Apple sues Psystar

[slugger]

Apple sues Mac-clone maker Psystar

Apple has taken Mac-clone manufacturer Psystar to court in the US, alleging copyright infringement.

Psystar has been selling the Open Computer, a Mac clone, for approximately three months.

Apple's lawsuit, filed in the US District Court in Northern California, alleges copyright infringement, inducement of copyright infringement and trademark infringement, and makes a number of other legal claims. Apple is seeking any profits earned by Psystar from its Open Computer, triple damages for "wilful acts" and a permanent injunction against the sale of the product, as well as the recall of those units already sold.

"Apple licenses the use of its Macintosh operating system software for use only on Apple-labelled hardware," the Mac maker said in the suit, adding that the only way to get a full version of the Mac operating system (OS) is on a new machine. The boxed software product, it said, is only an upgrade version, valid only for upgrading an existing, Apple-branded Mac.

Apple argued that, by selling the Open Computer in conjunction with a copy of the Mac OS, Psystar both infringed Apple's copyright and induced purchasers to violate Apple's copyright.

The infringement, Apple said "is and continues to be intentional, wilful and in conscious disregard of Apple's rights". The company also alleged that use of Apple trademarks "is likely, if not certain, to deceive or cause confusion or mistake" over whether there is a connection between Apple and Psystar.

A Psystar employee told ZDNet.co.uk sister site CNET News.com on Tuesday that no-one was available to comment on Apple's lawsuit.

However, Apple charged that Psystar's owners and managers have admitted in public statements to their knowledge of the existence of Apple's software licence agreement and its terms.

Because the infringements were wilful, Apple said it is entitled to triple damages.

A status conference in the case is set for October.

Mark A Goldstein, a lawyer with the SoCal IP Law Group, said Apple's case appears to be a "slam dunk".

"In view of the Grokster ruling, it's hard to see any viable argument [for Psystar]," he said. "If Psystar only sold hardware without an OS or only with Ubuntu or [Microsoft Windows] XP, then the case would be wholly different," he said. "They could assert that there are substantial non-infringing uses — that is, a hardware maker/reseller should be able to sell a computer that can run multiple operating systems."

"That they are selling Apple OS leaves them open for direct and contributory copyright infringement," Goldstein added.

John Ferrell, chairman of the intellectual-property practice at Carr & Ferrell, also wondered what legal theory Psystar will used to defend their cloning of the Mac.

"Using copies of Apple's operating system to build Apple look-alikes was thought to have been clearly settled in the 1983 landmark copyright decision that put the last of the significant Apple clone makers, Franklin Computer, out of the Apple business," he said in an email interview. "Apple's Macintosh products are protected by a wide range of intellectual-property assets, including copyrights, patents and trademarks. It's no [coincidence] that there have been no successful Macintosh 'me-too' manufacturers in the past quarter of a century."

Ferrell added that Infinite Loop, the road that stretches through Apple's headquarters, "is littered with the wrecked business plans of companies that have tried to copy and sell Apple look-alikes".

Source

it was never a question of if but when

 

[desiibond]

as expected. Psystart are not allowed to distribute os X

 

[abhinandh]

this was expected long back but maybe apple did not find time

 

[desiibond]

do analysis on how their OS will do if it is bundled by other vendor, get the result and sue them

 

[tarey_g]

Let it build up first and then screw them up causing more damage.

 

[Faun]

^^lol
destructive minds

 

[aryayush]

Apple is suing Psystar. Finally! They are going to crush them.


flames removed! watch it! warned!

 

[desiibond]

^^^ Steve Jobs, Is that you??

 

[tarey_g]

Apple is suing Psystar. Finally! They are going to crush them. The Psystar guys will be sorry they were ever born.

Hah hah! I take sick, grisly pleasure in seeing those who perpetrate the notion of running the pure and divine Mac OS X on crappy PCs that are no better than street urchins in front of Apple’s breathtaking and awe-inspiring Macs go down. Burn them at the stakes, Apple, and frame the ashes and hang them up in your headquarters.

^^ and this my friend is the definition of 'typical' Mac user.

^^^ Steve Jobs, Is that you??

Steve Jobs is not a ***, he is just a businessman. So this is definitely not him.

 

[goobimama]

Majja to ayega! It will also finally settle that debate that was going on in the fight club once and for all.

 

[desiibond]

^^LOL. start something involving apple in here and it turns into a war

 

[Voldy]

so early...that Shows how fast Apple is

 

[FilledVoid]

Everyone saw it coming. It was just a matter of when Apples Lazy legal Counsel would get off their rears. This is why I said you can't put mac OS X on a random computer with a Sticky note which says Apple and then Install Mac OSX and get away with it .

 

[hellknight]

Actually.. Psystar was right.. Apple can't lock the customers to a single hardware company.. for eg.. (in Psystar Words).. what if you buy a Honda City and Honda tells that you can drive it on a particular highway and can only fill from a particular petrol pump. Driving on other highways is illegal as is filling from the other stations.

This is the approach of Apple.. I really want that Psystar should win the case..

 

[goobimama]

Back to the famous thinkdigit car analogies I see..

 

[dheeraj_kumar]

An Apple Bites Back!!!

Just as expected, although I agree with some people that this should have been done sooner. Not matter how Psystar argues its case about an OS should be used in more computers, I still say that them doing it was just like a no-cd crack, or even worse, considering they branded it and actually sold it. In legal point of view, of course.

 

[MetalheadGautham]

since hitboxx removed ofending language displaying blind faith and ignorance in aayush's post, I deleted my reply to it to keep things peaceful.

 

[aryayush]

Offending language? It was an obvious and gross exaggeration meant to serve as humour. What about it offended you?

flames removed! watch it! warned!

I don’t get it. Doing some colourful commentary lambasting a small American startup (which, in all likelihood, will cease to exist in a month or two from now) in an attempt to create some humour is worth being warned about? Who on this forum did my post offend and for what reason? If someone comes along and declares that Apple is run by a bunch of nincompoops, will you warn that person for it? I, for one, don’t expect you to. That’s what freedom of speech is all about. If my post was aimed at any member of this forum, then by all means, I should be warned (or miserabled or banned) for my behaviour. But I was talking about some company somewhere in America and didn’t use any slangs in my post—I have no idea what I did wrong.

Mod reply: I will just follow it up here instead of getting into a new post. The post wasn't warned as an Apple or non-Apple comment but to the extreme hate shown in it, albeit un-intended, though you found it comical, I did not! No member reported or anything, just I didn't find it in the best interest of the forum. It appeared no different than one of praka's(no offence just an example) hate posts if you can understand.

 

[amitava82]

So, how PC is crappy compared to Apple Mac? AFAIK, there ain't any difference between PC & Apple hardware. Of course you get what you pay for. So, a $500 laptop may be crap in terms of quality compared to $2500 MacBook pro BUT when you compare a $2500 laptop with an equivalent MBP; PC bites.

 

[MetalheadGautham]

So, how PC is crappy compared to Apple Mac? AFAIK, there ain't any difference between PC & Apple hardware. Of course you get what you pay for. So, a $500 laptop may be crap in terms of quality compared to $2500 MacBook pro BUT when you compare a $2500 laptop with an equivalent MBP; PC bites.

PC Does not have Apple Logo.
PC is not named Macintosh.
PC does not Run Apple OS X.
PC is not invented by Steve Jobs.

Aren't those reason enough ?