“One of the attorneys hired by Psystar Corp. to defend it in a copyright- and trademark-infringement lawsuit brought by Apple Inc. hinted that the clone maker will bring up antitrust issues if the case goes to trial,” Gregg Keizer reports for Computerworld.
“Colby Springer, one of the three lawyers from the Palo Alto, Calif., firm of Carr & Ferrell LLP who will represent Psystar, wouldn’t go into details about legal strategies but spoke in general terms about the case during an interview on Thursday,” Keizer reports.
“‘This case has been mischaracterized,’ said Springer. ‘There are a lot more complicated issues than just copyright or trademark. There are more complex issues [than those] in respect to the end-user licensing agreement. And antitrust issues come into play, too,'” Keizer reports.
More in the full article here.
Good luck with that. The legal fees alone will bury them.
Lionel Hutz, the attorney with the sponge business cards.
The legal fees may not matter if the lawyers are representing them pro bono. Apple needs to defeat them in the courts. If Apple pays psystar off and it doesn’t go to court then it can open up hundreds of “cloners” looking to make a quick buck. The only option Apple has is to win in the courts and squash them like a bug…
Next at 10! Ford under investigation for anti-trust violations. The US carmaker is accused of not allowing any other car maker to build Mustangs.
A better legal strategy would be to bend over and kiss your ass goodbye.
Does this relate to the itele also? I don’t know if I want a generic transporter in the market.
quote “Next at 10! Ford under investigation for anti-trust violations. The US carmaker is accused of not allowing any other car maker to build Mustangs.”
not the correct analogy, it would be more correct if Ford were accused of not letting anybody else use their engine from their car (which they bought) and put it into another car.
Ah, the old “Big Oil charges too much for gasoline, so I am justified in stealing it and selling it to others” defense.
Any issues outside of Apple’s claims are immaterial. They do not legitimize the copyright and trademark violations. The judge will throw this “defense” right out.
An insanity defense might work better.
Look while Apple fights this in the Courts cloners are delayed while the legality of what they are doing is decided, and customers will wait too for fear of having a brick in their front room. Sales will be a trickle while they bleed cash. Even if Psystar eventually won their case by the time the matter was cleared up Apple will have used the time to further lock up the software to work only with its own hardware. As suggested elsewhere if that was found illegal then every company in the US would be in trouble. At worst this will be temporary inconvenience.
@bluemarlin1402 – Agreed. That’s why one should always use Starfleet approved transporters.
Whew! I’m glad I got that off my chest. I already feel energized!
Peace.
@EJB
Good analogy except that before Ford sells you the engine, you agree not to put it in another car. Then put it in another car anyway.
Dont get me wrong, I love Apple. They do have the best designed hardware and software around. BUT I do like build my own machines though. So I am rooting for psystar on this one. OSX is such a great OS that I dont think it should be limited to only apple computers.
I think MS is not on the Psystar side in this case because it all hinges on the EULA. Microsoft lives and dies by their EULA. They don’t want anyone to transfer an “OEM license” to another computer, and that is all restricted by the EULA. If the courts throw out Apple’s EULA, Microsoft would be very unhappy because it could invalidate their own EULA. The whole industry relies on the EULA to control what you can and can’t do with software. Watch for MS to quietly side with Apple on this one.
And, the FUD begins…
…and if that doesn’t work they’ll try the Chewbacca Defence.
Preventing competition in the entertainment device and disposable income widget sectors is causing harm to the public? What? If Psystar actually pays for that defense then they’ll surly be able to plead insanity as a fallback in case things begin to fall apart.
give me a break…..why doesnt someone sue GM for not being able to buy a Ferrari Engine inside a Malibu….Anti trust!!!! Monopoly!!!
Pirates!!!
@EJB
“Dont get me wrong, I love Apple. They do have the best designed hardware and software around. BUT I do like build my own machines though. So I am rooting for psystar on this one. OSX is such a great OS that I dont think it should be limited to only apple computers.”
I do not think Apple will care if you build your own computer and add Apple software. Its when you start selling Apple clones that use Apple software that they get mad.
Just a thought.
en
Yea, sure. Apple has such a monopoly position in the PC market place at 8% US market share! Uh, you got plan B, Pystar Corp? The monopoly idea seems to be a nonstarter.
ElderNorm,
Yup, sounds right to me.
Let the Wookie win
“Dont get me wrong, I love Apple. They do have the best designed hardware and software around. BUT I do like build my own machines though. So I am rooting for psystar on this one. OSX is such a great OS that I dont think it should be limited to only apple computers.”
so what you are saying is that you love OSX sooooo much you want to take it and illegally resell it, putting apple out of business and killing OSX….
thinking! not just a good idea!
Doesn’t this kind of kill an anti-trust defense?
http://www.axiotron.com/index.php?id=modbook
It’s a heavily modified MacBook with OS X Leopard for sale from a third party. There’s your Ford engine in another car.
@Passerby:
Not the same as what Psystar is doing. They took a MacBook, bought from Apple, and modified it and resold it. Psystar is making unauthorized copies of OS X, installing them on systems which are not Apple-built (violating the EULA), and selling them to the general public. Very different situation.
The anti-trust claims likely won’t work; however, they are probably a reason why Apple delayed in filing suit. The last thing Apple wants is a legal precedent by a runaway jury determining what it can or can’t do with its OS.
@bizlaw:
Plainly not the same thing. But wouldn’t Psystar’s claim of anti-trust violations depend on an argument that it is not possible to work within the Mac platform? Axiotron, hundreds of peripheral manufacturers, and thousands of software developers do manage to do business within the bounds set by Apple. The vast majority of these have no ownership ties to Apple whatsoever.
I can’t see how anti-trust can be proven, nor can I see what it has to do with Apple’s claims against Psystar. Either they’re stupid or I am. I suspect it’s not me.