RSSPsystar plans to use antitrust defense against Apple
By Ed Oswald | Published August 26, 2008, 3:47 PM
Attorneys for the makers of Mac OS X-compatible computers told reporters Tuesday they plan to argue that Apple's EULA violates provisions of the Sherman and Clayton antitrust laws.
Lead Psystar counsel Colby Springer of Carr & Ferrell said at a press conference this afternoon that his firm plans to raise questions of improperly tying Mac OS X to Apple-labeled hardware under the Sherman Antitrust Act, and claims of attempted monopoly and exclusive dealings under the Clayton Antitrust Act.
"We are alleging that [Apple's restrictions on Mac OS X are] anti-competitive and an unlawful restraint of trade," Springer told reporters in a press conference today.
Psystar's answer to Apple's complaint will be filed late Tuesday afternoon Pacific time. In it, Psystar plans to deny all allegations by Apple of copyright and trademark infringement and breach of contract, as Apple put forth in its lawsuit against Psystar last month. Apple also claimed Psystar made modifications to the Mac OS code to allow it to run on Psystar's systems.
While some had reported that Psystar missed filing deadlines, Springer said that was not the case, and that Apple had agreed to extend the deadlines.
Springer took time to address both claims directly. He noted that Psystar does not make copies of the Mac OS to install on its machines. In fact, every copy installed is an individually purchased copy of the operating system from Apple or one of its authorized resellers. "There's no pirating going on," he responded.
On claims of code modification, Springer said that the company had not made any modifications to the operating system. Any techniques applied to make Mac OS run on Psystar, he said, can be found in already available, open source software.
Psystar will also seek unspecified damages as part of its counter-complaint, although it did not disclose a specific amount during the press conference. It will also ask the court to declare Apple's current EULA illegal.
Now, the ball is back in Apple's court. It will have 30 days to respond, or it could ask for an extension as Psystar did. A case management conference is scheduled for October 22, according to court documents.
Until then, it's "business as usual," according to Psystar president and co-founder Rudy Pedraza. While he said the company has seen some effect on OpenComputer sales as a result of the lawsuit, it was not as much of a factor as he had originally predicted. It is also apparently working on a new "mobile device," although Pedraza would not confirm or deny if it was a laptop or something else.
"Apple makes a good operating system," Pedraza said. "They would probably be happy to hear us saying that."
No one -- not Psystar's executives, and not its attorneys -- has said how Psystar plans to pay for what could potentially become a costly legal battle for such a small company.
I'm beginning to wonder if Psystar wasn't purposely trying to bait Apple into sueing them...
Score: 0
|Ingram, my dual boot MacBookPro (XP/OSX) runs XP better than any laptop or computer I've ever owned - like a champ actually. Of course, I far prefer to use OSX any chance I get because it is a SOOOO much better experience. And believe me, I have labored through windoze since DOS.
OSX kicks ass!
Score: 0
|....so he can run what? His comment was that all of the apps he uses does not have an OSX variant. Why pay for the New PC with an OS he won't use when he already has one that works just fine for him?
Score: 0
|I've been debating getting one just to have a backup. IDK I just can't see me paying so much more for a apple when I can get a uber pc for less then a grand. However knowing that windows is working better now on the mac I have to admit is a plus...
However pctool is right in that when I have to deal with the business world and their variations of software... Unless I'm just curious enough to do it for my own edification (lol is that a real word lol), I doubt I would go to a mac for my needs.
Still its nice to know that it does work well for both OSes. that says something IMHO. Just good to know.
Score: 0
|Sounds more like a dying to me.
Score: 0
|Some living then...
Score: 0
|internetworld7-
"You PC nuts are comical at best. :) If you actually went down to an Apple store and sat in front of a Mac and actually tried using it, you would fall in love with it and experience for the first time what a computer is suppose to look and feel like."
Except all of the software I use to make a living DOESN'T RUN ON OSX you dumb ****ing retard.
Score: 0
|That here in has always been apples problem from the beginning. yes there is alternatives that work, BUT are said alternatives directly compatible? not always.
Consider programs like AutoCAD or MS Office, Or even Photoshop. Yes there are mac equivalents, but if your clients don't use it, you would be nuts to go apple. Yes apple has a dual boot option, but lets face it Windows xp on an apple is not pleasant at all. I'm sure the same is probably true visa versa, but we have not been given a chance to find out either, "legally" that is.
I don't even want to get into gaming. That's a huge barrier for Apple. has been since forever... Not enough made to run on it, and even when stuff is out for it, its years old by that time and not as popular anymore.
