Would-be ‘Mac cloner’ Psystar ‘happily’ agrees to Mac OS X injunction

“Apple and Mac clone maker Psystar traded barbs last week in federal court as they simultaneously asked a judge to end the case that began more than 15 months ago,” Gregg Keizer reports for Computerworld.

“Florida-based Psystar took the unusual step of conceding to an injunction, saying that it would agree to stop using Mac OS X 10.5, aka Leopard, on the machines it sells,” Keizer reports.

“The two companies have been battling since July 2008, when Apple sued Psystar over the latter’s practice of installing Apple’s Mac OS X operating system on generic Intel-based computers,” Keizer reports.

“Psystar said it would agree to an injunction preventing it from using Mac OS X 10.5, aka Leopard. ‘Psystar will happily submit to an appropriately tailored injunction … limited to Psystar’s allegedly illegal activities involving OS X Leopard, since it is only OS X Leopard that this case concerns. Since neither Psystar nor Apple sells OS X Leopard any longer, it is no great burden for Psystar to agree to such an injunction,’ its lawyers said in the competing Psystar motion,” Keizer reports. “That concession, however, is meaningless, since as Psystar noted, it now sells Mac OS X 10.6, or Snow Leopard, with its computers.”

Full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: When all is said and done, the amount of bad karma amassed by these illiterate wiseasses at Psystar and their unprofessional amateur-hour “legal team” will be enough to blow a hole in Florida bigger than Okeechobee. Lake Psystar is bound to be filed with raw sewage, no doubt.


  1. Absolutely. I installed SN quickly and easily on a HD with no previous system on it. Lots of people did the same- erase their HDs and install a nice fresh copy of SN.

    ShiteStar wouldn’t hesitate to do the same..

  2. @ Do Not Understand.

    Snow Leopard is more than just an update to Leopard on the $29 Disc.

    I’ve been able to do a clean install of Snow Leopard on My iMac. I had 10.5 Leopard on it, so I am being honest to Apple in my case. I Zero & Wiped out my HDD an just installed 10.6.. I just don’t like the idea of Installing an OS over another like the $29 disc was intended for. Whatever old junk you may have had will still be there. Nothing like a fresh install on a clean HDD.

    About Psystar: I am on Apple’s side, but I do give Psystar some credit for making it this far and still selling PC’s with Mac OS X. Me, I came to Mac in 2005 because of the OS, not because of Apple Hardware. But I have to pick favorites in Apple’s Lineup cause there isn’t much choice. But I do get complimented on the looks of my iMac and even more so with my old Mac Mini G4. People see a Psystar & they’ll think it’s a noisy Wintel Box.

  3. “That concession, however, is meaningless, since as Psystar noted, it now sells Mac OS X 10.6, or Snow Leopard, with its computers.”

    This is quickly becoming a situation in which a baseball bat will need to be applied to someone’s knees. Naughty, naughty Psystar.

    The Apple ninjas should have taken care of this months ago.

    Looks like it’s time for some new ninjas.

  4. @ Do not understand

    The “retail” Snow Leopard disc that costs $29 is intended as an upgrade of an existing Leopard installation (all retail Mac OS X retail discs ever sold are technically “upgrades” since every Mac already comes with some version of Mac OS). However, that Snow Leopard disc is a full installation disc. There is nothing technical that will prevent Pystar from doing the same thing that they did with Leopard. Since they were violating the Leopard license before, why would they feel suddenly compelled to pay attention to the Snow Leopard license. From their warped perspective, if they can buy it, they can do whatever they want with it.

  5. Gabriel writes:

    “If they can make it legal for OS X to be installed on cheapo POS crap from Dell and others, Apple would have a very difficult time keeping OS X development profitable under such an onslaught.”

    This is a very interesting point. Let’s put it in conjunction with another piece of recent information, that Macs represent just 40% of Apple’s revenue (mentioned in a recent MDN article). If iPhone and perhaps the mythical iTablet — basically the whole iApp architecture — explodes and grows the way some expect, Macs, even at higher sales rates than today, could shrink to a small fraction of Apple’s revenue (south of 10%). When that happens, what harm would Apple experience in licensing OS X to other hardware makers? The conditions would be strictly controlled, perhaps limited to a handful of partners, especially initially, but then Apple could grow market share in huge leaps and bounds and still sell high-end hardware. Profits wouldn’t be hurt much at all.

    Intriguing scenario, isn’t it? Several years away, but could be coming.

    — Marc

  6. If the iPhone and mythical iTablet explodes and grows the way some expect, the revenue that Macs represent would increase proportionally. Halo effect? You bet.

    Whether it accounted for 40% or 4% of their revenue, however, the harm Apple would suffer in licensing out OS X would be the death of the Mac platform. The whole “let’s allow 3rd parties to sell Mac clones!” business has been tried before. It didn’t work. It catastrophically didn’t work. It’s not like Steve Jobs killed it on his return just for kicks.

  7. Don’t get why your Poll gives Rush Limbaugh as an answer. Rush has been a die hard Mac fan even through the hard time 1980’s. He brags profusely about his Macs and can afford to buy as many as he wants. What interest would he have in supporting Phystar?

    Hopefully you added it only to tweak some people, but on the whole it made no sense.

  8. The Psystar business model makes no sense, especially if you add legal overhead. Those who think something else (paid by some body else) is going on, are probably on to something. Psystar’s lawyers have been professional enough so far to have dodged disclosure of their backers, and I don’t think they care how much bad karma they create. Psystar does not appear to be a real computer business, but rather an underhanded legal challenge.

  9. @ I dont understand…

    > Cant they start simply an update program, to let their customers update their Macs?

    Good point. However, in a major release, most of the previous system needs to be replaced. So that would be a 3 to 4GB download, probably. That would still be difficult for a lot of customers, even if they have some type of broadband. And it would certainly tax Apple’s servers on release day, with a level of load that is well above the operating norm.

    But I think Apple is moving in that direction. With Snow Leopard, you can initiate and run the upgrade process while started up normally. Before, with Leopard and earlier, you had to restart from the disc in the optical drive and run the installation from there. You can still install Snow Leopard the old-school way, by starting up from the disc (I did it that way), but I think most users inserted the disc while booted up normally and ran the upgrade from there.

    I think the “new way” with Snow Leopard is the first step in being able to pay for, download, and apply a major system update over the existing system. But Apple would still have to provide a disc-based method, because not everyone will be able (or willing) to download a multi-GB installer. And some people will need to obtain or create a bootable disc, if they need to do a clean installation on a newly erased internal drive

  10. @ Ken1w

    youre right about download volumen.
    But I thought a program that let customers order an “update” DVD, for example.
    Maybe one need to register the mac to have this option, or with somekind of order-code related to the mac- purchase.
    I think there are enough ways to find a good solution.
    Selling OSX is a bad way, I think.
    There will be everytime people who want to make profit with Apples developement. And this has to stop.

  11. “Don’t get why your Poll gives Rush Limbaugh as an answer.
    Hopefully you added it only to tweak some people, but on the whole it made no sense.”

    Just libs trying to tweak some of us.

    MDN, why no Obama in the poll?

  12. it’s not over ’til the fat lady sings.

    I’ve always been very suspicious of people who know little about the law making suppositions they cannot support…. like the editors here at MDN….

    Has it every occurred to ANYONE that Pystar may actually have a real case? And that despite Apple’s high price legal team, Apple may loose?

    Don’t get me wrong, I’m not in favor of OSX on all this junk hardware, but that doesn’t change the fact that maybe, just maybe, Pystar will be victorious, and be allowed to sell hardware with OSX installed.

Reader Feedback

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