Apple demands recall of all Psystar ‘Mac clones’ sold to date

“Apple is asking a court to order Miami-based Psystar to stop making unauthorized Mac clones and to recall all of the systems it has sold to customers since it began offering them for public sale in April,” Paul McDougall reports for InformationWeek.

“In a lawsuit filed against Psystar in federal court, Apple is seeking an order ‘requiring Psystar to recall all such products sold to the public as a result of Psystar’s infringement of Apple’s copyrights,'” McDougall reports.

“It’s not immediately clear whether Psystar could legally compel its customers to give return their systems. But the clones may not be of much use for long if Psystar is forced out of business and is unable to support them,” McDougall reports.

“Psystar’s Web site was offline as of Wednesday morning,” McDougall reports.

“Apple is charging Psystar with violating its copyrights and weakening its brand image. ‘By misappropriating Apple’s proprietary software and intellectual property for its own use, Psystar’s actions harm consumers by selling them a poor product that is advertised and promoted in a manner that falsely and unfairly implies an affiliation with Apple,’ the company said in its complaint,” McDougall reports.

“Apple also charged Psystar with illegally copying, modifying, and redistributing some of its products. The 18-page complaint outlines a total of 10 charges against Psystar. Psystar officials did not return a call seeking comment,” McDougall reports.

Full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Psystar’s going to have to rename the company “Smoking Crater” when this is all said and done. Our advice to Psystar: Begin applying for Superfund status immediately.


  1. Just my 2c. They may have had a legal leg to stand on if they had sold a EFI modified box and a retail copy of 10.5 to the end user as two separate entities. Whether the end user decided to install the later on the former is another matter as per a reseller’s responsibility to Apple’s EULA. Still think it is fine line. Wouldn’t want to be the one in court fighting.
    Not sure about the large box maker backing it to see what happens. Think there are better ways to test Apple’s protection of it’s EULA’s than the way ‘Fister’ have gone about things. Again, just my 2c.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.