Apple Sues Psystar over OpenComputer

[Consultant]

Finally. Hope these pirates go bankrupt and then some (they included a piece of software that is available for non-commercial use in their system).

Keep in mind you can buy Mac Pro for $2000 in refurb store. (Sometimes $1800 models are available but sell out quickly).

 

[tizy]

Why they waited so long to sue

I believe that even though their "END USER AGREEMENT" states you can't use the Mac OS on a non-'Mac' machine, that they haven't challenged this because as Psystar predicted that it would not hold up in court.

I think the reason Apple waited to sue was because they might fear that being the reality and only want to make an example out of them with altering with their software update to make it work with their machines.

The update is not a 'RIGHT' or a priveledge they have. Only if you bought OS X and using it on a MAC gives you the permission and entitlement to continuous updates...

 

[BenRoethig]

I don't really want a mid-range tower. I don't see the need for Apple to gain mass marketshare. All Apple computers have fast enough hardware so they all perform reliably. You can't walk out of an Apple Store with a new computer that will be slow and useless.

Depends on your needs and yours are not the same as everybody else.

 

[Peace]

Amen. Not that I particularly like Psystar as a company (they seem sketchy as hell...I certainly wouldn't buy their machines), but any ruling against DMCA bullsh*t is a victory in my book.

This suit isn't about EULA or DMCA. It's about legitimate concerns over Apple's O/S. Read what it says :

"The Mac maker filed a formal complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on July 3rd,
just one day after Psystar began distributing a modified version of the Mac OS X 10.5.4 Leopard update to customers who had previously purchased one of its unauthorized Mac systems."

 

[Mac21ND]

Hear hear!

 

[Voltaic]

Here's hoping Psystar gets a victory in this matter.

Ditto! Apple has become too greedy, restrictive and blind to user needs. Mac users need more hardware choices, Apple's hardware market is too narrow and has stifled over the past 4 years.

This, in the end, is about our rights, it is bigger than Apple and Mac OS. We should all be on Psystar's side, they represent our freedom of choice.

 

[socamx]

I hope Apple wins. These shoddy, pathetic clones will do nothing but harm Mac OS X's reputation, more harm than the negative publicity of Apple shutting them down in a legal battle.

If people are desperate enough that they want a shoddy, cloned Mac then just build one with better parts for less money. Either that or just suck it up and buy a legit Apple and stop whining about price, nothing wrong with the prices. (*Maybe* the MBA but that's besides the point.)

 

[Tallest Skil]

Ditto! Apple has become too greedy, restrictive and blind to user needs. Mac users need more hardware choices, Apple's hardware market is too narrow and has stifled over the past 4 years.

Don't you dare say that you liked the Quadra/Performa/Centris years better.

 

[jlblodgett]

Finally. Hope these pirates go bankrupt and then some (they included a piece of software that is available for non-commercial use in their system).

Keep in mind you can buy Mac Pro for $2000 in refurb store. (Sometimes $1800 models are available but sell out quickly).

Is that the attraction?

I would bet that Psystar sells a lot more of the base model ($399) with a few upgrades than they do the loaded "Pro" computer. ($999).

The base Mac Pro is (yikes) $2,799 and includes inferior components. ($1,500 to upgrade to 8Gig of memory, are you ****ing kidding me? Talk about being a pirate!)

 

[milo]

Perhaps they should just sell the clone with no operating system and leave the infringement on the consumer?

They could, but their sales would plummet. Their whole selling point is that they ship with OSX installed, without that you might as well shop around and buy any PC.

as far as I can tell they have not broken any actual laws yet.

Redistribution of copyrighted software, and a modified version at that. Plus violation of a license agreement can be litigated, whether it violates a law or not.

That's the nice thing about the whole Psystar thing - it showed Apple that if they don't have a low cost computer running OS X - someone else will...

Someone who? Hackers will do it, but companies can't if they're going to get sued and shut down.

Here's hoping Psystar gets a victory in this matter.

Snowball's chance in hell. And if they won (which won't happen) Apple could just add hardware copy protection and shut them out.

