Apple Wins Permanent Injunction Against Psystar

[Stridder44]

this is bull ****. Anything above preventing pystar from selling computers with OS X installed is overkill and really IMO is a misuse of civil law.

OMG everyone the sky is falling!!

When you use OS X you agree to it's licensing claims. This should come to the surprise of NO ONE, and Windows along with almost every other commercial software out there has a similar EULA as well. Apple is a hardware company first and foremost, so selling their machines is vital, hence why OS X isn't available for anyone to install on any random PC box. Stop being so damn dramatic.

And honestly, what's the point of an buying a computer from them specifically to hackintosh? You can run Linux/Ubuntu and/or Windows on a Mac already anyway, so what's the point?

 

[mingoglia]

Speaking of Darwin... I'm a BSD guy, have been for years. That's what eventually made a Mac "okay" in my book and I bought my first mac about 3 years ago. I have a hard time condemning a company for "stealing" code or an idea from the open source community and selling it (the hakintosh projects), when the core of Apple's OS is based on something "free". Granted they're well within their right to do so due to the open source licensing... but I still think it's got a slight bit of pot calling the kettle black going on.

Mike

 

[Bregalad]

Look at Psytar, there computers were generic and ugly. I pay not only for the ease of use and lack of stress, but also for the design asthetic. Thanks!

I may be in the minority here, but I don't give a hoot whether my computer has an aesthetic design or not. I mean seriously, how many seconds per day do you actually look at your computer? My old G5 sat on the floor beside my desk where I couldn't see it. My current mini is on the desk because that makes hooking up all the cables easier, but it's usually covered in papers so I can't see it either.

What matters? The quality of the displays I have to look at for 8-10 hours per day, the quality of the operating system, the quality of the applications I run and the reliability of all the unseen hardware.

Apple could make the case out of sanitized manure for all I care.

 

[bjeadeh]

The fact that they designed it, sold it to you, and service it for you, and the fact that they supply the OS which they wrote.

They designed it, but sold it to CDW, who modified it, who sold it to me.

 

[robotartfashion]

I may be in the minority here, but I don't give a hoot whether my computer has an aesthetic design or not. I mean seriously, how many seconds per day do you actually look at your computer? My old G5 sat on the floor beside my desk where I couldn't see it. My current mini is on the desk because that makes hooking up all the cables easier, but it's usually covered in papers so I can't see it either.

What matters? The quality of the displays I have to look at for 8-10 hours per day, the quality of the operating system, the quality of the applications I run and the reliability of all the unseen hardware.

Apple could make the case out of sanitized manure for all I care.

To each their own, but as an artist I appreciate the thought and effort that goes into the crafting. Especially every time I'm sitting next to someone with my Macbook Pro and they have some ugly plastic HP, Acer, or Dell.

It's just another piece of the overall pleased puzzle for me

P.S. it's not just the view, its the interior industrial design as well. I've never appreciated the interior of a computer like I have with my MacPro, beautiful and easy to work with.

 

[bjeadeh]

Apple could make the case out of sanitized manure for all I care.[/QUOTE]

I think you got something here but why sanitized? Don't get me wrong, I love all my Macs, ever since 1990 for me. But I would love to play with a Hackintosh along with all my Apples.

 

[mdriftmeyer]

Speaking of Darwin... I'm a BSD guy, have been for years. That's what eventually made a Mac "okay" in my book and I bought my first mac about 3 years ago. I have a hard time condemning a company for "stealing" code or an idea from the open source community and selling it (the hakintosh projects), when the core of Apple's OS is based on something "free". Granted they're well within their right to do so due to the open source licensing... but I still think it's got a slight bit of pot calling the kettle black going on.

Mike

Have a philosophical debate with Jordan Hubbard and the rest of the history of BSD and NeXT. Sorry, but the BSD License exists for a reason. Without the likes of Sun, NeXT, Apple, DEC and more BSD would not have sustained itself over the past two decades.

 

[Byrnes3969]

"Think Different" but don't touch

I have no idea where you got that idea. Generally people go on about "stolen Xerox technology"...that's still wrong, but at least it's understandable.

--Eric

"Using borrowed parts from Atari, having the main PCB printed up by Atari employee Howard Cantin, and receiving further assistance from Atari employee Ron Wayne, two non-employees, Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak, created and marketed their own home computer."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolan_Bushnell

"Jobs leaves Atari soon after, and he helps himself to some electronics that eventually end up integrated into the prototype computer Woz and Jobs create under the auspices of thier newly founded Apple Computer Company"

http://www.emuunlim.com/doteaters/play2sta1.htm

I wonder what would have happened if Atari has sued Apple for "borrowing parts"? My point here is that Apple, once a small start up company with dreams of "Thinking Different" looks more and more like a greedy, heartless corporation, crushing anyone that tries innovating or enhancing their products. Psystar is the latest casualty.

I can only pray that Woz replaces Jobs when he finally kicks the bucket.