I like what I see, and as many will say the Vista window dressing "features" is a knock off of OS X in many ways. I say then let OS X truly compete with Windows for a change. Lets see what becomes of REAL competition from both sides. It can't hurt what we got by any means... This was a step in the right direction that hit a HUGE legal wall that HAD to happen eventually. The ruling will determine the future IMHO. Competition or more of the same for another decade or so. This is essentially similar to the legal barriers that PC compatibles had to get through as well in their infancy. so its a we will have to wait and see what matures out of this process now for Apples clones too.
Score: 0
|I'm sorry but is this coming from the inbred hillbilly who lives out in the boonies, claims he hates California AND YET GOES BY THE USERNAME OF THE MOST FAMOUS CITY IN CALIFORNIA: Hollywood_? ^__^
Score: 0
|so? what's the point trollie?
Score: 0
|terminalx to internetworld7-
"Why are you so blindly following a product you don't have a clue with how it works?"
It's simple, because he's completely full of crap and doesnt own one. He obviously has no clue about anything but that little Apple logo.
Score: 0
|This entire issue is moot if Psystar simply sells the machine as compatible with any x86 compatible OS.
The user buys and installs OSX if they choose. Then Apple is in the position of enforcing their user agreement against individuals who vary from their agreement.
Does anyone here know what a TCM(trusted computing module) is and understand its function? Judging from the myriad wacko comments, few if any do!
Score: 0
|Seriously, someone explain this to me.
Why isn't Palm forced to open up Palm OS so others can sell their hardware with the software on it?
Score: 0
|Palm OS isn't hard coded not to work on other devices...it's written specifically for the Palm device. OSX run on regular PC hardware, but is deliberately made not to run on just any PC, only the PC's that have a special apple chip on them (designed for the sole purpose of identifying those PC's as "mac-able").
Score: 0
|I get that, but Apple wrote a piece of software who is going to FORCE them to open it up for the whole world to use? I simply don't get how this is a logical or legal argument.
Score: 0
|Because the software specifically locks out the competition there is no reason why someone should have to pay $1000 to use OSX. (Because that is all you are actually paying for) The parts used in an Apple Computer are no different then what is used in a standard beige box
The software will run on a regular pc as using a hack to lie to the OS allows it to work.
Score: 0
|In that last sentence, the word "work" should be in quotes. ;)
Score: 0
|Well IDK about that. I personally would like to try OSx on some existing equipment from time to time, yet be universally compatible with existing mainstream software at the same time. Meaning a PC with a partitioned off Mac OS X drive.
I for one have never been too keen on paying triple for APPLE branded equipment Just because Apple has a bug up its but about what it can run on and what it will not run on. If they took the time to make OS X universal, it would blow MS out of the water forever, and more companies would make stuff for OS X. Which is its only limiting factor IMHO.
IDK I don't much care either. I hope they win so more Mac clone systems can emerge to compete. Cause thats the only way to get Apples prices down. competition.
Score: 0
|Psystar will you please just roll over and die? Pretty please? No sane person in their right mind wants awesome Mac OS X on cheap PC hardware. This significantly cheapens the Mac experience. Mac OS X on a cheap garbage PC is 1/3 of a computer... NO THANKS!
http://www.newsweek.com/id/91512
Score: 0
|cheap? did you just called your mother cheap?! wow and why would want to look at a link about the "innovations" of apple? pendejo de mierda
Score: 0
|You do realize there is no such thing as Apple hardware right? You aren't that clueless are you?
Open up your Apple computer you will see the same name brands every other manufacturer uses...hence why Psystar might have a case...
Score: 0
|A Mac is made by Apple and only Apple is it not? A PC is made by practically every Tom, d*** and Harry on the planet is it not?
Thus the monumental difference between the superior Quality Controlled Mac hardware and the inferior non-quality controlled PC hardware.
Have a nice day terminalx. :)
Score: 0
|OK you have been quite brainwashed - lets try this...
Apple using intel chips - so does a regular beige box pc
Apple uses Nvidia graphics cards as does a regular pc
Apple uses Asus motherboards as does a regular pc
You don't have to buy special ram or a hdd if yours goes bad you can use the same type everyone else uses
So the only thing Apple is the casing that says so...try to do some research before you post next time, ok?
Score: 0
|Why don't you let us choose if we want to buy a cheap computer with the Mac OS on it, ok dude.
BTW, I seem to recall Apple whining about Microsoft doing pretty much the same thing with their software incorporated in XP
If I buy a Mac OS, I should be able to install it on w(ever)tf I want to install it on. Steve Jobs is an arrogant tool that needs to be crushed.