 

[SkippyThorson]

Not if Steve's there, they won't.

Lay on that reality distortion nice and thick, Steve.

"Not only are they breaking the law, they are tearing down the moral values of our society and ought to be punished to the full extent of every law to which they have so chosen to go against in their fit of blatant idiotic disregard. Bokay, your honor?"

I can see that.

 

[PowerFullMac]

Not if Steve's there, they won't.

LMAO!

Are they really doing anything wrong, though? I mean, law-wise?

I am surprised Apple didnt do something earlier though!

 

[Jaymes]

Typo

Apple's lawsuit is said to on the ground of copyright infringement.

Apple's lawsuit is said to be on the grounds of copyright infringement.

 

[BillyBobBongo]

Wondered when this would happen....bye bye Psystar! *wipes tear*

 

[BenRoethig]

I would like to purchase a mid range tower (Power Mac getting old), but instead I'll have to choose between a build my own hackintosh or a Mac Pro (which i really don't need).

The thing is that the Power Mac was a fair bit cheaper than the Mac Pro, which has caused a big gap now. I need something that can handle 4 hard drives and an Optical drive, with a few PCI-Express slots and an upgradable graphics card.

And a fair bit means close to a grand. That might not seem much to those who are driving beemers or still have access to the unlimited money source that is a parents' wallet, but for those making mid five-figures and have actual bills to pay, $1000 is a lot of money.

 

[BenRoethig]

Don't you dare say that you liked the Quadra/Performa/Centris years better.

I sure did. The hardware may not have had the flash, but it was practical and reliable, unlike the Ive machines.

 

[mcdermd]

This suit isn't about EULA or DMCA. It's about legitimate concerns over Apple's O/S. Read what it says :

"The Mac maker filed a formal complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on July 3rd,
just one day after Psystar began distributing a modified version of the Mac OS X 10.5.4 Leopard update to customers who had previously purchased one of its unauthorized Mac systems."

That is interesting. On my HackBook the 10.5.3 update required a modified update but the 10.5.4 worked straight from Software Update, modification-free, just as Apple provided. I don't think PsyStar would have had to modify the 10.5.4 update at all.

 

[Mac21ND]

Ditto! Apple has become too greedy, restrictive and blind to user needs. Mac users need more hardware choices, Apple's hardware market is too narrow and has stifled over the past 4 years.

This, in the end, is about our rights, it is bigger than Apple and Mac OS. We should all be on Psystar's side, they represent our freedom of choice.

I'm not against a lower cost Mac, but this isn't how you do it. As far as "rights", don't get me started. You don't have a right to own a Macintosh - or any - computer. You may choose to own one, but you don't have a right to one.

 

[clevin]

hahaha, lets see if apple has standing and can won this one.

 

[BenRoethig]

LMAO!

Are they really doing anything wrong, though? I mean, law-wise?

I am surprised Apple didnt do something earlier though!

Initially, no. They were running an unmodified version of OSX over what is basically an EFI emulation layer. In the newest patch, Pystar introduced a slightly modified version of OSX. Modifying code without consent is a violation of copyright.

 

[milo]

You have to be very carfull about what a "modified Mac OS X" is Much os what Apple calls "Mac OS X" is open source softwae that anyone is free to use. In fact I'd say half of the cose inside Mac OS is BSD UNIX. Apple did add on a nice pretty user interface. The question is which part of Mac OS did Pystar modify? If it is BSD Unix then Apple is in trouble.

Even if they only hacked BSD, which is extremely unlikely, it's still a copyright violation to redistribute the apple code along with their hacked code.

I don't really want a mid-range tower. I don't see the need for Apple to gain mass marketshare. All Apple computers have fast enough hardware so they all perform reliably. You can't walk out of an Apple Store with a new computer that will be slow and useless. You CAN bring home a $300 Dell that will hardly run Windows XP smoothly, and won't run Vista at all. I don't want that low-end or mid-range Mac. I want all Macs to be fast and reliable.

I want one, and you don't seem to understand the want at all. A midrange mac wouldn't be slower than current models, the whole point of it is that it could offer better price/performance than the current mini. They could either drop the price or boost performance for the same price - a midtower has the potential to be a BETTER model, not a low quality one.

