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.
“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
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.