 

[r.j.s]

"Using borrowed parts from Atari, having the main PCB printed up by Atari employee Howard Cantin, and receiving further assistance from Atari employee Ron Wayne, two non-employees, Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak, created and marketed their own home computer."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolan_Bushnell

I wonder what would have happened if Atari has sued Apple for "borrowing parts"? My point here is that Apple, once a small start up company with dreams of "Thinking Different" looks more and more like a greedy, heartless corporation, crushing anyone that tries innovating or enhancing their products. Psystar is the latest casualty.

I can only pray that Woz replaces Jobs when he finally kicks the bucket.

And what makes you assume the borrowed parts were stolen, and not in fact borrowed, on the promise of payment later?

 

[fifthworld]

Because Apple's business model is hardware sales. The software is there to help sell the hardware. If Apple allowed OS X to be installed on any PC, Apple's profits would plummet and enter Chapter 7 because no one would buy Apple's hardware anymore. If Apple wanted to survive, they would have to change their business model and start charging $300 for OS X.

This is the worst Apple business model defense I have heard: You are saying that Mac hardware have no extra value compared to a PC; hence, the only reason to buy Mac hardware is the OS. In this case please know that Apple is charging in average well above $1,000 for OS X, not just $300.

 

[Winni]

You Americans have my sympathies. This ruling is just another evidence for how screwed up your legal system is. Once again, the customer loses and a large corporation with an equally large legal department gets away with its customer hostile business practices. The sole purpose of the OS X EULA is to create a vendor lock-in and to force those who are locked into the OS X platform to purchase overpriced computer systems that are based on cheap industry standards. And yet, you guys applaud. Einstein was right about the infinity of certain things.

 

[Andronicus]

Hmm, everything Mac OS X related on Pystars website is out of stock...how strange...

 

[Livestfastest]

How many individual users has Apple sued for making a "Hackintosh"? They aren't going after you or Joe Geek, they're going after companies that try to market and sell this stuff.

Do want you want in your own home, Apple isn't stopping you and will never know. Actually Apple is extremely lenient with OS X...no DRM, no activation, no serial numbers, no checks when you pay the cheaper "Upgrade" price instead of the full version.

Everyone knew they were going to lose and nobody's going to miss Psystar, but I don't think anyone predicted this huge of a precedent being set across the board on all counts.

No, Apple isn't going to sue anyone in their homes, no doubt about that.

But say goodbye to all those Hackintosh websites now. BABYE!

Apple can easily take them all down with this ruling if they want to and throw the whole Hackintosh movement under the bus. I don't think they will immediately, but I do think they will ultimately do that.

 

[fifthworld]

"Using borrowed parts from Atari, having the main PCB printed up by Atari employee Howard Cantin, and receiving further assistance from Atari employee Ron Wayne, two non-employees, Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak, created and marketed their own home computer."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolan_Bushnell

I wonder what would have happened if Atari has sued Apple for "borrowing parts"? My point here is that Apple, once a small start up company with dreams of "Thinking Different" looks more and more like a greedy, heartless corporation, crushing anyone that tries innovating or enhancing their products. Psystar is the latest casualty.

I can only pray that Woz replaces Jobs when he finally kicks the bucket.

You conveniently forgot the last part of the quote:

"Using borrowed parts from Atari, having the main PCB printed up by Atari employee Howard Cantin, and receiving further assistance from Atari employee Ron Wayne, two non-employees, Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak, created and marketed their own home computer. They offered the design to Bushnell, but Atari had no desire to build computers at the time, instead focusing on the arcade and home console markets."

And also forgot that Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak created a brand new Apple computer not a clone of an Atari.

 

[Mac Kiwi]

I can only pray that Woz replaces Jobs when he finally kicks the bucket.

Oooh hell yes Woz at the helm ....buy one get one free or something similar,Woz is to much of a humanitarian / hard case to be a CEO.


On Psystar again - I do not think their backer will be able to play hide and seek forever,the internet / media will find out who it is eventually.

 

[WeegieMac]

As my favourite all time videogame, Sega Rally, used to say ...

"Game Over Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeah"!!!!

 

[Pika]

I hate Psystar the same way i hat PeTA.

 

[gnasher729]

Another crushing win for Apple's iSue dept.

So ironic that Apple will sue anyone it can to protect its intellectual property yet its foundation is built on stolen Atari technology.

Sad what it's become.

This is the second worst nonsense that I've ever heard.

 

[gnasher729]

You Americans have my sympathies. This ruling is just another evidence for how screwed up your legal system is. Once again, the customer loses and a large corporation with an equally large legal department gets away with its customer hostile business practices. The sole purpose of the OS X EULA is to create a vendor lock-in and to force those who are locked into the OS X platform to purchase overpriced computer systems that are based on cheap industry standards. And yet, you guys applaud. Einstein was right about the infinity of certain things.

Opinion on Groklaw is that your favorite computer seller, PearC, will soon find out how quick German courts can act when they are asked to act.

 

[gnasher729]

I'm suprised at how happy everybody is with this case. Let's think of the people who can't afford a $1k mac. I know, there's the mini, but come on Apple! Macs are a huge value, don't get me wrong, but why can't OSX be an open operating system?