Score: 0
|Thanks for making our point for us. Same hardware,(except for the "screw you" chip on the motherboard) different label and colored box.
Thanks for playing.
K, thanks
Score: 0
|Mac's hardware is cheap.
You can get like those top end Macs for only like $10,000.
Score: 0
|http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VlPJFcvsVY
Score: 0
|hahaha wow, its funny how full of it you Mac lovers are.
Score: 0
|Oooo. Some sweaty man can swap over my files to a different computer.
Big whoop.
Try this on for size: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7582197.stm
Score: 0
|I thought Apple used Intel motherboards and CPU's both.
Score: 0
|No DF.
The Mac is simply the latest incarnation of Intel's Roadmap specs.
Most of the components are commodity components that are NOT made by Apple. It is simply a PC with Apple styling and incorporating an industry standard TCM (trusted computing module) - in this case which authenticates to the OS.
Nothing more.
The Mac is a PC. That was the purpose for moving to the commoditized x86 platform. Get over it. And for the PC wackos, get a clue as well.
Score: 0
|rolls eyes...
The components can potentially be made by anyone according to the Intel Roadmap specs.
The only thing that makes the Apple hardware different (aside from case styling) is their inclusion of the industry standard TCM - which in this case is used to authenticate the hardware to OSX. And the TCM is not unique to Apple!
Find something else to speculate about.
Score: 0
|Wow, this is quite a situation. If this company wins against apple, say hello to everyone else selling Mac os on their computers as well. Dell, HP etc. Apple will be forced to just go ahead and partner with everyone. Granted this will be a double edge sword. Sell more os copies and sell less mac computers.
I always thought they should of done this in the first place. Apple should embrace this or buy them. It would be cheaper in the long run then paying their countless lawyers for months, or even years that is if this company can survive that long.
This is EXCELLENT free marketing for this company. Everyone knows Psystar name now. And they are able to sell the mac clones still.
Good for them, stand up for yourself, go out with a bang haha.
Score: 0
|I find myself looking around for Daryl McBride, and the SCO legal team. Has Microsoft written any mystery checks for $50 million lately?
Score: 0
|So its fair Apple charges a premium on hardware when the same components can be bought cheaper but without the pretty white casing?
Why won't Apple open it up, is the OS that unstable with other hardware?
Linux seems to be able to work fine and they both have a 'nix core so why?
Score: 0
|This should perhaps the the nub of the argument.
It's running on *nix and yet they've tied it to a particular system.
Score: 0
|Nonsense.
"Due to the extremely minimal restrictions of BSD-style licenses, software released under such licenses can be freely modified and used in proprietary (i.e., commercial) software for which the source code is kept secret...
Possibly the biggest difference between the GPL and BSD licenses is the fact that the former is a copyleft license and the latter is not. Copyleft is the application of copyright law to permit the free creation of derivative works but requiring that such works be redistributable under the same terms (i.e., the same license) as the original work.
Closely related to this is the fact that, in sharp contrast to the GPL, BSD-style licenses do not require that derivative works based on BSD-licensed software make the source code for such derivative works freely available. This allows the direct incorporation of code from open source projects (i.e., from BSD-licensed software) into closed source projects. The GPL, however, specifically states: "This General Public License does not permit incorporating your program into proprietary programs."
A third difference is that the GPL is a single, copyrighted (by the Free Software Foundation, Inc.) license with no variants. BSD-style licenses, in contrast, are commonly modified for the specific situation. "
http://www.linfo.org/bsdlicense.html
Score: 0
|I don't think that Psystar has a chance of winning this (disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer).
The only thing probably violating the anti-trust laws mentioned is Apple's licensing of Mac OS X for use on Apple hardware only. The way I see it, this would be illegal bundling if there were hardware out there that you could install Mac OS X on -- from the DVD that you buy from Apple.
This is something you cannot do. All the techniques out there require either a patching of said DVD (illegitimately) or the usage of an already running Mac OS X, i.e. you already need one Mac to make it run on a non-Mac. The latter requires a patching of the firmware, which should be protected by Apple's rights. (More specifically, the problem is Rosetta, Apple's firmware that makes it possible to run PowerPC code. It seems Psystar was impatient -- rumor has it Apple will discontinue PowerPC support in the next Mac OS X version.)
Score: 0
|THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS APPLE HARDWARE...that is psystar's point...
Score: 0
|THERE IS EVERY BIT A SUCH THING AS APPLE HARDWARE... that is Apple's point...
Score: 0
|Why are you so blindly following a product you don't have a clue with how it works?
Do you just troll forums for some laugh because you have nothing better to do?
