Judge dismisses ‘Mac cloner’ Psystar’s antitrust counterclaim; Apple not a monopolist

“Psystar’s counterclaims against Apple have been dismissed, which does not in the least surprise me. I told you they were off the wall, in my view. The judge agreed. He curls his lip to add that he found Psystar’s cases ‘unenlightening,'” Groklaw reports. “That’s legalese for ‘are you kidding??'”

Groklaw reports, “The judge did give them 20 days to try again to get it right, following the map he lays out for them to make improvements:”

For all the above-stated reasons, Apple’s motion to dismiss Psystar’s counterclaims is GRANTED. Psystar may move for leave to amend within twenty calendar days of the date of the entry of this order. Any such motion should be accompanied by a proposed pleading and the motion should explain why the foregoing problems are overcome by the proposed pleading. Plaintiff must plead its best case. Failing such a motion, all inadequately pled claims will be dismissed without further leave to amend.

Groklaw reports, “What does it mean? It means the counterclaims are gone, and with them any motivation to settle on Apple’s side, I’d think, and the complaint remains, unless Psystar can plead its best case within 20 days. Dum dee dum dum.”

Full article, including the text of the order which states, in part, “The pleading as a whole does not allege facts that, if true, plausibly indicate that Mac OS is an independent, single-product market,” here.

Slash Lane reports for AppleInsider, “The judge also dismissed the remainder of Psystar’s stated claims for a lack of sufficient evidence to back them up, including allegations that Apple is violating the common law of unfair competition, the Cartwright Act, and the California Business and Professions Code.”

“‘For the above-stated reasons, Psystar’s claim that Mac OS-compatible computer hardware systems constitute a distinct submarket or aftermarket contravenes the pertinent legal standards, and Apple’s motion to dismiss Psystar’s federal counterclaims is therefore granted,’ he wrote,” Lane reports.

Full article here.

Tom Krazit reports for CNET, “If Psystar fails to come up with a better argument, its counterclaim will be formally dismissed and it will have to get ready to defend itself against Apple’s claims that it is infringing on Apple’s copyright material and trademarks.”

More in the full article here.


  1. “If Psystar fails to come up with a better argument, its counterclaim will be formally dismissed and it will have to get ready to defend itself against Apple’s claims that it is infringing on Apple’s copyright material and trademarks.

    Which they will come up with more B.S. like there counterclaim, we all know it, so do they.

    Psystar is history folks, just a matter of time.
    Good riddance!

  2. What I just hate are flat-out crooks gaming the system and trying to tie up the court systems to legitimize their thievery.

    Steve Jobs is a certifiable genius and the people who work under him are creative and work hard. The people at Piss-Star are no better than crooks who break into your house, steal your stuff, and try to argue about how they had every right to do so.

    In this world, there are those who contribute to society (“plus signs”) and those who leach off of society (“minus signs”). Is there any doubt who is the plus sign and who is the minus sign in this dispute?

  3. I am sure that one of “Pissters” chief complaints with Apple is the pervasive market dominance that Apple has obtained. Being the almost sole source of operating system software in the known universe or multiverses must have some legal ramifications.

    Of course, we are talking science fiction here. It does make me wonder why “Pisster” didn’t take on Ballmy & Co. I mean M$ does have a bit more of a market presence. But who would want to steal and sell that POS software? (No offence to your black market traders out there)!


  4. Has my mom (a US 9th District Court Judge) put it, You can’t win a case on Circular logic unless the judge you get is a donut. Judge W. Alsup is not, he’s very much up on the law and court rulings in these type of cases. Unlike some judges in another Federal Court District that are preferred by the Patent Trolls, were the trolls are granted a very wide discretionary allowances in their complaints and arguments, because the court doesn’t follow and keep up on the law or cases from other districts, so, needless to say there is a percentage of donut judges.

Reader Feedback

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