Psystar Lawyer Hints at Anti-Trust Defense

[gnasher729]

To address your (once again, uninformed) comment, in actuality, 98% of the drivers do exist in OS X because 98% of the components inside Macs are the exact same compontents/protocols as generic PCs.

Whether MacOS X can run on a non-Apple computer or not is completely irrelevant. What matters is whether Apple gives an end-user or a company permission to install it on a non-Apple computer. They don't. It's their decision.

Analogy FAIL. PC-DOS was developed by Microsoft and lisenced exclusively to IBM. Microsoft wasn't at risk of being anti-competitive by only licensing PC-DOS to IBM. Apple, on the other hand, is denying licensing of OS X in order to attain sales of an unrelated product: their hardware.

Analogy fails. It doesn't matter why Apple doesn't allow Psystar to sell MacOS X. What matters is whether it is anti-competitive or not. And for that we need to look at whether Apple prevents Psystar from selling computers. Apple doesn't. Dell sells many times more computers than Apple without MacOS X. HP sells many times more computers than Apple without MacOS X. All that Psystar has to do is build good computers at a good price, get a license for Windows or get Linux running, do some advertising, build some support, all the things that Dell has done, and they can easily outsell Apple 5 - to - 1 without MacOS X.

 

[Joe The Dragon]

If you can build me a hardware configuration made of off-the-shelf parts that is fully compatible with with the TiVo OS, install it and prove to me that it works, I'll call a lawyer and sue them.

you can't buy the TiVo os. It runs on custom hardware also.

You can buy mac os and it runs on x86 hardware.

 

[Joe The Dragon]

You know, you can already install OSX on non-Apple x86 hardware. Psystar is simply making money out of somebody else's work that is available for free. Instead of supporting Psystar, you should donate money to the people that develop the hackintosh/OSx86. Without them, Psystar couldn't even do what they're doing.

.

There are MENY PC shops that do the same for windows so how is this not the same?

You can install and setup windows for free but there are people who pay for that.

 

[Eddyisgreat]

you can't buy the TiVo os.

ORLY?

http://www.dvrupgrade.com/dvr/stores/1/index.cfm

http://www.dvrupgrade.com/dvr/stores/1/category.cfm?SID=1&Category_ID=5&learnmore=1

 

[Fanon]

...Apple is not jsut a software company - if that were the case they would have been dead a long, long time ago. Their success is hinged on making the software AND hardware work hand-in-hand, and though not perfect (not that any engineered system is), the experience in operating and troubleshooting is far superior.

So how can it not be in their right to protect their own work? Why is it monopolistic to invent, design, refine, manufacture and sell something successfully and simply not want to let other competitors take your ideas for their own?

Apple makes little to none of the hardware their operating system runs on. While you have a point that their success hinges on how well their operating system runs on their selected hardware, their only work is inventing, designing, and refining their software.

Psystar didn't steal their software; they purchased it and made it run on non-Apple approved hardware. The only thing Psystar "stole" was the insane profit Apple makes on reselling overpriced hardware.

 

[Chaos123x]

EULA's mean nothing.

I could put a red line in my yard and have a message posted somewhere saying " if you pass over the red line you owe me $25)

It will not hold up.

When you buy a boxed version of OS X you do not sign a contract or anything.

So if Apple want's people to stop putting OS X on beige boxes they should just stop selling OS X as a boxed stand alone product.

OR make you sign a contract when you buy OS X.

 

[Clive At Five]

Whether MacOS X can run on a non-Apple computer or not is completely irrelevant. What matters is whether Apple gives an end-user or a company permission to install it on a non-Apple computer. They don't. It's their decision.

AGAIN, if that decision is anti-competitive, then they - BY LAW - cannot.

