Psystar is nearly toast...

[Pliablemoose]

A federal judge rules in Apple's favor in the Psystar copyright infringement case

Psystar's $600 Open Duo. Photo: Psystar Corp.

Nearly a year and a half after a Miami company called Psystar announced that it was selling "Open Computers" pre-installed with Apple's (AAPL) Mac OS X Leopard — and 17 months after Apple sued Psystar for copyright infringement — the case has come to its all-but-foregone conclusion: a federal judge in San Francisco ruled Friday in Apple's favor.

http://brainstormtech.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2009/11/14/apple-wins-clone-suit/?source=yahoo_quote

IMHO. the Hackintosh scene is one thing, attempting to make a legitimate business out of it is another...

 

[sjwaste]

You'll find out if they're one and the same if Apple pursues the breach of contract cause of action that is still pending.

Also, they ruled against Psystar on the DMCA count. That probably has ramifications on the hackintosh scene too.

Or are you talking from a moral standpoint, not a legal one?

 

[Pliablemoose]

You'll find out if they're one and the same if Apple pursues the breach of contract cause of action that is still pending.

Also, they ruled against Psystar on the DMCA count. That probably has ramifications on the hackintosh scene too.

Or are you talking from a moral standpoint, not a legal one?

I don't know enough about the law to really say, but it's not a business model I thought would survive, Apple is pretty vigorous in defending it's OS/market. While they're not happy about the hackintoshes, they don't seem to be rewriting their stuff to make it more difficult for an end user to do it, but I agree with them going after another company that's so blatant about using their software.

 

[sjwaste]

I'm not an expert in that area of the law, but I am minimally competent in at least one jurisdiction, and you are right that Psystar probably never had a chance.

They didn't litigate breach of contract. Well, they really didn't litigate any of the issues because Apple got summary judgment. But they did rule on the DMCA claim as part of the summary judgment, and that's probably the easiest way for Apple to go after amateurs making hackintoshes now. Not saying they're going to do that, as I highly doubt they want to alienate a community that probably has a decent "conversion rate" to genuine Apple products, but the door's a little more open than it was before.

Ethically, Psystar is different than you or me building a hack. Legally, a lot of the order granting summary judgment is tailored to the fact that Psystar was selling its product, but who knows what would happen if it were an average joe in court. Apple's probably just not in a position to complain when most people are buying a legit copy of their OS, not using any support, and some are buying a real Mac down the road.

 

[ViRGE]

I'm not an expert in that area of the law, but I am minimally competent in at least one jurisdiction, and you are right that Psystar probably never had a chance.

They didn't litigate breach of contract. Well, they really didn't litigate any of the issues because Apple got summary judgment. But they did rule on the DMCA claim as part of the summary judgment, and that's probably the easiest way for Apple to go after amateurs making hackintoshes now. Not saying they're going to do that, as I highly doubt they want to alienate a community that probably has a decent "conversion rate" to genuine Apple products, but the door's a little more open than it was before.

Ethically, Psystar is different than you or me building a hack. Legally, a lot of the order granting summary judgment is tailored to the fact that Psystar was selling its product, but who knows what would happen if it were an average joe in court. Apple's probably just not in a position to complain when most people are buying a legit copy of their OS, not using any support, and some are buying a real Mac down the road.

It's all much ado about nothing. If Apple wanted to kill the Hackintosh community, they would have done so already.

And good riddance to Pystar. They're a bunch of thieving lowlifes.

 

[Kaido]

http://brainstormtech.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2009/11/14/apple-wins-clone-suit/?source=yahoo_quote

IMHO. the Hackintosh scene is one thing, attempting to make a legitimate business out of it is another...

Yeah "nearly dead" is the key, the courts still have to deal with Psystar's Florida offices.

I have mixed feelings on Psystar. On one hand, I can appreciate what they're doing. Apple has a fuzzy-warm marketing strategy, but they are a big company like all other big companies at the core. From Psystar's standpoint, they're absolutely right - Apple is a big $25 billion monopoly. Also, Psystar has released some really useful software.

On the other hand, Psystar has CLEARLY stolen code from the Hackintosh community. If they had developed their own stuff 100%, I don't think people would be as upset. It's the same deal with EFI-X - the people at EFI-X stole code from the Hackintosh scene and sold it as their own, and they didn't even contribute any usable drivers like Psystar did.