What's the big deal about a midrange tower anyway? The slots for your own video card? That I can sort of understand, although the smallest Mac Pro should be more than adequate for things like that, right? Or are you too cheap to cough up the dough for a baby Mac Pro?

Swappable video card, better memory capacity, more drive bays, desktop parts (unlike the mini), choice of monitor.

The Mac Pro is way overkill in terms of both features and price - it would be stupid to pay that kind of price for extras you don't need. You call it "too cheap", I call it frugal and "not stupid".

As has been previously mentioned, the enforcibility of EULAs in court is questionable.

Weren't all of those suits with end users and not resellers? Did any of those cases involve hacking software and selling the hacked version?

If they were shipping the OS X intact, then the question is did they really violate anything.

But they weren't shipping the OS intact. They had to make changes to the OS itself to make it run, not just add drivers.

That will be the big question then -- has the OS been modified by Psystar to run on their computers?

Absolutely! We've known that since psystar even started doing this.

 

[fat phil]

So much in-fighting...

It's fairly obvious that anyone choosing a computer (on any operating system) wants first and foremost two things:

Reliability and Choice.

You'll turn to Apple for reliability, since Macs are made for OSX, and vice versa.

But the majority of people will pay a visit to the competitor because they want choice, and at a competitive price.

This is the foundation of anti-trust: The lack of choice for end users. And I'm sure Psystar will use this argument as their first line of defense. (Notwitshtanding that anti-trust also means the inability for a competitor to compete - but is that an argument in a closed market such as Mac?)

Lack of choice is certainly an argument I'd side with. As people regularly point out, Apple slap a huge premium on factory-installed RAM and other components. You can purchase and install these seperately of course, but even so there's a corner of the market that sees waste and a penny spent that needn't be.

Dell, for example, are no better - but Dell has an open market to compete with, and has been (slowly) improving on it's component pricing.

Without any competition, there's no compulsion for Apple to improve on it's offerings, or be generous - and don't think Apple are generous, because they're a hell of a lot greedier than Microsoft. They're not for 'the people'.

I like macs. I like OSX, and I like the fact that it peeves off Windows users no end. But I haven't liked Apple for a very long time.

All of that said, I experienced the 'legitimate' Apple clones first hand, and with that foreknowledge, I have to say that I'll ultimately choose stability over choice. Just look at how Vista is struggling with having to support virtually unlimited configurations of hardware.

OSX and Mac are made for each other. And that's the way it should stay.

 

[goosnarrggh]

Redistribution of copyrighted software...

Simple redistribution of copyrighted material (as opposed to duplication of copyrighted material), is NOT AGAINST ANY LAW. Otherwise, all used book/record stores would be in a ******** of trouble.

... and a modified version at that.

Much more plausible, provided that the modifications were made to portions of the OS that are not covered by any open source licenses.

Plus violation of a license agreement can be litigated, whether it violates a law or not.

More specifically, violations of a software license agreement, except where the relevant portions of such agreements are held to be invalid, constitute copyright violations.

 

[Small White Car]

"The Mac maker filed a formal complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on July 3rd,
just one day after Psystar began distributing a modified version of the Mac OS X 10.5.4 Leopard update to customers who had previously purchased one of its unauthorized Mac systems."

Sounds to me like the first system they sold didn't modify OS X and thus Apple was having difficulty finding a way to sue them.

It looks like they knew the day would come when they needed to modify something and they were just waiting for it to happen...legal plan in place, ready to spring.

 

[HLdan]

Apple has the right to sue them but Im sad that they are. People need some cheaper options if Apple cares to grow to the masses. Maybe if they would update the damn MINI I would not care about Hackintosh systems as much..

Agreed the mini seriously needs a SUPER upgrade. I don't know for sure if this would stop all this hackintosh bsuiness. I do feel that the hackintosh owners on this forum will soon mess it up for the rest of us. All of this installing Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware will result in Apple requiring activation for OS X. If this happens I will seriously blame ALL of the hackintosh owners.