Apple Wins Judgement Against Psystar for Mac OS X Copyright Infringement

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
47,565
9,372


Groklaw reports on the outcome of the Apple vs. Psystar case filed on Friday. According to the court documents, Apple's motion for summary judgment on copyright infringement and DMCA violation is granted.
So that means damages ahead for Psystar on the copyright issues just decided on summary judgment, at a minimum. The court asked for briefs on that subject. In short, Psystar is toast. Psystar's only hope now is Florida, and frankly I wouldn't bet the house on that one. Judges notice if you were just found guilty of a similar cause of action in another state.
Psystar and Apple have been in legal battle after Psystar began selling Mac clones back in April. Psystar provided modified versions of Mac OS X to run on the generic PC hardware. Apple filed suit in July.

Article Link: Apple Wins Judgement Against Psystar for Mac OS X Copyright Infringement
 

wgilles

macrumors 6502
Feb 21, 2008
315
0
I don't agree with the judgement... Apple is all pissed because someone found a cheaper way to sell their software. I kind of wish Apple was like MS (I'm gonna get killed for this one) and would open their software up to other hardware companies and give consumers some more options.
 

iGod 2.0

macrumors regular
May 4, 2009
123
0
Psystar deserved it

I don't agree with the judgement... Apple is all pissed because someone found a cheaper way to sell their software. I kind of wish Apple was like MS (I'm gonna get killed for this one) and would open their software up to other hardware companies and give consumers some more options.
It's Apple's software, they can do whatever they want with it. The least psystar could have done is asked for permission to use the software. I wouldn't want anyone doing that with my product if I had one. :eek:
 

iGod 2.0

macrumors regular
May 4, 2009
123
0
Inevitable result.

I just wonder why Psystar were so blatant in their actions? Did they really expect to win?

That's what I was wondering. How far did they think they were going to get with that one...
 

La Porta

macrumors regular
Dec 15, 2006
241
0
I don't agree with the judgement... Apple is all pissed because someone found a cheaper way to sell their software. I kind of wish Apple was like MS (I'm gonna get killed for this one) and would open their software up to other hardware companies and give consumers some more options.
Been there: done that. Apple would go under in a relatively short time with A: complete decimation of their pricier hardware sales (which is what actually makes them money), and B: nowhere near enough royalties from any Mac OS X licensing scheme with the market share that they have. Think about it.
 

thegoldenmackid

macrumors 604
Dec 29, 2006
7,772
5
dallas, texas
I don't agree with the judgement... Apple is all pissed because someone found a cheaper way to sell their software. I kind of wish Apple was like MS (I'm gonna get killed for this one) and would open their software up to other hardware companies and give consumers some more options.
They didn't find a cheaper way, they just decided to charge less money. It's not like Apple, a huge international corporation, pays more for Intel chips then Psystar, a small start-up.
 

pdjudd

macrumors 601
Jun 19, 2007
4,041
65
Plymouth, MN
What no Type 11 bankruptcy!?
They already filed for Chapter 11, and a couple months later they emerged. They cannot re-declaire bankruptcy for another 12 months - leaving them open for suing by Psystar’s various debtors.

Its over for them and now Apple has a much stronger defense against future litigation against other companies. No surprise here
 
I don't agree with the judgement... Apple is all pissed because someone found a cheaper way to sell their software. I kind of wish Apple was like MS (I'm gonna get killed for this one) and would open their software up to other hardware companies and give consumers some more options.
No, Apple is all pissed because someone is using their software on a non Apple Machine when it isn'y allowed. Apple could do whatever they want with their software that they created.
 

CLuv

macrumors 6502
Apr 9, 2007
293
2
Northern VA, USA
Oh great, someone mad at :apple: since they don't open their software to other manufactures. Apple is not a software only company like MS, they build the hardware and bundle the software. A complete ecosystem. If you want them to be like MS, then I'm sure we all can't wait to have issues with all the crap variations of hardware out in the Windows market that MS tries to support.