Apple is in a difficult situation as well - I don't really think they cared about Hackintosh, because (1) it's just more people using THEIR operating system, and (2) with 100,000 kids with free time registered on InsanelyMac, nothing they could ever do security-wise would stop them. Apple's customers aren't interested in Hackintosh, they're interested in no-brainer computers. The nerds of the world like us will always be tinkering with things, but Hackintosh will never take over Apple's business.

And, I'd never want it to. And I don't really want Apple to release their OS for general consumption. The reason OS X is as good as it is, is because they run their software on a limited selection of in-house hardware, which is a HUGE bonus for stability & compatibility.

Microsoft does the same thing. Yeah, millions of people pirate Windows & the Office suite, but Microsoft loves it - it's MORE people using THEIR product! They know that for every user that pirates Windows & Office at home, that they're developing a familiarity with it that then correlates to purchases for school computers and work computers. So the more people get it, the more money they make and the more they win. If they really cared, then your computer wouldn't even boot up when MS detected it was a pirated version - instead there's a little nag screen (from what I understand, but maybe the newer countermeasures are stronger) that pops up once in awhile to mention it's copyrighted.

The bottom line is that Psystar is rocking the boat. Everybody is happy with things the way they are, and Psystar had to go and ruin it for the tinkerers and for the big companies. They're not getting a Christmas card from me, bah humbug!

 

[Pepsei]

wow.. they have to pay out the nose... 1 million +... did they even make that much from the sale?

 

[MotionMan]

One of the first things Jobs did when he came back to Mac was to kill the clones. I think he hates Hackintoshes and would love to kill them, too, but it makes some business sense to not piss off such users.

Psystar was an easy target, legally. (I heard a rumor that Pystar was secretly bankrolled by a bunch of hardware companies to see what would happen before they all put their names on the line in the Mac clone business.)

Apple is a hardware company at heart and, I believe, Jobs sees anything that takes away hardware purchases are a direct attack on Apple.

That being said, Apple could make a lot more money making good mice instead of the crap they put out. Every Mac owner I know uses a Microsoft (or MS-like) mouse

Microsoft does the same thing. Yeah, millions of people pirate Windows & the Office suite, but Microsoft loves it - it's MORE people using THEIR product! They know that for every user that pirates Windows & Office at home, that they're developing a familiarity with it that then correlates to purchases for school computers and work computers. So the more people get it, the more money they make and the more they win. If they really cared, then your computer wouldn't even boot up when MS detected it was a pirated version - instead there's a little nag screen (from what I understand, but maybe the newer countermeasures are stronger) that pops up once in awhile to mention it's copyrighted.

I completely disagree with this statement. MS is rabid about stopping piracy and do not understand (or care) that many pirated versions of their software lead eventually to purchases.

They do not have some of the toughest anti-piracy measures in the business for nothing.

MotionMan

 

[Fayd]

One of the first things Jobs did when he came back to Mac was to kill the clones. I think he hates Hackintoshes and would love to kill them, too, but it makes some business sense to not piss off such users.

Psystar was an easy target, legally. (I heard a rumor that Pystar was secretly bankrolled by a bunch of hardware companies to see what would happen before they all put their names on the line in the Mac clone business.)

Apple is a hardware company at heart and, I believe, Jobs sees anything that takes away hardware purchases are a direct attack on Apple.

That being said, Apple could make a lot more money making good mice instead of the crap they put out. Every Mac owner I know uses a Microsoft (or MS-like) mouse




I completely disagree with this statement. MS is rabid about stopping piracy and do not understand (or care) that many pirated versions of their software lead eventually to purchases.

They do not have some of the toughest anti-piracy measures in the business for nothing.

MotionMan

microsoft? the toughest anti-piracy measures?

you mean the popup that says this is an illegitimate copy, here's a link to buy a legitimate copy?

...

 

[MotionMan]

microsoft? the toughest anti-piracy measures?

you mean the popup that says this is an illegitimate copy, here's a link to buy a legitimate copy?

...

Um, it does a little more than that.

And that is not the only one.

MotionMan

 

[Fayd]

Um, it does a little more than that.

And that is not the only one.

MotionMan

i would guess microsoft is harsh on companies that dont pay for legitimate licenses, but i've NEVER heard of a private user taken to court for piracy against microsoft.

 

[MotionMan]

i would guess microsoft is harsh on companies that dont pay for legitimate licenses, but i've NEVER heard of a private user taken to court for piracy against microsoft.

Nor have I.

Not sure what your point is?

