Facebook Plunges Again
Tumblr 101: Tips And Tricks To Get Started
Mac-clone company Psystar loses big in Apple lawsuit
You may have heard of Psystar, an infamous manufacturer of Mac clone "open computers." They're best known for frequently getting into legal hot water with Apple over everything from trademarks to copyrights to selling Apple's OS X operating on non-Apple computers. Apple just took Psystar to school on that last issue, winning summary judgment in a California court on copyright violations and Digital Millennium Copyright Act Violations. Psystar's losing argument really splits some hairs, and the court wasn't buying it. Here's what happened: Psystar bought one copy of OS X and loaded it onto a Mac Mini. They then transferred it from the Mini to a non-Apple computer, where they modified the kernel so it would run on the computers they sell. Psystar argued that they were allowed to sell their (legally-purchased) copy of OS X, but the court recognized that the copies made from the Mini and the second, non-Apple machine weren't made legally. Advantage: Apple.
Judgment in Apple's favor means Psystar will likely have to pay damages at minimum. This could potentially sink their entire ship. The takeaway, according to an article on Groklaw? Don't mess around with licensing agreements, especially Apple's.
[via Slashdot]
Comments
5
Subscribe to commentskojo87Nov 15th 2009 2:04PM
i know it will never happen and Apple has zero incentive to do so, but i would really like to see Apple sell OSX as standalone software that can be installed on any computer. like i said i know this won't happen because it would severely hurt their hardware sales and contradict their whole theory of Mac software on Mac hardware is the greatest thing ever and any other hardware is just poorly made crap.
putting OSX on a PC is the only way Apple anything will come into my house. not even iTunes or Quicktime
gojedaNov 15th 2009 3:58PM
I don't ever want to hear another syllable about how Microsoft and their "monopolistic" practices.
JoshNov 15th 2009 8:47PM
How is this monopolistic, though?
hazardNov 16th 2009 12:32AM
Here's a few syllables ..
While MS or any other company does not not have a Monopoly of the OS market, it is essentially a Monopolistic Competition which allows companies such as MS and Apple to exert monopolistic behaviour over consumers and other third parties in their food chain.
gojedaNov 15th 2009 8:51PM
Josh: exactly my point. This is not monopolistic, and nor is Microsoft - yet the charge has been levied against them on more than on occasion.