Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Archive > Archives of Old Posts > MacBytes.com News Discussion

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Aug 17, 2009, 11:30 AM   #1
MacBytes
macrumors bot
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Apple accuses Psystar of purposefully destroying evidence.




Category: News and Press Releases
Link: Apple accuses Psystar of purposefully destroying evidence.
Description:: none

Posted on MacBytes.com
Approved by Mudbug
MacBytes is offline   0
Old Aug 17, 2009, 12:07 PM   #2
supmango
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
This article makes Pystar sound like it is run by a group of the smartest narcissists I have ever heard of.
supmango is offline   0
Old Aug 17, 2009, 12:16 PM   #3
cohibadad
macrumors 6502a
 
cohibadad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
ouch. Willful destruction of evidence. Courts tend to frown on that.
cohibadad is offline   0
Old Aug 17, 2009, 12:17 PM   #4
Peace
macrumors P6
 
Peace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Space--The ONLY Frontier
Sure sounds like something Psystar would do too.
Peace is offline   0
Old Aug 17, 2009, 12:24 PM   #5
bruinsrme
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peace View Post
Sure sounds like something Psystar would do too.
Yeah Psystar is the only company in the world with shredders and would do something like that.
bruinsrme is offline   0
Old Aug 17, 2009, 12:26 PM   #6
r.j.s
Moderator emeritus
 
r.j.s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Fort Knox
Quote:
Originally Posted by bruinsrme View Post
Yeah Psystar is the only company in the world with shredders and would do something like that.
I didn't take it that way. When you look at everything else Psystar has done (CEO not knowing sales numbers, no records of anything, convenient bankruptcy filing, etc) it just fits in with everything else they've done.
r.j.s is offline   0
Old Aug 17, 2009, 12:27 PM   #7
Peace
macrumors P6
 
Peace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Space--The ONLY Frontier
Quote:
Originally Posted by bruinsrme View Post
Yeah Psystar is the only company in the world with shredders and would do something like that.
I was referring to the current case between Apple and Psystar and this discussion not the world as a whole.

Perhaps you should take a remedial course in english.
Peace is offline   0
Old Aug 17, 2009, 12:30 PM   #8
r.j.s
Moderator emeritus
 
r.j.s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Fort Knox
Interesting ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by The article
... the intentional destruction of evidence is a serious offense which, if proven true, can render the need for an actual trial unnecessary via a default judgement for Apple, burden Psystar with paying all of Apple’s legal fees, and potentially land Psystar employees in jail.
It may be decided this week.
r.j.s is offline   0
Old Aug 17, 2009, 12:55 PM   #9
bruinsrme
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Sorry for my sheety remark.

The whole case makes me laugh.
First Psystar openly sells such computers, more than likely knowing there will be implications. Then when the hot water rises they claim bankruptcy for protection, just like many of the companies associated with the Big Dig. As they continue operating, they find out what documents are being requested.
Does Psystar have any documents, probably so or did. But since apple hasn't probably gotten anything from them apple has to present to the courts that they suspect the destruction of any documentation since no business can operate without some type of documentation.
Cripes at certain points of the world it was mandantory to fire up the shredders. With the lack of evidence when we pulled back into port it was extremely difficult to prove anything. Same with Psystar.
Apple could go after the credit card companies and shipping companies to see exactly how many systems were purchased and shipped.
Apple will win this hands down but in no way will Psystar make it easy for them.
Why apple wants the code is beyond me as they probably already obtained a system and can strip it off the OS.
I would suspect Psystar to throw the towel in soon, the people in charge disappear to a distant island and then the code to show up on the internet and there be a community similar to the iphone jailbreaking community that is all about hackintosh any pcs.
bruinsrme is offline   0
Old Aug 17, 2009, 01:17 PM   #10
thejadedmonkey
macrumors 604
 
thejadedmonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Pa
Send a message via AIM to thejadedmonkey
Quote:
Originally Posted by bruinsrme View Post
I would suspect Psystar to throw the towel in soon, the people in charge disappear to a distant island and then the code to show up on the internet and there be a community similar to the iphone jailbreaking community that is all about hackintosh any pcs.
I humbly welcome you to 2006.
__________________
MacBook • 17" MacBook Pro • iPod Nano • Apple TV
PS4 • Custom Windows 8.1 Desktop • WP8.1
"Good judgment comes from experience,
experience comes from bad judgment."
- Mulla Nasrudin
thejadedmonkey is offline   0
Old Aug 17, 2009, 03:10 PM   #11
mrfrosty
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by thejadedmonkey View Post
LOL ! I love that !
__________________
MrFrosty
mrfrosty is offline   0
Old Aug 17, 2009, 04:18 PM   #12
HyperZboy
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
I'll be the last person to say Psystar is a great company or even that I would buy one of their computers, but...