MotionMan

 

[Ka0t1x]

I think Psystar did the right thing by trying to push OSX install on the consumer, but it should have been that way from the beginning (via HardMac.com). They really put themselves in the line of fire, but I was still wanting to see what would come of this suit. I really see no issue with them selling their machines ready to go for OSX install, but as Netkas has posted on the subject.. Rebel EFI is based on open source...

 

[Parasitic]

microsoft? the toughest anti-piracy measures?

you mean the popup that says this is an illegitimate copy, here's a link to buy a legitimate copy?

...

IMO the award for most ridiculous anti-piracy measures goes to Adobe. If you didn't deactivate their products beforehand (like before a reformat or sending off your laptop for a repair, only to find that your HD got reimaged), good luck getting them to help you activate their product again.

 

[Ichigo]

Nor have I.

Not sure what your point is?

MotionMan

His point would be that their anti-piracy policies are not as harsh as you claim it to be.

Not that I personally know either way, but since you clearly seem to think you know something he doesn't, either explain why you think they have strict anti-piracy policies or let it go. This feigned ignorance where you pretend you don't know what the other guy is getting at is a waste of everyone's time.

 

[MotionMan]

His point would be that their anti-piracy policies are not as harsh as you claim it to be.

Not that I personally know either way, but since you clearly seem to think you know something he doesn't, either explain why you think they have strict anti-piracy policies or let it go. This feigned ignorance where you pretend you don't know what the other guy is getting at is a waste of everyone's time.

As is your post, but, setting that aside for the moment...

WGA is more than just a pop-up. If that is all he thinks it does then, yes, I do know something he doesn't.

Anyone who thinks that Microsoft is soft on piracy clearly does not know something that I do.

I do not have the inclination to explain myself on this point. He can try Googling it. Believe me or not - I do not much care.

MotionMan

 

[Fayd]

As is your post, but, setting that aside for the moment...

WGA is more than just a pop-up. If that is all he thinks it does then, yes, I do know something he doesn't.

Anyone who thinks that Microsoft is soft on piracy clearly does not know something that I do.

I do not have the inclination to explain myself on this point. He can try Googling it. Believe me or not - I do not much care.

MotionMan

or you can not be a douche and back up your statement in the thread you made it in.

your method of argument of making baseless statements then expecting the reader to research them to back up YOUR argument is a bit like me yelling "jews did 9/11. google it!" or some other inane garbage.

with regard to WGA popup, yes, on one iteration of a pirated OS, the WGA popup is JUST that, a popup. it does nothing, because it has been neutered. if it ISNT neutered, then yes it restricts the computer significantly. there's many different ways to pirate windows, and this is the only one that was described to me that still retains the popup.

and there's far worse that a company can do aside from simply restricting computer use on a pirated OS. till i hear of microsoft taking end users to court for software piracy, i'll continue to believe that they've been incredibly lax about it.

 

[MotionMan]

or you can not be a douche and back up your statement in the thread you made it in.

your method of argument of making baseless statements then expecting the reader to research them to back up YOUR argument is a bit like me yelling "jews did 9/11. google it!" or some other inane garbage.

with regard to WGA popup, yes, on one iteration of a pirated OS, the WGA popup is JUST that, a popup. it does nothing, because it has been neutered. if it ISNT neutered, then yes it restricts the computer significantly. there's many different ways to pirate windows, and this is the only one that was described to me that still retains the popup.

and there's far worse that a company can do aside from simply restricting computer use on a pirated OS. till i hear of microsoft taking end users to court for software piracy, i'll continue to believe that they've been incredibly lax about it.

You caught me. I made it up. Microsoft is actually easy on piracy.

You win. Feel better?

MotionMan <--- Too lazy to prove the sky is blue.

 

[Kaido]

lol @ you guys arguing about Windows piracy countermeasures on a Mac forum

For the record - Psystar sold 768 machines in 2009 - LOL. To illustrate how little that is, so far in 2090 Apple has sold 768 machines every minute :awe:

http://www.osnews.com/story/22539/Apple_Asks_for_Permanent_Injunction_Psystar_Sold_768_Machines

They also had some wild estimates: they thought they'd sell between 1.45 million and 12 million Psystar clones in 2011, which meant (quoting from the article here) that they'd have to sell 70,000 machines in 2009 (768 so far, going strong! lol), 470,000 in 2010, and 1.45 million in 2011 - for the low end. Optimism is an amazing thing haha.