MS even acknowledges that Apple doesn't sell software, they sell the whole experience. If you want them to be like MS to have an MS experience then stick with Windows. Enjoy the issues.

Also, look at the history of the Mac Clones that Apple ventured into at one point. Yea, that turned out just great.

Do you really want them to go the MS route? If you do, then we'll all have crapware installed on new machines.

I support MS crap all day long at work, when I come home I just want my machine to work. Thank you MS for your shoddy programming, it keeps me employed.
 

maloj631

macrumors newbie
Nov 14, 2009
5
0
Lucky for Apple

If that lawsuit would have gone through for Pystar, that might have been the downfall of Apple. Part of their marketing is that their software is best-designed for their hardware and vice versa. They can ensure the highest quality of both.

In short, I am glad to see this judgement and happy to see that it is the end of the road for Pystar.
 

Ploki

macrumors 601
Jan 21, 2008
4,102
1,387
I don't agree with the judgement... Apple is all pissed because someone found a cheaper way to sell their software. I kind of wish Apple was like MS (I'm gonna get killed for this one) and would open their software up to other hardware companies and give consumers some more options.
hey, its like with music, if someone uses your music (samples it) other way then you intended it, its copyright infringement.
Apple did not intend to use their software otherwise (did not agreed to have it "sampled"), thus you cannot use it legally. i think its only fair...
if someone misused a piece of MY intellectual property, id be pissed too..

Apple can suck it. Greed, greed, greed.
whatever it is, apple is RIGHT. however theyre greed and evil, they are RIGHT.
 

balamw

Moderator
Staff member
Aug 16, 2005
19,368
978
New England
I don't agree with the judgement... Apple is all pissed because someone found a cheaper way to sell their software. I kind of wish Apple was like MS (I'm gonna get killed for this one) and would open their software up to other hardware companies and give consumers some more options.
They weren't selling the software cheaper, or even really selling cheaper systems since the cheapest dual core Psystar was not any cheaper than a Mac mini. They were however filling a hole for the higher performing mid-range ~$800-$1600 quad core desktops.

IMHO Psystar really screwed the Hackintosh scene when they started selling OS X pre-installed on machines. This is the source of the copyright violations they were found guilty of.

If they had just stuck to selling the compatible hardware and unmodified software separately with instructions they would have been able to avoid some of the results of this trial.

B
 

Peace

macrumors Core
Apr 1, 2005
19,546
4,189
Space--The ONLY Frontier
They already filed for Chapter 11, and a couple months later they emerged. They cannot re-declaire bankruptcy for another 12 months - leaving them open for suing by Psystar’s various debtors.

Its over for them and now Apple has a much stronger defense against future litigation against other companies. No surprise here
There's still another case in Florida that hasn't been decided yet. This is why psystar is still selling hackintoshs.
 

iGod 2.0

macrumors regular
May 4, 2009
123
0
I think that could be said if they were going after Joe Hackintosh but Psystar was doing something that was blatantly illegal on a much grander scale.
Good point. One person it's whatever but a whole damn company doing, that's pretty much reckless.
 

gnasher729

macrumors P6
Nov 25, 2005
16,690
3,381
I don't agree with the judgement... Apple is all pissed because someone found a cheaper way to sell their software. I kind of wish Apple was like MS (I'm gonna get killed for this one) and would open their software up to other hardware companies and give consumers some more options.
So what mistakes did the judge make in your opinion?

Did Psystar not make illegal copies of MacOS X?
Did Psystar not create illegal derivatives of MacOS X?
Did Psystar not circumvent Apple's copy protection for MacOS X?
Did Psystar not enable its customers to infringe against Apple's copyright?

Apple can suck it. Greed, greed, greed.
So what do you think is Psystar's motivation?
 

iGod 2.0

macrumors regular
May 4, 2009
123
0
I think that could be said if they were going after Joe Hackintosh but Psystar was doing something that was blatantly illegal on a much grander scale.
Good point. One person it's whatever but a whole damn company making a living off of it, that's really really reckless, bold, but reckless.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.