Does this not look almost like a Witch Hunt by Apple?

You can look at this 2 ways basically...

Either Psystar made an attempt to get within the legal limits in how they were installing MacOS X by changing their installation practices.

or

They were deliberately destroying evidence to prevent Apple from proving their case.

The end game though is, unless Apple can prove what the evidence (code) was or that is was deliberately destroyed for the purposes of evading the law, Apple is going to lose.

The very mention that Apple KNOWS what's on Psystar's customers' computers is kind of disturbing to me.

Will Apple go after the OSX86 Project people next? Probably not. Most likely, all of of Apple's actions are designed to sue (LEGAL-BILL) Psystar out of business. But, the implications of Apple's actions are kind of scary.

That Apple Mac Introduction "Big Brother" commercial that aired during the Super Bowl is starting to have a new scary meaning.

Steve Jobs needs to look in the mirror.

Between this case and the abandonment of all the PowerPC customers, I'm seriously considering the Hackintosh route for my next go-round of Mac purchases.

Last edited by HyperZboy; Aug 17, 2009 at 04:26 PM.
HyperZboy is offline   0
Old Aug 17, 2009, 04:31 PM   #13
BaldiMac
macrumors 604
 
BaldiMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperZboy View Post
I'll be the last person to say Psystar is a great company or even that I would buy one of their computers, but...

Does this not look almost like a Witch Hunt by Apple?
No. They were ordered by the court not to destroy the source code. They did.

Quote:
You can look at this 2 ways basically...

Either Psystar made an attempt to get within the legal limits in how they were installing MacOS X by changing their installation practices.

or

They were deliberately destroying evidence to prevent Apple from proving their case.

The end game though is, unless Apple can prove what the evidence (code) was or that is was deliberately destroyed, they are going to lose.
My understanding from this article and others that I have read is that the ball is actually in Psystars court to prove that they had no obligation to preserve the code.

The were using code. They were ordered to preserve it by the court. They destroyed it.

Quote:
The very mention that Apple KNOWS what's on Psystar's customers' computers is kind of disturbing to me.
Huh?

Quote:
Will Apple go after the OSX86 Project people next? Probably not. Most likely, all of of Apple's actions are designed to sue (LEGAL-BILL) Psystar out of business. But, the implications of Apple's actions are kind of scary.
In what way is suing someone who violates your license scary?

Quote:
That Apple Mac Introduction "Big Brother" commercial that aired during the Super Bowl is starting to have a new scary meaning.
What "new scary meaning" does the commercial have? That Apple will defend its IP rights in court? Is that new? Or specific to Apple?

Quote:
Steve Jobs needs to look in the mirror.
Why?
BaldiMac is offline   0
Old Aug 17, 2009, 04:37 PM   #14
r.j.s
Moderator emeritus
 
r.j.s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Fort Knox
Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperZboy View Post
The very mention that Apple KNOWS what's on Psystar's customers' computers is kind of disturbing to me.
No, it isn't. If you look back, Apple has several Psystar machines, therefore, they are customers.
r.j.s is offline   0
Old Aug 17, 2009, 04:37 PM   #15
pdjudd
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Plymouth, MN
Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperZboy View Post
Does this not look almost like a Witch Hunt by Apple?
No. This is Apple doing what it is legally obligated to do, protect its brand name and trademarks as vigorously as possible.
Quote:
You can look at this 2 ways basically...

Either Psystar made an attempt to get within the legal limits in how they were installing MacOS X by changing their installation practices.

or

They were deliberately destroying evidence to prevent Apple from proving their case.
Since there is no legal way to install OSX on aything other than a Mac as of now, I would say its number two. It is very cosistatant with a company that has been as flagrant about Apple as Psystar
Quote:
The end game though is, unless Apple can prove what the evidence (code) was or that is was deliberately destroyed for the purposes of evading the law, Apple is going to lose.
No, Apple can still win, If the tampering charges come to naught, the case will proceed as usual.

Quote:
The very mention that Apple KNOWS what's on Psystar's customers' computers is kind of disturbing to me.
Wait, where did you get any sense that Apple knows anything what is on your hard drive. There is no way that they could have done that without a subpoena.