While its not the most reliable if you HAVE a Apple pc all you would have to do is open it up and see they use the same components everyone else does APPLE DOES NOT MAKE ANY OF THE HARDWARE
http://www.tomshardware....ardware-difference-macs
There's links to wikipedia that describe it more and if you ask anyone with a clue they would tell you the same thing but you'll ignore it and spew your usual nonsense
Score: 0
|"The way I see it, this would be illegal bundling if there were hardware out there that you could install Mac OS X on -- from the DVD that you buy from Apple."
The only reason you can't do that is because apple puts what is nothing more then a "copyright" chip on the motherboards telling OSX it's ok to continue with the installation. That chip is the only reason you can't install OS X on other hardware, and that's what psystar is saying is potentially illegal....I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know. :)
Score: 0
|"but you'll ignore it and spew your usual nonsense"
Pretty much and by the way have you seen this great article by NewsWeek on Apple's innovative history?
http://www.newsweek.com/id/91512
Score: 0
|At least you admit you have no clue, so that's something.
Score: 0
|*Laughs*
Their "innovative" history has nothing to do with current apple products containing any more "Apple Hardware" than the case/keyboard/mouse.
The rest is standard PC hardware with the addition of a TCM chip.
Score: 0
|itard7 strikes again....
But like an 18 car pile-up on the highway, we just can't help but look...
at least for a little while...
out of morbid curiosity...
Score: 0
|hey PC dont feed the troll man come on
Score: 0
|There is no way they are going to win. No one can prove that Apple is a monopoly in making computers or OS's. You can't have two monopolies for the same thing. All Apple has to do is point to Dell and Microsoft and say see we aren't a monopoly.
Score: 0
|Dell don't make an OS and tie it to their hardware.
Microsoft don't either.
It is questionable (though probably not monopolistic) that Apple build an OS and only allow it to be installed on products made by them.
It should be open to any platform, but with no support for any system other than Apple hardware.
I'm not entirely convinced they should be allowed to lock OS to hardware, but I see the argument for why they do.
Score: 0
|OK then how about Tivo and Directv. I want TiVo software for my Directv to watch all the new HD. Directv says No so I'm stuck with their crappy software.
Score: 0
|Talk about missing the point...
Two different services, DirectTV is a satellite service and TIVO is for recording tv programs.
Tivo is not supporting any satellite service due to some patent issue, its both companies stating it won't happen in this case its just Apple.
Score: 0
|Let's see...Dell doesn't make an OS and MS doesn't make computers. Duh.
"...They should be allowed"? LOL!
So we rule out most of the high end UNIX products as well, huh, as the OS is tightly coupled to the hardware for purposes of machine control and status monitoring?
A comment worthy of the desktop jockeys.
The only thing "tying" it, is the expectation of seeing and handshaking with a Trusted Computing Module - an open initiative also supported by MS and the other major OS manufacturers.
Its always nice to listen to so much speculation based on speculation supported by emotional nonsense. But hey, its BN!
Score: 0
|Another reason you can't win against Apple is most lawyers and judges probably own and love their iPhones!
Score: 0
|LOL. He must be a distant cousin of yours because you're always missing the point.
Score: 0
|Since you have zero creditability on this forum and no one actually believes you even own a Apple product, the point is you have nothing better to do then type nonsense and its not even good nonsense or anything that is fact based.
You make the other Apple zealots look like amateurs while you worship at the altar of Steve Jobs.
But to really appreciate Apple you should at least get a clue about the company because as of now you haven't one.
Score: 0
|I'm not speculating on anything.
I'm saying it'd be nice if they openend it up, but I don't think they'll be forced to.
The same argument as you have.
Congratulations on flaming people on both sides.
Score: 0
|They shouldn't be forced to open it.
And I love listening to so many think that it is tied to some Apple specific hardware as if a Mac is not simply the latest incarnation of the Intel Roadmap. There is no "Apple only" special hardware other than the design. All of it is compliant to the Intel Roadmap.
And I am very tired of the same crap over and over in this site about Apple...primarily by idiots who not only have never spend enough time to be familiar with it but who know even less and prove it repeatedly with nothing more than emotionally loaded fanboy posts based on their like/dislike of Jobs or some other nonsense.
Apple has chosen to market both hardware and software and so many seem surprised that they want to use the OS as a strategic marketing advantage for their machines. They are certainly entitled.
I just happen to think that the OS is good enough that they need not fear the non-Apple PC market - and that they would capture a much larger market share if those PC users too afraid to take a risk on a Mac (even though it is an excellent Windows only or Linux only machine if they so chose) to try OSX were allowed to try it on their own machine and take advantage of the larger world of UNIX and Windows computing and the programs available.