Analogy fails. It doesn't matter why Apple doesn't allow Psystar to sell MacOS X. What matters is whether it is anti-competitive or not. And for that we need to look at whether Apple prevents Psystar from selling computers. Apple doesn't. Dell sells many times more computers than Apple without MacOS X. HP sells many times more computers than Apple without MacOS X. All that Psystar has to do is build good computers at a good price, get a license for Windows or get Linux running, do some advertising, build some support, all the things that Dell has done, and they can easily outsell Apple 5 - to - 1 without MacOS X.

There's more to being anti-competitive than denying sales. Read here... specifically "Tying."

-Clive

 

[Lord Blackadder]

EULA's mean nothing.

<snip>

It will not hold up.

Be prepared for this post to be quoted after the ruling...

 

[iMacmatician]

Hi,

It wouldn't surprise me if a special interest group with very, very deep pockets was supporting this effort in order to knock Apple down another notch.

s.

I tend to agree with you.

 

[Overseer]

^ or the people at PsyStar are incredibly stupid, which is where i'm sitting.

this is coming from.. wait for it. a guy who works with pc's, who doesnt, and has never owned a mac, and isnt in the foreseeable looking to get one. i'm a windows developer. i appreciate the advantages in support (or lack of) that apple's model brings and fully support those who say that the MS model of a "chaotic" mix of hardware brings nothing but trouble.. and btw.. WHQL isn't "that" strict. its automated. no human interaction these days.

and yes, the apple will get more and more "spyware/virus blah blah" issues the bigger they get..

anyways.. back to topic. how did i end up here? i have an iphone.. because its features got me. nothing more, nothing less.

this psystar case is very very different and far less complex than whats gone on before with MS, IBM and anythign else.. apart from.. people selling ripped off copies of windows with homebuilt pc's.

as has been said before.. its NOT that psystar has a legit licence.. they have copied and MODIFIED the disks so they're effectively selling hacked copies of apple software.

there is no anti trust issue or anything more complex than that. straight up copyright/piracy issue.

 

[Sun Baked]

as has been said before.. its NOT that psystar has a legit licence.. they have MODIFIED the disks and copied them.

its nothing more complex than that.

They have also altered the "Software Update" process so it looks towards Psystars servers, not Apple's servers.

This is so the people can get certified/modified updates from Psystar.

With an unmodified OS, there is no need for this.

 

[robbyx]

Apple, on the other hand, is denying licensing of OS X in order to attain sales of an unrelated product: their hardware.

Um, unrelated? What are you smoking? MacOS and Mac hardware have been intimately related since day one. Just because Apple uses Intel chips today doesn't mean that suddenly they must license to everyone. I don't get why people always want to tear down success. Psystar has done nothing innovative, yet they are supposed to benefit from all of Apple's hard work, marketing efforts, retail effort, etc. All because Apple sells a boxed upgrade copy of OS X for THEIR HARDWARE. There's no logic to your argument, just whining.

 

[rfruth]

I think that MacX86 & Psystar is helping Mac to spread and APPLE SHOULD THANK THEM.

 

[robbyx]

If Apple had any desire to sell nasty cheap boxes, they could have bought Gateway a year or two ago for maybe $800 million. Since Gateway sold about the same number of computers as Apple at that time, Apple would even have doubled their market share!

Alternatively, Michael Dell has said in public that he would love to sell machines running MacOS X. Does anyone think Psystar could compete with Dell on price, quality and so on?

Not a chance. Dell would crush them in under 24 hours.

Apple doesn't care about "hackintosh" nerds and I'm glad they don't. I've been an Apple/NeXT user for 26 years and I love the fact that they aren't the everyman computer. I love that things work. I love that I don't need to worry about driver conflicts, if I have the right chipset, if the next upgrade is going to break some peripheral, etc.

Apple views the computer as an appliance and I wholeheartedly agree. I say if someone wants to build his own hackintosh, go for it. Nerd out and enjoy. But that's where it should end. No one has the "right" to simply make a business out of a product they did not develop just because it can be purchased in a store. Maybe Apple should just pull OS X off the shelves and only sell it to existing Mac customers. Then maybe the whining will stop.