Quote:
Will Apple go after the OSX86 Project people next? Probably not. Most likely, all of of Apple's actions are designed to sue (LEGAL-BILL) Psystar out of business. But, the implications of Apple's actions are kind of scary.
Lawsuits are a part of business. Apple has to do whatever it can to protect its products or it can loose the rights to the,. That is a legal requirement. If Psystar cannot take a lawsuit, well thats too bad. Legal action is a legitimate risk of business.

Quote:
That Apple Mac Introduction "Big Brother" commercial that aired during the Super Bowl is starting to have a new scary meaning.
How? Apple is not spying on you. Apple is not saying that an individual cannot make a hackintosh - they have never commented on it. They are saying that you cannot make a business out of it. That is very different.

Quote:
Steve Jobs needs to look in the mirror.
And see what? A successful CEO that is engaging in the correct pracices that any other business would engage in?

Quote:
Between this case and the abandonment of all the PowerPC customers, I'm seriously considering the Hackintosh route for my next go-round of Mac purchases.
I fail to see how the two are related. Apple has no obligation to support any hardware platofrm beyond what they are legally entailed to do. They can drop anything at anytime. How that justifies hackintoshing (which would require you to buy an intel computer anyway) is beyond me.
pdjudd is offline   0
Old Aug 17, 2009, 04:41 PM   #16
skunk
macrumors Demi-God
 
skunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Republic of Ukistan
Anyway, what's all this bollocks about "spoilation of evidence"? Don't these people have a dictionary? It's spoliation.
__________________
"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted the spoons." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
skunk is offline   0
Old Aug 17, 2009, 04:43 PM   #17
HyperZboy
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaldiMac View Post
No. They were ordered by the court not to destroy the source code. They did.

My understanding from this article and others that I have read is that the ball is actually in Psystars court to prove that they had no obligation to preserve the code.

The were using code. They were ordered to preserve it by the court. They destroyed it.

Huh?

In what way is suing someone who violates your license scary?

What "new scary meaning" does the commercial have? That Apple will defend its IP rights in court? Is that new? Or specific to Apple?

Why?
I personally think Psystar has broken the law in at least their initial installation process, but then again I think the DMCA law is an abomination that should have never happened, so I guess we'll have to agree to disagree there because I come from a completely different perspective.

However, I still believe Apple's EULA will never survive a full court challenge as it's way too egregious by almost any legal or ethical standard.

Apple is just trying to sue Psystar out of business and it appears they'll play the Big Brother role and pry into Psystar buyers' computers. I think that's a BIG BROTHER scary thing.

Will Apple go after individual Hackintosh customers next?

I know all the Fanbois hate Psystar and I don't even like them really.

But Apple is starting to look scary these days. In another article on here, Apple legal is attempting to sue just to prevent an article about Steve Jobs from being published! LOL
HyperZboy is offline   0
Old Aug 17, 2009, 04:55 PM   #18
HyperZboy
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by r.j.s View Post
No, it isn't. If you look back, Apple has several Psystar machines, therefore, they are customers.
So if I sell my Hackintosh on Ebay, maybe Steve Jobs will be the highest bidder? LOL

But seriously, I've never understood people who support the current DMCA law.

It is totally anti-consumer and makes lots of people guilty before proven innocent for IP.

I hope it eventually goes to the Supreme Court and gets the tossing it deserves.

Obviously Apple is basing much of its case on the DMCA law which gives them ridiculous protections and even the ability to SUE HACKINTOSH users if they wanted to!

I'm sorry, but that IS Big Brother scary and that's an incredible irony considering Apple's initial "Big Brother" Super Bowl commercial for the introduction of the Macintosh.

Last edited by HyperZboy; Aug 17, 2009 at 05:06 PM.
HyperZboy is offline   0
Old Aug 17, 2009, 04:57 PM   #19
BaldiMac
macrumors 604
 
BaldiMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperZboy View Post
I personally think Psystar has broken the law in at least their initial installation process, but then again I think the DMCA law is an abomination that should have never happened, so I guess we'll have to agree to disagree there because I come from a completely different perspective.
I agree that the DMCA is a horrible law that was horribly written and is overly broad in its application. What do we have to agree to disagree about?

Quote:
However, I still believe Apple's EULA will never survive a full court challenge as it's way too egregious by almost any legal or ethical standard.
This case is a full court challenge. What terms of Apple's SLA are "way too egregious"?

Quote:
Apple is just trying to sue Psystar out of business and it appears they'll play the Big Brother role and pry into Psystar buyers' computers. I think that's a BIG BROTHER scary thing.
Where did you get that idea?

