Apple’s list of grievances against Mac clone maker Psystar spans 16 pages, but, in the end, its argument boils down to the one expected. Psystar, Apple says, had no right to do what it did, and should be stopped and forced to pay.
In its lawsuit, a copy of which was seen by CNET News courtesy of our colleagues at ZDNet, Apple alleges copyright infringement, inducement of copyright infringement, trademark infringement, as well as a couple of other legal claims. It seeks any profits earned by Psystar from its Open Computer, triple damages for willful acts, a permanent injunction against the sale of the product, as well as recall of those units already sold.
John Ferrell, chairman of the intellectual property practice at Carr & Ferrell added that One 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.”
Lots of lawyerly quoting in the article. No one thinks Psystar has a snowball’s chance.
I thought phystar doesn’t exist. Oh well another day another time someone tries to steal apple’s ideas.
There’s an implicit assumption here that “fair use” doesn’t apply to software. I don’t think a software license can be just an open-ended collection of anything a vendor might want to force you to agree to when you buy his product.
If it were that simple, Apple’s license could include terms forbidding you from running non-Apple software on the OS, or from modifying the functionality in any way, or changing the official color scheme. Or from saying anything bad about Apple.
GM can’t include a “license agreement” with a car that tells you where you can drive it.
Apple, like the music industry, is just making up new “rights” and counting on a combination of expensive lawyers and confused judges to make them stick. It will work, for a while, but it sure isn’t increasing my loyalty to these companies.
[I won't be posting here anymore (not that I'll be missed) because the site has become too slow. It now takes minutes, after I hit Submit, before I get the Captcha page.]
Who cares. Everyone (at least smart enough to know the difference) can run hacked OSX in their PC machines. The reason they don’t is that 60% of having a Mac is the ability to show the Mac. 40% is the user Xperience. So Psystar made 2 major blunders:
1st
Used a restricted Software without agreement from the owner company.
2nd
Made Gawd ugly machines.
It’s like some 2cent watch company made plastic replicas and then said “yeah, but inside there’s an original Breitling mechanism.”
You are all wrong…..
OS/2 for the win!
Is there anybody out there who actually knew OS/2 and could use it properly? I could, and damn do I miss it.
It’s almost as if the last 10 years of OS design has actually gone backwards!
SKL
funny how macfans rabidly defend their beloved steve’s business.
market leader…in their dreams
I honestly don’t think Apple wants market share. Exclusivity and outrageous cost make for a better brand, just like how a $2000 purse inspires awe in women even though its the same as a $20 purse.
If apple actually made inexpensive PC’s, they would be jettisoning their high end product line sales in the process, sending it into a tailspin.
The OS might be usible as a seperate probuct but in order to do that you have to fudge something on the machine that runs it or you have to crack the software and that I think is that.
This was tried with the Apple II clones and if it didn’t fly then I don’t expect it to fly now.
What is Apple afraid of? The price of their hardware is cheap enough that clones shouldn’t be much of a threat.
Besides, they are cleaning going into the media and phone business. Their computer days are numbered, aren’t they?
#29 Greg – According to #27 Rick Cain, the computer gives them street cred so they will take a loss in the computer market share.