 

[mavfan11]

Stealing something that cost you nothing to develop and repackaging is hardly 'Making' something! Microsoft already did that to Apple, I doubt they will ever let that happen again.

How about copying Rod Stewart's CDs and reprinting the labels and selling them under a new name such as Rod Clone Inc. see how far you'd get!

That's just an awful analogy.


It isn't at all like stealing Rod Stewart's CDs. It's like Rod Stewart releasing music that will only play on a CD player that Rod says you must buy from him, and then you find a way to tweak a basic CD player to play Rod's music, and Rod sues you for doing it.

Also, they didn't "steal" they purchased Apple's OS disks like anyone can purchase Microsoft Windows OS disks. They didn't buy one Leopard disk and copy it, they include a unique Apple-sold-at-a-profit copy of Leopard with each computer.

I wish I could take a look into the alternate universe where the fanboys that are bashing Psystar are praising Psystar for doing this same thing, but to Microsoft.

 

[robbyx]

I'm not saying Psystar is right to resell modified copies of OS X, but I am in favor of allowing an individual user to modify his/her copy without legal consequence... and of course at the price of losing official support from Apple on said copy.

Who is stopping anyone from doing this? If you really want to build your own box, buy OS X, and figure out how to get it working, good for you. Apple certainly isn't going to care. But that's not the issue. The issue is some third part opportunist trying to cash in on Apple's hard work.

 

[robbyx]

Analogy fails. It doesn't matter why Apple doesn't allow Psystar to sell MacOS X. What matters is whether it is anti-competitive or not. And for that we need to look at whether Apple prevents Psystar from selling computers. Apple doesn't. Dell sells many times more computers than Apple without MacOS X. HP sells many times more computers than Apple without MacOS X. All that Psystar has to do is build good computers at a good price, get a license for Windows or get Linux running, do some advertising, build some support, all the things that Dell has done, and they can easily outsell Apple 5 - to - 1 without MacOS X.

AMEN!!!

 

[Eddyisgreat]

I think that MacX86 & Psystar is helping Mac to spread and APPLE SHOULD THANK THEM.

Helping them?

Don't really know who "MacX86" is, but if Psystar wants to help them, why don't they do what Adobe and Visicalc did for Apple in the early years-create a killer app that will bring people to the platform.

All these jokers are doing are offering a low budget solution to a high octane crowd. The OSX experience wasn't designed for everyone and their momma, or their hardware. Why these guys feel they are entitled to bring it there anyway? No one knows.

osX86, however, did bring me to the platform, although I had planned on switching in the first place. Its a community effort with a great following and even Apple recognizes this. From the short 3 years that I've been on the scene (well technically, I started with PearPC), Apple has never drastically complained or made any efforts to thwart the process of the osX86 community. They are getting these idiots because they cater to the masses who will dilute, damage and destroy Apple's brand name.

Some of you should stop trying to think different and just think for a change.

 

[gnasher729]

AGAIN, if that decision is anti-competitive, then they - BY LAW - cannot.



There's more to being anti-competitive than denying sales. Read here... specifically "Tying."

-Clive

You are repeating yourself, but you keep completely missing the point of all these laws. Competition laws try to prevent anti-competitive practices. Any practice is anti-competitive if it prevents competition. "Tying" is illegal if it prevents competition. If it doesn't prevent competition, it is perfectly legal. Now tell us how selling MacOS X + Apple computers together prevents Psystar in any way from selling computers. It doesn't. That is the crucial question: Does Apple prevent Psystar from competing?

Tying is mentioned in these laws because it is a method that _can_ be used to be anti-competitive. An example that was posted here was many years ago when IBM had 90 percent of the punched card reader market and tied their punched cards with their readers - that effectively reduced the potential market for other manufacturers of punched cards to 10 percent and was anti-competitive. (Note that this wasn't anti-competitive against other manufacturers of punched card readers. And note that I just repeat what another poster said). But if tying doesn't prevent competition then it is not anti-competitive.