Quote:
Will Apple go after individual Hackintosh customers next?
I doubt it, but maybe. But that's a risk you take by playing in those legally gray areas.

Quote:
I know all the Fanbois hate Psystar and I don't even like them really.
Why does it matter who likes them?

Quote:
But Apple is starting to look scary these days.
You keep saying that. You must be easily frightened.

Quote:
In another article on here, Apple legal is attempting to sue just to prevent an article about Steve Jobs from being published! LOL
Did you just make that up? I haven't seen any mention of a court case.

Last edited by BaldiMac; Aug 17, 2009 at 05:09 PM.
BaldiMac is offline   0
Old Aug 17, 2009, 05:09 PM   #20
HyperZboy
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaldiMac View Post
Did you just make that up? I haven't seen any mention of a court case.
It's in another Macrumors.com thread. I'm sorry that I read more than you do.

http://www.macrumors.com/

And if you don't think Apple's SLA or EULA is way too egregious, then there is really no further point in arguing.
We'll have to agree to disagree.

And yes, I think Apple's EULA will get thrown out in court, but they won't let that happen.

Their plan is to sue Psystar out of business before it ever goes to court and so far, they're pretty darn close.

If a judge ever got a hold of Apple's EULA, it would be picked to pieces the same way the EU hammered Microsoft.

Almost ALL EULAs are egregious in my opinion and deliberately written that way for more of the warning purpose than the legal purpose. I seriously doubt Apple wants its MacOS X EULA tested in court because they have more to lose than they do by winning. No one is buying Psystar computers. However, if Apple's EULA gets tossed in part, DELL could be selling MacOS X computers. That is what this case is REALLY about.

Last edited by HyperZboy; Aug 17, 2009 at 05:16 PM.
HyperZboy is offline   0
Old Aug 17, 2009, 05:11 PM   #21
BaldiMac
macrumors 604
 
BaldiMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperZboy View Post
It's in another Macrumors.com thread. I'm sorry that I read more than you do.

http://www.macrumors.com/
You may read, but not well. The MacRumors story makes no mention of any "attempting to sue".
BaldiMac is offline   0
Old Aug 17, 2009, 05:11 PM   #22
BellsWhistles
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
How can you possibly think it is correct ...

Not that I am here to reinforce Apple's position. But who in their LEGAL mind thinks that it is OK for Psystar to use the purchased OS in that fashion. First, Apple is a hardware company that is selling an update to their OS. If Nokia offered software updates to their phones, would it be OK for LG to strip it out and use it on their phones??? Of course not. Second, it states in the EULA that the Boot ROM, is to be used on Apple hardware. So, where does the sophomoric concept come along and lead someone to believe that Apple is behaving in a Fascist approach?

Extracted from the OS EULA: "Apple Boot ROM code and firmware is provided only for use on Apple-labeled hardware and you may not copy, modify or redistribute the Apple Boot ROM code or firmware, or any portions thereof.

Even if it was altered to proceed without the hash from the Apple boot ROM, than the EULA is be violated by reverse engineering. So why would you think at all, that a court would not side with APPLE's brief?
BellsWhistles is offline   0
Old Aug 17, 2009, 05:26 PM   #23
HyperZboy
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by BellsWhistles View Post
Not that I am here to reinforce Apple's position. But who in their LEGAL mind thinks that it is OK for Psystar to use the purchased OS in that fashion. First, Apple is a hardware company that is selling an update to their OS. If Nokia offered software updates to their phones, would it be OK for LG to strip it out and use it on their phones??? Of course not. Second, it states in the EULA that the Boot ROM, is to be used on Apple hardware. So, where does the sophomoric concept come along and lead someone to believe that Apple is behaving in a Fascist approach?

Extracted from the OS EULA: "Apple Boot ROM code and firmware is provided only for use on Apple-labeled hardware and you may not copy, modify or redistribute the Apple Boot ROM code or firmware, or any portions thereof.

Even if it was altered to proceed without the hash from the Apple boot ROM, than the EULA is be violated by reverse engineering. So why would you think at all, that a court would not side with APPLE's brief?
Obviously you think the DMCA law is a good thing. Once again we'll have to agree to disagree.

Under DMCA and your quote from Apple's EULA, I've been a criminal for decades and so have many people on this site. Let's all go to jail together huh?

And so has practically EVERYONE ELSE on this site who's ever jailbroken an iPhone or installed MacOS 8.5 on an unsupported machine. Geez, I once installed Tiger on a PowerMac 7500!

