars that such an arrangement is legal?
“In the EULA, you agree to only use that software on a MAC.”
Eula’s are rather controversial and this case will help iron out that question. Can you restrict where an *unaltered* piece of software is installed..
I’m very liberal when it comes to software and OS. If you pay the freight for the OS it should be liberally distributed. It is outrageous that some rich boomer stooges in California allow it only to run on their over priced rigs
And these stooges will lose this court case, mark my word
Yeuow! Loads of fanboys will take it in the shorts. It’s impossible to brag about an overpriced mauve colored machine you just bought when Psystars are available. Instead they’ll have to brag about some new sushi restaurant or something as silly
You seem to be operating under the mistaken belief that judges are inclined to throw out laws about software licensing, EULAs, Trademarks, and intellectual property rights left and right. It isn't happening.
Suppose you like a Warner Brothers movie that is being sold by Warner Brothers only on BlueRay Disk for $35 because the director and producer do not want to produce a less than optimal viewing experience of their work. The studio is not issuing a DVD of the movie and is not allowing it to be sold on anything except WB's BlueRay disks. Lot's of other people like the movie as well and would like to buy it and watch it but don't want to buy the movie for $35 or don't have a BlueRay disk player and really, really want to watch it on their DVD player. Can you take that movie, rip it from the BlueRay disk and put it on a DVD and then sell it for $17.50 merely because some people want to buy it less expensively in another format? Do you have that right because you bought the BlueRay disk? Nope, you don't and you can't. Read the EULA that is displayed at the start of the movie.
How about taking your newly purchased BR disk of the movie, putting it into your spiffy BlueRay Disk Player, connected to your really neat 120 inch Plasma High Definition TV with the awesome 7.1 THX Surround Sound Theater audio system, and setting up a box office and selling tickets to all those people who want to see the movie? Can you do that? Nope, you are not licensed for that and are specifically enjoined from doing it. Read the EULA that comes with the movie.
Psystar boys will then demo an Apple computer with boot camp and XP installed. This will really get the judge scratching his head. Muttering to himself -- Apple brags about running XP better than a Dell machine? Yet makes it impossible to run Apple OS on generic hardware?
Sorry, Windows is licensed to be run on computers made by multiple manufacturers. It is perfectly legal to run it on a Mac under Microsoft's license agreement. That is its intended purpose. To see a legitimately licensed copy of Windows XP or Vista running on a Mac computer is totally irrelevant to seeing Mac OS X runningcontrary to its license and purposeon a Psystar Open Computer.
“You seem to be operating under the mistaken belief that judges are inclined to throw out laws about software licensing, EULAs, Trademarks, and intellectual property rights left and right. It isn’t happening.”
Thats not my assumption, we might very well hear that if you sell the CD’s sans hardware you cant tell people what hardware to put it on, the again... we might not. You’re assumption is that because its in a EULA its law and we have seen time and time again that just aint the case..
“Can you take that movie, rip it from the BlueRay disk and put it on a DVD and then sell it for $17.50 merely because some people want to buy it less expensively in another format?”
The difference here is that they are not modifying the Apple software in any way. To make your analogy more accurate lets say that Warner got together with Samsung and put in a license that you can only watch the movie on a Samsung player (or alternatively lets say Warner started to sell their own blue ray players) if the movie will play on a fuji player would it be legal for Fuji to sell the player with a free copy of the movie (assuming they legally bought the movie.
*if* they are modifying the OSX software than we are in the area of copyright infringement and this is not a case about the apple EULA. If they are not modifying it than this is a case of can apple tell you what hardware you can run the software on?
“How about taking your newly purchased BR disk of the movie, putting it into your spiffy BlueRay Disk Player, connected to your really neat 120 inch Plasma High Definition TV with the awesome 7.1 THX Surround Sound Theater audio system, and setting up a box office and selling tickets to all those people who want to see the movie? Can you do that?”
Another specious comparison Prystar did not buy one copy and is giving it out to Millions of people. What if a movie theater bought the rights to show the arwner movie and warner tried to stipulate what kind of projector it could be shown on?
Psystar is selling what they call an "Open Computer"
They will install Linux, Windows or Apple OS on it
Most the judge will do is tell them they cannot pre-install the Apple OS
That Psystar will have to ship the Apple OS discs with separate instructions and software to do the Apple install
Meanwhile Psystar is getting reams of publicity courtesy of the sourpusses who run Apple
And that free publicity translates into sales for their bargain basement Apple clones
Score a big one against that bald headed stooge who runs Apple
Any judge with common sense will not give Apple a sympathetic hearing. The wise guy shtick at Apple is wearing thin where you guys pull stunts like installing windows but others cannot install Apple OS
The two demos are appeals to common sense and the judge will simply say -— “No more pre-installations of the Apple OS”
Well that all depends on what is rewarded in damages, they could put prystar under then again even if the outcome is as you say ( prystar gets the ok to sell hardware with a disk ) but the damages are enough to put them under then you will see another prystar pop up in a few weeks..
Let a thousand Psystars bloom....
My guess is no damages assessed on these young men
It’s David versus Goliath and the judge will take this into account
18 months ago I emailed a Canadian company that was rumored to sell clones. The guy was so furtive about it. He would only say his computer has been tested and retested to run OSX. But I was 100% on my own as far as installing OSX plus he did not sell it
Once Psystar wins their business model will be copied
“My guess is no damages assessed on these young men”
I very much doubt that, *if* the judge finds it is *not* ok to sell OSX preloaded on the openPC then there is damage done. What amusing is that were the judge to be a real jerk about it he could make the damage for each unit sold equal to the cost of a mac mini and thus these guys would have been logins sales..
In the end Apple will probably end up in a world where OSX can get loaded on clones (or just sold with) but I suspect apple will eventually start using a hardware check (wow back to dongles ;) ) on updates..