And one important point: These laws make sure that others can compete. It doesn't make sure that others can compete successfully. Psystar can compete by selling PCs with Windows. If Psystar claims that MacOS X is better than Windows, and by selling Macs with MacOS X Apple has a competitive advantage against Psystar who has to sell their computers with Windows, then no court will give a damn. Apple has the right to produce better products and not let others share their competitive advantage.

But actually, all this doesn't matter anyway. If Psystar thought Apple did something illegal by refusing to license MacOS X to Psystar, then they should have sued Apple. They can't just go ahead and install MacOS X against Apple's EULA until they have a court decision that allows it. They can't just take the law into their own hands.

And again, before you start another post: How exactly does Apple prevent Psystar from competing? If you can't answer that question then any claim that Apple is anti-competitive is meaningless and pointless.

 

[robbyx]

you can't buy the TiVo os. It runs on custom hardware also.

You can buy mac os and it runs on x86 hardware.

This is splitting hairs. Of course you can buy the Tivo OS. It comes on your Tivo. Just because Apple sells a boxed copy of their software doesn't mean their EULA is null and void simply because you want to install it elsewhere.

 

[robbyx]

Psystar didn't steal their software; they purchased it and made it run on non-Apple approved hardware. The only thing Psystar "stole" was the insane profit Apple makes on reselling overpriced hardware.

Psystar is modifying MacOS. Not only does it violate Apple's EULA, but it infringes upon Apple's IP. If installing MacOS was as simple as buying a boxed copy and installing it on any PC, there'd be a lot of Mac users! But it's not that simple, so let's be real about what Psystar is doing.

 

[robbyx]

AGAIN, if that decision is anti-competitive, then they - BY LAW - cannot.

You have a very weird idea of what competition means. Apple has plenty of competition. Dell, Toshiba, Lenova, etc. Apple doesn't prevent any of them from selling computers. I don't even understand how you arrive at the anticompetitive conclusion when, quite clearly, Apple isn't doing anything to stop their competition from selling machines. They're just trying to stop some lame opportunist from cashing in on their hard work and untold billions invested in R&D. As they should!

 

[gnasher729]

I think that MacX86 & Psystar is helping Mac to spread and APPLE SHOULD THANK THEM.

Apple disagrees. Apple is suing them. And since Apple owns the copyrights to MacOS X, and you don't, it doesn't count what you think. What counts is what Apple thinks.

You can find Apple's 30 page complaint on the Internet if you look around a bit. You will find that Apple thinks that Psystar is causing them severe damage.

 

[robbyx]

as has been said before.. its NOT that psystar has a legit licence.. they have copied and MODIFIED the disks so they're effectively selling hacked copies of apple software.

there is no anti trust issue or anything more complex than that. straight up copyright/piracy issue.

Amen! Why is this so hard for some people to grasp???

 

[DakotaGuy]

I don't understand how you want something but want another choice.

It's a Mac.

If you get something else, its not a Mac. Done.

So what do you want? A PC? A PC That acts like a Mac? Or a Mac? If Apple's offerings aren't good enough for your intended purpose, then the Macintosh Platform is not designed for you.

What exactly is the Macintosh Platform? Today's Mac is as much of a PC as a PC is. The only difference is one has Windows installed and the other has Mac OSX installed. Macs may look better on the outside, however on the inside the same components are used from the same suppliers. Remember you have to compare hardware quality at the same price level. You can't compare a crappy $350 PC to a $1,400 iMac, but you can compare a $1,400 PC to a $1,400 Mac. At that price level you will not find any difference in the components and most are sourced from the same vendors while final assembly takes place in China.

I don't see why everyone is so scared that someday, somehow there might be a Mac clone again. You don't have to buy it, but many people will if they find it to be a better value. I run an iMac for the OS not for the pretty design, but others value design more then me.