Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!

Judge Dismisses Psystar's Anti-Trust Counterclaim Against Apple

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
50,386
11,759
https://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png

A California judge has dismissed a counterclaim from Psystar which asserted that Apple was violating federal and state anti-trust laws in limiting the sale and use of Mac OS X on Apple branded computers..
But in a 19-page order passed down on Tuesday, Judge William Alsup largely reject Psystar's claims and granted Apple's motion to have the countersuit thrown out of court should the clone maker not better its argument through an amended complaint that can be filed no later than Monday December 8th.
AppleInsider notes that Psytar attempted to define a "Mac OS market" in which Apple held a monopoly. Apple, of course, successfully disputed this definition of a "market" with which the judge agreed.
"Apple asks its customers to purchase Mac OS knowing that it is to be used only with Apple computers," he wrote. "It is certainly entitled to do so."
Psystar is a small company which sells a Mac clone using off-the-shelf PC parts and a modified version of Mac OS X Leopard. Apple sued Psystar over these products and that case is still pending.

Article Link: Judge Dismisses Psystar's Anti-Trust Counterclaim Against Apple
 

Consultant

macrumors G5
Jun 27, 2007
13,310
32
Oh wow, a judge who understands intellectual property laws and technology!!! Fantastic!
 
Comment

PlaceofDis

macrumors Core
Jan 6, 2004
19,240
5
i can't actually believe that they thought their shaky ground would last. be interesting to see what they come up with by next month.
 
Comment

Blue Velvet

Moderator emeritus
Jul 4, 2004
21,922
209
Oh good. A new Psystar thread. :D

I'm not surprised by this decision; I wonder if they can or will appeal against this part of the case.
 
Comment

The Tall One

macrumors regular
Aug 1, 2008
150
0
Apple needs the competition I think, since anyone using an Apple knows how terrible Windows is. Apple charges ridiculous prices, and they know it. It won't be long until all of this backfires on them and Microsoft becomes the underdog.
 
Comment

czachorski

macrumors 6502a
Sep 24, 2007
871
1
Makes perfectly good sense. The statement "it is certainly entitled to do so" will irritate many naysayers around here, but is absolutely correct.
 
Comment

Twilight Elk

macrumors regular
Aug 31, 2007
188
0
Arizona
So what does this mean... can someone exlpain?

PsyStar counter-sued Apple for restricting OS X to their own computers. Now that this particular case has been dismissed, Apple can, in fact, allow to keep their Macintosh operating system to their own products.

This does not, however, count for Apple's claim against Psystar for infringing on their rights and using the Macintosh OS on Psystar products, which is still going on.


(If there are inaccuracies in my summary, please point them out)
 
Comment

czachorski

macrumors 6502a
Sep 24, 2007
871
1
Apple needs the competition I think, since anyone using an Apple knows how terrible Windows is. Apple charges ridiculous prices, and they know it. It won't be long until all of this backfires on them and Microsoft becomes the underdog.

There's two sides to every transaction, and every single "ridiculous" price that Apple charges is countered by a customer on the other side of the transaction who saw value in conducting the transaction at that price.
 
Comment

schneb

macrumors member
Sep 5, 2008
99
0
Apple charges what the market will bear. That said, pricing too high brings alternatives that people will turn to for a second look. It would behoove Apple, this coming MacWorld, to introduce a Psystar-killer box that will silence these upstarts once and for all. This would be a far more lucrative response then going in to court every other month.

Psystar's complaint had nothing to stand on. The fact is that OSX being only able to run on Apple hardware is as legitimate as the Blackberry OS only able to run on its hardware.
 
Comment

JML42691

macrumors 68020
Oct 24, 2007
2,082
2
If they can appeal it, then I suspect that they will, but won't get far with that either. I kind of hope that this company gets completely shut down after all of this.
 
Comment

plumbingandtech

macrumors 68000
Jun 20, 2007
1,993
1
Apple needs the competition I think, since anyone using an Apple knows how terrible Windows is. Apple charges ridiculous prices, and they know it. It won't be long until all of this backfires on them and Microsoft becomes the underdog.