I once sold a Mac on Ebay that had Tiger installed and it was an unsupported machine so that violated the EULA!
I had to do a workaround to install Tiger.

Looks like I'm going to jail. Thank you EULA. Thank you Apple.

Trust me, if there is ever a court challenge of MANY companies' EULAs, they almost certainly will be picked to pieces or tossed completely.

Once again I'll say, I'm not a big fan of Psystar, but this will set a TERRIBLE BIG BROTHER precedent if Apple wins.

Why hasn't Apple shut this company down ?

http://eshop.macsales.com/OSXCenter/XPostFacto/

They are clearly hacking Apple software and code too.

Last edited by HyperZboy; Aug 17, 2009 at 05:33 PM.
HyperZboy is offline   0
Old Aug 17, 2009, 06:01 PM   #24
BellsWhistles
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
What part of this is Big Brother

Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperZboy View Post
Obviously you think the DMCA law is a good thing. Once again we'll have to agree to disagree.

Under DMCA and your quote from Apple's EULA, I've been a criminal for decades and so have many people on this site. Let's all go to jail together huh?

And so has practically EVERYONE ELSE on this site who's ever jailbroken an iPhone or installed MacOS 8.5 on an unsupported machine. Geez, I once installed Tiger on a PowerMac 7500!

I once sold a Mac on Ebay that had Tiger installed and it was an unsupported machine so that violated the EULA!
I had to do a workaround to install Tiger.

Looks like I'm going to jail. Thank you EULA. Thank you Apple.

Trust me, if there is ever a court challenge of MANY companies' EULAs, they almost certainly be picked to pieces or tossed completely.

Once again I'll say, I'm not a big fan of Psystar, but this will set a TERRIBLE BIG BROTHER precedent if Apple wins.
Not sure what to say. Obviously you have construed your own point of view. And made your own set of justifications.

I have done my fair share of non-conformed usage. But, than again, I didn't give the hardware company the finger in defiance either.

My point was there is NO legal ground for Psystar's stance. If Psystar were to prevail .... the ramifications in the other direction, for APPLE to protect its' future investments, would make your skin crawl. Think about it .. what if it was YOUR millions (billions) at risk.
BellsWhistles is offline   0
Old Aug 17, 2009, 06:55 PM   #25
HyperZboy
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by BellsWhistles View Post
Not sure what to say. Obviously you have construed your own point of view. And made your own set of justifications.

I have done my fair share of non-conformed usage. But, than again, I didn't give the hardware company the finger in defiance either.

My point was there is NO legal ground for Psystar's stance. If Psystar were to prevail .... the ramifications in the other direction, for APPLE to protect its' future investments, would make your skin crawl. Think about it .. what if it was YOUR millions (billions) at risk.
You're assuming Apple can prove all of this of course.
This is yet to be seen or that Psystar prevailing would doom Apple to failure.

Maybe Apple would make multi-million dollar licensing deals with Dell and HP to license MacOS X ?

I know the Mac clone thing has been done before, but it was never done with any companies willing to pay Apple some serious money before now.

Both Motorola and PowerComputing both basically ripped Apple off in a way far worse than Psystar is doing. Well, in PowerComputing's case, because they did it legally and started selling too many computers and Apple made really bad deals with both companies, and Apple basically didn't have very good competitive products back then.
Yes, back then PowerComputing was just plain making better more powerful computers than Apple.

So, when Steve Jobs came back to Apple, one of the first things he did was buy PowerComputing and cancel Motorola's license.

I have a strong feeling that not to long in the distant future, Apple will own Psystar.

Because Apple has far more to lose as you said and there's no way that EULA will completely pass a court test! That's why Apple is filing motion after motion, to LEGALLY COST this company out of business.

But isn't that kind of very anti-competitive? I guess we could debate that forever, but I'm not sure I'm liking Apple's actions here or with the iPhone or stopping Steve Jobs Bio from being published.

Yes, I think its beginning to look like a scary Big Brother scenario. Other fanbois may disagree.
HyperZboy is offline   0


 
MacRumors Forums > Archive > Archives of Old Posts > MacBytes.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Apple CSR accuses me of abusing live chat... Tronic iPhone 16 Sep 20, 2013 05:21 PM
Apple Accuses DOJ of Wanting Amazon to Have 'Significant Competitive Advantage' MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 216 Sep 4, 2013 07:32 PM
Apple Accuses Samsung's Version of Android and the Galaxy Note 10.1 of Infringing Patents MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 392 Nov 9, 2012 05:07 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:06 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC