‘Mac-cloner’ Psystar drops antitrust issue, adds ‘misuse doctrine’ in counterclaim against Apple

“Florida’s now well-known unofficial Mac clone maker [Psystar] has modified its counterclaim against Apple to drop some of the riskier assertions of anti-competitive behavior, but has similarly added new sections that refute allegations of violating the DMCA,” Aidan Malley reports for AppleInsider.

“The altered response, which would be filed on January 15th if given permission by a Northern District of California court judge, specifically omits the Clayton Act and Sherman Act antitrust claims of monopolistic abuse of copyright that had triggered Apple’s successful motion to dismiss in the fall. Psystar ‘respectfully disagrees’ with the court’s interpretation of a monopolistic market but will abide by the earlier ruling for now,” Malley reports.

“However, the PC builder maintains that copyright is still at the heart of the issue. Psystar insists that Apple’s policies regarding Mac OS X are considered abuse under the legally recognized concept of a ‘misuse doctrine,’ which prevents copyright from being wielded to block competition outside of any officially sanctioned terms,” Malley reports.

Full article here.

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Fred Mertz” for the heads up.]


  1. Do we expect Sony to support their Playstation OS on non-Sony hardware?

    Do we expect RIM to support their Blackberry OS on non-RIM smartphones?

    Why, then, does Psystar to expect Apple to support Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware?

    Someone commented elsewhere that this is like trying to sue Nintendo for preventing their Mario games from running on the Playstation.

  2. Just where the heck is the small start-up Pystar getting all the money to fight Apple in court? There just may be something to Apple’s charges that someone big is funding them.

  3. Most people in this thread don’t seem to understand that there with every Psystar sold comes an official copy of MacOSX. Thus it appears that the copy has been paid for.

    There may be an issue with the pre-installed copy on the Psystar, though.

    But the main point that should be discussed is whether Apple has the right to dicatate what exactly can and cannot be done with a legally purchased copy of MacOSX.

    E.g., may it be run under emulation/virtualization on a different processor or programs similar to Parallels Desktop, VMware, Q, etc.? (p.s. for Windows this is now the case for all its variants)

Add Your Feedback

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