Buy a mac pro for $2500, or a $1000 PC with a core i7 920 and overclock it. Jeez, it's such a difficult choice...

If you can't afford a "$1k mac", how can you afford a $100 PC with a core i7 920? You either have the money or you don't. If Rebel EFI is a dream for you, what about some cheap burglary tools? If you want to buy Rebel EFI so that you can illegally use MacOS X on a cheap PC, why not invest in some burglary tools, so you might be able to use MacOS X on a real, but stolen, Mac?

Good. Keep Rebel EFI going, Psystar, until my hackintosh is completed.

You are misunderstanding the injunction. Psystar wanted the injunction to specifically exclude Rebel EFI. Since they didn't tell the court what Rebel EFI exactly was, it wasn't excluded from the injunction. However, Psystar is not allowed to sell anything that can be used to help you install MacOS X on a non-Apple computer, including your hackintosh. As the judge said, they can sell it "at their own peril". The peril would be contempt of an injunction.

The simple-minded "you must obey anything the shrinkwrap license says" folks in this thread don't seem to be aware that this is a largely unsettled legal matter. UCC 2B was supposed to settle things once and for all. It went down in flames. UCITA replaced it, but it was only ratified by two states, last I heard.

To quote from Judge Alsup's ruling on the injunction: "In sum, customers were contractually precluded from: (1) installing and running Mac OS X on any non-Apple computer system, (2) enabling others to install or run Mac OS X on any non-Apple computer system, (3) modifying or creating derivative works of the software, and (4) transferring the software to others except as expressly authorized by the license agreement."

Sounds rather settled to me.

I disagree with this analogy.
Because one can use OS X on their own hackintosh if they so choose, but if one started selling those hackintoshes in order to profit, ala Psystar, this is where the problems of intellectual property arise.

See Judge Alsup's quote above.

 

[gnasher729]

All this does is prevent Psystar from copying OSX or modifying OSX (i.e. copyright, not anti-trust). How does that mean "the end" of Psystar or anything else? It only deals with them modifying OSX early on. I really think these articles jump to conclusions.

They sold about 780 computers. The number of computers sold without MacOS X is probably a lot lower (my estimate: zero). They can't sell computers with MacOS X anymore, they can't sell anything that would aid in copying MacOS X (which shoots down their Rebel EFI stuff), so they have to really work hard now to grow their business selling computers with Windows or Linux, and then they have to pay more than $2.5 million to Apple.

 

[newb16]

Didn't anyone at Apple get anything resembling the following from all of this?

"Gee, maybe some of our customers want a mid-range mini-tower."

And then these customers will insert third-party expansion boards, video cards,
install buggy drivers, experience crashes and even worse - blog about it, write articles and all such.

 

[50548]

An obvious ruling. Totally expected.

Alsup said he did so because Psystar's statements to the court avoided saying specifically what Rebel EFI does

More evasive BS chicanery from Psystar. These fools will go to any length to waste everyone's time.

"Whether such a defense would be successful on the merits, or face preclusion or other hurdles, this order cannot predict," Alsup said. "What is certain, however, is that until such a motion is brought, Psystar will be selling Rebel EFI at its peril, and risks finding itself in contempt if its new venture falls within the scope of the injunction."

Good enough, for now, but it just prolongs this fiasco. it seems the Revel EFI issue isn't quite decided yet because Psystar evidently withheld information about it.

Legally speaking, this was obvious and more than expected...an important ruling nevertheless to stop all those STUPID HACKERS from trying a similar criminal act in the future. Psystar deserves to buried to the ground without mercy, and sucked dry of any remaining resources they might have gotten from "invisible" sponsors...the Rebel EFI is pretty much in, also, through Alsup's words: "...Psystar will be selling Rebel EFI at its peril, and risks finding itself in contempt if its new venture falls within the scope of the injunction." So it will come next, worry not.

And to all the morons who bought hackintoshes from Psystar, without any due regard to Apple's R&D: SUCK IT, PUNDITS! Once more, congratulations, Apple!

 

[AlexisV]

Buy a mac pro for $2500, or a $1000 PC with a core i7 920 and overclock it. Jeez, it's such a difficult choice...

But your $1000 PC would look like sh*t.

 

[dudemac]

I still want to know the backstory on Psystar. Yes, I read the articles on them, 2 brothers, or whatever, but their strategy doesn't make sense. It was obvious all along that they would lose, so what was the motivation?

It can't have been to sell clones; maybe to bilk investors out of money, hence their wildly inflated sales projects? Maybe it was just publicity, like white House crashers and balloon boy? Whatever happened to Apple's contention that there was someone behind the curtain funding them, a' la' SCO?

There's more to this.

\
Since I am always up for controversy, I think a more likely source would be Apple themselves. They have more to gain from this than anyone else. The guys selling clones where not moving very many and probably not making much money on the cloning. But by bring this to court and getting a ruling in Apple's favor means that others that have been helping put OSX on vanilla intel machines will be more easily dealt with legally. It is sad but this to me is a much more likely path than some malevolent outsider bent on destroying the MAC eco system.

thedude