Apple has competition.

It's called _the rest of the computer industry_....

And that's just what the judge said today.
 
Comment

paric

macrumors member
Nov 14, 2007
44
0
It won't be long until all of this backfires on them and Microsoft becomes the underdog.

Backfires? Oh, yeah. I'm sure Apple dreads the day that they have a greater than 50% market share, and Microsoft is the underdog. :rolleyes:
 
Comment

Kwill

macrumors 68000
Mar 10, 2003
1,595
1
Paystar's business model and legal defense appears to be contrived from the imagination of a hacker kid.
 
Comment

paric

macrumors member
Nov 14, 2007
44
0
Apple needs the competition I think, since anyone using an Apple knows how terrible Windows is. Apple charges ridiculous prices, and they know it.

Windows systems are cheaper, and are terrible.

Apple systems are better and more expensive.

Do you really not see the correlation? You get what you pay for!
 
Comment

rjfiske

macrumors regular
Dec 8, 2003
117
0
Washington State
Apple needs the competition I think, since anyone using an Apple knows how terrible Windows is. Apple charges ridiculous prices, and they know it. It won't be long until all of this backfires on them and Microsoft becomes the underdog.

So who gets to define "ridiculous"? You? Me? A government agency? The open market? I don't think that Apple knows their prices are ridiculous. I think the extremely poor build of inexpensive PC's coupled with a frustratingly poor Windows operating system (which we're in agreement on) is what's ridiculous.

And I am not sure if we'll see Microsoft become the underdog in my lifetime, at least as it pertains to operating systems. If it does, I'm guessing the threat will come from Google, not Apple. I could be wrong. Just my opinion. :)

Having said all of that, I also think Apple needs the competition. I still believe that the competition currently exists and we don't need a government agency to define it.
 
Comment

Consultant

macrumors G5
Jun 27, 2007
13,310
32
So what does this mean... can someone exlpain?

Judge said: the information shyster submitted included evidence that there IS competition (example is Apple running Ads to bring people in from the competition, if there is no competition, ads are a waste of money), and shyster suit is full of fail.

Thus it will be dropped unless they can provide any evidence to back up their countersuit.
 
Comment

kamchadal

macrumors newbie
Nov 12, 2008
4
0
Better for the world....

It is better to stand up and lose, than never to stand up. I think that Apple should give to those who would give to Apple. It is the best policy. I like it.
 
Comment

Clive At Five

macrumors 65816
May 26, 2004
1,438
0
St. Paul, MN
Well, the counterclaim was completely misdirected. If they are to have any chance at having a case at all, they need to pursue anticompetitive "tying" arguments.
 
Comment

Beric

macrumors 68020
Jan 22, 2008
2,148
0
Bay Area
My dream would be to no longer have to use Apple's overpriced, under-specced, overheating products to run their excellent OS. But this lawsuit was stupid and destined to fail. I really don't think there's any fair legal route to force Apple to open its OS. But knowing our courts, ridiculous things can happen by activist judges. Regardless, the only truly fair thing is for Apple to choose to open its OS.
 
Comment

bradl

macrumors 601
Jun 16, 2008
4,040
12,214
Windows systems are cheaper, and are terrible.

Apple systems are better and more expensive.

Do you really not see the correlation? You get what you pay for!

But you totally miss the point, and sounds very close to fanboi.

Name one machine outside of a Mac that you can install OS X on.

Windows? can go on a Mac, PC, or even a DEC Alpha.

Linux? Macs, PCs, Sun workstations/servers, DEC Alphas, SGIs, Zseries, ARM, the entire lot.

OS X? Only Apple. What I believe Psystar was trying to do was correlate OS X only being used on Macs to Internet Explorer and the issues they had in the EU.

Yes, there is competition as far as the rest of the industry is concerned, but when it comes to OS X, Apple saying that it can only go onto Macs does start to smell of antitrust.

BL.
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.