So to that degree, yes, the Apple only zealots are obnoxious. And the Windows only zealots are obnoxious, and they can too often add ignorant as well, as so many are clueless and living off 15-20 year old Mac cliches.
Score: 0
|"Dell don't make an OS and tie it to their hardware."
I'm sorry, I try not to speak Ebonics if I don't have to.
Score: 0
|"Any techniques applied to make Mac OS run on Psystar, he said, can be found in already available, open source software."
"Open source" does not mean "open to do anything you want with it." Even if Psystar has not violated Apple's rights, they most likely have violated the rights of open source developers, who typically only license free use for private, non-commercial purposes.
Score: 0
|Psystar aren't making profit on the OS.
They are making profit on the hardware.
It is a pointless argument unless they are actually hacking/patching the Apple code. They are certainly not violating the GPL (unless they aren't attributing them, possibly).
Score: 0
|Exactly Paul. Mac OS X is a $129 add on to the computer, exactly what it costs to purchase it at retail.
Score: 0
|Then simply don't include it! Sell a machine that effectively looks like a unit with a valid TCM and let users buy and install the OS.
This ain't rocket science folks.
Score: 0
|Honestly, I hope Psystar wins.
I'm open minded enough to actually want to learn how MacOS works, but I don't need to purchase another overpriced proprietary PC to do it.
That being said, Apple will not let their OS install on just any machine because their touted claims of stability and reliability goes right out of the window.
To me, MacOS is like Windows XP embedded or the OS on the Xbox or PS2/3. You can marry the hardware and software so tightly that sure it's going to be 100% stable and reliable. But then you stifle innovation, you restrict any possible competition, you corner your own market and then of course, have no one to blame when your market disappears.
If Apple diversified their hardware base and had the guts to go for it, they just might have game publishers making more games for them and actually bring some real entertainment value to a Mac.
Score: 0
|Good, I hope they win. Someone needs to take Apple's ego down a notch.
Score: 0
|Who cares about their ego.
Oh sorry, fanboys are only concerned about egos.
What would be nice if, since Jobs can't see the opportunity in offering OSX to the larger market, that competition might force Apple to acknowledge that market segment.
And Apple would do well to step up and match and effectively compete with the competition.
Score: 0
|Apple see it that they can make a profit at both ends with both the hardware and the OS.
If they release the OS to all PCs then their Mac sales would slump.
I'm sure they've done the maths.
This is the reason they don't want to open it up to all PCs.
Score: 0
|not to mention if they opened it up to all pc's then they would get to deal with trying to support every piece of hardware in the world and deal with driver hell just like windows
Score: 0
|Absolutely wrong.
They could easily release it in an unsupported manner - just like Linux - clearly stating that only machines that adhere closely to the Intel Roadmap (its a real doc folks) will work and that support is limited to users groups.
And if you want to stray outside that, you are on your own - JUST like with Windows and Linux. So YOU can be your own best friend or worst enemy.
But I am sure that won't stop the same fanboys who whine here from whining anyway.
The other alternative is to beef up the MiniMac with more RAM and room for a video card and offer it for about the same $700 entry price point to compete with the toys folks think are so cool in the Windows world.
Score: 0
|You PC nuts are comical at best. :) If you actually went down to an Apple store and sat in front of a Mac and actually tried using it, you would fall in love with it and experience for the first time what a computer is suppose to look and feel like.
Why would the greatest company on earth put the world's most advanced operating system on what amounts to be nothing more than glorified typewriters that have an upside down Mac GUI?
Here, maybe the greatest CEO to ever live can put it in better words than me:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upzKj-1HaKw
Score: 0
|^This^ minus the mac mini part
Score: 0
|Why would the greatest company on earth put the world's most advanced operating system on what amounts to be nothing more than glorified typewriters that have an upside down Mac GUI?
You mean a PC?
The same thing the Mac OS currently runs on?
Welcome to 2008, Apple went Intel.
Score: 0
|They could easily release it in an unsupported manner - just like Linux - clearly stating that only machines that adhere closely to the Intel Roadmap (its a real doc folks) will work and that support is limited to users groups.
*insert clips from our last discussion revolving around the perception of Apple's products "Just Working" once unleashed upon systems upon which it...doesn't*
You remember that one, don't ya? ;)
Score: 0
|Oh my you really are an idiot. The greatest company on earth that is a good one. Besides making an average MP3 player and an over priced computer what have they done? Waiting, waiting, Like I thought nothing except koolaide for you.
Score: 0
|